November 21, 2008
Wither the Clintons?
I suppose there are some republicans like me who feel like the whole world was just turned upsidedown with the election of Barack Obama.
I was so concerned about the Clintons getting back into the white house, I spent a great deal of time and energy rooting for Barack, simply because I could not stomach the Clinton Gestapo taking the reigns of power again.
A few weeks before the election I started to do some serious research about Obamas past associations and marxist worldview. The more I read, the more I gagged at the thought of him being our president and commander in chief of our armed forces.
If its not concerned citizens arming themselves tooth and nail against the world government thug - o - crats who are about to launch perhaps the biggest nanny state takeover of american life, just reading the chats at Free Republic the past few weeks has convinced me that many freedom lovers are feeling the same angst that I am.
Concerns about Barack Obama stem from his unwillingness to prove that he is a Natural Born American Citizen.
His complete ties to Communists like Bill Ayers who has been accused of writing Obamas Biography Dreams from my father and will likely be very involved in an Obama Administration.
His motivation to suspend US Sovereignty in order to hand America over to a World Collective.
Ron Paul was interviewed by Alex Jones on this topic recently.
And for me the ultimate betrayal of the American Psyche and trust is the many claims that Mr. Obama is a closet Bi Sexual and has been cheating on his wife Michelle for the whole of their marriage. A MAN WHO WILL CHEAT ON HIS WIFE WILL CHEAT ON HIS COUNTRY!!!
I was watching season one of 24 last night, (never watched that one as I did not get into the show until season 2). As I watched the set up for the dynamics of the show, it reminded me of a claim by Larry Sinclair on his web site. He claimed that Mr. Obama as president has so many skeletons in his closet, (along with the bodies of some dead gay men), that he will be very prone to extortion and bribery as Commander in Chief. Larry claimed this presented a unique national security risk. I had never thought of that side of it before, I was just angry that some members of the homosexual community were being snuffed out so he could be president, but Mr. Sinclair is exactly right.
And it is why I am deeply concerned about the criminals of the world collective stepping in and taking over our government.
Clinging to my religion and gun in Colorado!
CNN: Gun sales are UP!
Ayers on GMA
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 12:10 PM
November 5, 2008
Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life
David over at NRO has an interesting piece....it's sort of written in code. You have to have a certain level of literacy and political awareness to get his meaning. You PhD's are mostly WAY TOO SMART to understand what he is talking about. But for the regular folks...give it a read.
And then weep, and then like so many in the conservative sphere, I'm thinking it's time to start SHRUGGING.
My husband is a computer geek genius. Many times over the years he has worked himself to the edge of his health. The latest "death march" marathon at work culminated in him saying to me with tears in his eyes, "Sometimes I feel like I have this whole company resting on my shoulders."
Now Paul has never read Atlas Shrugged. He is a sports fanatic who loves to follow his favorite teams in his spare time. He passionately watches his childrens ball games. Yet he is exactly the "heroic" man of the mind that Ayn Rand so eloquently describes in her books. When he made that statement to me after several nights with no sleep with managers and clients literally screaming at him to work harder, faster, better. I looked him right in the eye and I said, "SHRUG".
Granted, he is well compensated for his mental efforts on behalf of his company and I told him that I supported whatever he chose to do. But for me, losing his sleep, his health, his ability to function for a job was just not worth it.
I told him I would be willing to go live in a shack and just do menial labor with him for the rest of my life if it meant he could relax and be healthy. But he takes his responsibility to provide for our family so seriously, he just looked at me like I was nuts.
When pondering the looters coming into the pocketbooks of those of us who produce to be used for whatever purposes they feel is the definition of hope and change, I have come up with some suggestions for ways that mothers and fathers can better hold on to what they produce so that the tax collectors and mob are not able to steal the fruits of our labors.
What is most chilling to me when considering the collective taking over, is the lifestyle they may impose on dedicated homemakers. I see the outlawing of homeschool and forced preschool as the beginning. The Collectivised countrys in our world like Cuba and China have no problem stealing children from their parents to be used for the collective good of the country. I watched all those little chinese gymnasts at the olympics who had been taken from their homes to serve mother china at the tender age of three and four.
And the Cuban government kidnaps the children when they turn six.
I wonder how many ignorant and naive mothers of large families who just voted in the election for hope and change will be gobsmacked when the collective tells them (or their daughters) how many children from their wombs mother earth can manage to sustain. And if those mothers choose to become pregnant with more than one child will they be sterilized or aborted like our sisters in China?
Well, time will tell.
Practical ideas for stay at home mothers intent on providing a legitimate financial future for their children and grandchildren.
1. Put in a supply of survival foods and a large garden and while you work with your children teach them the principles of Constitutional Government
2. Learn the self reliant skills of Mothering like home nursing, childbirth, herbs, and cooking from scratch so that you do not have to pay cash for these services
3. Learn a practical skill that can be used as a bartering tool. Instead of paying cash for cutting hair, dog walking/grooming, tutoring, child care, pre school etc, etc...learn one or two of these skills yourself and be ready to barter with other women so that you do not have to be involved in the cash flow of our American Economy.
4. Ecourage your children to learn a basic skill or start a small home business to provide the necessities of life, and then work that skill to give food, clothing, and shelter to his or her family with an emphasis on farming and homesteading - but pull back from participation in the economic world of colleges, universities, and media while continuing to study, as time permits, all areas of technology, political science, commerce, international relations, and the Arts, so that when the collapse comes (And I'm thinking maybe twenty years), a whole new generation of young americans will be ready to rebuild. I know many of you homeschoolers already are doing and planning these things as it is, but I believe it is time to take it to a much higher level.
5. Get a shotgun, lots of ammo, and learn how to use it.
6. Don't be afraid of the Looters.
Some ideas for the fathers who work the jobs that provide for the mothers and the children
(And I know I am being somewhat sexist in these gross stereotypes, assuming that Fathers are the bread winners in a given home - if the situation is reversed and Dad is the at home parent, and Mom works, please don't shoot the messanger, just take these ideas as food for thought)
1. If you are a small business owner making between $250,000.00 and $300,000 per year, consider making certain that your profits etc are never more than $249,999.99 per year. That is IF Obama's tax plan truly will only penalize companies that earn over 250. If you are a small business owner that makes more than $250,000.00 per year, consider dividing your corporation into parts, re-incorporate them all and make certain no business makes more than $250,000.00 per year.
2. If you work for a corporation, consider asking your employer to keep you in the income bracket that will make it impossible for the Looters to steal your money. For example: If you are making $65,000.00 per year, and are up for a raise and that raise puts you into a catagory where your money can be stolen at a much higher level, ask your employer to let you have one day off per month to spend with your family, rather than getting the raise. Or if your employer is planning to give you a financial bonus, ask instead for a gift that cannot be taxed - more time off to spend with your wife and children...etc..
3. If you are an inventor, scientist, thinker, or person who works with your mind, consider taking a four or eight year sabatical from the marketplace of ideas and put your mind into a vault (lock box) so no looter can rob your intellectual property. Grow a garden and peddle your food door to door, or consider setting up and running your local black market from a garage sale in your home. Do as much bartering of goods as is humanely possible, with no exchange of cash money.
4. Support your wife in her efforts to learn the skills of self reliance, by making sure she always has fast internet connectivity, has a couple hours a week to chat online and/or in person with other mothers who are also preparing and living providently, and is able to gradually wean from the infrastructures of government money using peer support. Be patient as she masters Family Sovereignty. It takes time to learn all of these skills. You should also learn as many self reliant skills as possible, and help her in her mothering by purchasing timely books, curriculums for self education, and the tools of home making.
5. Buy a shot gun, lots of ammo, and learn how to use it to defend your family.
6. Don't be afraid of the looters.
And remember: "Healthy Families Make A Healthy World!"
Reporting from Galts Gulch in Colorado:
(Oops temporary blindness from Obamamania and wishful thinking)
Reporting from The Peoples Republic of Boulder:
(AKA The Belly of the Beast!)
Jenny Hatch
The Natural Family Company
Healthy Families Make A Healthy World!
