Dawood Khan

Posts Tagged ‘barack obama’

Barack Obama says “I’M BLACK YO!!!

In culture, Politics on August 28, 2008 at 4:40 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00674/obamapoll404_674786c.jpg
He’s black and that is historic.  And, well, that seems to be the only qualification that he needs to be President.  If you are a Liberal.

I’m reminded of Chris Rock anytime an Obama disciple starts to froth at the mouth about the Obaminator.  Inevitably they say something that amounts to “he speaks so well.”  I can’t help but laugh.

If one of them can name some significant piece of legislation that he sponsored and ushered to passage.  Name something that he improved in Chicago as a community organizer.

He’s said to be “bi-partisan.”  Name one time that he crossed the aisle and voted against his party.  He is THE most liberal Senator.  The #1 liberal in the Senate.  What about that speaks to a bi-partisan attitude.

He’s supposed to be eloquent.  I’ve never seen his eloquence away from a teleprompter.

But hey, he’s Black.  And that seems to be all that matters.

I agree that it is past time for the Causasian male monopoly on the White House to come to a graceful conclusion.  But can’t we get someone who is qualified.  Barack Obama and his empty slogans can not be the best option out there.  There are other folks out there who are just as qualified, if not more, as George Bush, Al Gore, John Kerry and John McCain.  I know that there are capable Black men and women.  Capable Latin men and women.  Capable White women.  Capable Asian men and women.  Capable Arab men and women.  They are out there.

Barack Obama just isn’t one of them.  But hey!  He’s Black.  And that’s historic.  And that seems to be enough for the Democratic Party.  Too bad he’s Jimmy Carter Redux.  I’m sure he’ll be just as successful if he wins.

If we are who we were waiting for then we are all in trouble.

P.S.  All of you Ultra Liberals out there.  I know what you’re going to say now.  You’ll call me a racist.  Blah blah blah  Why will you do this?  Because you have no other argument.  In a Presidential race that the Democrats should win running away, you picked an empty suit as a candidate and he may not win.  That must make you guys feel stupid.  Next time, don’t pick a Marxist wannabe.  America doesn’t want to be a Socialist paradise.  And if that is your desire.  Swim to Cuba.

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/political-pictures-barack-obama-heres-hillary-nice-try.jpg?w=604

Another empty Obaminator slogan.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2291/2311174232_875780c87b_o.jpg

I know.  I know.  If you don’t support the Obaminator, you must be a racist.  That can be the only reason.  It can not be that he is a far left liberal who will take America back to being a Carter Era joke on the International scene. That’s change that I can do without.

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/01/30/PH2008013002503.jpg

That’s Obama in December.  Waving goodbye to National relevance.  Joining Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry in the list of also rans.  That will be a historic moment as well.

Believe.  I do.

Against the darkness, we fight…

In Politics on August 23, 2008 at 7:55 am

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12

While Obama thinks that we shouldn’t fight against evil in this world because it’s Gods job.  I disagree.  We must do that job ourselves.  While Obama will talk and talk as they use his naivite to their advantage, real leadership must plan to thwart the plans of the masters of terror and the enemies of peace.  The Wahhabis, the Russians, Communists, despots of every stripe, Fatah, Hamas, the PLA, the deceitful Lords of Qom and all  of the rest wish for nothing more than an Obama Presidency.  Michelle Obama thinks that the real enemy is America itself.  Obama seems to agree with his numerous comments on the subject.

Obama suits the terror lords and the despots and dictators.  They know that he will talk and talk and do little else.  Much like Carter and Clinton before him.  Should Obama become President, America will be rudderless.  The evil in the world relishes the opportunities that will be the Presidency of cowardice, empty talk and Inaction that an Obama White House promises.

They fear a McCain Presidency.  Real leadership that will keep the wolves at bay.

Senator Obama off kilter without teleprompter.

