Conservatism Today

You Can't Make this Crap up: Barack's Obama's Aunt is an Illegal Immigrant, You and I Pay for her Housing, yet she has Contributed Illegally to Barack Obama

Link to the full story is at Ace of Spades. Note that the New York Times did the original piece and noted:

However, that Ms Onyango made a contribution to the Obama campaign would indicate that she is a US citizen.

So, the NY Times, being the last, great bastion of journalism in America, left it to the Associated Press to figure out that she is living here illegally. Nice job, NYT. And i really do believe journalism is dead in America, but nice job journalisming, AP.

Exit questions: Did Senator Obama know his aunt was living here illegally? Did he do anything to help her remain here illegally?

Also interesting from the AP article you can access from Ace's place:

"It was not immediately clear how Onyango might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order."

Yeah, how did that happen?

Meanwhile, the folks at Kos are going batshit crazy. Up over 300 comments now. Read them all if you hate your sanity. I actually read most of them and need to go somewhere else in a hurry to remind myself why I love this country.

Great questions from a commenter ("nobody of consequence") at Ace of Spades:

If there were any real journalists left in America, they might want to ask some of the following questions in addition to the obvious "did he know" ones:

1. "Your aunt said she couldn't talk about you until after the election. Who told her that?" (removes the "we didn't know" response option)

4. "Your campaign defended its lack of fraud control for online credit card donations by saying they would be caught later on during screening. Isn't the fact that an illegal alien was able to make multiple donations to your campaign proof that your screening either doesn't work or doesn't actually exist?"

More good questions from No Quarter:

• How did she contribute a total of $260 to her nephew’s campaign in a series of small donations from her South Boston address if she is not a United States citizen?
• Are many illegal immigrants and foreigners submitting small donations to the Obama campaign in order to avoid scrutiny by the FEC?
• How does she qualify for public housing if she is not a United States citizen?
• How is Obama to be trusted to reform the immigration system if his relatives are breaking immigration laws and living illegally in this country?
• And why did the Senator not file a form I-130, a Petition for Alien Relative, on behalf of his aunt after her request for political asylum was rejected? As a United States Senator, he certainly could expedite the adjudication of such a petition.

Zogby Poll Shows McCain Up One, in Friday-Only Polling

From Drudge:

ZOGBY SATURDAY: McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...

Can't wait til the folks at Kos get ahold of that one. It's happening again folks. 

Schwarzenegger: I only Play an Action Hero in my Movies, but John McCain is a Real Action Hero. Oh, and Barack Obama is a Weak Little Girlie Man

"I left Europe four decades ago because socialisim has killed opportunities there, and many entrepreneurs and business people also left and took jobs with them."

"I would not have accomplished anything that I've accomplished... (without America) because this is the greatest country in the world."

"Obama says he wants to pursue the same spread the wealth ideas that Europe had decades ago."

"Senator Obama, explain to me the advantage of turning social security from a retirement system into a welfare system."

"For the last two years the democrats have contrrolled the House and the Senate. How has that been working out for everybody?"

"You can't get the hog to butcher itself."

"Senator Obama has raised more money than any candidate in history... If Senator Obama had taken all the money he has spent in ads, he could have bailed out the banks, paid off everyone's mortgages and saved taxpayers a ton of money."

"Our Democracy is not for sale."

Think You're Getting a Tax Cut under Obama? Watch This:

'Evaporative Economics' - or 'My Favorite Video for Undecided Voters'

Step one: Find an undecided voter. Step two: Show him this video. Step three: McPalin wins the election.

It covers almost every major issue in this election. If I could talk like this man, I wouldn't be writing.

Endorse John McCain, and Barack Obama will Throw you off his Plane

Gee, I wonder why the election coverage of Barack Obama is so much more positive than John McCain's? Because, more than anything, the media wants access to the big story?

The Obama campaign has decided to heave out three newspapers from its plane for the final days of its blitz across battleground states -- and all three endorsed Sen. John McCain for president!