The Natural Family BLOG
PS From beloved writer Leo Tolstoy who believed it was wise to study fiction to learn the truth:
"The anarchists are right in everything; in the negation of the existing order, and in the assertion that, without authority, there could not be worse violence than that of authority under existing conditions. They are mistaken only in thinking that anarchy can be instituted by a revolution."
Who is John Galt???
THE MEN OF THE MIND and VALUE AND VIRTUE Ninth section of an ongoing project to explore Galt's Speech from Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand using images and video from current events.
Text by Ayn Rand
Read by Christopher Hurt
Edited for YouTube by XCowboy2
Music by John Williams.
Anthem from my favorite rock band Rush:
Ayn Rand's Anthem, a novelette
This novelette depicts a world of the future, a society so collectivized that even the word "I" has vanished from the language. Anthem's theme is: the meaning and glory of man's ego.
Ayn Rand was a Russian-born American novelist, philosopher, playwright, and screenwriter. She is widely known for her best-selling novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, and for developing a philosophical system she called Objectivism.
She is known as a defender of objective reality, absolute reason, a morality she called rational selfishness/rational egoism, laissez-faire capitalism, and romantic art.
"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute."--Ayn Rand
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine."--Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
Howard Roarks Speech from the Movie, The Fountainhead
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
Onion Satire
Hope and Change
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:17 AM
Power to the people - God bless the Mormons in California! Prop 8 controversy
One little glimmer of light over the fruited plain
LOS ANGELES (AP) -
In an election otherwise full of liberal triumphs, the gay rights movement suffered a stunning defeat as California voters approved a ban on same-sex marriages that overrides a recent court decision legalizing them.
The constitutional amendment—widely seen as the most momentous of the nation's 153 ballot measures—will limit marriage to heterosexual couples, the first time such a vote has taken place in a state where gay unions are legal.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Of which I am a faithful member) has issued this statement about the passage of Proposition 8 in California:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SALT LAKE CITY 5 November 2008 COMMENTARY
Since Proposition 8 was placed on the ballot in June of this year, the citizens of California have considered the arguments for and against same-sex marriage. After extensive debate between those of different persuasions, voters have chosen to amend the California State Constitution to state that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Voters in Arizona and Florida took the same course and amended their constitutions to establish that marriage will continue to be between a man and a woman.
Such an emotionally charged issue concerning the most personal and cherished aspects of life — family, identity, intimacy and equality — stirs fervent and deep feelings.
Most likely, the election results for these constitutional amendments will not mean an end to the debate over same-sex marriage in this country.
We hope that now and in the future all parties involved in this issue will be well informed and act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility toward those with a different position. No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information.
It is important to understand that this issue for the Church has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage — a union between a man and a woman.
Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the Church were and are simply wrong. The Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility toward gays and lesbians. Even more, the Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.
Some, however, have mistakenly asserted that churches should not ever be involved in politics when moral issues are involved. In fact, churches and religious organizations are well within their constitutional rights to speak out and be engaged in the many moral and ethical problems facing society. While the Church does not endorse candidates or platforms, it does reserve the right to speak out on important issues.
Before it accepted the invitation to join broad-based coalitions for the amendments, the Church knew that some of its members would choose not to support its position. Voting choices by Latter-day Saints, like all other people, are influenced by their own unique experiences and circumstances. As we move forward from the election, Church members need to be understanding and accepting of each other and work together for a better society.
Even though the democratic process can be demanding and difficult, Latter-day Saints are profoundly grateful for and respect the ideals of a true democracy.
The Church expresses deep appreciation for the hard work and dedication of the many Latter-day Saints and others who supported the coalitions in efforts regarding these amendments.
Here is a round up of excellent articles written by thinking Mormons to help educate my readers on this issue.
Will Gay Rights Trample Religious Freedom? Marc D. Stern
Same-Sex Marriage Is About More Than “I Do” Lowell Brown
Church Readies Members on Proposition 8
The Negative Impact of Same-Sex Marriage
How Same Sex Marriage Affects all of us
Standing Up for Prop 8: “I Hope You Know We're Not Haters” Michelle Worley
Californias Proposition 8: Open Season on Mormons? Lowell C. Brown
Proposition 8 and Californias School children: A Primer on Falsehoods Lowell C. Brown
Amidst the media campaign against Prop 8 a particularly bigoted attack against mormons came out in the form of this television ad:
More Articles about Prop 8 written by Mormons:
The Perils of raising the Title of Liberty: Maurine Jensen Proctor
Quote from Maurines Article:
Two Hard Realities
"During this campaign, two hard political realities have been driven vividly home to those working in the trenches for marriage, children, and religious freedom. Defending family and any remnant of morality in this nation will demand courage and clarity-and it will not be just a single skirmish after which we can all put our signs down and go home with some relief.
This struggle for the heart of our nation does not allow for extended summer vacations or long-term retirement in an easy chair. We are not born into a time for easy chairs-and it is because as citizens we have been dozing for too long that our nation has arrived at this point of moral blight on every side where defending the right of a child to deserve a mother and a father is considered hate speech."
Testimonials from LDS Street Activists
"These pictures were taken minutes before a car sped by and someone threw a handful of coins at this cherub, my grandson, giving him a huge goose egg on his head. We were so grateful it wasn't anything larger, or more dangerous, and yet WE're the HATERS. It's been challenging and yet rewarding as ward, stake and community members UNITED in a common goal, and an opportunity to support President Monson as our Prophet, by more then lip service.
We ended sacrament meeting Sunday by standing and all singing, or trying to sing, "Who's on the Lord's Side, Who?"
Thank you for a great way to receive true, timely and useful news. We love Meridian.
Sue Williams"
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:36 AM
November 2, 2008
Doubts persist about Obama birth certificate
Considerable evidence still points to candidate's birth in Kenya
HONOLULU – "Even though Hawaii officials now claim to have verified the authenticity of Sen. Barack Obama's birth certificate – in hopes of ending widespread speculation and even multiple lawsuits challenging the Democrat candidate's constitutional qualification to be president – it turns out there is still reason for serious questioning.
In fact, there is considerable evidence that Obama was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii as the candidate and his campaign have maintained.
...The controversy is further fueled by a video posted on YouTube in which Obama's Kenyan grandmother Sarah claims to have witnessed personally Obama's birth in Kenya. The YouTube.com video tape also features Sayid Obama who was interviewed by WND.
To date, Obama and his campaign have refused to disclose the name of the doctor delivering the candidate or the precise hospital where he was born.
The main reason doubts persist regarding Obama's birth certificate is this question: If an original Hawaii-doctor-generated and Hawaii-hospital-released Obama birth certificate exists, why wouldn't the senator and his campaign simply order the document released and end the controversy?
That Obama has not ordered Hawaii officials to release the document leaves doubts as to whether an authentic Hawaii birth certificate exists for Obama.
Rather, the failure to release the document fuels the theory – true or not – that the Obama family, shortly after Obama's birth overseas, returned to Hawaii and registered at the Hawaii Department of Health the original Obama birth certificate that had been issued by the doctor and hospital that delivered Obama in Kenya."
"Everybody in Kenya seems to know something about Barack Obama, that Americans don't know! Hear what they have to say about Barack Obama's religion and where he was actually born. I guarantee you'll find it interesting whichever political side you may be on. Remember that the United States Constitution requires that a President must be a "natural born" citizen of the United States - born to American parents on American soil! Stay up-to-date on the latest and hottest issue sparked by the revelations that Obama had posted a fake birth certificate on his website (the forgery was later confirmed as shown in another video). What is Barack Hussein Obama up to? "
Jenny Hatch
The Natural Family Company
This video will share how a potentially fake birth certificate was created.
I will show you to create an authentic looking Hawaiian Birth Certificate with a graphics program.
The one off Obama's site was created the same way by a blogger that admitted it.
People have been asking me how it could be done...
I will show you. In less then 5 min.
Hopefully you'll see why the lawsuits for Obama to produce his "vault" long copy are so critical to establishing citizenship.
