THE POLITICAL SLIME OF THE MEDIA HIGHLIGHTED

Never before have I heard more outrageous and scurrilous language used by people in the media to intimidate voters to pull the lever for a candidate.
The Leftist elite in the Media have been promoting the Obama campaign for the last two years, but only within the last few weeks has here been the increase of racial intimidation.

This is an example of desperate people who cannot stomach the thought of a McCain victory in next Tuesdays Presidential election. The racial bating has been stepped up in the past few days with the intent to make voters feel they must vote for Obama, despite the issues, because they do not want to be labeled as racist in the eyes of the World if Obama should lose.

The American Thinker has this quote from Slate's Jacob Weisberg. "If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: The United States had its day but, in the end, couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race."


And if this is not enough there is this from Newsweeks Johnathan Alter: ""They don't read newsmagazines or newspapers, don't watch any cable news and don't cast their ballots early. Their allegiance to a candidate is as easily shed as a T shirt. Several million moved to Obama through September and October; they'd heard he handled himself well in the debates. Then, in the last week, the LIVs swung back to the default choice: John McCain. Some had good reasons other than the color of Obama's skin to desert him; many more did not." Apparently this elitist write does not consider the fact that more people are realizing each day, that Obama is a redistribution Socialist who would be bad for our Country.

Unfortunately it is not only the Media, but Obama's campaign "followers" who are using the race card. In West Virginia Obama Campaign manager and West Virginia State Democratic Party Chairman Nick Casey took name calling to an entirely new level. During an October 18th bus-tour road performance, the inimitable Obama cheerleader incited a Beckley, WV crowd by telling them "there's a lot of people out there think you're a bunch of inbred, redneck racists."

As much as I searched the media and the Internet. I can find no negative column being written by McCain backers who are claiming that Blacks are racist. This despite the fact that polls show that 95% of Blacks will vote for Obama because he is Black!

THE DANGER OF FOLLOWING A PERSON WHO WILL CHANGE THE USA

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

The French political thinker and historian Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) was a student of American Democracy. He wrote "Democracy In America", a two volume set that was published in 1835 and 1840. The man was a "Liberal" of his times, considered by most as beginning the work on study of Sociology and Political Science. I was first introduced to his works in a Poly-Sci. course at Northwestern University.

He had many things to say about the greatness of America, but he cautioned about people who use words(we call it semantics) to garner the peoples attention. Such words as used by the Obama campaign as CHANGE" he had little use for.
The following is a quote from his book.

"Democratic nations are passionately addicted to generic terms and abstract expressions because these modes of speech enlarge thought and assist the operations of the mind by enabling it to include many objects in a small compass. A democratic writer will be apt to speak of capacities in the abstract for men of capacity and without specifying the objects to which their capacity is applied.…

These abstract terms which abound in democratic languages, and which are used on every occasion without attaching them to any particular fact, enlarge and obscure the thoughts they are intended to convey; they render the mode of speech more succinct and the idea contained in it less clear.…

Men living in democratic countries, then, are apt to entertain unsettled ideas, and they require loose expressions to convey them. As they never know whether the idea they express today will be appropriate to the new position they may occupy tomorrow, they naturally acquire a liking for abstract terms. An abstract term is like a box with a false bottom; you may put in it what ideas you please, and take them out again without being observed".

To which I can only add something that Tocqueville did not anticipate but which is quite consistent with his observations: that the looseness and flexibility of abstract ideas may serve to conceal the fact that what appear to be unsettled ideas are in fact much more settled, even stagnant, than they appear to be.Change can be either a change for the better or a change for the worse! Such was the case with Adolph Hitler and Karl Marx!

Tocqueville's words imply another danger: that these words can thrill ( as seen in the messianic nature of Obama's followers)and "intoxicate", and that their meaning can be made to expand reason and bloat into something actually dangerous. Or the words may at least bring something deeply opposite to their original supposed meaning. It also suggests that a democratic culture may be particularly susceptible to such hyperbolic rhetoric.AS in politicians promise anything to be elected, but then once they get in office their memory becomes very short!

