Saturday, November 1, 2008
White Racists and Anti-Semites for Obama
From the chairman of the American Nazi Party on Obama:
"White people are faced with either a negro or a total nutter who happens to have a pale face. Personally I'd prefer the negro."
But there's more....
"White people are faced with either a negro or a total nutter who happens to have a pale face. Personally I'd prefer the negro."
But there's more....
A Scary Halooween with Sarah Palin
In central Pennsylvania, the Republican base is afraid of Obama, and lost in fever dreams of a neo-Soviet nightmare. But it's all in God's hands.
One of the many things that had 84-year-old World War II veteran John H. Gay on edge was worry for Sarah Palin's safety. "She's a brave woman, an old-fashioned American woman who's not afraid to have kids," said Gay. "She's one of the bravest women around, and someone might just assassinate her." But he was tormented by images of a fantastical Stalinoid world to come. According to Gay, Obama believes the communist "mantra" "from each according to his abilities, and to each according to his needs"; that "if we go the socialist way, you young people will lose all your freedoms -- mentally, physically and religiously."
As he envisioned a possible future under Obama, he spoke of scarce hot water and hulking Soviet-era high-rises of the sort that ring Moscow.
One of the many things that had 84-year-old World War II veteran John H. Gay on edge was worry for Sarah Palin's safety. "She's a brave woman, an old-fashioned American woman who's not afraid to have kids," said Gay. "She's one of the bravest women around, and someone might just assassinate her." But he was tormented by images of a fantastical Stalinoid world to come. According to Gay, Obama believes the communist "mantra" "from each according to his abilities, and to each according to his needs"; that "if we go the socialist way, you young people will lose all your freedoms -- mentally, physically and religiously."
As he envisioned a possible future under Obama, he spoke of scarce hot water and hulking Soviet-era high-rises of the sort that ring Moscow.
Friday, October 31, 2008
An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches.
Yes, Weezy, apparently there is a 67 page paper on this with 192 footnotes.
Obama draws crowd of 25,000 in Des Moines today
"On the day of the Iowa caucuses, my faith in the American people was vindicated and what you started here in Iowa has swept the nation," Obama told a crowd his campaign said totaled about 25,000 in a downtown park under a warm fall sun.
"A couple of elections ago, there was a presidential candidate who decried this kind of politics and condemned these kinds of tactics. And I admired him for it. He said, 'I will not take the low road to the highest office in this land.' Those words were spoken eight years ago by my opponent, John McCain," he said. "But the high road didn't lead him to the White House then, so this time, he decided to take a different route."
Obama also criticized a new McCain ad that shows the Democratic nominee in the past praising McCain and Sen. Joseph Lieberman for their work on global warming.
"As if there's something wrong with acknowledging when an opponent has said or done something that makes sense," Obama said. "I do that all the time....I think we need more of that attitude in Washington. We need more civility in Washington. I don't disagree with Senator McCain on everything. I respect his occasional displays of independence."
Left two photos: Linda Turner, Right photo: Don Abbott
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Apparently McCain "funds radicals" too.
When McCain served as Chairman of the Board of the International Republican Institute, distributed several grants to KHALIDI'S ORGANIZATION, in 1998 one grant alone was nearly half a million dollars.
Rob Hubler, the Democratic challenger to Steve King, Iowa's Finest
Not a lot of time left; but surely enough time to help this guy defeat Iowa's version of Michelle Bachmann, Ms. Pro-America.
What McCain Defectors See in Obama
Thanks to Don Abbott for bringing this to my attention; a fantastic summary of what led to the GOP defections.
DPA Ban may be adding to Financial Crisis
Sorry for the long post; but this is something near and dear to me and my business. The largest company participating in "DPA", or Down-payment assistance, was Nehemiah. How it worked: FHA requires a 3% downpayment. The seller was able to, at closing, "donate" 3% of their sale proceeds to the non-profit (i.e., Nehemiah). Upon signing an agreement, the non-profit would gift the 3% downpayment to the buyer. The seller then had agreed to donate that same amount, plus a fee, to the entity at the time of closing. Because the seller has to take less for the house to be able to do it, and the listing price of the property is not to be raised to cover it; it was a way for sellers to accommodate a buyer and sell a property that may have otherwise taken longer to sell.