In Politics on August 21, 2008 at 12:41 am

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

No Contest

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, August 18, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election ’08: Last weekend’s McCain-Obama protodebate made it clear why Obama won’t keep his promise to debate McCain “anywhere, anytime.” McCain, with a robust resume and details at his fingertips, won big.


Read More: Election 2008 | Religion


It was only in May that Sen. Barack Obama cockily proclaimed he would debate Sen. John McCain “anywhere, anytime.” But in June, Obama said no to McCain’s challenge to have 10 one-on-one town hall meetings.

After what happened at Lake Forest, Calif.’s evangelical Saddleback megachurch Saturday evening, we may have found that debating is Obama’s Achilles’ heel. Whether or not you like the idea of such events being held in religious venues, the plain-and-simple method of questioning used by Saddleback pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren revealed fundamental differences between these two men.

“It’s one of those situations where the devil is in the details,” Obama said at one point. He could have been referring to his own oratorical shortcomings when a teleprompter is unavailable. We learned a lot more about the real Obama at Saddleback than we will next week as he delivers his acceptance speech in Denver before a massive stadium crowd.

The stark differences between the two came through the most on the question of whether there is evil in the world. Obama spoke of evil within America, “in parents who have viciously abused their children.” According to the Democrat, we can’t really erase evil in the world because “that is God’s task.” And we have to “have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil.”

For McCain, with a global war on terror raging, there was no equivocating: We must “defeat” evil. If al-Qaida’s placing of suicide vests on mentally-disabled women and then blowing them up by remote control in a Baghdad market isn’t evil, he asked: “You have to tell me what is.”

Asked to name figures he would rely on for advice, Obama gave the stock answer of family members. McCain pointed to Gen. David Petraeus, Iraq’s scourge of the surge; Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who “had his skull fractured” by white racists while protesting for civil rights in the 60s; plus Internet entrepreneur Meg Whitman, the innovative former CEO of eBay.

When Warren inquired into changes of mind on big issues, Obama fretted about welfare reform; McCain unashamedly said “drilling” — for reasons of national security and economic need.

On taxes, Obama waxed political: “What I’m trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code.” McCain showed an understanding of what drives a free economy: “I don’t want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich. I don’t believe in class warfare or redistribution of the wealth.”

To any honest observer, the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have been evident all along. What we saw last weekend was Obama’s shallowness juxtaposed with McCain’s depth, the product of his extraordinary life experience.

It may not have been a debate, but it was one of the most lopsided political contests in memory. No wonder Obama wants to keep debate formats boring and predictable.

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

Best Obama Picture Yet!

In Politics on June 30, 2008 at 9:08 am

This picture captures the Cult of Saint Obama perfectly.

Barack Obama, Moveon.org and the fall of Western Civilization

In Politics on June 21, 2008 at 12:08 am

When nothing is worth fighting for…

Moveon.org and all it’s sibling movements out there are the surest sign of the apocalypse.

Not her child she says.  Not Alex.  Not a child of the Liberals who refuse to defend themselves against anyone.  The Soviets.  Terrorists.  It matters not.  I’m certain that the woman in this video will be more than willing to see other sons and daughters go off to war.  Just not her child.  That’s the problem with the Left and the Pacifists and all of those like them.  They must flee or they die.  The only societies in which it is possible to hold those ideals sacred are societies that have men and women standing at the ready to defend them.  A pacifist won’t defend himself or herself.  Thus it will always fall to others to defend these folks.  Pacifism and anti-War ideals are noble indeed.  It takes an army of fighting men and women to defend those ideals though.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill

We make war that we may live in peace.

Aristotle

Obama the Humble Savior

In Politics on June 9, 2008 at 8:59 am

The short version of the Democratic Party primary campaign is that the media fell in love with Barack Obama but the Democratic electorate declined to.

“I felt this thrill going up my leg,” said MSNBC’s Chris Matthews after one of the senator’s speeches. “I mean, I don’t have that too often.” Au contraire, Chris and the rest of the gang seem to be getting the old tingle up the thigh hairs on a nightly basis. If Obama is political Viagra, the media are at that stage in the ad where the announcer warns that, if leg tingles persist for more than six months, see your doctor.