Thus, we have yet another reason to be attentive to the ways in which abstract words are misused. To illustrate this point, look more closely at two such words: "experiment" and "promise." Both are abstractions of extraordinary importance in American public speech. Both speak to values and characteristics that are thought to be typically American. But both have largely lost their original meaning and have become crafted into usages that serve to undercut some of the very things they once served to support. The one we face today is CHANGE!

Will the Change Obama and his ilk bring to US be a good thing or a disaster. I think if you look at his voting record and what he has espoused in the past it would make anyone who values the freedoms we now have nervous.

THE ACTIONS OF A SECRET AGENT

I am a fan of 007 movies and anything that involves secret agents or covert action.
So it is natural to me to be suspicious of a man who aspires to be POTUS that not only refuses to provide a properly documented birth certificate, but has sealed his records at Harvard Law School and when in the Illinois Senate voted present 129 times!

There is a constant thread that appears in every secret agents file. There is no file! The information that could identify a particular person of being an agent is hidden from any prying eyes.
One such illustration is found in the record of the Communist Russian KGB. After the fall of Soviet Russia, the KGB made sure their files of covert agents around the world, and especially in the USA were destroyed.


In 2006, Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) stated that archives containing data on employed secret security agents and people confidentially assisting them cannot be declassified, FSB registration and archive department chief Vasily Khristoforov told Interfax.

The files on people suspected of anti-Soviet propaganda have been destroyed, he said.
Information on forces, resources, sources, methods, and plans used in conducting clandestine operations, on their results, on people who infiltrated organized criminal groups, on employed clandestine security agents, on people assisting security agencies on confidential basis, and also on the organization and tactics of search operations," Khristoforov said.
All this information constitutes state secrets, as is the case with any "efficient special service in the world," and such records can never be declassified, he said.
"Information on people who infiltrated organized criminal groups, employed clandestine security agents, and people who assisted security agencies on confidential basis can be made public only with their written consent.

Despite the confidential nature of the former KGB,in 2006, 3,500 requests were processed and 1,500 persons were allowed to read archives materials in an open reading room.
Private individuals and organizations are free to file their requests with the FSB's Central Archives at 2, Bolshaya Lubyanka, or come to the FSB's reception office at 22, Kuznetsky.

Yet the voting public is denied the right to view the record of Obama's Harvard Law school papers and more disturbing is his failure to provide a bonafide birth certificate which would make him eligible to be the POTUs per our Constitution!

In the law the only people who want their history and records kept secret are the guilty. People who are innocent, rush to show any documents that support their position of innocence, unless they have legal advice that anything they say or produce will tend to incriminate them!
My plea is to Obama and his handlers. It is to release all records pertaining to his papers and a birth certificate with appropriate seal of issuing authority, if you want people to believe anything you say or do.That is unless you have something to hide that if revealed would disqualify you from being worthy of the voters trust!

I KNEW BILL AYERS WHEN I WAS EIGHT, YEAH RIGHT!!

It is a Elmer Gantry year! Not unlike the hustler preacher played well by Burt Lancaster, Obama has acted and spoken as though his run for the Presidency has been "divinely" inspired. Obama has often mentioned that he has felt a "righteous wind at my back"! And unfortunately many followers and the MSM have acted as though he is Divine!

But he is like the reverend Gantry, in that he twists the truth all too much. one of his most infamous lies is about his relationship with William Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, of the notorius Weathermen bombers.
Obama claims he was only eight years old when the weathermen bombed the U.S. Capitol, but he served on the Annenberg funded Chicago group with Bill Ayers for for years as an adult lawyer. If that is not enough to make the connection. How about the 1993 party that Obama attended in California as reported but not published by the LA Times.

"In April, L.A. Times reporter Peter Wallsten reported on a 2003 farewell party for Rashid Khalidi, a radical Palestinian Liberation Organization spokesman/adviser turned Ivy League professor. The anti-Israel Arab American Action Network sponsored the gala. In attendance: good neighbors Barack Obama and Weather Underground terrorist duo Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn".source: Tony Blankley

This quote brands Obama's claim that Ayers and Dorn are nothing to him but neighbors as a bald faced LIE! Since when do neighbors fly across the country to attend a party for an alleged terrorist?

Is the type of association indicative of what we can expect in an Obama cabinet? A leftist who describes himself as a unrepentant bomber, who is a communist with a small "c"?