The NY POST, WASHINGTON TIMES and DALLAS MORNING NEWS have all been told to move out by Sunday to make room for network bigwigs -- and possibly for the inclusion of reporters from two black magazines, ESSENCE and JET, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Despite pleas from top editors of the three newspapers that have covered the campaign for months at extraordinary cost, the Obama campaign says their reporters -- and possibly others -- will have to vacate their coveted seats so more power players can document the final days of Sen. Barack Obama's historic campaign to become the first black American president.

From Drudge.

Obama: Hey, you know, that Change I Talked About for over a Year? It's Going to be really Difficult and Might not even Happen, but Vote for me Anyway

The Obama campaign is now looking to lower expectations for an Obama administration, the same expectations that it has worked to amplify for more than a year. I'm convinced that it is only a matter of time before all the campaign promises are tossed under the Obama bus, where they will vie with Obama's grandmother and Reverend Wright for attention.

From Fox News:

Barack Obama's senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week's election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harboring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.

The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of "hope" and "change" are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.

One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, "so there's not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair."

The aide said that Obama himself was the first to realize that expectations risked being inflated.

Obama was the first to realize it. Too funny. But his judgment wasn't such that he could envision that response as a real consequence of running as a blank slate of hope and change who anyone and everyone could project their vision of change onto.

Judgment.

Dangerous. First he fills his airhead supporters with foolish visions of change that he knows he can't accomplish. Now he realizes he has to deal with the prospect of living up to that change if he somehow wins this.

That smell you are noticing is the rotten stench of another Jimmy Carter in the making.

Freaking Tito the Builder on Hannity and Colmes

Classic. "These (shades) are to intimidate Colmes." Brought up the minor point of the LA Times tape, too.

No Negativity, can we Handle that for Five Days and Win this Thing?

I get enough negativity from Obama supporters pretending to be "life-long Republicans." I don't need it from my fellow conservatives. We are going to win this election as long as McCain voters are not cowed by the media and the polls into staying home and not voting. If you can't abide by my wishes, as conservatives, and be positive for the next five days, I want no part of you here. We can talk again after the election.

Hiibuzz has an excellent (and long) post on the subject. I suggest any of you fighting pessimism check it out. I would excerpt it, but it's all worth reading:

Eeyore Free Zone

9-Year old Vandal Gets a Shock

I'll quote Ace on this one:

Shocker: 9 Year Old Caught Stealing McCain Signs

The "shocker" in the headline is literal. The guy got sick of miscreants stealing his sign so he juiced it up with electricity.

The kids' father says the little scamp just grabbed it to "see how it was put together."

It's a sign. It's a stick with a fucking piece of cardboard stapled to it.

But this curious little Future Engineers of America Chapter President wanted to see how this gizmo called a "sign" worked.

That's the Obama Effect -- children taking great interest in educating themselves. Look at this budding young Nicolai Tesla, so curious about the complex aeronautics of a yard-sign.

Now that's he's figured out the inner workings of the staple, he's moving on fulfill Barack Obama's campaign pledge of building a car that runs on love.

 At least he didn't get shot at like the two punks yesterday. Go there to view the video.

Updated to note the fine parenting going on by the kid's father:

A few minutes later, the boy's father, Andrew Noble, was at Turschak's door, demanding an explanation from Turschak's 13-year-old daughter, who called her parents on the phone to say a man was yelling at her. Both families agree on one aspect of the exchange, that Noble chastised her for "electrocuting" his son, then left.

Not, "what the hell were you doing messing with things in other people's yards, son?" No, it's "how dare you electrocute my little tyke?"

A New Era of Marxism

Bill Dupray of the Patriot Room has an excellent post comparing this current point in time with a seemingly-similar point back in 1934:

Seventy-four years ago a man named Dr. William Wirt testified before Congress about a gravely serious matter.

(Statements of Dr. William Wirt, 73rd Congress, 2nd Session, April 10 and 17, 1934)

I was told they believe that by thwarting our then evident economic recovery they would be able to prolong the country’s destitution until they had demonstrated to the American people that the Government must operate business and commerce. By propaganda they would destroy institutions making long-term capital loans—and then push Uncle Sam into making these loans. Once Uncle Sam becomes our financier he must also follow his money with control and management.

Sounds eerily familiar doesn’t it? Isn’t Barack Obama telling us that capitalism (the “economic theory” of the last 8 years) is broken? Didn’t the Democrats destroy our banks, (institutions making long-term capital loans), with 30 year sub-prime mortagages? Didn’t they then push Uncle Sam into making these loans by buying equity interests in banks, thereby making the government a lender? 

Dupray follows that up with some pretty good information and analysis. Check it out.

Bill Clinton: Obama Needed me and Hillary to help him Understand Financial Crisis

Overwhelming support for Barack Obama from former President Bill Clinton. I'm really starting to like this guy, now that he's long out of office.

Clinton's explanations of why Obama is qualified were interesting, to say the least.

"You know what he did?" Clinton said, heralding Obama's reaction to the financial crisis. "First he took a little heat for not saying much. I knew what he was doing. He talked to his advisers – he talked to my economic advisers, he called Hillary. He called me. He called Warren Buffet. He called all those people, you know why? Because he knew it was complicated and before he said anything he wanted to understand."

Got that?

"If we have not learned anything we have learned that we need a president that wants to understand and who can understand," Clinton said.

Thank heaven the Clintons were there to help Obama understand!

Gosh. One might be tempted to wonder why the Democrats selected Obama over Hillary to begin with. Why not eliminate the middle man? And hell, if Hillary wanted to consult wtih Bill, all she would have to do is go home at night and... check that... contact whoever's on bimbo-watch patrol and have that person tell Bill she needs to talk.

Barack Obama's Creepy Courtship

Check out this beauty from Nancy of Conservative Insights: Breaking Up With Barack Obama

When people elect a candidate there is an element of courtship that needs to take place, there should be a subtle seduction from the candidate that leaves the public reassured and wanting more. When a candidate is intriguing and new, you find yourself moved, maybe in spite of your own political beliefs, maybe so much so you are willing to take a chance and make a more permanent commitment. This is what Obama had going for him, a flirtation with the public which allowed him to become the front runner. For Obama however, this wasn't good enough, he wasn't happy with taking a chance. So he has now become a victim of his own neediness. In the past few weeks Obama has sought to buy the affection of the public with endless ads, soft interviews and now finally a 30 minute infomercial which I believe has turned off a significant segment of the American public.

Obama has now become "that guy" who you were once infatuated with, but are now quite irritated by. Not only will Obama not leave us alone, but his media friends are now harassing us endlessly as well. It's like they are trying to convince us that "he's a great catch, just give him another chance." This type of peer pressure is frankly pretty desperate and just like in the dating world, its a huge turn off.  When Rachel Maddow commented about Obama's infomercial at the beginning of her show she said "he had me at the waving wheat." To which I say, fine you like him so much, you deal with him, but get him off my television.

While the electorate may be contemplating breaking up with Obama he can always be comforted by the never ending love from Chris Mathews.  Last night Mathews said, and I kid you not, "Obama has taught people how to be."  I mean, this type of unbridled man lust is just gross at this point, his pals in the media only make Obama more repulsive. The media and the Obama campaign have become almost stalker like in the way they inundate every aspect of our lives.

More at the link. I'm just happy I kicked the loser out of my home the first day he came calling. It was difficult, what with Chris Matthews bitterly clinging to his left leg. But necessary.

Ohio Man Shot at Trespassers who Vandalized McCain Yard Signs

Actually, it appears only one of the punks actually vandalized the signs. From Smoking Gun:

Angered that two neighborhood teenagers knocked over a John McCain sign on his lawn, an Ohio man allegedly grabbed a rifle and fired three times at the duo as they sought to drive away from his Warren Township home. Kenneth Rowles, 50, was charged with felonious assault in connection with the Saturday afternoon incident, which resulted in one boy suffering a minor bullet wound. According to a Warren Township Police Department report, Patrick Wise, 16, yelled, "This is for Obama" as he knocked over the McCain sign. Wise's cousin, Kyree Flowers, 17, was waiting in the passenger seat of the SUV, which was struck by three bullets fired by Rowles. One bullet hit Flowers in the arm, while another shattered the passenger's and driver's side windows. Rowles, pictured in the above mug shot, claimed in a police interview that he "shot three times attempting to scare the subjects." Shortly after the October 25 confrontation, Rowles called police to complain about two instances in which his McCain signs had been vandalized, but never bothered to mention that he had, minutes earlier, fired at a vehicle carrying Wise and Flowers.

OK, we have a few issues here. First off, if a man cannot be secure in his property rights, or secure that at least he is able to secure his own property rights, we have no society as such anymore. Obviously, he overreacted. Nobody wants to see a couple young punks getting killed over some idiotic thing they did as teens.

That being said, I have not seen the kids charged. The kids were black, the man was white, and they were yelling, "this is for Obama." If we reverse the races and the candidate, I'm pretty sure they would currently be in the process of being booked on charges of a hate crime. Not that I agree with that. But instead, the kids get off free, one with a minor flesh wound, and are now big timers in their little world. They are also now seen as the victims, and will likely be able to file suit against the shooter. This is not good.

I kid you not, less than an hour ago, some punk ran onto the back porch of my condo and stole a cigar I had out there. My first inclination was to put another cigar out there and wait inside with my pistol for him to return. It took about 20 seconds before I cooled down, but my first thoughts were to protect my property with whatever means were necessary. And I am far from a violent person. So I understand the shooter's thinking. He, also, should not be overly punished for an act that was provoked by lawbreakers on his own property. 

At least that's my opinion. What do you think? 

Meanwhile, the link there has the police report, which is kind of interesting. It seems that the shooter called to report the vandalism, but never mentioned the subsequent shooting. He asked the officer about Ohio's law on defending property, to which the officer replied along the lines that it would be really stupid if someone got shot over a yard sign. The shooter agreed. Perhaps he was thinking that it was indeed stupid that a couple kids would risk getting shot over a yard sign. Perhaps he's a total nutcase. I have no idea.

Note: this was not a case of simple vandalism, of kids being kids. The shooter was on his front porch when the kid decided to trespass and destroy property. It wasn't some little joke, he did it in the presence of the eventual shooter while yelling at the eventual shooter. Who knows if the shooter had reason to fear for his safety? I certainly would not have felt comfort, or safe in my home under such circumstances.

This is where the libs come in and say it was just kids being kids, offering up excuses that perpetuate the problem. When we minimize crime like this to the extent we have, society will eventually dissolve. If a man is not comfortable in his home, we are screwed.

Could be some scary times a'comin' folks.

Be that as it may, the gunshots after the trespasser left are certainly overkill.

Reaction to Obama's Infomercial: I Need New Friends and Fellow Bloggers

So, I told everyone that I wasn't going to be able to watch Barack Obama's infomercial live and would have to watch it when I got home. Surely some of you must've seen it already. No warning? No email telling me not to watch it because I'll be bored to tears? Nobody telling me I've already seen this story on Lifetime before?

I will never get those 30 minutes of my life back. Not. Ever. Screw you all.

Meanwhile, Chris Matthews of PMSNBC has a different take. You tell me who the loon is:

I thought it was Hollywood. It was romance. It was realism. The technical quality of it, the production values were perfect, the way they timed going to live, the biographical material. But most important, the connection with the average person in the economic turmoil we face right now I thought was fabulous. Of course, there we see the setting, which is very much like an Oval Office setting, showing that he's comfortable and we should be comfortable and will be with him in such a setting. I thought everything was just right.

I thought, the most important part of it, I thought, was the biographical, showing him talking about his mom and talking about him taking a chance in history and not wanting to miss it having seen his mother die at a young age. It was very human and I think you'd have to be a tough customer not to be touched by it.

Now I know all you Obama supporters have never heard of Jimmy Carter, but let's recall the fact that Matthews was a speechwriter for Jimmy Carter.

 

Live-Blogging Barack Obama's Infomercial

A group of conservative bloggers will be live-blogging the Infomercial at Conservative Attack Dog. I won't be able to make it, but this group is very reflective of my opinions. If you would like to join in respond to his latest post there:

If we can get enough people together, I’d like to live blog the Great Leaders 30 minute Marxfest tonight.

Comment here with your email (or email me) if you’d like to be on it.

I know this is last minute and I thank you for considering.

Me, I'll either watch it when I get home from church or just read the comments from the live-blog. Probably the latter.

The A-Ha / Tears For Fears Realist Videos

OK, I've resisted posting these, but I've listened to them sufficiently that I now like these versions better than the originals. Very funny stuff, and the guy who does them really has the both the singers' voices down pat. Courtesy of www.dustfilms.com:

Personally, I think the new one is better:

Probable Content of the LA Times, Khalidi Tape Revealed

Read this funny, and probably all too accurate "transcript" of the Obama/Khalidi tape that the LA Times continues to refuse to release. Chicagoans Against Obama

An excerpt:

uhh….It is truly refreshing to be surrounded by such a large group of people in which…uh.. I can truly see eye-to-eye with…uh…and completely agree…

Reverend Farrakhan..ughh…great to see you tonight…you always look great in a yellow bow-tie…and..uhh…tonight is no exception….

Bill..Bernadine….I see you everyday…so I don’t need to say much…but…ughh…you know I love you….keep doing the work you do….it’s time to start a revolution

Reverend Wright…..ughh…you are the father that I never had….I’ve never missed a sermon…and…uhh….I never will…

Michelle, while I find your frown so beautiful….I hope to one day make you proud of this country..and uhh…happy…and finally see you smile….

The author makes a good point at the end:

IN LIGHT OF THE LOS ANGELES TIMES NOT RELEASING THEIR COPY OF THE TAPE….CONSIDER THIS PROBABLE TRANSCRIPT TO BE ACCURATE, AND FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE IT TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE AN HONEST ASSESSMENT OF SENATOR OBAMA, PRIOR TO CASTING THEIR VOTE

If any Obamabots object to my writing, please call the Los Angeles Times, and convince them to release the original copy to prove me wrong.

Yes, please do.

LA Times Continues to Hold Back Khalidi Tapes

From Obama's Change:

The Los Angeles Times, which has endorsed Barack Obama, has refused to release a video in 2003 where Barack Obama was at an event for Rasheed Khalidi, the former PLO spokesman.  Bill Ayers was also in attendance at the event for Khalidi, which was thrown to celebrate Khalidi’s new post at Columbia University.  Would the L.A. Times release a video of John McCain with individuals who have caused terrorist acts to America or proclaimed Isreal should be dissolved as a nation, as Khalidi has said?  Of course, yet the Los Angeles Times refuses to release the Video, or even video transcripts of the event in 2003.  We, as voters who are deciding the fate of our nation in 7 days, deserve to see the video entirely.  Please call or email the Los Angeles Times at:

The site goes on with detailed instructions on how to reach a real, live person at the LA Times.

A Plea From and for Hillbuzz to Defeat Barack Obama

That's Hill as in Hillary Clinton. And having spent much time at the site I can tell you that these people are great Americans who, should I ever meet them, would be proud to call friends and patriots. I have never supported Hillary Clinton, and would have opposed her at every turn, but I would not be fearing for our country's future were she about to beat John McCain for the presidency. The folks at Hillbuzz and other PUMA sites have been among the most active participants in attempting to prevent the victory of Barack Obama. They have truly put country first, and I look forward to the day, hopefully in 2012 with a Palin or Bobby Jindal vs Hillary, when we can get back to discussing substantive issues with mutual respect, or at least lack of hatred, between our political opponents.

So I direct you to this post there:

Republicans, we Clinton Democrats stand with you. So join us any way you can and help us fight for America.

Republicans, this is directed at you.  Hillary’s Army remains strong, and committed to putting McCain/Palin in the White House. Do not listen to the media. Ignore the trolls. Corral your Eeyores and put them on the endangered species list.  Because by our most conservative estimate, you’re going to get 4 million Hillocrats on your side next week, with roughly another 3 million Democrats who voted for Kerry staying home or throwing their votes to McKinney or Nader. That’s 7 million votes Obama has lost from lifelong Democrats — because we love this country more than Republicans have ever given us credit for.

This is the greatest nation on Earth and we Democrats never fail to wake each morning deeply thankful and grateful for the opportunities we have here. We know what socialism is, and know we want no part of this here. Obama’s mission is to weaken this country and put us under the thumb of the UN, like a European socialist state. That’s not what we want.