Out there in the voting booths, however, Democrat legs stayed admirably unthrilled. The more the media told Hillary she was toast, and she should get the hell out of it and let Obama romp to victory, the more Democrats insisted on voting for her. The more the media insisted Barack was inevitable, the less inclined the voters were to get with the program. On the strength of Chris Matthews’ vibrating calves, Sen. Obama raised a ton of money – over $300 million – and massively outspent Sen. Clinton, but he didn’t really get any bang for his buck. In the end, he crawled over the finish line. The Obama Express came a-hurtlin’ down the track at 2 miles an hour.

But what does he care? Sen. Obama has learned an old trick of Bill Clinton’s: If you behave like a star, you’ll get treated as one. So, even as his numbers weakened, his rhetoric soared. By the time he wrapped up his “victory” speech last week, the great gaseous uplift had his final paragraphs floating in delirious hallucination along the Milky Way:

“I face this challenge with profound humility and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people … . I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal … . This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation.”

It’s a good thing he’s facing it with “profound humility,” isn’t it? Because otherwise who knows what he’d be saying. But mark it in your calendars: June 3, 2008 – the long-awaited day, after 232 years, that America began to provide care for the sick. Just a small test program: 47 attendees of the Obama speech were taken to hospital and treated for nausea. Everyone else came away thrilled that the Obamessiah was going to heal the planet and reverse the rise of the oceans: When Barack wants to walk on the water, he doesn’t want to have to use a stepladder to get up on it.

There are generally two reactions to this kind of policy proposal. The first was exemplified by the Atlantic Monthly’s Marc Ambinder:

“What a different emotional register from John McCain’s; Obama seems on the verge of tears; the enormous crowd in the Xcel Center seems ready to lift Obama on its shoulders; the much smaller audience for McCain’s speech interrupted his remarks with stilted cheers.”

The second reaction boils down to: “‘Heal the planet’? Is this guy nuts?” To be honest I prefer a republic whose citizenry can muster no greater enthusiasm for their candidate than “stilted cheers” to one in which the crowd wants to hoist the nominee onto their shoulders for promising to lower ocean levels within his first term. As for coming together “to remake this great nation,” if it’s so great, why do we have to remake it? A few months back, just after the New Hampshire primary, a Canadian reader of mine – John Gross of Quebec – sent me an all-purpose stump speech for the 2008 campaign:

“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.”

I thought this was so cute, I posted it on the Web at National Review. Whereupon one of those Internetty-type things happened, and three links and a Google search later the line was being attributed not to my correspondent but to Sen. Obama, and a few weeks after that I started getting e-mails from reporters from Florida to Oregon, asking if I could recall at which campaign stop the senator, in fact, uttered these words. And I’d patiently write back and explain that they’re John Gross’ words, and that not even Barack would be dumb enough to say such a thing in public. Yet last week his demand in his victory speech that we “come together to remake this great nation” came awful close.

Speaking personally, I don’t want to remake America. I’m an immigrant, and one reason I came here is because most of the rest of the Western world remade itself along the lines Sen. Obama has in mind. This is pretty much the end of the line for me. If he remakes America, there’s nowhere for me to go – although presumably once he’s lowered sea levels around the planet there should be a few new atolls popping up here and there.

Marc Ambinder is right. Obama’s rhetoric is in a different “emotional register” from John McCain’s. It’s in a different “emotional register” from every U.S. president – not just the Coolidges but the Kennedys, too. Nothing in Obama’s resume suggests he’s the man to remake America and heal the planet. Only last week, another of his pals bit the dust, convicted by a Chicago jury of 16 counts of this and that. “This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew,” said the senator, in what’s becoming a standard formulation. Likewise, this wasn’t the Jeremiah Wright he knew. And these are guys he’s known for 20 years.

Yet at the same time as he’s being stunned by the corruption and anti-Americanism of those closest to him, Obama’s convinced that just by jetting into Tehran and Pyongyang he can get to know America’s enemies and persuade them to hew to the straight and narrow. No doubt if it all goes belly-up, and Iran winds up nuking Tel Aviv, President Obama will put on his more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger face and announce solemnly that “this isn’t the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad I knew.”

Every time I hear an Obama speech, I start to giggle. But millions of voters don’t. And, if Chris Matthews and the tingly-legged media get their way and drag Obama across the finish line this November, the laugh will be on those of us who think that serious times demand grown-up rhetoric.

©MARK STEYN

I can’t believe that the DNC are just so many Zombies. Watching an Obama rally is much like watching a Hitler speech/rally in 1933. I keep expecting to hear; “Heil Obama!” I keep expecting books to be burned. Obama has spent the past 20 years surrounding himself with thieves, thugs, racists and anti-Americans and is now surprised that they are all falling as his fame drags his cast of misanthropic elitist scalawags to the light.

What’s most hilarious and simultaneous ugliest about the Obama-ites is the fact that anyone who disagrees with their savior or anyone who doesn’t fawn and throw themselves at the sacred Obama feet in worship is immediately decried as a racist, bigot or worse.

Obama and his followers are a huge mistake waiting to happen. The world will run roughshod over an Obama Presidency. Obama is Jimmy Carter lite. I kinda hope they get it. Jimmy Carter brought us Reagan. Perhaps Obama will bring us another great such as Reagan.

Stupid Obama?

In Politics on June 5, 2008 at 8:11 pm

For this country’s safety, we must pierce the smoke of Obama’s ‘intelligence’ at the earliest possible moment. If Obama’s smoke of obfuscation obscures long enough to gain him the White House, that fatal smoke could be blown away only to reveal a greater smoke rising from the ruins of America – a deadly smoke which next time will surely dwarf the ghostly clouds which broiled up from the burning buildings and planes on 9/11.

Barack and Michelle Obama have benefited from the greatness of America and white guilt (Affirmative Action) more than any other two people in American History. Yet, they still complain.  Perhaps, they’re just too stupid to see their fortune in having been born amongst “whitey” in the oppressive apartheid state of America.

Stupidity. Lack of Intelligence would go a great way in explaining this. I suppose the puppet masters could only hide it for so long.

Barack Obama wants to disarm America

In Politics on June 5, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Barack and Michelle Obama think that some mysterious band of nefarious evil doing “whiteys” are out there raising bars over their heads.  Yet, Barack thinks that he can deal with madmen like Ahmadinejad and the pedophile king of North Korea.  Barack is a babe in a forest full of wolves.  He’s not ready.  What more proof does one need than the video above.  Barack actually thinks that the Russians want to talk to the US about disarmament.  I don’t see it.  I suppose that he, too, can see into the soul of Putin and the Russians.

Barack wants to unilaterally disarm America. He’s of the same liberal ideology as Carter. He and the rest of the fools who believes that if we smile warmly and disarm ourselves, the rest of the world will love us.

A country with the size, resources and ambitions of America must have a solid defensive capability. What’s more. If we wish to maintain our democracy at home. We must promote democracy abroad. We must protect fledgling democracies. We must protect our interests abroad.

More than that. We must be willing to do these things. We can not shy away from the difficult decisions. Decisions of weight. Obama is not ready for them.

The man wants to shake hands with the devil and doesn’t know the price. 

This man can not be President.

Barack Obama has a Russian Uncle

In Politics on May 28, 2008 at 8:00 am

The Soviets liberated Auschwitz.

Apparently, Obama had an Uncle in the Soviet Army.

Obama DID have an uncle who was in a US Army unit that liberated a Buchenwald satellite camp. He got the name of the camp wrong, not the existence of the uncle or the gist of the story.

Kenny D aka Oruacat2

Obama seems to be in a competition with Dan Quayle for most gaffes in an Election Campaign.

Obama — change to die for…

In Politics on May 26, 2008 at 4:18 am

America’s first Kaliph. That would certainly be a “change.”

Obama can change America so that this mentality is common here as well as in the Middle East.

Change. We Can. Hope.

I agree. We need a change in our Politics. But socialism of the brand that Obama espouses was tried in Eastern Europe and Russia. It didn’t work. As a matter of fact, Ronald Reagan finally ushered it down the aisle and into the dust bin of history.

It should not be revived. No matter how charismatic it’s proponent may be. Obama should be allowed a final resting place near Karl, if he so desires. Marxism is dead. Let it remain so. I don’t want Obama telling me how to live. I don’t care if it’s through collectivism or Islam.

Obama/Marx 2008

In Politics on May 25, 2008 at 8:08 am

Michelle Obama and Abortion

In Politics on May 23, 2008 at 4:14 am

Michelle Obama, the attorney wife of pro-abortion Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, is coming under fire for a letter she wrote defending partial-birth abortions. The 2004 letter, written to help Obama in his campaign for his U.S. Senate seat, opposes the ban on the abortion procedure.

In February 2004, Michelle Obama penned a fundraising letter to help her husband Barack raise funds for his Illinois-based Senate seat.

The letter contends the federal ban on partial-birth abortions “is clearly unconstitutional” and “a flawed law.”

Though the three-day-long partial-birth abortion procedure involves the partial birth of a baby during the middle trimester of pregnancy and the jamming of scissors into the back of her head to kill her, Obama’s wife describes it as “legitimate” medicine.

“The fact remains, with no provision to protect the heath of the mother, this ban on a legitimate medical procedure is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned,” Michelle Obama writes in the letter.

She also said the Bush administration should not encourage the abortion practitioners who sued to reverse the ban to drop their lawsuit to make it unconstitutional. The Supreme Court later sided with Bush and Congress in saying the ban is legitimate.

In closing, Obama told prospective donors that they could “count on” Barack to “keep the Bush team from appointing the Supreme Court justice that will vote against Roe v. Wade.”

Noted pro-life advocate Jill Stanek highlighted the letter on her blog and said Michelle was “leeching off the partial birth abortion ban” to raise funds for her husband.

“I’d like to ask Michelle to explain her legal opinion about this law the Supremes went on to declare constitutional,” Stanek said.

“I’d like to ask Michelle how in the world she could in good conscience raise money from fear-mongering about this barbaric abortion procedure,” she added.

Stanek pointed out that Barack Obama recently issued a warning to “lay off my wife” after she came under fire about an unrelated issue.

Stanek said the request amounted to “Free speech for me but not for thee” — something she called “a typical left-wing position.”

“So it’s fine to kill late-term babies, but we can’t risk hurting Michelle’s feelings about it,” she added.

Michelle Obama. Not content with merely hating on white folks [WHITEY!]. She thinks that jamming a pair of scissors into the back of the head of a baby inside the womb of the mother is a constitutional right. So babies are the enemy of Michelle Obama as well. I wonder what perceived slight the babies of the world committed. Michelle and her Liberal Marxist Cronies and Universal Victim-hood. Liberal Victim Theology. “Libvictomology.” A new leftest religion.

What is wrong with these people?

Michelle and Barack advocate murdering babies in order to raise money for an election. I find this disgusting.

Obama–International Leader or Community Organizer?

In Politics on May 23, 2008 at 2:23 am

It’s an important and defining question. Can Obama Act Decisively? Words. Actions. Consequences. Does Obama understand?

But it seems as though you are the only idiot who doesn’t truly understand the power of words. Especially when they come from the mouth of the President of the United States of America.

Democrats are right to feel upset about President Bush’s appeasement accusation. It is their Achilles’ heel in this election and they know it. The foreign-policy mantra of the Obama campaign amounts to this: Talk is cheap.
Over the next five months we will see the many tentacles of such a strategy emerge and the comeback “that’s political” — as Obama has objected — will be treated with the disdain it deserves. Determining how to deal with the enemies of freedom and democracy is as political as it gets.

When a POTUS speaks to someone. When a POTUS sits at a table with someone. When a POTUS breaks bread with someone. It confers legitimacy upon the person or party. It tells the world that this is a serious person. This is someone who should be noted. Someone to whom we should pay attention.

The Soviet Union. China. We had no choice but to notice them. They were a reality and their decision and actions had the effect of creating realities.

Iran. North Korea. Lybia. These countries leaders. These are not serious people. Their decisions are usually petty. They are usually destructive. They are more often than not aimed toward a purpose to disrupt rather than to create or assist or build. These are nations with the sole intent of destroying with their actions.

These are Nations that support, create and carry out terror.

If the POTUS meets with these nations, that signals to the world that these are serious nations with whom the world should treat. With whom the world should break bread.

If Obama becomes POTUS, he needs to act as if he knows the gravity of his choices. If Iran truly is no threat, as Barack states, then there is no reason to meet with the mad, little Iranian aspirant to mass murder. Yes, I speak of Mahmood Ahmadinejad.

North Korea should be treated as a belligerent state. It should not be rewarded. I think we should back out of the North Korea sweepstakes completely. Let the South and Japan take the lead for the West.

The world wants the US to back off some from our World Police mentality. North Korea and Iran would be perfect places to do so in my opinion. Back off. Let the other Nations deal with them.

But if attacked by either. Our reaction should be swift and hard. Deadly. Destructive. Decisive. The Full Force of American Might and Resolve.

I know McCain can be those things. Will Obama waver? Is Obama but a Carter redux? A fearful and irresolute foreign policy President who will blink when faced with a crisis. We may face that question in the years to come. Will a President Obama pass the test?

In other words, talk isn’t cheap at all. And a President Obama’s stunningly specious foreign policy will be paid for in blood, sweat, and tears.

Hillary wins Kentucky

In Politics on May 21, 2008 at 3:45 am

[Clinton]

Clinton won the Kentucky primary. But it’s a victory of scant political value in a Democratic presidential race moving inexorably in Obama’s direction. The Illinois senator is favored to win in Oregon, where 52 delegates are at stake.

I knew my State would repudiate that mad charlatan. Good Job, Kentucky!

NOW.  Do the right thing and vote for John McCain in the general election.

Barack Obama spokesman — Racists are Republican/Republicans are Racist

In Politics on May 20, 2008 at 5:18 am

Today, in an interview with Linda Douglass of the National Journal, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe tried to play down any impact Obama’s race has on his electability, saying, “the vast, vast majority of voters who would not vote for Barack Obama in November based on race are probably firmly in John McCain’s camp already.”

Basically, the DNC is going to paint any independent who does not vote for their candidate as a racist and/or ignorant. It doesn’t matter that many think of Obama as Stalin lite. It’s race that matters. Not political leanings or a person’s ability to choose based on real issues that are important to them.

According to the Obama Campaign and the DNC, if you vote McCain you must be “just another Republican racist.” Self-determination be damned in this age of Political Correctness.

When do we get assigned our thought police and our Regional DNC appointed Political Commissar.

Tough Guy Barack Obama Threatens “Lay Off My Wife or else!”

In Politics on May 19, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Sen. Barack Obama ripped into a Republican ad today that targets comments made by his wife, Michelle, and called the GOP tactic “low class” and “detestable.”

The senator and his wife discuss the race for the White House. The Illinois senator told “Good Morning America” that he expects hardball tactics from the Republicans if he becomes the Democratic presidential nominee.

“But I also think these folks should lay off my wife,” he told “GMA” as his wife chuckled beside him.

Obama told “GMA” that he believes he will win a majority of the Democratic delegates once the votes are counted after Tuesday’s primaries in Kentucky and Oregon. Obama is favored in Oregon while rival Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York is expected to win Kentucky.

[SNIP]

The Republicans seem to have come to the same conclusion and a GOP Internet campaign in Tennessee has an ad featuring Michelle Obama’s comments during the long Democratic campaign that “for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country.”