One other thing to consider is the position that Obama has taken about foreign wars.
He has stood against the Iraq war since he was in the Illinois Senate, and has said he would immediately withdraw our troops by executive order once he assumes the Presidency. But then he also said we should pursue Osama in Afghanistan. I take this to mean that he will expand the war in Afghanistan. A country that has rough mountainous terrain, and was the place where the Taliban defeated the once mighty Russian Army!

If he was not lying about pursuit of Osama, he will need to follow the advice of Congressman Charles B. Rangel. Rangel has been lobbying for years to re-institute the DRAFT. Will the anti-war supporters of Obama find that he has lied to them also,and will we have a draft to balance as Rangel says the disparity of Caucasians troops in uniform to minorities?
Something for all voters to think about other than the economy!

RACISM IS A TWO HEADED COIN!

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Bill Ayers has thrown a racial Molotov cocktail in his new book to be released after Novemer's Presidential election.
You can find it advertise on Amazon. The new book by unrepentant Weatherman bomb throwers Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who sponsored Barack Obama's political coming-out party in Chicago leftwing politics.
It's not something Ayers and Dohrn wrote when Obama was eight years old! It's a book that is timed to come out right after this election.

Here's the Amazon review:
"Race Course Against White Supremacy (Paperback) by William C. Ayers (Author), Bernardine Dohrn (Author)
White supremacy and its troubling endurance in American life is debated in these personal essays by two veteran political activists. Arguing that white supremacy has been the dominant political system in the United States since its earliest days-and that it is still very much with us-the discussion points to unexamined bigotry in the criminal justice system, election processes, war policy, and education. The book draws upon the authors' own confrontations with authorities during the Vietnam era, reasserts their belief that racism and war are interwoven issues, and offers personal stories about their lives today as parents, teachers, and reformers.
Guess what? America is racist down to its very bones, even if it elects Obama. And Bill Ayers, who is pleased to call himself "a small 'c' communist" is nothing but a "veteran political activist" and "reformer."
This is the credo of Jeremiah Wright --- "God Damn America!" Because Wright and his fellow race- baiting neo-segregationists are convinced that whites are guilty by virtue of their race.
The Civil Rights revolution began in hope, with the support of the vast majority of whites. That is why the Civil Rights laws passed with overwhelming majorities, once the power of seniority from the Dixiecrats in Congress was overcome. Today, the tables have been turned --- public racism is all on the other side. Black liberation has become black revenge --- and it's the creation of the same Democrats who used to by the party of white racism.
This is not Dr. King's dream. It may be Obama's dream, and it is certainly Bill Ayers' dream.
This book is a flaming Molotov cocktail, aiming to worsen race relations in America by convincing blacks and Leftist whites that you --- yes, you who are reading this --- must be a White Supremacist. It spurs black paranoia, which has a real enough basis in history. This is the most cruel and malignant bomb to throw into the most racially charged election in American history. Regardless of who wins, this book will do further damage to human relationships in America. Hat tip to James Lewis!

When McCain or his supporters asks legitimate questions regarding Obama's associations with domestic terrorists, vile anti-Semites, and ACORN, and as the campaign disagrees with his policies, especially his economic plans that have been labeled Socialism by various financial publications, the response is always the same: Racism

But people of intelligence and good faith must question the motives of people who throw the label of "racism" in the face of anyone who questions the actions and associates of a man who aspires to sit in the Oval Office.

After all the smoke clears, and Obama has won the prize, will the word "honky" become a racist term subject to censorship and derision as is the word "ni****r"? Will people like Louis Farrakhan and the reverend Wright be called racists when the say "god damn America", and Jews should be exterminated?

Will the thousands of white people who were passed over for promotion in all industries and business, because of Federal mandated affirmative action quotas, be called victims of racism?

I doubt not! But here in America we have stood by silently while hundreds of academics, journalists, newspaper an television people have preached the mantra of racial injustice in one of the remaining free Countries where our Constitution declares all men are created equal, and by law and judicial fiat has made opportunity to get ahead more possible than any other Country in the World.