We will fight tooth and nail to stop him. We’ve sunk everything we have into this — because McCain/Palin are worth it. We believe they will serve this country well, and will work with our champ, the new lion of the Senate, Hillary Clinton, to make us energy independent, to secure good solid jobs for all Americans, and to strengthen and grow our economy in a world stressed and tried in these times.

We do not intend for this alliance to be of only this moment — we’ve worked alongside all of you for months now and see we all have more in common than we ever had apart. We will never agree on everything, but let’s all start with our love of country. Our pride in America. Our willingness to work hard together to give everyone opportunities — not hand outs. Europe calls Obama’s plans socialism. We call it welfare. Obama says this is change. We paraphrase the McCain campaign because, much to our initial surprise, Clinton Democrats find more in common with McCain/Palin than we do the socialists the current Democratic Party revealed itself to be.

So, all of us centrists stand strongly with you.  Please work hard in every way you can this last week.  Join us in Ohio if you can — or in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, or Virginia. Let’s make sure socialism is defeated once and for all.

We can do this together. If we work hard, we will win. And after our victory, we will work hard to find other commonalities going forward.

Of this, we promise you, our new friends.

Elephants and pumas together, now and going forward...

If you are able, go there and donate to help the PUMAs help us defeat Obama in Ohio. And for those of you who objected to my near-record breaking run of posts calling Barack Obama a socialist, note that these Clinton Democrats agree 100%.

I am donating myself the minute I finish typing this up. And while I will never support Hillary Clinton, I vow not to get into personal attacks should she have the opportunity to run for President again. If I've realized anything in the past few months, it's that honest, respectful disagreement with those who have the same goals as we do is a good thing. Both sides can learn a thing or two in that instance and find some common ground. And I've realized I love more of this country than I thought I did. Alas, this is not possible with most Obamabots, but I am thankful to realize that many Clinton supporters view the world in much the same way as I do, with different ideas on how to best accomplish our goals. Nobody has a monopoly on good ideas.

Except for the fact that I am usually correct.

;)

To any conservative who has not spent time at Hillbuzz, check it out. The amount of useful information and the comments with people from different sides working together to avoid a serious danger to America is heartwarming. I could spend hours there every day if I didn't have to write stuff myself.   

Boy will my wife be shocked tomorrow when I tell her we donated money to a site for Hillary Clinton supporters.

How Far Has Journalism Sunk in America?

Journalism is so dead in America that Ace of Ace of Spades is being forced to offer $25,000 to any journalist willing to release newsworthy information to the public. In the past, wasn't this considered the duty of journalists? I've been out of journalism school for nearly four whole months now, so my memory is a little foggy. But I thought I remembered learning that.

This offer includes is particularly directed towards Los Angeles Times employees. Maybe ones that just got fired. Or will get fired in the next couple of weeks.

Guaranteed.

Anonymous.

That's how we roll.

Pretty pathetic that we have to try to bribe "newsmen" to release newsworthy tapes.

If your conscience is troubled, They should have released it anyway.

Plus that $25,000. You know what helps an aching conscience? Rubbing it with crisp hundred dollar bills, that's what....

If that's what it takes to get the Los Angeles Fucking Times to produce genuine news, so be it.

Release the damn tape already.

Obama Has no Chance in Pennsylvania

An excerpt from this post by Bill Dupray of the Patriot Room:

You can believe pollsters (who wrongly predicted the Obama v. Hillary contest) or you can believe the Democrats on the ground who worked with the voters and volunteers in the primary and who are with them today.

In Pennsylvania, we are not alone.

The same people who ran the board for us in the primary — who assured us daily that the polls the media was pushing were wrong in claiming Obama would beat Clinton in PA — tell us on a daily basis that McCain is going to win Pennsylvania. There’s a damn good chance this won’t even be close, if what people are seeing on the ground right now holds, and is indicative of the whole state.

DEMOCRATS are staffing McCain offices across the state. DEMOCRATS are phone banking and canvassing for McCain. DEMOCRATS are raising large sums to fund this last week of campaigning.

DEMOCRATS.