Just because you see it on-line, don't take it at face value.
Folks, this is serious.
Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and has refused to release ANY records, school, medical, college, birth.
I wanted to put this out, as Obama is heading to Hawaii.
Andy Martin has filed an Emergency Lawsuit for Obama to produce his records.
By me posting this first, you can see I have nothing to hide.
Have fun, amaze your friends, create your own birth certifcate
And some satire for the road:
Hill and Chel get off message:
Capitalist Pigs going John Galt!
A "RIGHTEOUS" wind at Obamas back!
Dizzy Yet?
Transformers!
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:18 PM
Some of my favorite columnists share final insights on the election
From Blogger Jenny Hatch
Free Republic Thread on this post
Here is an election roundup from my favorite political commentators:
Mark Steyn: Obama in 2-D (Must Read!!!)
Victor Davis Hanson: The End of Journalism
Ben Johnson: Socialism we can believe in
Michael Freund: Look who's rooting for Obama
Mark Levin interviews Sarah Palin
Phyllis Schlafly: Big Media Pull Out All Stops to Elect Obama
Cal Thomas: Smoking audio I blogged this story here.
Peter Wehner: Liberals and the Surge (Must read!!!)
QUOTE:
In his April testimony, while stipulating that “the situation in certain areas is still unsatisfactory and innumerable challenges remain,” Petraeus presented an avalanche of statistics illustrating the degree to which “security in Iraq is better than it was when Ambassador Crocker and I reported to you last September, and . . . significantly better than it was 15 months ago when Iraq was on the brink of civil war and the decision was made to deploy additional U.S. forces to Iraq.”
To which Crocker added:
Last September, I said that the cumulative trajectory of political, economic, and diplomatic developments in Iraq was upward, although the slope of that line was not steep. Developments over the last seven months have strengthened my sense of a positive trend.
Which did not stop Barack Obama from taking to the op-ed page of the New York Times two months later to insist that “the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true.” A week later, ABC’s Terry Moran asked Obama if, knowing what he knew now, would he support it? Obama’s answer was “No.” That is, he was still against the surge despite his own belated acknowledgment that it had, in fact, “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.”
In the effort to reconcile this blatant contradiction—akin to a diagnostician’s continuing to oppose the treatment that made the patient well—he twisted himself into an intellectual pretzel, asserting that the decrease in violence was the result not of any new American strategy but of “political factors inside Iraq that came right at the same time.”
...And so it goes. By the time General Petraeus handed over the flag of his command to General Raymond Odierno in September, the situation in Iraq had been utterly transformed.
...For some liberals, hatred of the President was clearly so all-encompassing that they had developed a deep investment in the failure of what they habitually dismissed not as America’s war but as “Bush’s war.” To an extent, this passion was driven by merely partisan considerations: Iraq had become a superbly effective instrument with which to bludgeon Republicans. It had helped the Democrats take control of both the House and the Senate in 2006; might not a thorough “Republican” defeat in Iraq lastingly reshape the political landscape in their favor?
This is, admittedly, an unpleasant line of speculation, and those foolhardy enough to venture upon it have been loudly condemned for questioning the patriotism of their political adversaries. But patriotism is not the issue—judgment is. When politicians acting in good faith misjudge a situation, nothing prevents them from acknowledging their error and explaining themselves. For the most part, we await such acknowledgments in vain.
In partial extenuation, it might be contended that politicians have an elementary obligation to be responsive to the opinions of their constituents; since Iraq had become a certifiably unpopular cause, stepping out of line on the issue was likely to be regarded as an offense punishable at the polls. But what, then, are we to say of the opinion shapers, the editorial writers of our great newspapers, the essayists and columnists and book authors who, unconstrained by petty interest, present themselves as stalwartly independent spirits willing to follow the truth wherever it may lead? What was at work in them when the evidence of American progress—which started as a trickle, and then became a river, and eventually became a flood—could no longer be denied? For not only did they continue to deny it, but they actively promoted an alternative policy of withdrawal and retreat that would have made an American defeat, and a jihadist and Iranian victory, inevitable. Is it not fair to say that what was at work in them was an ideological antipathy not just to an American President, but to America’s cause?
Fortunately, as I noted at the outset, Americans at large are not so ready to deny the evidence of their senses, and appear open to reasoned argument on the basis of that evidence. For a political leader in high office, this is a great blessing. Some eyes will refuse to open and some ears will refuse to hear and some voices will always be raised high in derision. To act rightly in such circumstances is difficult and often enormously costly; but it is the very essence of leadership. If a leader’s decision is wise, there are grounds for hoping that in time this wisdom will be vindicated and, perhaps, recognized—even in the case of a war once massively unpopular but now winnable."
Donald Kochan: Selfishness IS a Virtue
As Adam Smith described:
"Every individual is continually exerting himself to find out the most advantageous employment for whatever capital he can command. It is his own advantage, indeed, and not that of society, which he has in view. But the study of his own advantage naturally, or rather necessarily, leads him to prefer employment which is most advantageous to the society . . . . [H]e intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." -- Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, bk. IV, ch. 2, 397, 399 (D.D. Raphael ed., 1991) (1776).
In his book "Capitalism and Freedom" (1962) Milton Friedman (1912-2006) advocated minimizing the role of government in a free market as a means of creating political and social freedom.
And the final, to me most important, column written about the election in the past month.
Erik Rush: Obama and the Trinity United murders
Members of Chicago's Trinity United Church (the house of worship attended by Democrat presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama for 20 years) already had their Christmas trees up when members of the Chicago press circulated through the city, interviewing many of them as they mourned Donald Young, their 47-year-old choir master who has been found shot dead in his South Side Chicago home on December 3, 2007.
Young, known for having a flamboyant persona, was an openly gay man.
The choir director's murder and the execution-style murders of two other gay Trinity United congregants within 60 days of each other had gays and blacks terrified over the winter of 2007-2008. They feared that a serial killer targeting either blacks, gays or both might have hung out his shingle in Chicago.
Curiously, neither Sen. Obama, his surrogates nor law enforcement had anything to say regarding the circumstantial connection. Nowhere in the news reports of the killings has there been any mention of Obama, or the questioning of him or any of his cohorts or staffers by Chicago police.
To suggest that Sen. Obama was somehow involved in these murders is obviously a leap. However, one would imagine that if any other prominent citizen had been publicly accused of being a closet homosexual, then three gay men from their church were murdered in the months that followed, local law enforcement would have crawled up one of their excretive orifices with an entire forensics lab.
Although this columnist and Fox News' Sean Hannity have been accused of similar transgressions, the Rev. James David Manning appears to have taken on the mission of preventing the election of Barack Obama as a holy and personal crusade. The minister, who presides over New York-based Atlah World Ministries, has released a flurry of anti-Obama videos that depict the candidate as "an emissary of the devil."
Manning asserts that Barack Obama is at least bisexual, if not a closet homosexual and former drug abuser, an unregenerate sinner who is only using the issue of faith to advance himself in the political realm. Manning is also opposed to the progressive agenda for blacks, maintaining that it has only served to render blacks irresponsible and dependent.
Although former Obama associate and accuser Larry Sinclair — who precipitated Obama's short-lived "gay bimbo eruption" at the beginning of his campaign — failed a polygraph test following his assertions that he had done cocaine and had sex with Obama in 1999, it does give pause that the candidate continues to be linked with sex and drugs.
Though Obama did admit to experimentation with drugs years ago, some speculate that he was concerned that his experimentation with (or immersion in) sexually adventurous realms might not sit so well with American voters. If Rev. Manning's charges contained any truth whatever, it might lend credence to accusations that the three men murdered in Chicago were victims of a conspiracy to silence those who might bring Obama's homosexual dalliances to light.
Left wing blogs and some YouTube posters portray Manning as a veritable psych ward escapee. Others find him — though brutally frank — as one who simply possesses a certain orthodoxy as regards literal obedience to Christian doctrine in the tradition of a Pat Robertson, though possibly being singled out because he is black (an because some are so slavishly dedicated to Obama).