Enough is enough, it is time to recognise that there is racism in the Blacks and Hispanics equally threatening as any in the Caucasian peoples! La Raza("dedicated to empowering the Hispanic community"),The Muslim Brotherhood, the Black Liberation Theology of James Cone, and the Nation of Islam are just a few of the groups that prove my point.

To elect a man who has Socialist principals because he is a Black man, and it is THEIR time, is a betrayal of the basic principles that this Country is founded on. The freedom to do what is right and lawful, not the license to do what feels good or salves ones collective conscience.

Remember that the "Freedom and license are profoundly different". WE should all tolerate the evil doer, but not what he proposes to do. Freedom is the power to do what is right and just, and loss of freedom comes from abusing it!
Socialism is the direct opposite of Freedom, never forget it!

IT IS OFFICIAL, OBAMA PROMOTED SOCIALISM!!

There have been a lot of promises by the two candidates running to be OUR next President, but the one promise that has been hidden until now is Obama's promise to redistribute the wealth.
It is not a new concept for Obama that has been prompted by his campaign flip flops. It is a philosophical concept that Obama demonstrated publicly on a radio show while he was a member of the Illinois State Senate. It clearly shows that the front runner is a SOCIALIST!


Obama, in 2001 said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.

"A 7-year-old radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.
The interview -- conducted by Chicago Public Radio WBEZ-FM in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law lecturer at the University of Chicago -- delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when "dispossessed peoples" appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal!
In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a "redistributive change" in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren, also a Liberal. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.
"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical," Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.
"It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.
"And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way -- that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted. my comment==Thank God!
"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that," Obama said.
The 2001 interview evokes recent questioning by Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher, the Ohio man who asked Obama about his proposal to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000. Obama told Wurzelbacher he wants to hike taxes on the wealthy so that the government can spread the wealth. source: American Thinker

Of course Obama's campaign managers denied this 2001 statement had any thing to do with his economic plans, but only those who have already drank the "Kool Aide" that Obama has been feeding the public, could possibly not recognize that Obama is an advocate of Marxism, and his change will be a severe jerk to the left for this country!
And as would be expected, the Main Stream Media has used one of the favorite tactics of the press in this campaign; pretending that what Obama said isn't really what he meant and that what he meant is harmless fluff! Hopefully, Ameicans will not be so easily tricked! Why else do all Socialist Countrys around the world hope that Obama is OUR next President?

SOROS PULLS MORE STRINGS THAN A MARIONETTE MASTER

Thanks to Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 10/25/2008
On March 25,1995 Pope John Paul II issued his "Evanggluim Vitae because he believed the Secular World was promoting a culture of death not a culture that recognizes the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.
The Encyclical is very long so I will include only those quotes that relate to the theme of this Blog.

"The Second Vatican Council, in a passage which retains all its relevance today, forcefully condemned a number of crimes and attacks against human life. Thirty years later, taking up the words of the Council and with the same forcefulness I repeat that condemnation in the name of the whole Church, certain that I am interpreting the genuine sentiment of every upright conscience: "Whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or wilful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others like them are infamies indeed. They poison human society, and they do more harm to those who practise them than to those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonour to the Creator".

"Unfortunately, this disturbing state of affairs, far from decreasing, is expanding: with the new prospects opened up by scientific and technological progress there arise new forms of attacks on the dignity of the human being. At the same time a new cultural climate is developing and taking hold, which gives crimes against life a new and-if possible-even more sinister character, giving rise to further grave concern: broad sectors of public opinion justify certain crimes against life in the name of the rights of individual freedom, and on this basis they claim not only exemption from punishment but even authorization by the State, so that these things can be done with total freedom and indeed with the free assistance of health-care systems.

All this is causing a profound change in the way in which life and relationships between people are considered. The fact that legislation in many countries, perhaps even departing from basic principles of their Constitutions, has determined not to punish these practices against life, and even to make them altogether legal, is both a disturbing symptom and a significant cause of grave moral decline. Choices once unanimously considered criminal and rejected by the common moral sense are gradually becoming socially acceptable. Even certain sectors of the medical profession, which by its calling is directed to the defence and care of human life, are increasingly willing to carry out these acts against the person. In this way the very nature of the medical profession is distorted and contradicted, and the dignity of those who practise it is degraded. In such a cultural and legislative situation, the serious demographic, social and family problems which weigh upon many of the world's peoples and which require responsible and effective attention from national and international bodies, are left open to false and deceptive solutions, opposed to the truth and the good of persons and nations.