This has NEVER happened before — and the media is ignoring it. The media consistently claims that Obama enjoys the support of 85% of Democrats, versus only 80% of Republicans who supposedly are supporting McCain. We call BS on all of this — we’d say 90% of Republicans are supporting McCain, and 65-70% of Democrats are actually supporting Obama. At least that’s the case in Pennsylvania, and in Ohio too. Our mission this next week is to reach out to every Democrat we can and let them know it’s okay to vote Republican this year — because the Republican is the better choice. . . .

We do not believe Obama will carry Pittsburgh or Harrisburg in PA. He’ll win Philly, but not by the large margin he needs to take the state. You’ve heard Governor Ed Rendell is “worried” about Obama’s chances in Pennsylvania. That is an understatement. Obama will lose a state that hasn’t gone red in generations.

We have Democrats on the ground in Pennsylvania telling us this while Ed Rendell is rubbing his forehead and wondering what to do. The Racist, Redneck, Bitter Clingers, who won the state for Hillary by a margin of 10 points, are gearing up to vote for a Republican war hero to replace the disgraced Jack Murtha. And these are just the Democrats. I think Republicans get to vote in Pennsylvania too.

This backs up much of what I've been saying and hearing elsewhere.

While you're there, check out this post and corresponding video: Video: Obama 1995 - “Reverend Wright Represents The Best Of What The Black Church Has To Offer”

Barack Obama's Love of Marxist Socialists

Bill Sammon notes what the MSM doggedly ignores:

Barack Obama laughs off charges of socialism. Joe Biden scoffs at references to Marxism. Both men shrug off accusations of liberalism.

But Obama himself acknowledges that he was drawn to socialists and even Marxists as a college student. He continued to associate with Marxists later in life, even choosing to launch his political career in the living room of a self-described Marxist, William Ayers, in 1995, when Obama was 34.

Obama's affinity for Marxists began when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles.

"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully," the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, "Dreams From My Father." "The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."

Obama's interest in leftist politics continued after he transferred to Columbia University in New York. He lived on Manhattan's Upper East Side, venturing to the East Village for what he called "the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union..."

Obama supporters point out that plenty of Americans flirt with radical ideologies in college, only to join the political mainstream later in life. But Obama, who made a point of noting how "carefully" he chose his friends in college, also chose to launch his political career in the Chicago living room of Ayers, a domestic terrorist who in 2002 proclaimed: "I am a Marxist."

Also present at that meeting was Ayers' wife, fellow terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, who once gave a speech extolling socialism, communism and "Marxism-Leninism."

Obama has been widely criticized for choosing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an anti-American firebrand, as his pastor. Wright is a purveyor of black liberation theology, which analysts say is based in part on Marxist ideas.

Few political observers go so far as to accuse Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, of being a Marxist. But Republican John McCain has been accusing Obama of espousing socialism ever since the Democrat told an Ohio plumber named Joe earlier this month that he wanted to "spread the wealth around..."

But the debate intensified Monday with the surfacing of a 2001 radio interview in which Obama lamented the Supreme Court's inability to enact "redistribution of wealth" -- a key tenet of socialism. On Tuesday, McCain said Obama aspires to become "Redistributionist-in-Chief."

To the people who keep telling me Barack Obama isn't a socialist, all I can ask you is how you are able to type while you are closing your eyes, covering your ears, and saying la la la I can't hear you over and over?

Obama Plan Would Raise Taxes for Those Making as Little as 50K by 2010

As part of an excellent piece entitled What Obamabots Need to Know, Nancy of Conservative Insights posted the following chart from American Thinker. (Having trouble posting chart, just go to Nancy's post.) I linked to Nancy's story because the rest of it and the following discussion is well worth reading:

I am so sick of the blatantly false claim that Obama will lower anybody's taxes. It isn't going to happen. Ever. Obama has already promised to let the Bush tax cuts expire. That alone will be the largest tax increase in American history.

Dow Up 890 Points, 2nd Largest Gain in History and this Month

WSJ:

The Dow Jones Industrial Average leapt 889.35 points, or 10.9%, to 9065.12, aided by gains in all 30 of its components. The rally was its second-best this month, behind only the 936-point leap on Oct. 13 to break a painful eight-day losing streak.