DPA Ban May Be Adding to Crisis
By Amilda Dymi, National Mortgage News
WASHINGTON-A bigger financial crisis has overshadowed the underlying risk and long-term implications of thinning affordable housing options due to limited credit and higher downpayment requirements.
Meanwhile, a controversial ban on seller-funded downpayment assistance took effect on Oct. 1, adding to the overall crisis.
It may seem fair Congress did not spare time to review the FHA Seller-Financed Downpayment Reform and Risk-Based Pricing Authorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 6694), which would restore DPA indefinitely.
The ban is based on HUD claims that DPA programs contribute to higher default rates and could potentially result in having to offset the risk by tapping into its reserves, a claim long disputed by DPA providers and industry members. Not only six hours after the ban took effect, the Congressional Budget Office issued a report that says seller-financed DPA loans insured by the FHA generate homeownership at no cost to the U.S. government for at least the next five years thanks to its self-funding mechanism.
"All of this substantive opposition to DPA has been taken off the table," said Scott Syphax, president and CEO of Nehemiah Corp. of America, the country's largest DPA provider.
Bipartisan bill H.R. 6694 introduced by Reps. Al Green, D-Texas, Gary Miller, D-Calif., Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Maxine Waters, D-Calif., in July was based on DPA industry data and independent report findings.
As the ban took effect on Oct. 1, Rep. Green stressed that as DPA is eliminated to comply with the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Congress needs to recognize it helped transform lives without spending a single taxpayer dollar.
In addition, "the Congressional Budget Office estimates that seller-financed DPA will generate $65 million over the next five years and save taxpayers $13 million next year." H.R. 6694 will create a new DPA "under new standards that will effectively balance the risk of potential foreclosures with the goal of increasing homeownership," he said.
Moreover, the bailout bill (H.R. 3997, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) designed to aid Wall Street avert a serious recession does not offer a direct solution to a potentially more severe crisis within the affordable housing market.
Commenting on H.R. 3997, Mr. Syphax said a provision within the bailout to reinstate DPA "could help ensure continued liquidity in the stagnating housing market by providing aid to an estimated 600,000 working-class people for home purchases next year, generating $150 billion in home sales."
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
LET'S PUT SOCIALISM TO REST
"Like, Socialism": Hendrik Hertzberg, The New Yorker
During the 2000 campaign, on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” a young woman asked him why her father, a doctor, should be “penalized” by being “in a huge tax bracket.” McCain replied that “wealthy people can afford more” and that “the very wealthy, because they can afford tax lawyers and all kinds of loopholes, really don’t pay nearly as much as you think they do.” The exchange continued:
YOUNG WOMAN: Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . .
MCCAIN: Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.
For her part, Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist—Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine—that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it (“collectively,” no less), but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist. ♦
Click title for full article; and note: emphasis, mine. (The argument that Obama is giving money TO PEOPLE THAT DO NOT PAY TAXES AT ALL, is not true, as it implies people that do not work at all are receiving benefits. Only workers that pay payroll taxes would receive the credit, as it is an income tax credit, not a direct handout. In Alaska, every man, woman and child received $3,269 this year; EVEN those that don't work at all. What exactly is that?
During the 2000 campaign, on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” a young woman asked him why her father, a doctor, should be “penalized” by being “in a huge tax bracket.” McCain replied that “wealthy people can afford more” and that “the very wealthy, because they can afford tax lawyers and all kinds of loopholes, really don’t pay nearly as much as you think they do.” The exchange continued:
YOUNG WOMAN: Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . .
MCCAIN: Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.
For her part, Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist—Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine—that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it (“collectively,” no less), but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist. ♦
Click title for full article; and note: emphasis, mine. (The argument that Obama is giving money TO PEOPLE THAT DO NOT PAY TAXES AT ALL, is not true, as it implies people that do not work at all are receiving benefits. Only workers that pay payroll taxes would receive the credit, as it is an income tax credit, not a direct handout. In Alaska, every man, woman and child received $3,269 this year; EVEN those that don't work at all. What exactly is that?
This is just fun: www.palinaspresident.us
Looks as though it's been updated; Colin Powell's picture's in the shredder, and just noticed a few new changes.. check it out. (and turn your sound on)
Newest Florida Mailing
Would someone please send me things like this that have been sent out by the DNC? We have the "Obsession" video, the Virginia Democrats-vote-on-November-5th, the Florida fake voter registration cards, the ObamaBucks, the Virginia GOP mailing on terrorism with a picture of a person looking a lot like Obama, the Curious George Obama-monkey, the kids with red x'd out t shirts of Obama's face, Bobby May, treasurer of the Buchanan Co. Virginia Republicans, with the most racist, unbelievable thing I've seen this entire campaign (are we seeing a TREND with Virginia? Obviously)..... Seriously, I'd really like to see where the Democrats are sending this out. 