In conversation, Rev. Manning is entirely lucid. He maintains that his sources and information pertaining to Obama are "rock-solid and incontrovertible" He has met with Larry Sinclair and while Sinclair "obviously has other things going on in his life relating to his credibility," the pastor said that, in general, Sinclair speaks easily and knowledgably when he talks about Obama's bisexuality and crack cocaine use.
So what do we really know? What we know is that three gay members of trinity United Church were murdered in close temporal proximity during late 2007. It is extremely unlikely that Obama never met these men, particularly the choir director. We also know that somewhat earlier, a former Obama acquaintance claimed that he and Obama had participated in gay sex and drug use. Though it was revealed that the man was lying about something, law enforcement operatives know that polygraphs are not universally reliable and even pathological liars don't lie all the time.
The tabloids The National Enquirer and The Globe have been investigating Obama's alleged homosexual adventures and drug use for some time. A private investigator who works with the Chicago Police Department allegedly told the tabloid The Globe that Donald Young was silenced because of something he knew about Obama.
As we know, despite the outlandish tales sometimes spun by these publications, quite often they are spot-on as regards the lives of people in the spotlight. A prime example is the case of Sen. John Edwards' love child. If the tabloids know anything, however, they are clearly biding their time.
As may be some others..."
Erik Rush broke the story on Rev. Wright in 2007
I don't have anything to add to these excellent comments on the current political situation, except to challenge my readers to go vote!!!
Let Freedom Ring!
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 5:24 AM
October 30, 2008
Donald Young, murdered in Chicago - Obamas Gay Lover???
This story, supressed by the media, is the one that most concerns me as an American.
Larry Sinclair has been yelling about Obamas Bi-Sexuality for many months now and he has been mostly ignored by the media and the blog world. I heard about his claims at Free Republic when his first You Tube Video was published months ago.
I did not blog about it because I honestly did not care about Baracks sexuality. I figured if he was gay...whatever...I was not planning to vote for him. But when I read about Donald Young, the Gay Choir Director of Reverend Wrights church in Chicago being murdered last year, I found myself increasingly angry that the story was not properly vetted in the press, except to discredit and make fun of Larry Sinclair.
And when I read on Larrys blog how he was being bullied by Obama thugs, I was completely enraged that a citizen of our country was being falsely arrested and had his site hacked etc...
Here is a link to the most recent Jeff Rense interview with Larry. Scroll down for the link. (Jeff's site has also been repeatedly hacked)
Free Republic has been pulled for hours off the web, and my own blog has been hacked twice this month since I posted the information about Larry Sinclair and Donald Young.
I guess the thing that is most important to me is the truth. Before Bill Clinton was elected we had all sorts of stories coming out about his immorality. He allowed a Bimbo Eruption campaign to be conducted against his past girlfriends. Some of these women were brutalized by Clinton Thugs.
But to have this gay man in Chicago murdered, it just breaks my heart, and I believe the public has a right to know the truth. How many political murders and coverups will be conducted against the American People over the next four years if Barack Obama is elected president in three days time?
It just sickens me to think about the police state we will be living in if the commie thugs take over our government.
Please take some time to ponder and pray about this issue before you vote on tuesday.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:33 PM
I've been waiting for some honest hearted person in the Obama Camp to spill the beans on this topic...
Hill Buzz Dems who were for Hillary are all going one hundred percent for McCain/Palin. I was listening to Rush Limbaugh this morning and heard him read this comment on the air. It struck me as really interesting because I have personally experienced this sort of flaming on my Blog, my You Tube Vids, and in various chat rooms, especially at Mothering Magazine and Free Republic.
Anyway, here is the comment: (Number 25 in the comment section of the post) Perhaps some of my readers who have participated in chats have experienced this sort of "flaming" from web users being paid by the Obama Campaign to work as full time internet political prostitutes.
sarah p Says:
October 27, 2008 at 5:04 am
Ok, I want to clear my conscious a little. Hopefully you could make a blog post to help some fellow clinton supporters out.
I work for a campaign and can’t wait for this week to be over.
I was doing it for a job. I was not a fan of any candidate but over time grew to love HRC.
The internal campaign idea is to twist, distort, humiliate and finally dispirit you.
We pay people and organize people to go to all the online sites and “play the part of a clinton or mccain supporter who just switched our support for obama”
We do this to stifle your motivation and to destroy your confidence.
We did this the whole primary and it worked.
Sprinkle in mass vote confusion and it becomes bewildering. Most people lose patience and just give up on their support of a candidate and decide to just block out tv, news, websites, etc.
This surprisingly has had a huge suppressing movement and vote turnout issues.
Next, we infiltrate all the blogs and all the youtube videos and overwhelm the voting, the comments, etc. All to continue this appearance of overwhelming world support.
People makes posts to the effect that the world has “gone mad”
Thats the intention. To make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.
We have also had quite a hand in skewing many many polls, some we couldn’t control as much as we would have liked. But many we have spoiled over. Just enough to make real clear politics look scarey to a mccain supporter. Its worked, alough the goal was to appear 13-15 points ahead.
see, the results have been working. People tend to support a winner, go with the flow, become “sheeple”
The polls are roughly 3-5 points in favor of Barack. Thats due to our inflation of the polls and pulling in the sheeple.
Our donors, are the same people who finance the MSM. Their interests are tied, Barack then tends to come across as teflon. Nothing sticks. And trust, there were meetings with Fox news. The goal was to blunt them as much as possible. Watch Bill Oreilly he has become much more diplomatic and “fair and balanced” and soft. Its because he wants to retain the #1 spot on cable news and to do that he has to have access to the Obama campaign and we worked hard at stringing him a long and keeping him soft for an interview swap. It worked and now he is anticipating more access. So he is playing it still soft.
This is why nothing sticks.
The operation is massive, the goal is to paint a picture that is that of a winner, regardless of the results.
There is no true inauguration draft or true grant park construction going on. There will be a party, but we are boasting beyond the truth to make it seem like the election is wrapped up.
Our goal is to continue to make you lose your moral. We worked hard at persuasion and paying off and timing and playing the right political numbers to get key republican endorsements to make it seem even more like it was over and the world was coming to an end for you all.
There is a huge staff of people working around the clock, watching every site, blogs, etc. We flood these sites. We have had a goal to overwhelm.
The truth is here. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.
I am saying this because I know HRC was better for the country, and now realize this. I was too late by the time I connected to her. To me Barack was just a cool young dude that seemed like a star. I didn’t know him or his policies, but now I understand more than I care to and I realize his interests are more for him, and the DNC and all working like puppets with dean. I always thought a president wanted the better good for the country. The end result I see is everyone dependent on the government, this means more and more people voting for the DNC. This means the future is forever altered. I don’t see this as america, so I am now supporting John Mccain.
Sarah Palin is a huge threat, and our campaign has feared her like you can’t imagine. If it seems unfair how she has been treated, well its because she has had a team working round the clock to make her look like a fool.
this is a big conspiracy and I am so shocked that its not realized.
We released a little blurb the other day that the Obama campaign was already working on reelection and now putting our efforts towards 2012. This was to make it seem like it was above us to continue caring about 2008. Trust me, its a lie. David is very smart, but its a sticky ugly not very truthful kind of intelligence.
Its not over yet, but I think the machine is working. And its a hill to climb.
I will be quitting my post on nov 5th and my vote will be for John Mccain. Fortunately, my position has been a marketing position and I don’t feel I had any part of anything I would feel guilty for. But I look forward to getting out of this as the negativity and environment upsets me.
I wish you all well, and goodluck.
PS my name is not really sarah. but I am a female and I understand your plight.
This story combined with the Newsmax story about the Hillary supporters who have claimed massive fraud and Will NOT be SILENCED tells me that the marxists who are running things will stop at nothing to make sure the Manchurian Candidate is elected.
Part One of We Will Not Be Silenced Documentary
Click on the extended entry to read the newsmax article and watch the rest of the documentary.
Hillary Backers Decry Massive Obama Vote Fraud
Sunday, October 26, 2008 9:02 PM
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman Article Font Size
With accusations of voter registration fraud swirling as early voting begins in many states, some Hillary Clinton supporters are saying: “I told you so.”
Already in Iowa, the Obama campaign was breaking the rules, busing in supporters from neighboring states to vote illegally in the first contest in the primaries and physically intimidating Hillary supporters, they say.
Obama’s surprisingly strong win in Iowa, which defied all the polls, propelled his upstart candidacy to front-runner status. But Lynette Long, a Hillary supporter from Bethesda, Md., who has a long and respected academic career, believes Obama’s victory in Iowa and in twelve other caucus states was no miracle. “It was fraud,” she told Newsmax.
Long has spent several months studying the caucus and primary results.
“After studying the procedures and results from all 14 caucus states, interviewing dozens of witnesses, and reviewing hundreds of personal stories, my conclusion is that the Obama campaign willfully and intentionally defrauded the American public by systematically undermining the caucus process,” she said.
In Hawaii, for example, the caucus organizers ran out of ballots, so Obama operatives created more from Post-its and scraps of paper and dumped them into ice cream buckets. “The caucuses ended up with more ballots than participants, a sure sign of voter fraud,” Long said.
In Nevada, Obama supporters upturned a wheelchair-bound woman who wanted to caucus for Hillary, flushed Clinton ballots down the toilets, and told union members they could vote only if their name was on the list of Obama supporters.
In Texas, more than 2,000 Clinton and Edwards supporters filed complaints with the state Democratic Party alleging massive fraud. The party acknowledged that the Obama campaign’s actions “amount to criminal violations” and ordered them to be reported to state and federal law enforcement, but nothing happened.
In caucus after caucus, Obama bused in supporters from out of state, intimidated elderly voters and women, and stole election packets so Hillary supporters couldn’t vote. Thanks to these and other strong-arm tactics, Obama won victories in all but one of the caucuses, even in states such as Maine, where Hillary had been leading by double digits in the polls.
Obama’s win in the caucuses, which were smaller events than the primaries and were run by the party, not the states, gave him the margin of victory he needed to win a razor-thin majority in the delegate count going into the Democratic National Convention.
Without these caucus wins, which Long and others claim were based on fraud, Hillary Clinton would be the Democrats’ nominee running against John McCain.
Citing a detailed report on the voting results and delegate accounts by accountant Piniel Cronin, “there were only four pledged delegates between Hillary and Obama once you discount caucus fraud,” Long said.
Long has compiled many of these eyewitness reports from the 14 caucus states in a 98-page, single-spaced report and in an interactive Web site: www.caucusanalysis.org.
ACORN involvement
The Obama campaign recently admitted that it paid an affiliate of ACORN, the controversial community organizer that Obama represented in Chicago, more than $832,00 for “voter turnout” work during the primaries. The campaign initially claimed the money had been spent on “staging, sound and light” and “advance work.”
State and federal law enforcement in 11 states are investigating allegations of voter-registration fraud against the Obama campaign. ACORN workers repeatedly registered voters in the name of “Mickey Mouse,” and registered the entire starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys twice — once in Nevada, and again in Minnesota.
A group that has worked with ACORN in the past registered a dead goldfish under the name “Princess Nudelman” in Illinois. When reporters informed Beth Nudelman, a Democrat, that her former pet was a registered voter, she said, “This person is a dead fish."
ACORN was known for its “intimidation tactics,” said independent scholar Stanley Kurtz, a senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC. who has researched Obama’s long-standing ties to the group.
Fully 30 percent of 1.3 million new voters ACORN claims to have registered this year are now believed to be illegitimate.
Long shared with Newsmax some of the emails and sworn affidavits she received from Hillary supporters who witnessed first-hand the thuggish tactics employed by Obama campaign operatives in Iowa and elsewhere.
Jeff, a precinct captain for Clinton from Davenport, Iowa, thought his caucus was in the bag for his candidate, until just minutes before the voting actually began.
“From 6-6:30 p.m., it appeared as I had expected. Young, old males, females, Hispanics, whites, gay and lesbian friends arriving. Very heavily for Ms. Clinton, a fair amount for Edwards and some stragglers for Obama,” he said.
That makeup corresponded to what he had witnessed from many precinct walks he had made through local neighborhoods.
“My mind began to feel victory for my lady,’ he said. “THEN: at 6:50 p.m., over 75 people of African-American descent came walking in, passed the tables and sat in the Obama section. I knew one of them from my canvassing. I knew another one who did not live in this precinct. And aside from four or five families that live on Hillandale Road, there are no other black people in this unusually white precinct. And one of those black couples were in my Hillary section,” he said.
Thanks to the last-minute influx of unknown Obama supporters, Obama won twice the number of delegates from the precinct as Hillary Clinton.
After it was over, “a very large bus was seen in the parking lot afterwards carrying these folks back” to Illinois, Jeff said.
Obama’s flagrant busing of out-of-state caucus participants from Illinois was so obvious that even Joe Biden — today his running mate, then his rival — pointed it out at the time.
At a campaign stop before the Jan. 3 caucus at the JJ Diner in Des Moines, Biden “said what we were all thinking when he got on stage and said, ‘Hello Iowa!’ and then turned to Barack’s crowd and shouted, ‘and Hello Chicago!’” another precinct captain for Hillary told Long.
Thanks to Illinois campaign workers bused across the border into Iowa, all the precincts in eastern Iowa went for Obama, guaranteeing his win in the caucuses, Long said.
Obama supporters were also bused into northeast Iowa from Omaha, Nebraska, where Obama campaign workers were seen handing out “i-pods and free stuff: T-shirts, clothes, shoes, and free meals” to students and people in homeless shelters,” according to eyewitness reports collected by Dr. Long.
In Iowa City, red and white chartered buses with Illinois license plates arrived from Illinois packed with boisterous African-American high school students, who came to caucus for Obama in Iowa after Obama campaign workers recruited them.
2,000 complaints in Texas
In a change in the Democratic National Committee rules for this year’s election season, four states had caucuses and primaries: Washington, Nebraska, Idaho and Texas. “But Texas is the only one that counted both the caucus result and the primary result,” Dr. Long told Newsmax. “The others didn’t count the primary at all, calling it a ‘beauty contest.’”
Because caucuses are more informal, and can last hours, they tend to favor candidates with a strong ground operation or whose supporters use strong-arm tactics to intimidate their rivals.
“There is inherent voter disenfranchisement in the caucuses,” Long said. “Women are less likely to go to caucuses than men, because they don’t like the public nature of the caucus. The elderly are less likely to go to a caucus. People who work shifts can’t go if they work the night shift. And parents with young children can’t go out for four hours on a week night. All these people are traditionally Clinton supporters,” she said.
But Obama’s victories in the caucuses weren’t the result of better organization, Long insists. “It was fraud.”
In state after state, Hillary was leading Obama in the polls right up until the last minute, when Obama won a landslide victory in the caucuses.
The discrepancies between the polls and the caucus results were stunning, Long told Newsmax. The most flagrant example was Minnesota.
A Minnesota Public Radio/Humphrey Institute poll just one week before the Feb. 5 caucus gave Hillary a 7-point lead over Obama, 40-33. But when the Minnesota caucus results were counted, Obama won by a landslide, with 66.39 percent to just 32.23 percent for Hillary, giving him 48 delegates, compared with 24 for Clinton.
“No poll is that far off,” Long told Newsmax.
Similar disparities occurred in 13 of 14 caucus states.
In Colorado and Idaho, Obama had a 2-point edge over Hillary Clinton in the polls, but won by more than 2-to-1 in the caucuses, sweeping most delegates.
In Kansas, Hillary had a slight edge over Obama in the polls, but Obama won 74 percent of the votes in the caucus and most of the delegates. In nearly every state, he bested the pre-caucus polls by anywhere from 12 percent to more than 30 percent.
This year’s primary rules for the Democrats favored the caucus states over the primary states.
“Caucus states made up only 1.1 million (3 percent) of all Democratic votes, but selected 626 (15 percent) of the delegates,” said Gigi Gaston, a filmmaker who has made a documentary on the caucus fraud.
In Texas alone, she says, there were more than 2,000 complaints from Hillary Clinton and John Edwards supporters of Obama’s strong-arm tactics.
One Hillary supporter, who appears in Gaston’s new film, “We Will Not Be Silenced,” says she received death threats from Obama supporters after they saw her address in an on-ine video she made to document fraud during the Texas caucus. “People called me a whore and a skank,” she said.
John Siegel, El Paso Area Captain for Hillary, said, "Some people saw outright cheating. Other people just saw strong-arm tactics. I saw fraud.”
Another woman, who was not identified in the film, described the sign-in process. “You’re supposed to sign your names on these sheets. The sheets are supposed to be controlled, and passed out — this is kind of how you maintain order. None of that was done. The sheets were just flying all over the place. You could put in your own names. You could add your own sheets or anything. It was just filled with fraud.”
Other witnesses described how Obama supporters went through the crowds at the caucus telling Hillary supporters they could go home because their votes had been counted, when in fact no vote count had yet taken place.
“I couldn’t believe this was happening,” one woman said in the film. “I thought this only happened in Third World countries.”
On election day in Texas, Clinton campaign lawyer Lyn Utrecht issued a news release that the national media largely ignored.
“The campaign legal hot line has been flooded with calls containing specific accusations of irregularities and voter intimidation against the Obama campaign,” she wrote. “This activity is undemocratic, probably illegal, and reflects a wanton disregard for the caucus process.”
She identified 18 separate precincts where Obama operatives had removed voting packets before the Clinton voters could arrive, despite a written warning from the state party not to remove them.
The hot line also received numerous calls during the day that “the Obama campaign has taken over caucus sites and locked the doors, excluding Clinton campaign supporters from participating in the caucus,” she wrote.
“There are numerous instances of Obama supporters filing out precinct convention sign-in sheets during the day and submitting them as completed vote totals at caucus. This is expressly against the rules,” she added.
But no one seemed to care.
Despite Clinton’s three-and-a-half point win in the Texas primary — 50.87 percent to 47.39 percent — Obama beat her in the caucus the same day by 56 to 43.7 percent, giving him a 38 to 29 advantage in delegates.
Linda Hayes investigated the results at the precinct level in three state Senate districts. Under the rules of the Texas Democratic Party, participants in the caucuses had to reside in the precinct where they were caucusing and had to have voted in the Democratic primary that same day.
When she began to see the results coming in from the precincts that were wildly at variance with the primary results, “I could see that something was wrong,” Hayes said.
Hayes said she found numerous anomalies as she went through the precinct sign-in sheets.
“Many, many, many Obama people either came to the wrong precinct, they did not sign in properly, they did not show ID, or they did not vote that day.” And yet, their votes were counted.
In a letter to Rep. Lois Capps, a Clinton supporter calling himself “Pacific John” described the fraud he had witnessed during the caucuses.
“On election night in El Paso, it became obvious that the Obama field campaign was designed to steal caucuses. Prior to that, it was impossible for me to imagine the level of attempted fraud and disruption we would see,” he wrote.
“We saw stolen precincts where Obama organizers fabricated counts, made false entries on sign-in sheets, suppressed delegate counts, and suppressed caucus voters. We saw patterns such as missing electronic access code sheets and precinct packets taken before the legal time, like elsewhere in the state. Obama volunteers illegally took convention materials state-wide, with attempts as early as 6:30 a.m.”
The story of how Obama stole the Democratic Party caucuses — and consequently, the Democratic Party nomination — is important not just because it prefigures potential voter fraud in the November 4 presidential election, which is already under way.
It’s important because it fits a pattern that Chicago journalists and a few national and international commentators have noticed in all of the elections Obama has won in his career.
NBC correspondent Martin Fletcher described Obama’s first election victory, for the Illinois state Senate, in a recent commentary that appeared in the London Telegraph.
“Mr. Obama won a seat in the state Senate in 1996 by the unorthodox means of having surrogates successfully challenge the hundreds of nomination signatures that candidates submit. His Democratic rivals, including Alice Palmer, the incumbent, were all disqualified,” Fletcher wrote.
Obama’s election to the U.S. Senate “was even more curious,” conservative columnist Tony Blankley wrote in The Washington Times.
Citing an account that appeared in The Times of London, Blankley described how Obama managed to squeeze out his main Democratic rival, Blair Hull, after divorce papers revealed allegations that Hull had allegedly made a death threat to his former wife.
Then in the general election, “lightning struck again,” Blankley wrote, when his Republican opponent, wealthy businessman Jack Ryan, was forced to withdraw in extremis after his divorce papers revealed details of his sexual life with his former wife.
Just weeks before the election, the Illinois Republican Party called on Alan Keyes of Maryland to challenge Obama in the general election. Obama won a landslide victory.
“Mr. Obama’s elections are pregnant with the implications that he has so far gamed every office he has sought by underhanded and sordid means,” Blankley wrote, while “the American media has let these extraordinary events simply pass without significant comment.”
Hillary Clinton supporters, belatedly, now agree.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 5:46 PM
October 28, 2008
The Abomination: Corsi writes a book and Obamas handlers explode
I bought Corsi's book, read it, then printed out the Obama Camp Response and read it. PDF file of Obamas rebuttal that was poorly written and has multiple mispellings and non responses to non issues in Corsi's book.
(Click on the image to get to the book)
Then I read the Corsi Rebuttal to the Campaign Rebuttal.
Here is the final analysis from Corsi's Rebuttal:
Ad Hominem Attacks: The Lowest Form of Argumentation
Pages 34-40 of "Unfit for Publication," approximately 15 percent of the total document, are devoted to ad hominem attacks against me.
Since the days of ancient Greek rhetoric, ad hominem attacks have been considered the lowest form of argumentation. Typically, debaters or apologists only resort to ad hominem attacks only when they have already lost the argument because they are unable to win through evidence and logic. Ad hominem attacks attempt to discourage the listener from paying attention to the arguments made. The problem is that ad hominem arguments fail to refute the substantive contentions of the person who is being attacked personally.
In a section entitled "Consider the Source: Corsi Holds Widely Discredited Beliefs," the Obama campaign rebuttal presents entirely one-sided, emotionally-laden and partial descriptions or distortions of arguments I have made in books and on the radio concerning topics unrelated to the subject matter of "The Obama Nation." Put simply, these ad hominem attacks are irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of the arguments I make in "The Obama Nation."
...Throughout the 2004 election cycle, I remained active in promoting "Unfit for Command" as has been documented by Scott Swett and Tim Ziegler in their 2008 book entitled "To Set the Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New Media Defeated John Kerry." I attended as an invited guest multiple meetings of the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth and was honored by awards given by the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth for my participation in their campaign.
That the Obama campaign feels compelled to attack me personally in order to refute "The Obama Nation" is a clear indication how weak and troubled are the arguments the campaign is capable of mounting in defense of their candidate.
I trust unbiased readers will see the ad hominem attacks leveled at me by "Unfit for Publication" for what they are – attacks unworthy of any serious effort to elect a candidate to the highest political office in the United States.
The last section of "Unfit for Publication" lists "Offensive Language in Corsi's Book." Without repeating the cited sentences drawn out of context from "The Obama Nation," I also trust unbiased readers to see what the Obama campaign is attempting to accomplish here – to rule out of bounds as politically incorrect language as any comment adverse to Sen. Obama, regardless of their truth, if any reference is made whatsoever to race, national identity, religion, disease or sex.
My rejoinder is simple: The Obama campaign rebuttal fails to demonstrate any of the comments itemized as politically objectionable in their limited view were false. Targeting as politically correct any and all unpleasant criticisms of Sen. Obama or any and all politically inconvenient comments regarding Sen. Obama is nothing more than an attempt at political censorship that has no place within the robust intent of open discussion as defined by the First Amendment.
If personal abuse is the price for writing a book that is critical of Sen. Obama, then that is a price I will gladly pay, especially since the 40-page rebuttal plus cover has failed to prove a single falsehood contained in pages of the book, "The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality."
Bottom line? As Corsi made so abundantly clear, Barack Obama has some things he has been hiding from the American Public.
In this stunning and comprehensive new book, the reader will learn about: -Obama's extensive connections with Islam and radical politics, from his father and step-father's Islamic backgrounds, to his Communist and socialist mentors in Hawaii and Chicago, to his long-term and close associations with former Weather Underground heroes William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn—associations much closer than heretofore revealed by the press
-Barack and Michelle's 20-year-long religious affiliation with the black-liberation theology of former Trinity United Church of Christ Reverend Jeremiah Wright, whose sermons have always been steeped in a rage first expressed by Franz Fanon , Stokely Carmichael and Malcolm X, a rage that Corsi shows has deep meaning for Obama
-Obama's continuing connections with Kenya, the homeland of his father, through his support for the candidacy of Raila Odinga, the radical socialist presidential contender who came to power amid Islamist violence and church burnings
-Obama's involvement in the slum-landlord empire of the Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko, who helped to bankroll Obama's initial campaigns and to purchase of Barack and Michelle's dream-home property.
-the background and techniques of the Obama campaign's cult of personality, including the derivation of the words “hope” and change”
-Obama's far-left domestic policy, his controversial votes on abortion, his history of opposition to the Second Amendment, his determination to raise capital-gains taxes, his impractical plan to achieve universal health care, and his radical plan to tax Americans to fund a global-poverty-reduction program
-Obama's naïve, anti-war, anti-nuclear foreign-policy, predicated on the reduction of the military, the eradication of nuclear weapons and an overconfidence in the power of his personality, as if belief in change alone could somehow transform international politics, achieve nuclear-weapons disarmament and withdrawal from Iraq without adverse consequences, for us, for the Iraqis or for Israel.
Meticulously researched and documented, THE OBAMA NATION is the definitive source for information on why and how Barack Obama must be defeated—not by invective and general attacks, but by detailed arguments that are well-researched and fact-based.
Pat Buchanan has some thoughts on Obamas first one hundred days.....shudder, gasp, and groan...
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 2:48 PM
Sarah Palin's a Brainiac
Click on the image to get to the McCain/Palin web site
Sarah Palin's a Brainiac
by Elaine Lafferty
It's difficult not to froth when one reads, as I did again and again this week, doubts about Sarah Palin's “intelligence,” coming especially from women such as PBS's Bonnie Erbe, who, as near as I recall, has not herself heretofore been burdened with the Susan Sontag of Journalism moniker. As Fred Barnes—God help me, I'm agreeing with Fred Barnes—suggests in the Weekly Standard, these high toned and authoritative dismissals come from people who have never met or spoken with Sarah Palin. Those who know her, love her or hate her, offer no such criticism. They know what I know, and I learned it from spending just a little time traveling on the cramped campaign plane this week:
Sarah Palin is very smart.
What is often called her “confidence” is actually a rarity in national politics: I saw a woman who knows exactly who she is.
Palins Glass Ceiling Speech
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 2:32 PM
WND: Obama rips U.S. Constitution
"Seven years before Barack Obama's "spread the wealth" comment to Joe the Plumber became a GOP campaign theme, the Democratic presidential candidate said in a radio interview the U.S. has suffered from a fundamentally flawed Constitution that does not mandate or allow for redistribution of wealth."
Power Line: Obamas Constitution
"Yesterday the Obama campaign called on University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein to tamp down the furor over Obama's advocacy of "redistributive change" and overcoming of the Constitution's "negative rights" in his 2001 radio interview. Politico's Ben Smith reliably channelled Professor Sunstein's spinning on behalf of Obama.
...The debate on the left, alluded to in Obama's remarks and addressed in Sunstein's book, has been whether Congress or the courts should promulgate the welfare state agenda. Three years ago Sunstein et al. modestly posited the fulfillment of their welfare state dreams in 2020. With left-wing Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, and with Obama's ascendance, it looks like the future is now.."
Here is what Heavenly Father has to say about the American Constitution:
77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;
78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.
79 Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.
80 And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 2:02 PM
John McCain on Glenn Beck Today!
Go Here to read the whole thing...
October 28, 2008 - 13:17 ET
GLENN:
Senator McCain.
SENATOR McCAIN:
Glenn, how are you?
GLENN:
I'm very good. How are you?
SENATOR McCAIN:
Glad to talk to you again, Glenn.
GLENN:
Are you tired yet? Are you ready for this to be over?
SENATOR McCAIN:
No. It's so exciting. I was in Boxville, Pennsylvania last night. We had 5,000 people show up yelling, screaming. I'm telling you, it fires you up. I'm telling you, it just fires you up.
GLENN:
I tell you, I feel fired up myself. I feel fired up with the -- I think America is finally addressing who Barack Obama really, truly is. This man is frightening with the tapes that have come out recently of him espousing Marxist ideas and talking about how the Constitution really needs to be changed.
SENATOR McCAIN:
It's remarkable some of the things that he said, and I've got to -- listen, if there's one man that I'm grateful to in America today, it's Joe the plumber was standing out in his driveway.
GLENN:
Oh, boy.
SENATOR McCAIN:
Obama came through the neighborhood. I can't tell you the number of signs, Rose the florist, Ralph the landscaper, now all of these people show up carrying their signs. But it really is. It's the classic left liberal redistribution of the wealth. I mean, that's all it is. I mean, everybody's the -- yeah.
GLENN:
Do you really think it is only that? I mean, this is so far beyond Ted Kennedy. When you have in 2001 Barack Obama saying that the Supreme Court, "Didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution when it comes to redistribution of wealth," we're not talking about the typical liberal. This is way beyond.
SENATOR McCAIN:
Oh, yeah. It's very, very left. Very, very left. But, of course, that's why he's the most liberal senator in the Senate. That's why you continue -- that's why he opposed and won the filibuster, Alito and Roberts. I mean, every indication of his record is from the far left and again, it's scary -- no, it's not scary. It's just disturbing. Let me add nothing is scary in this world because I believe in America and I believe the fundamentals of America is, you know, that Americans will put checks and balances on anybody, but it is very, very disturbing to see that he has these kinds of views which have been tried in other countries and failed.
GLENN:
Okay, let me be frightened for you. I have to tell you, Senator McCain, in my business I have never seen anything like what this media has done to you, your campaign, Sarah Palin, and allowed Barack Obama and Joe Biden to get away with. There was a serious reporter. She was an assistant to Peter Jennings. Barbara West in Orlando, she asked a serious question. They have blackballed her. I am wildly concerned about the Fairness Doctrine coming back in and our freedom of speech being crushed. How is that not a frightening idea?
SENATOR McCAIN:
Well, if you re -- try to reinstate this Fairness Doctrine, it will kill Glenn Beck, it will kill every program that has any controversy associated with it. Willing there's no doubt about that. But how about this card check thing where he supports that a union organizer can come to a person's home and say, hey, I want to sign you up to a union, right, okay? They are going to take away the secret ballot for people as far as where they want to join unions. This is a far left agenda that's being pursued and so as far as the media's concerned, I think what was terrible is them pulling their ads. If you don't ask the right questions, we'll pull our ads and we'll deprive you of revenues. That's a remarkable problem.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:57 PM
Dear Mr. Obama...
An Iraq Veteran has a personal message for Barack Obama
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:55 PM
Thanks Zo, for giving me a couple of laugh out loud moments this morning!
Hey y'all! God bless ya's! I'm Zo!
Founder of Macho Sauce Productions.
I'm a musician, martial artist, amateure movie makin', Christian conservative republican. Groovie oovie!
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 1:49 PM
October 24, 2008
Obama Commie Connections
Free Republic Thread on this post!
Click on the picture to get more fun stuff!
This blog post is simply to share some videos, links, and pictures with my readers about the various Marxists who influenced Barack Obama.
Now perhaps you do not believe Communism is a revolutionary force that has been embraced by the elites in our society to enslave the people of America and the World. If that is the case, a quote from Sam Adams comes to mind, because if you are reading this post right now, consider yourself warned.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams"
Barack Obamas Mother Stanley Ann Dunham, was a Marxist: You Tube Video documenting her life.
Barack Obamas Father was a highly educated and intelligent man: Perhaps if he had spent more time with his biological father, he would not be so confused about the source of HOPE and CHANGE.
UPDATE: That afternoon, I stand corrected, Obamas Father was a Socialist, I just received this email from someone who shared some more information with me.
"Jenny, I appreciate your blog's efforts to expose Obama, the stealth candidate. However, it is a mistake to accept Raymond Omwami’s denial that Obama Sr. was a socialist.
In fact, like the nominee of our nation’s socialist party Obama Sr. was a Marxist himself. Even Dreams From My Father hints at this in its account that he was ousted from his government job when Kenyas president cracked down on communist agitators (pp. 214-215).
In his July 1965 East Africa Journal essay “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Obama Sr. contended that Kenyas government should use compulsory force to impose collective ownership of property:
We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.
[If need be, government should] force people to consolidate through the easiest way, which, I think, would be through clan co-operatives rather than through individual initiative.
… the society, through the government, which is its instrument, should enforce means by which this growth and change can be brought about.
The dad of Barry’s dreams argued that individual rights must be subordinated to the collective good, and economic equality imposed:
If the government should, however, feel that individual ownership is the best policy to take in order to bring development, then it should restrict the size of farms that can be owned by one individual throughout the country and this should apply to everybody from the President to the ordinary man.
… we also need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now. It is a case of cure and prevention and not prevention alone. . . .
[S]o long as we maintain free enterprise one cannot deny that some will accumulate more than others.
Obama Sr. claimed that even 100% percent taxation would be justified as long as the government redistributes benefits fairly. He called for nationalization of Kenyas industries, with even hotel rates set by the government. To justify his views, he appealed to what Marx had written on economic and political power. He objected that the moderate socialism proposed in the Kenyan government’s position paper is inconsistent with Marx: “one who has read Marx cannot fail to see that corporations are not only what Marx referred to as the advanced stage of capitalism but Marx even called it finance capitalism by which a few would control the finances of so many and through this have not only economic power but political power as well” (pp. 29-32, italics supplied).
Alex
(Thanks Alex, for the information, I really appreciate it! Jen)
QUOTE:
"In other words, Obama senior’s paper was not a cry for acceptance of radical politics but was instead a critique of a government policy by Kenya’s Ministry of Economic Planning and Development, which applied African socialism principles to the country’s ongoing political upheaval.
“The critics of this article are making a big mistake,” says Omwami, who at Politico’s request read the document and the associated Internet debate over the weekend. “They are assuming Obama senior is the one who came up with this concept of African socialism, but that’s totally wrong. Based on that, they’re imbuing in him the idea that he himself is a socialist, but he is not.”
Madelyn Dunham in Baracks Commercial
Obamas white grandparents were Marxists as was their friend Frank Marshall Davis, who was an early influence on Obama as a teen: You Tube Video
Frank Davis
QUOTE:
"The pro-Davis quotes in the Takara article in the Western Journal of Black Studies, which are cited in the Obama report, are actually preceded by Davis’s own incriminating words, in which he says:
“From now on I knew I would be described as a Communist but frankly I had reached the stage where I didn’t give a damn. Too many people I respected as Freedom Fighters were listed as Red for me to fear name calling.”
These quotes are carefully omitted from the Obama report. Instead, the report only uses quotes that make it appear as though Davis was not an extremist of any sort."
It recently came out that Davis was a sexual pervert and raging member of the Communist Party.
QUOTES:
"Davis confessed: "I could not truthfully deny that this book, which came out in 1968 as a Greenleaf Classic, was mine."
The appalling catalog of admitted real-life decadence is laced with perverted sexual activity, bisexuality, rape - and the seduction of children.
"
Davis' admission he wrote this disturbing book exposes Obama's mentor as living a secret double life - and as a sexual pervert," disclosed a source.
In his shocking tell-all, Davis admits to seducing a thirteen year-old girl, voyeurism, exhibitionism, bisexuality, rape and sadomasochism.
Barack, called "Barry" as a child, was a mere ten year old when he first met the family friend who lead a secret double life.
Obama's grandfather introduced Barry and Davis because he believed it would help his alienated grandson identify with being of mixed heritage because Barack's mother, Ann, was a white American while his father, Barack Sr.black Kenyan."
Jack Cashill has perhaps the most compelling line of articles about Bill Ayers influence on Barack Obama and his political career. He shares evidence that Ayers was ghost writer for Obamas bio, Dreams from my Father, and used it to help propel Obama into the national spotlight. Here is a link to his most recent article and if you scroll down you can see the links to this whole series of articles written in the past few weeks.
We all know Jeremiah Wright, Obamas pastor, was and is an America Hater.
And we have to assume with all of these mentors, family, friends, and religious leaders that Barack Obama has some Marxist Tendencies himself. His own words compel one to ponder on the agendas, plans, and goals for an American Presidency run on Marxist Principles.
Obama and Friends, History of Radicalism is a You Tube Round up of videos produced to share the facts of Baracks circle of Communist Friends.
Time will tell. I won't be voting for him, but when we wake up a few years hence to a police state that is run by a thugocracy tied to a world government, don't say I didn't warn you. I don't plan to be a cog in the world government death machine.
Give me Liberty or give me Death!
The Videos are hosted below:
We Americans owe it to the tens of thousands of soldiers who died and fought Communism these past 100 years to make sure that we do not welcome a Marxist into the White House to serve as Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces.
It absolutely sickens me to think of a man who has been so agonizingly pummelled by his Communist Family and Friends being in charge of the American Military.
Please vote for John McCain in the upcoming election. Barack was raised and mentored by communists, John McCain was tortured by them. McCain will lead our country holding true to American Values and Principles of Freedom.
Glenn Back and Jonah Goldberg discuss Chavez style of leadership!
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:37 AM
October 23, 2008
Meridian Magazine: Orson Scott Card: Will the last honest journalist please turn on the lights?
An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:
Mr. Card has been one of my favorite authors since I read Enders Game in 1988. Since that time I have read all of his books, some numerous times, and absolutely love the Seventh Son Series. As a fellow mormon, we share quite a bit in common, I just wish my other mormon democrat friends had the insight and intellect of Orson, so they could figure out the sad state of journalism in America and embrace the truth.
QUOTES:
"I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.
This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.
It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.
What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.
The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.
They end up worse off than before.
This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.
Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.)
Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?
I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."
Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.
As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" ( http://snipurl.com/457townhall_com] ): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury."
These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.
Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!
What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?
Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.
And after Freddie Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.
If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.
But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign — because that campaign had sought his advice — you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.
You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.
If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.
If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.
There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)
If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.
Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.
But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.
If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.
Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means . That's how trust is earned.
Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.
Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months.
So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?
Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?
You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.
That's where you are right now.
It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.
If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.
Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.
You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.
This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.
If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe — and vote as if — President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.
If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats — including Barack Obama — and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans — then you are not journalists by any standard.
You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a news paper in our city.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:22 AM
October 19, 2008
It's The COMMUNISM Stupid, (A Liberal Supermajority!)
"Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on."
These past few days I have been doing quite a bit of research about Barack Obama.
I have spent most of my adult life studying political ideologies and reading books on political theory.
I guess what is so baffling to me is how easily the American People, especially women, allow themselves to be duped by somone that "sounds good".
One thing needs to be fully understood by anyone reading this post. Communism is NOT a political party. It is not a legitimate, "alternative" to the party system in America. Marxism is a revolutionary force that has at its roots the overthrow of all Free People through class envy, warfare, and violence. Socialism is the stepping stone to world communism.
The fact that all of Obamas closest friends, mentors, and family members are die hard marxists is troubling enough. But when I read an article last night from the International Tribune that claimed his Mother was also a dyed in the wool Marxist, I just about threw up.
When a child is gestated in the womb of a woman who has such confused thoughts about freedom and slavery, it creates this psychic wound in the Freedom Loving portion of the babes brain