Michelle Obama was asked about the ad on “GMA,” but her husband said, “Let me just interject on this.”

“The GOP, should I be the nominee, I think can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record,” Obama said. “I’ve been in public life for 20 years. I expect them to pore through everything that I’ve said, every utterance, every statement. And to paint it in the most undesirable light possible. That’s what they do.”

“But I do want to say this to the GOP. If they think that they’re going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable,” he said.

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com

Barack Obama wants to use his wife on the campaign trail but wants her off limits to the GOP. Sorry Barry. As long as she runs her mouth and campaigns on your behalf, she is open to criticism. Especially when she is such a divisive point in American Politics as she undeniably has become. Her “I’m proud of America for the first time in my adult life” comment was idiotic. She wasn’t proud when the Berlin Wall fell. She isn’t proud of any other American accomplishment. If we want to talk race. She wasn’t proud about Colin Powell and Condi Rice or Clarence Thomas. She’s only proud because a Black DEMOCRATIC made an advance. Pure party politics. She’s as big a hack as her husband.

I hope the country has enough sense to change their minds about Obama. We can elect a real President as opposed to a Marxist tool.

“Che” Obama — Let the Bloody Revolution begin…

In Politics on May 19, 2008 at 7:46 am

Barack Hussein Obama, Black Liberation Theology (Theologically Enshrined Racism) and Marxism

Basically, a large group of American people desire to elect a Marxist who is more than likely a closet racist to the Presidency .

The DNC may as well nominate an Ahmadinejad/Hugo Chavez ticket. While they’re at it, they can disband Congress and emplace Hamas in the House and Hezbollah in the Senate. Cement the destruction of the Constitution by placing the former Soviet Politburo in the Supreme Court. Special bonus: Kim Jung Il as Speaker of the House. Khamanei can be Attorney General in this ideal State of Affairs.

I wonder where Michelle and the Mullahs will build the first Gulag. Alaska, perhaps? Or will they just cede it back to Russia as a special Red Gift. I wonder if Obama will be as bloodthirsty as the men he admires. Che and Fidel the murdering twins of South America. Perhaps, Che Obama will be the American Stalin or our Mad Murdering Mao. Jeremiah Wright will re-emerge as Political Thought Commissar.

The DNC has finally gone off the deep end. Obama will make Jimmy Carter look like a mastermind.

Is Obama a Crackhead?

In Politics on May 17, 2008 at 11:46 am

Is Obama somehow involved with this strange man? Why has this story not been picked up by the mainstream media? Obama admits to doing cocaine in his college years? If true, why has the press not picked up on this. Cocaine is addictive. Couple that with this bit of oddity and…?

George Bush admitted to wild early years. The press wouldn’t let it go. Now Obama gets a free pass. Why?

Red State Update

In Politics on May 17, 2008 at 4:35 am

I received this video in an email. It is absolutely hilarious. These two guys are obviously from somewhere in Red State Tennessee. They were gearing up for the Obama/Hillary showdown, I assume.

“Hurry up and nominate someone, so’s I can know who I’m votin’ against!”

Classic!

A Truth about the Obama Campaign

In Politics on April 21, 2008 at 9:12 am

Playing by Obama’s Rules

By Patrick Buchanan

To observe Democrats this week, savaging one of their heroines, is to understand why the party is unready to rule.

Consider: At the 1984 Democratic convention in San Francisco, an unknown member of Congress was vaulted into history by being chosen the first woman ever to run on a national party ticket.

Geraldine Ferraro became a household name. And though the Mondale-Ferraro ticket went down to a 49-state defeat, “Gerry” became an icon to Democratic women.

This week, however, after being subjected for 48 hours to accusations of divisiveness by Barack Obama, and racism by his agents and auxiliaries in the media, Ferraro resigned from Clinton’s campaign. What had she said to send the Obamaites into paroxysms of rage?

She stated an obvious truth: Had Barack not been a black male, he probably would not be the front-runner for the nomination.