The end result of this is tragic: not only is the fact of the destruction of so many human lives still to be born or in their final stage extremely grave and disturbing, but no less grave and disturbing is the fact that conscience itself, darkened as it were by such widespread conditioning, is finding it increasingly difficult to distinguish between good and evil in what concerns the basic value of human life".

Despite this admonition there those within the Catholic Church and many who hate the Catholic Church, who believe that abortion is a non-issue in elections. People like "Father" Pfleger(defender of Louis Farrakhan) and a few liberal Bishops have advocated the election of Obama/Biden. Both of whom are supporters of abortion and late term abortion!
Now we learn that Billionaire George Soros, in addition to a supporter of Obama, is bankrolling liberal Catholic groups that support abortion.

An investigation by the New York-based Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights finds that George Soros' Open Society Institute gave Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good $50,000 in 2005 and $100,000 in 2006.Soros defines his concept of an Open Society as:"An open society, in my definition, is an imperfect society that holds itself open to improvement". This includes being tolerant of new ideas and different modes of thinking and behavior! No wonder he backs Obama and abortion rights "catholica".



Catholic League president Bill Donohue suspects that Soros may also be funding the group Catholics United, an organization with which Catholics in Alliance has a formal relationship. Donahue contends both groups are "in the pocket of the Democratic Party" and are trying to sell Catholics the notion that they can be opponents of abortion and not seek to overturn Roe v. Wade if they support minimum wage and more welfare benefits.

"George Soros, who's basically an anti-American, far left-wing, pro-abortion, anti-Semite, anti-Catholic, is funding the Catholic left. Now, if the Catholic League were getting money from an anti-American, far right-wing, pro-abortion, anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic source, we'd be out of business in a New York minute," Donahue says. "By the way, George Soros lavishly funds Catholics for Choice, previously called Catholics for a Free Choice."

Donohue suggests Soros is attempting to make respectable the idea that one can be Catholic and promote abortion. However, Donohue notes Pope Benedict XVI has said some issues for Catholics are non-negotiable -- including abortion

Catholic League president Bill Donohue exposes the nexus between George Soros and two left-wing Catholic groups, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United:

“In 2003, after left-wing mogul George Soros blamed Jews for anti-Semitism, the ADL branded his comments ‘obscene.’ Two years later, I accused him of anti-Catholicism when his group, MoveOn.org, posted a picture of a smiling Pope Benedict XVI holding a gavel outside the U.S. Supreme Court, along with the following inscription: ‘God Already Has a Job…He does not need one on the Supreme Court.’

“Why is this relevant? Because this same bigot is connected to two apologists for abortion rights, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United. In 2006, Soros’ Open Society Institute gave Catholics in Alliance $100,000 (double the amount he gave in 2005), and in the same year Catholics in Alliance listed Catholics United on its 990 as an organization with which it has a formal relationship. John Podesta, White House Chief of Staff under President Bill Clinton from 1998 until 2001,who runs the Soros-funded organization, Center for American Progress, admits that he works closely with Catholics in Alliance and Catholics United. The Center for American Progress is also the sponsor of Faith and Public Life.Illinois born Podesta is presently head of the Liberals much anticipated Transition Team for Obama!

“Why would any Catholic organization take money from a man like George Soros? Because legitimate sources of revenue aren’t available? And why would Soros have any interest in funding Catholic groups? He doesn’t give the Catholic League any money, and if he offered, THEY would refuse it.

“The reason Soros funds the Catholic Left is the same reason he lavishly funds Catholics for Choice, the pro-abortion group that has twice been condemned as a fraud by Catholic bishops: they all service his agenda, namely, to make support for abortion rights a respectable Catholic position. On October 17, Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput accused Catholics in Alliance and Catholics United as doing a ‘disservice’ to the Catholic Church. He’s right. And now we know what really makes them tick.”

All those who believe in the Ten commandments must recognise that abortion is the modern day genocide of tiny infants who should be in the most safe place in the world, a mother's womb!
It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets.