|
|
|
|
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 5:30:17 PM | 10 Concerns about Barack Obama
It's policy.
By William J. Bennett & Seth Leibsohn
1. Barack Obama’s foreign policy is dangerous, naïve, and betrays a profound misreading of history.
THAT IS OPINION. MY OWN OPINION IS TO TALK AND NEGOTIATE RATHER THAN COMMITS ACTS OF WAR ECONOMICALLY AND MILITARILY. WE'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN "TALKING" WITH NORTH KOREA AND GOT RESULTS WITH NO "PRECONDITIONS". WHATS THE DIFFERENCE, EXCEPT FOR THE WET DREAM SOME HAVE OF BOMBING IRAN?
2. Barack Obama’s Iraq policy will hand al-Qaeda a victory and undercut our entire position in the Middle East, while at the same time put a huge source of oil in the hands of terrorists.
THAT IS AN OPINION. WEVE BEEN THERE FIVE YEARS, ALREADY, TIME TO COME HOME. IRAQ AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER M.E. COUNTIES AS WELL AS INDIA AND PAKISTAN CAN DEAL WITH AL-QUEDA AND ISLAMIC FUNDEMENTALISM, THEYRE ALL BIG BOYS AND GIRLS NOW. OH, BY THE WAY, TRANSLATION: WE WANT THE OIL IN O U R HOT, LITTLE HANDS, SEE?
3. Barack Obama has sent mixed, confusing, and inconsistent messages on his policy toward Israel.
MORE OPINION. ISRAEL HAS A BRUTAL, HARD RIGHT REGIME GOING, THEY ARE NO ANGELS AND WE NEED TO BE MORE EVEN-HANDED WITH THEM. NOAM CHOMSKY HAS A FEW OPINIONS ABOUT ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AS WELL AND SEEMS TO THINK THAT OBAMA IS FAR TOO PRO-ISRAEL. ITS PRETTY OBVIOUS TO ME THAT ISRAEL WANTS TO KEEP THE GAZA STRIP AND WEST BANK, LOOK AT A DAMNED MAP. ITS VERY OBVIOUS. I KNOW A JEWISH FELLOW INVOLVED WITH FUND-RAISING HERE IN BOSTON FOR SYNAGOGUES AND HE CONFIDED THAT I WOULD BE SHOCKED AT THE INFLUENCE THE JEWISH AND ISRAELI LOBBIES HAVE HERE, ALSO THAT ISRAEL WANTS ROOM FOR FUTURE JEWISH IMMIGRATION, BASICALLY, THEY INTEND ON HARASSING AND TREATING PALESTINIANS LIKE DIRT UNTIL THEY DISAPPEAR.
4. While his Mideast policy may have been the quickest turnaround or flip-flop on a major issue, it is not the only one. In the primary campaign, Barack Obama consistently campaigned against NAFTA, but has now changed his tune, as he has with other issues.
OPINION. LOTS OF PEOPLE WANT TO CHANGE THE NAFTA AGREEMENT.
5. Barack Obama’s judgment about personal and professional affiliations is more than troubling.
OBAMA DID NOT CONDEMN THE MAN, BUT HE CONDEMNED HIS RHETORIC AND HIS ACTIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WRIGHT JUST DID NOT QUIT IT. ROCK AND A HARD PLACE AND HE MADE THE RIGHT CALL TO SEVER HIS TIES TO THAT CHURCH, IN MY OPINION.
6. Obama is simply out of step with how terrorists should be handled; he would turn back the clock on how we fight terrorism, using the failed strategy of the 1990s as opposed to the post-9/11 strategy that has kept us safe.
OPINION. OBAMA SIDED WITH HABEAS CORPUS, WHICH OUR SUPREME COURT MADE A DECISION ON AND WHICH WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
7. Barack Obama’s economic policies would hurt the economy. As Kimberly Strassel recently put it in the Wall Street Journal: “Mr. Obama is hawking a tax policy that would take the nation back to the effective marginal tax rates of the Carter days. He wants to further tax income, payroll, capital gains, dividends and death. His philosophy is pure redistribution.”
OPINION. MOST OF THESE THINGS WERE PROTECTIONS THAT WERE UNDONE BY BUSH IN A HUGE TAX BREAK FOR THE VERY WEALTHY IN A TIME OF MASSIVE NATIONAL DEFICITS. IT IS COMMON SENSE TO ROLL THESE BACK. IF MCCAIN IS GOING TO CONTINUE AN EXPENSIVE WAR IN IRAQ OR THREATEN MORE WITH IRAN DURING A RECESSION AND WITH THE NATIONAL DEFICITS WE HAVE NOW, THAT IS TRULY HARMFUL.
8. Barack Obama opposes drilling on and offshore to reduce gas and oil prices. While Barack Obama has opposed off-shore drilling and a gas-tax holiday.
OPINION. THE GAS HOLIDAY IS A JOKE AND AMOUNTS TO A WHOPPING $35 A CAR. DRILLING IS TEN YEARS OFF AND NO HELP NOW, PLUS ITS ONLY BUSINESS AS USUAL. NEITHER IS A SOLUTION TO THE ENERGY CRISIS.
9. Barack Obama is to the left of Hillary Clinton and NARAL on the issue of life. As a state senator in Illinois, Barack Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, a law that would have protected babies if they survived an attempted abortion and were delivered alive. When a similar bill was proposed in the United States Senate, it passed unanimously and even the National Abortion Rights Action League issued a statement saying they did not oppose the law.
I DONT KNOW MUCH ABOUT THIS SUBJECT. ABORTION IS PRETTY ABHORRENT TO ME, PERSONALLY, BUT WOMEN CARRY THESE FETUSES, THEY GET TO DECIDE, NOT MEN.
10. Barack Obama is actually to the left of every member of the U.S. Senate. According to the National Journal, “Sen. Barack Obama…was the most liberal senator in 2007.”
OPINION. WHAT THE HECK DEFINES "LIBERAL", ANYWAY? IF YOU THINK IT HAS ANY MEANING OR IS A BAD THING, THAT'S PURELY AN OPINION.
WEVE HAD 8 YEARS OF NEO-CON, LOOK WHERE ITS GOT US.
Next???? | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 6:13:21 PM |
Next????
opinion...next????
Hey!! That works pretty good thanks!! One next is as good as the next, next. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:23:16 PM | In an ABC interview on Monday, Sen. Barack Obama urged us to go back to the era of criminal-justice prosecution of terror suspects, citing the successful efforts to imprison those who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993.
"In previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated."
**************************************
According to the Democrat's pick for the President of our Country, we are to wait until we are hit, maybe thousands more innocent people killed, before we do anything. In Obama's own words, "In previous terrorist attacks" "were able to" "currently in U.S prisions."
Does anyone other than myself find this reasoning irrational? How can the man who seeks the highest office in the land, believe that this Country (which he claims to love) should suffer terrorist attacks BEFORE any action is taken? He not only believes we need to be attacked first, but that if we are somehow successful enough to catch the attackers (before they kill themselves, too) and are successful in prosecuting them; Obama then feels that we should care for them for the rest of their lives.
I find such irrational reasoning not only sickening, but extremely dangerous.
V for Victory | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:30:50 PM | | Obama smamma, he won't make any more difference as president than anyone else because the president is just a figurehead with no real power. Its a joke. China is the next superpower and is destroying the US economically. We need to get our noses out of everybody else's business and take care of matters at home. Nothing will change no matter who is president as long as the US citizens keep their heads stuck up their asses. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 7:57:51 PM |
According to the Democrat's pick for the President of our Country, we are to wait until we are hit, maybe thousands more innocent people killed, before we do anything. In Obama's own words, "In previous terrorist attacks" "were able to" "currently in U.S prisions."
Does anyone other than myself find this reasoning irrational? How can the man who seeks the highest office in the land, believe that this Country (which he claims to love) should suffer terrorist attacks BEFORE any action is taken? He not only believes we need to be attacked first, but that if we are somehow successful enough to catch the attackers (before they kill themselves, too) and are successful in prosecuting them; Obama then feels that we should care for them for the rest of their lives.
I find such irrational reasoning not only sickening, but extremely dangerous.
Obama's comment wasn't related to terrorism prevention.
If the question is what to do with people who have allegedly committed terrorism, that NECESSARILY takes place AFTER a terrorist act.
You're way off. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 9:18:55 PM | Ah, gee, BRBP, if I go and rape my neighbor's wife BEFORE he came over and raped mine, I think he would have a little issue with that.
If you think that going in and bombing and overtaking counties we "think" might want to hurt us is a good thing.......... well, I guess that's your opinion, isnt it.
After all, "we dont want the smoking gun to be........ A MUSHROOM CLOUD...."
Do we???????????????????????????????????
(whoops. no WMDS there.........none there, either..........oh, well)...............he-he.
Yeah, so its really responsible to go and kill millions of people because they might have plans to kill thousands of us..........and then we can say, see? ...because we killed them, they couldnt hurt us! Thats the kind of thinking I want in a President, really responsible like that..............you betcha. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/24/2008 9:47:39 PM | | I give Obama a lot of credit. He reinvents himself more than Madonna. His platforms and policies change on a daily basis. Every day is a new treat. Some days I totally disagree with him. Some days I think he's got the right answers. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/25/2008 4:48:14 AM |
I give Obama a lot of credit. He reinvents himself more than Madonna. His platforms and policies change on a daily basis. Every day is a new treat. Some days I totally disagree with him. Some days I think he's got the right answers
That's he means when he touts "change."
He's all things to all people because he's the chameleon. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/25/2008 8:23:20 PM | Obama is generally more consistent in his views than McCain, who has flip flopped more than the striper I caught when I was a little girl!
Yes, he may have changed his mind on public funding, but his concerns are valid. He wants to be prepared for the right wing attack machine and put a stop to their lies and craziness. I remember the Swift Boat Vets all too well, and they disgusted me with their attempts to smear a man who served honorably so that an AWOL coward can get back in the White House. Like the Boy Scouts say: "Be prepared!" | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/25/2008 8:56:50 PM |
How can the man who seeks the highest office in the land, believe that this Country (which he claims to love) should suffer terrorist attacks BEFORE any action is taken?
Because that is not what he believes. He believes that the US should not retaliate until a decisive threat is identified. That is why we have the CIA and NSA. True threats usually telegraph their blows. If we had adhered to the simplistic "attack before being attacked" philosophy with the Soviets, we would probably not be here right now-- talk about dangerous. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/26/2008 6:01:03 PM | | we should all pay heed to the words of one who knows Obama best.."He is a politician he says what he has to say." Of all of the things that Dr Wright has been saying this has to be the most honest and Accurate... | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/26/2008 6:27:16 PM | Well we've seen McSame, McCane, McBush what about;
McSperienced or McQualified? | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/26/2008 9:18:20 PM | How about McInsane, McEmotional, McTemper? I think I'll pass. I'd much rather have a younger man who is president, but is able to hold a rational thought. McCain scares me because he could easily trigger World War III, a frightening thought indeed.
Obama is the kind of guy we need in the White House, and BADLY after eight years of gross incompetence and grave dishonor to our nation. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/26/2008 10:53:16 PM |
McQualified
He can't keep the Muslim factions straight that alone says he isn't qualified. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 2:28:09 AM | http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/?page=5
Grim proving ground for Obama's housing policy
The candidate endorsed subsidies for private entrepreneurs to build low-income units. But, while he garnered support from developers, many projects in his former district have fallen into disrepair
CHICAGO - The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can't afford to live anywhere else.
But it's not safe to live here.
About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale - a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.
Grove Parc has become a symbol for some in Chicago of the broader failures of giving public subsidies to private companies to build and manage affordable housing - an approach strongly backed by Obama as the best replacement for public housing.
As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.
But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.
Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.
Some of the residents of Grove Parc say they are angry that Obama did not notice their plight. The development straddles the boundary of Obama's state Senate district. Many of the tenants have been his constituents for more than a decade.
"No one should have to live like this, and no one did anything about it," said Cynthia Ashley, who has lived at Grove Parc since 1994.
Obama's campaign, in a written response to Globe questions, affirmed the candidate's support of public-private part nerships as an alternative to public housing, saying that Obama has "consistently fought to make livable, affordable housing in mixed-income neighborhoods available to all."
Watch a video of residents complaining about conditions at Grove Parc Plaza in Chicago, at boston.com/globe.
The campaign did not respond to questions about whether Obama was aware of the problems with buildings in his district during his time as a state senator, nor did it comment on the roles played by people connected to the senator.
Among those tied to Obama politically, personally, or professionally are:
Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to Obama's presidential campaign and a member of his finance committee. Jarrett is the chief executive of Habitat Co., which managed Grove Parc Plaza from 2001 until this winter and co-managed an even larger subsidized complex in Chicago that was seized by the federal government in 2006, after city inspectors found widespread problems.
Allison Davis, a major fund-raiser for Obama's US Senate campaign and a former lead partner at Obama's former law firm. Davis, a developer, was involved in the creation of Grove Parc and has used government subsidies to rehabilitate more than 1,500 units in Chicago, including a North Side building cited by city inspectors last year after chronic plumbing failures resulted in raw sewage spilling into several apartments.
Antoin "Tony" Rezko, perhaps the most important fund-raiser for Obama's early political campaigns and a friend who helped the Obamas buy a home in 2005. Rezko's company used subsidies to rehabilitate more than 1,000 apartments, mostly in and around Obama's district, then refused to manage the units, leaving the buildings to decay to the point where many no longer were habitable.
Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers - including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko - collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama's campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama's own accounting.
One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.
Butler and Davis did not respond to messages. Rezko is in prison; his lawyer did not respond to inquiries.
Jarrett, a powerful figure in the Chicago development community, agreed to be interviewed but declined to answer questions about Grove Parc, citing what she called a continuing duty to Habitat's former business partners. She did, however, defend Obama's position that public-private partnerships are superior to public housing.
"Government is just not as good at owning and managing as the private sector because the incentives are not there," said Jarrett, whose company manages more than 23,000 apartments. "I would argue that someone living in a poor neighborhood that isn't 100 percent public housing is by definition better off."
In the middle of the 20th century, Chicago built some of the nation's largest public housing developments, culminating in Robert Taylor Homes: 4,415 apartments in 28 high-rise buildings stretching for 2 miles along an interstate highway.
By the late 1980s, however, Robert Taylor Homes and the rest of the Chicago developments had become American bywords for urban misery. The roughly 30 developments operated for poor families by the Chicago Housing Authority were plagued by crime and mired in poverty
In Stateway Gardens, a large complex just north of Robert Taylor, a study of 1990 census data found the per-capita annual income was $1,650. And the projects were falling apart after decades of epic, sometimes criminal, mismanagement.
Similar problems plagued public housing in other cities, leading the federal government to greatly increase funding to address the problems. Many cities, including Boston, mostly used that money to rehabilitate their projects, maintaining public control.
Chicago chose a more dramatic approach. Under Mayor Richard M. Daley, who was elected in 1989, the city launched a massive plan to let private companies tear down the projects and build mixed-income communities on the same land.
The city also hired private companies to manage the remaining public housing. And it subsidized private companies to create and manage new affordable housing, some of which was used to accommodate tenants displaced from public housing.
Chicago's plans drew critics from the start. They asked why the government should pay developers to perform a basic public service - one successfully performed by governments in other cities. And they noted that privately managed projects had a history of deteriorating because guaranteed government rent subsidies left companies with little incentive to spend money on maintenance.
Most of all, they alleged that Chicago was interested primarily in redeveloping projects close to the Loop, the downtown area that was seeing a surge of private development activity, shunting poor families to neighborhoods farther from the city center. Only about one in three residents was able to return to the redeveloped projects.
"They are rapidly displacing poor people, and these companies are profiting from this displacement," said Matt Ginsberg-Jaeckle of Southside Together Organizing for Power, a community group that seeks to help tenants stay in the same neighborhoods.
"The same exact people who ran these places into the ground," the private companies paid to build and manage the city's affordable housing, "now are profiting by redeveloping them."
Barack Obama was among the many Chicago residents who shared Daley's conviction that private companies would make better landlords than the Chicago Housing Authority.
He had seen the failure of the public projects in the mid-1980s as a community organizer at Altgeld Gardens, a large public housing complex on the far South Side.
He once told the Chicago Tribune that he had briefly considered becoming a developer of affordable housing. But after graduating from Harvard Law School in 1991, he turned down a job with Tony Rezko's development company, Rezmar, choosing instead to work at the civil rights law firm Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, then led by Allison Davis.
The firm represented a number of nonprofit companies that were partnering with private developers to build affordable housing with government subsidies.
Obama sometimes worked on their cases. In at least one instance, he represented the nonprofit company that owned Grove Parc, Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., when it was sued by the city for failing to adequately heat one of its apartment complexes.
Shortly after becoming a state senator in 1997, Obama told the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin that his experience working with the development industry had reinforced his belief in subsidizing private developers of affordable housing.
"That's an example of a smart policy," the paper quoted Obama as saying. "The developers were thinking in market terms and operating under the rules of the marketplace; but at the same time, we had government supporting and subsidizing those efforts."
Obama translated that belief into legislative action as a state senator. In 2001, Obama and a Republican colleague, William Peterson, sponsored a successful bill that increased state subsidies for private developers. The law let developers designated by the state raise up to $26 million a year by selling tax credits to Illinois residents. For each $1 in credits purchased, the buyer was allowed to decrease his taxable income by 50 cents.
Obama also cosponsored the original version of a bill creating an annual fund to subsidize rents for extremely low-income tenants, although it did not pass until 2005, after he had left the state Senate.
"He was very passionate about the issues," said Julie Dworkin of the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, who worked with Obama on affordable housing issues. "He was someone we could go to and count on him to be there."
The developers gave Obama their financial support. Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko all served on Obama's campaign finance committee when he won a seat in the US Senate in 2004.
Obama has continued to support increased subsidies as a presidential candidate, calling for the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund, which could distribute an estimated $500 million a year to developers. The money would be siphoned from the profits of two mortgage companies created and supervised by the federal government, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
"I will restore the federal government's commitment to low-income housing," Obama wrote last September in a letter to the Granite State Organizing Project, an umbrella group for several dozen New Hampshire religious, community, and political organizations. He added, "Our nation's low-income families are facing an affordable housing crisis, and it is our responsibility to ensure this crisis does not get worse by ineffective replacement of existing public-housing units."
One of the earliest public-private partnerships of the type supported by Daley and Obama took place in the Woodlawn neighborhood, a checkerboard of battered apartment buildings and vacant lots just south of the University of Chicago.
the rest of the article can be found on the link | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 2:39:20 AM | June 26, 2008
Ooops! Another Obama Supporter Slips Under the Bus
Rick Moran
Yesterday, we asked the question "Who is Martin Klonsky?" It turns out Mr. Klonsky was another one of those radical acquaintences of Barack Obama who are only a "distraction" from the real issues of the campaign; like trying to find someone who wasn't a Weather Underground/radical racist/bigot/crook from Obamaa's past.
Klonsky, the Maoist hardliner who received $75,000 from the William Ayers-Obama led Annenberg Project had a blog right on Obama's website.
Today his blog was removed from the Obama website.
Comrade Klonsky is no longer with us. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 11:50:25 AM | NY Times is reporting today how Obama is striving to be a Centrist. Obama has done a major flip flop on too many issues now. If a person is Left of Center, Obama is no longer displaying their causes.
Another thing which gets me is that Obama himself is playing the 'Race' card...by consistently saying the Right will use Obama's inexperience, his funny name and that he is Black. It's Obama using the race card... not McCain or the Republican party. Guess it's AOK for Obama to use it. Talk about double standards. I'm growing weary of turning on the News and hearing Obama's racist attitude. But, the more he talks, the more he turns away from his own Political Party (Democrat's platforms) and tries to appeal to Middle America by flip flopping from his previous stands to ones which the Republicans have long held without wavering. Reason: Middle America is Conservative.
It's obvious the game Obama is playing. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 11:59:54 AM |
It's obvious the game Obama is playing.
Yes...a well rehearsed game on the left.
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/06/27/why_liberals_lie_about_what_they_believe?page=full&comments=true
By John Hawkins
Once you've watched liberals long enough to understand how they think -- scratch that, how they feel -- they become extraordinarily predictable.
To begin with, the liberal agenda is, in many respects, the same as it was in the thirties. Whether you call it communism, fascism, socialism, liberalism, or progressivism, the only real difference is how much they believe they can get away with, the way they sell it to people, and the latest trendy name for what they believe.
So, once the liberals pick a policy from their stale program to push, the next step is to get it implemented. This is where liberals have problems because whether a policy makes sense, is practical, or actually improves people's lives is of secondary importance to them. What is important to liberals is whether supporting or opposing that policy makes them feel good about themselves.
This is why liberals continue to support dysfunctional policies that have been failing miserably for decades and why they often oppose common sense programs that have been proven to work time and time again -- because it isn't about whether it works or not, it's about how it makes them feel.
In other words, a liberal will almost always prefer a policy that's extremely expensive, is difficult to implement, helps almost no one, but seems "nice" -- to a policy that is cheap, simple to implement, extremely effective, and seems "mean."
However, since most Americans make decisions about policies based on whether or not they believe the policy makes people's lives better or worse, liberals have had to become habitually dishonest about what they believe and want to do to get their ideas put into action.
This is a point worth stressing because many people who aren't familiar with politics believe that conservatives and liberals are simply flip sides of the same coin and therefore, approach issues the same way. However, conservatives genuinely believe that this is a center-right country. That's why conservatives have no qualms about being publicly labeled as conservatives and it's part of the reason why we're much more honest than the Left -- because we believe that a majority of the American people generally agree with us and share our values.
So, those of us on the Right spend our time trying to explain to the American people what we really want to do, while the Left spends its time trying to hide what it really wants to do from the American people.
Because of this, when liberals don't feel that the political winds are blowing in their direction, not only will they generally avoid discussing the things they believe, they will typically deny that they believe them at all.
Additionally, liberals go to bizarre lengths to tilt the political playing field in their favor. They move into the mainstream media so that they can tip what are supposed to be "objective" news stories in their favor. They get into positions of power in our educational system so that they can teach kids liberal propaganda before they're old enough to know better. They uniformly support judges who care nothing about the Constitution as long as it moves liberal ideological goals forward. Even the Left's support of illegal immigration is rooted in the desire to bring in millions of poor people from socialist countries who are more likely to vote Democratic. If they can't convince the American voters they're right, then they'll just bring in some new voters.
More disturbing is the Left's ever-increasing reliance on what are commonly thought of as fascist tactics. Liberals at college campuses attempt to disrupt conservative speeches and the Democrats want to try to drive conservative talk radio hosts off the air with the Fairness Doctrine. Conservatives like Tom DeLay, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter have been targeted criminally for political reasons and there's even talk of trying to jail members of the Bush Administration over policy differences after they're out of office. Ideological soulmates of modern liberals -- like Stalin, Lenin, and Mao -- would certainly approve of those tactics.
Still, even though this is a center-right country, we do have political cycles and there are times when those cycles favor the Left. When that happens and the Lefties start to get a bit more confident, usually a few liberals at the edges will start talking about what they want to do. At that early point, most other liberals will still vehemently deny their ideological goals to the public out of fear that it will prevent them from getting into power.
However, when the Left gains enough strength to be capable of getting one of the policies they favor implemented, all the liberals who previously denied that they supported it will unapologetically shift on a dime and vote for it en masse -- while they rely on their ideological allies in the media and the fact that many Americans are ill informed about politics to cover their tracks.
So, if you want to know what liberals want to do, their words mean absolutely nothing because lying about their agenda has become as natural to them as chasing a cat is to a dog.
Instead, what you have to do is watch what other liberals have done when they have come into power. Look at Canada, where conservatives are being put on trial for hate crimes because they've dared to criticize Muslims. Look at European countries, where they have socialistic economies, sky high tax rates, rigid speech codes, and overweening nannystates. You can even look at liberal enclaves in the United States like Berkeley and San Francisco, where members of the military are treated like pariahs and they boo the national anthem.
If you believe the liberals in Berkeley, France, Canada or for that matter in the bowels of the Daily Kos or Huffington Post, are significantly different than, say Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, you are kidding yourself. The only differences are in what they think they can get away with and how honest they are willing to be about their agenda. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 12:27:37 PM |
Yes...a well rehearsed game on the left.
Awesome!
About time we had a counter to all the well rehearsed games on the right played out over the last few decades.
 | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 12:31:28 PM | | after having bush in office for eight years, anybody will be better. i really dont like obama either. but surely not going to vote for a bush clone . like mcain. it will take our country 50 years to make up for what. george w bush has done. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 3:22:06 PM |
it will take our country 50 years to make up for what. george w bush has done. I hope you aren't referring to the cost of the War or anything like that, Obama has already played a big part in committing America to much more than has been spent on the War to support the Poor of the World(Primarily African countries) the Global Poverty Act....costs about 843 billion dollars over 13 years above what the U.S. Already spends on foreign aid, putting it at somewhere around a Trillion dollars... | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 4:04:03 PM | | War aside, what he's not done with his opportunities has hit us hard. The environment, the jobs going overseas. You can say this is Clinton's fault and you might be right. But our country has suffered greatly because of this and he's not done much to correct it. No child left behind set the schools and children farther back than when they started, and nothing has been done about social security and Medicare. Nothing. He's had 8 years to work on or fix these things....and no progress has been made on ANY of it. | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 4:10:10 PM | If Obama gets in with a Dem. majority Congress, we will see gas prices sky rocket because if anything is put into place now to try to rectify the mess the Democrats have made by blocking the USA from using it's resources, Obama and camp will somehow reverse it.
This is no longer about Bush. It's about the horrific consequences if Obama gets in with the Dems. which is now costing the USA Middle American great pain in economic crisis due to gas pricing.
I can only hope and pray that the American People will turn out and vote McCain! | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 4:19:40 PM | Obama isn't in office yet and already the horrible consequences of him not being in office are high gas prices? The oil companies are reporting billions in profits and it's still the Democrats...no, no it's Obama's fault? Odd about that, MoveOn is organizing 'gas station' events for early in July. They seem to have a different view of the Problem:
"Gas prices have risen to an all-time high—from $1.50 to $4.00 a gallon during Bush's presidency. And the oil industry is making billions on $4.00 gas, while nothing much is being done about oil independence or global warming. Big Oil has made it clear who their candidate is in this race by investing $1 million in John McCain's campaign. And McCain has repaid that friendship by supporting millions of dollars in tax breaks for oil companies and pushing gimmicks like offshore drilling and gas tax holidays that provide no immediate relief or long-term solutions."
That's from their email to me AND, yes, we ALL know MoveOn is just a bunch o' lefties. I had no idea that Obama's FUTURE presidency "is now costing the USA Middle American great pain in economic crisis due to gas pricing."
Lemme guess.....the pharmacy's outta Lamictal again, right? | |
|
| Obama
Posted: 6/27/2008 4:19:59 PM | | Using our own resources will take 10 years to see any results when you're talking about offshore drilling. I'm not sure about drilling in Alaska. We need a quicker fix than that, and I don't think McCain or Obama can provide it. I think we're stuck with these great gas prices for a long time to come. | |
|
|
| Page 10 of 25
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 |
|
Home
login 