There are still so many way undervalued stocks out there when compared with earnings. Depending on who wins the election, I'm as bullish as I've ever been. That's bullish. Not full of bs.

UPDATE: A commenter noted a couple of stories about the history of the stock market since 1948. (Why is it always since 1948? You would think they would like to include the years of the great FDR, but for some reason, though, they never do.)

Here is an excellent read by Don luskin taking on this assessment.

So there you go. Forget about the tax increases. Forget about the regulations, the protectionism, the union influence. Democrats are great for growth. The study proves it!

I've run the numbers myself. Superficially at least, the Democratic claims are true: Since 1948, the Standard & Poor's 500 total return (capital gains plus dividends) has averaged 15.6% when a Democrat was in the White House and only 11.1% when a Republican was in the White House...

But it's not so simple when you study that "study." First, not all Democrats act like Democrats, and not all Republicans act like Republicans. John F. Kennedy, for example, was an enthusiastic supply-side tax cutter, and George H.W. Bush raised taxes. Bill Clinton promoted free trade, and Richard Nixon imposed wage and price controls.

If you assign those four presidents to the opposite party based on that -- make the two Democrats into Republicans and the two Republicans into Democrats -- the numbers completely reverse. Now stocks average 14.7% under Republicans and only 10.5% under Democrats.

In fact, it turns out that if you do just one single switch -- if you make Richard Nixon into a Democrat -- it's enough to reverse the numbers. Then stocks average 14% under Republicans and only 12.1% under Democrats. This fact discredits this whole study more than it does Republicans, or even Richard Nixon himself. Any analysis that can be undone by omitting or changing a single data point isn't very robust.

There are other problems with this study as well. While stocks could be expected to react very quickly to changes and expectations of changes in the political environment, the whole economy doesn't just turn on a dime. So when we compare real GDP growth under Democratic and Republican presidents, maybe we should lag the results by a couple years. That is, we'll assume that the growth in a given year was the result of the president's policies from two years ago.

When we do that (putting Nixon back as a Republican, by the way), we find that the economy performed pretty much exactly the same regardless of the president's party: 3.5% under Democrats and 3.4% under Republicans.

The logic of those who just use the years of the administration is flat-out ridiculous. So Reagan gets credit for 1981 and 1982, years in which his drastic tax policy changes weren't in effect? Disastrous Carter-remnant years? And he doesn't get credit for the next two years after he left, and before Bush the Liberal raised taxes? Downright silly, and a dishonest way to look at things. Luskin then notes the impact of Congress:

Under Republican Congresses, stocks have averaged a 19% return, while under Democratic Congresses only 11.9%. Real GDP growth, lagged two years, has averaged 3.7% under Republican Congresses, and only 3.2% under Democratic ones.

Then there are the various party mixes between the president and Congress. If John McCain wins and we have a Republican president and a Democratic Congress, history leads us to expect an average 10.3% total return from stocks and 3.3% real GDP growth. If Barack Obama wins, and we have a Democratic Congress too, then according to history stocks will average 13.8%, and real GDP growth 3.3%.

But that's no argument for voting for Mr. Obama. Vote for Mr. McCain -- but vote for Republican senators and representatives too. When Republicans have controlled the whole government, it blows away anything Democrats can do. Stocks have averaged 17.5% and real GDP growth 3.3%.

By the way, as fond as Democrats are of saying how poorly stocks have performed under George W. Bush, here's a sobering fact: Stocks averaged 14.1% return in those Bush years when Republicans controlled Congress -- and when Democrats got in there and mucked things up, the average has been a loss of 8.9%. That's not even including 2008 year-to-date, which doesn't look so pretty.

If the electorate were really smart, it would elect a Democratic president and a Republican Congress. Under that deal, stocks have averaged a 20.2% total return, and real GDP averaged 4%. That tells us that economic and stock market success isn't really about partisan politics at all. Sadly, nobody has a political incentive to conduct a study about that.

One thing Luskin pointed out in the first quote is that fiscal conservatives at the helm have done much better than fiscal liberals. The D and the R have undergone some fairly big changes since Nixon's administration. But even ignoring that, I would say none of this proves anything, although Luskin's analysis is interesting. We have a sample size of like 10.