Monday, October 27, 2008
Voter Suppression in Virginia
Voters are getting calls that threaten criminal charges if they show up to vote, and in Hampton Roads a phony flier tells Democrats and Independents voting for Democrats that an emergency legislative session has split election day into two; and they are to vote November 5th.
Infighting, Jumping Ship, and Dead Horses
I'm beating a dead horse here, (Ross Douthat uses the same phrase in a link I just found as I returned to this to edit before posting), but I'm at a loss for why party loyalty trumps reason. I have no problem admitting that Joe Biden does no one any favors a good 10% of the time he opens his mouth (o.k., 50% of the time). But the fact remains that he is a good man, who made a commitment to his boys and stuck to it, through their entire childhood. He and John McCain have been very close friends for years, and he has tremendous respect for his foreign policy knowledge and experience. It is utterly disturbing the vitreous hate that is coming from the hangers on to the McCain/Palin campaign.
Everyone has a right to their beliefs; but to say that questioning your candidate is blasphemy is the makings of a fine dictatorship. While Andrew Sullivan is whole-heartedly behind Senator Obama, (I encourage you to read the linked piece of his) Daniel Larison, at American Conservative Magazine, is most definitely NOT. But he, in my opinion, is correct in pointing out that the GOP is not what it once was; fiscal conservancy, reduced government, strong military. It has become the captive of the "neocons', the far Christian right. But the current party has strayed from that; but better to hear that from a committed conservative:
Daniel Larison:
Having defended and enabled Mr. Bush for years, many of the recent ship-jumpers and critics of Palin finally declared that enough was enough, while some conservatives who have had more problems with the administration have decided that what is needed is more party loyalty and sycophancy focused now on Palin instead of Bush. When it is pointed out that this is self-defeating and actually makes more “purist” conservative arguments more politically irrelevant than ever, there is a flood of anathemas. (click here for full article)
I came back to this after reading a post from Ross Douthat. He does not think that conservatives/Republicans should vote for Barack Obama our of a jumping on the bandwagon mentality, but rather, decries the infighting that is going on, which IS MY POINT.
Ross Douthat: (click here for full post)
The bigger point (and I know I'm a broken record here) is this. Whatever direction you think conservatism should be going in from here on out, the absolute worst thing the members of a losing political movement can do - if they ever want to win again, at least - is attempt to pre-emptively close off debate about the movement's future. Conservatives need to have arguments, not promise excommunications, or else pretty soon there won't be very much worth arguing over.
Everyone has a right to their beliefs; but to say that questioning your candidate is blasphemy is the makings of a fine dictatorship. While Andrew Sullivan is whole-heartedly behind Senator Obama, (I encourage you to read the linked piece of his) Daniel Larison, at American Conservative Magazine, is most definitely NOT. But he, in my opinion, is correct in pointing out that the GOP is not what it once was; fiscal conservancy, reduced government, strong military. It has become the captive of the "neocons', the far Christian right. But the current party has strayed from that; but better to hear that from a committed conservative:
Daniel Larison:
Having defended and enabled Mr. Bush for years, many of the recent ship-jumpers and critics of Palin finally declared that enough was enough, while some conservatives who have had more problems with the administration have decided that what is needed is more party loyalty and sycophancy focused now on Palin instead of Bush. When it is pointed out that this is self-defeating and actually makes more “purist” conservative arguments more politically irrelevant than ever, there is a flood of anathemas. (click here for full article)
I came back to this after reading a post from Ross Douthat. He does not think that conservatives/Republicans should vote for Barack Obama our of a jumping on the bandwagon mentality, but rather, decries the infighting that is going on, which IS MY POINT.
Ross Douthat: (click here for full post)
The bigger point (and I know I'm a broken record here) is this. Whatever direction you think conservatism should be going in from here on out, the absolute worst thing the members of a losing political movement can do - if they ever want to win again, at least - is attempt to pre-emptively close off debate about the movement's future. Conservatives need to have arguments, not promise excommunications, or else pretty soon there won't be very much worth arguing over.