Here are the words that sent her to the scaffold.

“If Obama was a white man he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up with the concept.”

Note that Ferraro did not say race was the only reason Barack was succeeding. She simply said that being an African-American has been as indispensable to his success as her being a woman was to her success in 1984. Had my name been “Gerald” rather than Geraldine, I would not have been on the ’84 ticket, Ferraro conceded.

In calling her comments racist, Barack’s retinue is asserting that his race has nothing to do with his success, even implying that it is racist to suggest it. This is preposterous.

What Geraldine Ferraro said is palpably true, and everyone knows it.

Was the fact that Barack is black irrelevant to the party’s decision to give a state senator the keynote address at the 2004 convention? Did Barack’s being African-American have nothing to do with his running up 91 percent of the black vote in Mississippi on Tuesday?

Did Barack’s being black have nothing to do with the decision of civil rights legend John Lewis to dump Hillary and endorse him, though Lewis talks of how his constituents do not want to lose this first great opportunity to have an African-American president?

Can political analysts explain why Barack will sweep Philly in the Pennsylvania primary, though Hillary has the backing of the African-American mayor and Gov. Ed Rendell, without referring to Barack’s ethnic appeal to black voters?

What else explains why the mainstream media are going so ga-ga over Obama they are being satirized on “Saturday Night Live”?

Barack Obama has a chance of being the first black president. And holding out that special hope has been crucial to his candidacy. To deny this is self-delusion — or deceit.

Nor is this unusual. John F. Kennedy would not have gotten 78 percent of the Catholic vote had he not been Catholic. Hillary would not have rolled up those margins among white women in New Hampshire had she not been a sister in trouble. Mitt Romney would not have swept Utah and flamed out in Dixie were he not a Mormon. Mike Huckabee would not have marched triumphantly through the Bible Belt were he not a Baptist preacher and evangelical Christian. All politics is tribal.

The first campaign this writer ever covered was the New York mayoral race of 1961. Republicans stitched together the legendary ticket of Lefkowitz, Fino and Gilhooley, to touch three ethnic bases. Folks laughed. No one would have professed moral outrage had anyone suggested they were appealing to, or even pandering to, the Jewish, Italian and Irish voters of New York. People were more honest then.

Obama’s agents suggest that Ferraro deliberately injected race into the campaign. But this, too, is ridiculous. Her quote came in an interview with the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif., not “Meet the Press.”

The attack on Ferraro comes out of a conscious strategy of the Obama campaign — to seek immunity from attack by smearing any and all attackers as having racist motives. When Bill Clinton dismissed Obama’s claim to have been consistently antiwar as a “fairy tale,” and twinned Obama’s victory in South Carolina with Jesse Jackson’s, his statements were described as tinged with racism.

Early this week, Harvard Professor Orlando Patterson’s sensitive nostrils sniffed out racism in Hillary’s Red Phone ad, as there were no blacks in it. Patterson said it reminded him of D.W. Griffith’s pro-KKK “Birth of a Nation,” a 1915 film.

What Barack’s allies seem to be demanding is immunity, a special exemption from political attack, because he is African-American. And those who go after him are to be brought up on charges of racism, as has Bill Clinton, Ed Rendell and now Geraldine Ferraro.

Hillary, hoping to appease Barack’s constituency, is ceding the point. Will the Republican Party and the right do the same? Play by Obama rules, and you lose to Obama.

There is nothing new here. These are the same tactics that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have used to bully everyone and bleed bribes out of any organization that happens to get in the way of their agenda.

It’s not about healing the racial divide. It’s about dividing and conquering. Obama has learned this lesson well and is applying it in this election. He was subtle at first. As he gains momentum, his subtlety will give way to a sledge hammer.

Geraldine was but the first prominent national casualty. Obama will destroy many more in his pursuit of power. If he gains the Presidency, there will be too many to count. Look to Detroit, Michigan and it’s Mayor to see the future of Obama as President.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 43 other followers