The Top Ten Reasons Conservatives Should Vote For Obama
No, Andrew Sullivan is not paying me under the table for linking to him. But in my opinion he consistently offers the most reasoned, non-inflammatory coherent point of view. He is committed to holding the next President accountable for his actions and promises; and while there are many things we may disagree on, my respect for him is profound.
10. A body blow to racial identity politics. An end to the era of Jesse Jackson in black America.
9. Less debt. Yes, Obama will raise taxes on those earning over a quarter of a million. And he will spend on healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan and the environment. But so will McCain. He plans more spending on health, the environment and won't touch defense of entitlements. And his refusal to touch taxes means an extra $4 trillion in debt over the massive increase presided over by Bush. And the CBO estimates that McCain's plans will add more to the debt over four years than Obama's. Fiscal conservatives have a clear choice.
8. A return to realism and prudence in foreign policy. Obama has consistently cited the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush as his inspiration. McCain's knee-jerk reaction to the Georgian conflict, his commitment to stay in Iraq indefinitely, and his brinksmanship over Iran's nuclear ambitions make him a far riskier choice for conservatives. The choice between Obama and McCain is like the choice between George H.W. Bush's first term and George W.'s.
7. An ability to understand the difference between listening to generals and delegating foreign policy to them.
6. Temperament. Obama has the coolest, calmest demeanor of any president since Eisenhower. Conservatism values that kind of constancy, especially cmopared with the hot-headed, irrational impulsiveness of McCain.
5. Faith. Obama's fusion of Christianity and reason, his non-fundamentalist faith, is a critical bridge between the new atheism and the new Christianism.
CLICK HERE FOR THE REST:
Drudge Report: Wrong about Obama "Redistribution of Wealth" from 2001
Read Andrew Sullivan's post on this, it's about the civil rights movement, not socialism.
UPDATE:
FACTCHECKER JUST DEALT WITH THIS (QUICKLY, AS THE 2001 SUPREME COURT ISSUE JUST STARTED MAKING THE ROUNDS TODAY: THEIR CONCLUSION:
The Pinocchio Test
With very few exceptions, all American politicians, including both presidential candidates, are in favor of a progressive income tax system and welfare policies (such as Medicare and Social Security) that "redistribute wealth." Barack Obama is more enthusiastic about "spreading the wealth around" than his Republican rival. But that does not make him a "Socialist." The McCain camp is wrong to suggest that the Illinois senator advocated an "wealth redistribution" role for the Supreme Court in his 2001 interview.
TWO PINOCCHIOS
UPDATE:
FACTCHECKER JUST DEALT WITH THIS (QUICKLY, AS THE 2001 SUPREME COURT ISSUE JUST STARTED MAKING THE ROUNDS TODAY: THEIR CONCLUSION:
The Pinocchio Test
With very few exceptions, all American politicians, including both presidential candidates, are in favor of a progressive income tax system and welfare policies (such as Medicare and Social Security) that "redistribute wealth." Barack Obama is more enthusiastic about "spreading the wealth around" than his Republican rival. But that does not make him a "Socialist." The McCain camp is wrong to suggest that the Illinois senator advocated an "wealth redistribution" role for the Supreme Court in his 2001 interview.
TWO PINOCCHIOS
Amazon Had Obama Mask Listed As A "Terrorist Costume"
This was reported in the LA Times on Sunday; and Think Progress shows Top of the Ticket caught the image via screenshot.
Economy Down, Gun Sales Up.
From Washington Post's article today:
Americans have cut back on buying cars, furniture and clothes in a tough economy, but there's one consumer item that's still enjoying healthy sales: guns. Purchases of firearms and ammunition have risen 8 to 10 percent this year, according to state and federal data.
"I think right now people are scared Obama is going to take their rights away," said Margaret Marcus, who was carrying a Glock 19 9mm semiautomatic pistol under a blue jean jacket embroidered with "Winnie the Pooh" characters. "He's definitely anti-gun, despite what you see in the mainstream media."
Americans have cut back on buying cars, furniture and clothes in a tough economy, but there's one consumer item that's still enjoying healthy sales: guns. Purchases of firearms and ammunition have risen 8 to 10 percent this year, according to state and federal data.
"I think right now people are scared Obama is going to take their rights away," said Margaret Marcus, who was carrying a Glock 19 9mm semiautomatic pistol under a blue jean jacket embroidered with "Winnie the Pooh" characters. "He's definitely anti-gun, despite what you see in the mainstream media."
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Obama's Inaugural Speech Is Not Already Written
CBS News reported, a story that Barack Obama's inaugural speech has already been written.
CBS is now reporting that the Obama campaign says the charge is completely false. As Matthew Yglesias says, it's also true that the charge is completely false. Anyone who has heard Senator Obama speak in the last 2 weeks knows; he's not taking anything for granted.
CBS is now reporting that the Obama campaign says the charge is completely false. As Matthew Yglesias says, it's also true that the charge is completely false. Anyone who has heard Senator Obama speak in the last 2 weeks knows; he's not taking anything for granted.
ANCHORAGE DAILY NEWS ENDORSES OBAMA
Sen. McCain describes himself as a maverick, by which he seems to mean that he spent 25 years trying unsuccessfully to persuade his own party to follow his bipartisan, centrist lead. Sadly, maverick John McCain didn't show up for the campaign. Instead we have candidate McCain, who embraces the extreme Republican orthodoxy he once resisted and cynically asks Americans to buy for another four years.
Yet despite her formidable gifts, few who have worked closely with the governor would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth. To step in and juggle the demands of an economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would stretch the governor beyond her range. Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time.
Click here for full article.
Sen. McCain describes himself as a maverick, by which he seems to mean that he spent 25 years trying unsuccessfully to persuade his own party to follow his bipartisan, centrist lead. Sadly, maverick John McCain didn't show up for the campaign. Instead we have candidate McCain, who embraces the extreme Republican orthodoxy he once resisted and cynically asks Americans to buy for another four years.
Yet despite her formidable gifts, few who have worked closely with the governor would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth. To step in and juggle the demands of an economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would stretch the governor beyond her range. Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time.
Click here for full article.
How Do You Feel About This?
Taken from: www.fivethirtyeight.com On The Road: Big Stone Gap, Virginia
Last week, Julie Hensley made one of her thousands of phone calls on behalf of Barack Obama. A woman answered. As Hensley ran through her short script, the husband impatiently broke in.
"Ma'am, we're voting for the n***er." And hung up.
Hensley wasn't having it. "I went and made a couple other calls but chafed over this absurdity," she told us, "so I called them back, as I still had a couple questions for the wife." This time the man answered, asked pointedly who she was, and when she replied he hung up again.
As for Hensley, her story ended with a twist. A couple hours later during a pause in her dials, her phone rang. She recognized the number. "This is going to be good," she remembers thinking, getting ready to scrap.
It was the husband. He was calling for the woman on whom he'd hung up. She then got something she didn't expect -- an apology. Calmly, Hensley told the man she'd accept his apology on one condition -- he had to tell her who he was voting for.
"Oh, I don't normally talk about it but I feel like I owe you," the man said. "I am voting for Senator Obama." He asked if Hensley would like to speak to his wife, as he'd interrupted the original call. Hensley mentioned that she had been surprised when he'd called to apologize. Apparently the husband and wife had been talking the entire couple hours since the original call. "Did she get upset with you?" Hensley asked.
"What do you think?" the man replied.
Eleven days.
Last week, Julie Hensley made one of her thousands of phone calls on behalf of Barack Obama. A woman answered. As Hensley ran through her short script, the husband impatiently broke in.
"Ma'am, we're voting for the n***er." And hung up.
Hensley wasn't having it. "I went and made a couple other calls but chafed over this absurdity," she told us, "so I called them back, as I still had a couple questions for the wife." This time the man answered, asked pointedly who she was, and when she replied he hung up again.
As for Hensley, her story ended with a twist. A couple hours later during a pause in her dials, her phone rang. She recognized the number. "This is going to be good," she remembers thinking, getting ready to scrap.
It was the husband. He was calling for the woman on whom he'd hung up. She then got something she didn't expect -- an apology. Calmly, Hensley told the man she'd accept his apology on one condition -- he had to tell her who he was voting for.
"Oh, I don't normally talk about it but I feel like I owe you," the man said. "I am voting for Senator Obama." He asked if Hensley would like to speak to his wife, as he'd interrupted the original call. Hensley mentioned that she had been surprised when he'd called to apologize. Apparently the husband and wife had been talking the entire couple hours since the original call. "Did she get upset with you?" Hensley asked.
"What do you think?" the man replied.
Eleven days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
