November 17, 2008
American Thinker: Orwell's Children by Bruce Walker
Orwell even told us, by name, the professionals who would lead us into the nightmare of 1984: "sociologists," "teachers," "bureaucrats," "journalists," "professional politicians," "scientists," "trade union organizers," "publicity experts," and "technicians." (The term "community organizer" was unknown to him.) Those who enslave were those who taught students, who created the news, who sat in the halls of government power, and who defined official "truth" (at least truth de jour.)
Orwell's Children live among us now, not in tiny numbers in weird Marxist cults like Jim Jones' People Temple, but as leaders of Congress, as the establishment of academia, as the producers of news and entertainment, as the administrators of public schools, as the "experts" in a thousand myriad and odd fields of putative "expertise." They infatuate our bored children with the only reality and the only diversion that many can find. They wait for the rest of us to grow older and to die.
Will these children inherit the earth? History, not theology, has shown a single defense against the spreading contagion of Orwell's Children. Solzhenitsyn found God in the godless Gulag. Michael Power in early 1939 wrote: "In the Christianity of the German people, the National Socialist has found the one enemy it could not vanquish" - and Christians in Germany, alone, chose to voluntarily seek death before selling their souls to Nazism.
The Jewish refusniks proved indigestible to the brutal Soviet police state. When all else failed the Jewish people under the Nazis, devout Jews like my wife's mother clung to the Blessed Creator and survived the Holocaust. God can touch us all. God can protect us all from evil (not from harm - we all suffer and we all die - but from the much greater danger of the sort of evil Orwell described.)
Education, science, technological gadgetry, good medical care - all of this can not stop us from sliding into a massive Jonestown, a realized Oceania, a place marked by Dante's grim caution "Abandon hope, all you who enter here." We are all anchored in belief, but it is what we believe that matters. We can believe in the lies of Big Brother, which change each day with the needs of the party or we can believe in the truth of a living God. We can become the children of Orwell or the special creatures of God. Everything -- our nation, our world, our families, our communities -- flows from that choice.
Bruce Walker is the author of two books: Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie, and his recently published book, The Swastika against the Cross: The Nazi War on Christianity.
Jenny Hatch
The Natural Family Company
Healthy Families Make A Healthy World!
The Natural Family BLOG
The ending of 1984 by George Orwell
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 5:46 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 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
October 22, 2008
WSJ: Clarence Thomas: How to Read the Constitution
Click on the image to get to my book review of Justice Thomas amazing Biography, My Grandfathers Son. It has remained my favorite read of the year. (And please do NOT ever forget that it was Joe Biden who led the high tech lynching of Judge Thomas when he was being approved for the Supreme Court.)
The following is an excerpt from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's Wriston Lecture to the Manhattan Institute last Thursday:
"When John F. Kennedy said in his inaugural address, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country," we heard his words with ears that had been conditioned to receive this message and hearts that did not resist it. We heard it surrounded by fellow citizens who had known lives of sacrifice and hardships from war, the Great Depression and segregation. All around us seemed to ingest and echo his sentiment and his words. Our country and our principles were more important than our individual wants, and by discharging our responsibilities as citizens, neighbors, and students we would make our country better. It all made sense.
Today, we live in a far different environment. My generation, the self-indulgent "me" generation, has had a profound effect on much around us. Rarely do we hear a message of sacrifice -- unless it is a justification for more taxation and transfers of wealth to others. Nor do we hear from leaders or politicians the message that there is something larger and more important than the government providing for all of our needs and wants -- large and small. The message today seems more like: Ask not what you can do for yourselves or your country, but what your country must do for you.
This brings to mind the question that seems more explicit in informed discussions about political theory and implicit in shallow political speeches. What is the role of government? Or more to the point, what is the role of our government? Interestingly, this is the question that our framers answered more than 200 years ago when they declared our independence and adopted our written Constitution. They established the form of government that they trusted would be best to preserve liberty and allow a free people to prosper. And that it has done for over two centuries. Of course, there were major flaws such as the issue of slavery, which would eventually lead to a civil war and casualties of fellow citizens that dwarf those of any of the wars that our country has since been involved in.
Though we have amended the Constitution, we have not changed its structure or the core of the document itself. So what has changed? That is the question that I have asked myself and my law clerks countless times during my 17 years on the court.
As I have traveled across the country, I have been astounded just how many of our fellow citizens feel strongly about their constitutional rights but have no idea what they are, or for that matter, what the Constitution says. I am not suggesting that they become Constitutional scholars -- whatever that means. I am suggesting, however, that if one feels strongly about his or her rights, it does make sense to know generally what the Constitution says about them. It is at least as easy to understand as a cell phone contract -- and vastly more important.
The Declaration of Independence sets out the basic underlying principle of our Constitution. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . . ."
The framers structured the Constitution to assure that our national government be by the consent of the people. To do this, they limited its powers. The national government was to be strong enough to protect us from each other and from foreign enemies, but not so strong as to tyrannize us. So, the framers structured the Constitution to limit the powers of the national government. Its powers were specifically enumerated; it was divided into three co-equal branches; and the powers not given to the national government remained with the states and the people. The relationship between the two political branches (the executive and the legislative) was to be somewhat contentious providing checks and balances, while frequent elections would assure some measure of accountability. And, the often divergent interests of the states and the national government provided further protection of liberty behind the shield of federalism. The third branch, and least dangerous branch, was not similarly constrained or hobbled.
Since Marbury v. Madison the federal judiciary has assumed the role of the interpreter and, now, final arbiter of our Constitution. But, what rules must judges follow in doing so? What informs, guides and limits our interpretation of the admittedly broad provisions of the Constitution? And, more directly, what restrains us from imposing our personal views and policy preferences on our fellow citizens under the guise of Constitutional interpretation?
To assure the independence of federal judges, the framers provided us with life tenure and an irreducible salary -- though inflation has found a way around the latter. This independence, in turn, was to assure our neutrality and impartiality, which are at the very core of judging -- and being a judge. Yet, this independence can also insulate a judge from accountability for venturing beyond the proper role of a judge. But, what exactly is the proper role of a judge? We must understand that before we can praise or criticize a judge. In every endeavor from economics to games there is some way to measure performance.
As important as our Constitution is, there is no one accepted way of interpreting it. Indeed, for some commentators, it seems that if they like or prefer a particular policy or conduct, then it must be constitutional; while the policies that they do not prefer or like are unconstitutional. Obviously, this approach cannot be right. But, it certainly is at the center of the process of selecting judges. It goes something like this. If a judge does not think that abortion is best as a matter of policy or personal opinion, then the thought is that he or she will find it unconstitutional; while the judge who thinks it is good policy will find it constitutional. Those who think this way often seem to believe that since this is the way they themselves think, everyone must be doing the same thing. In this sense, legal realism morphs into legal cynicism. Certainly this is no way to run a railroad, not to mention interpret the Constitution. . . .
Let me put it this way; there are really only two ways to interpret the Constitution -- try to discern as best we can what the framers intended or make it up. No matter how ingenious, imaginative or artfully put, unless interpretive methodologies are tied to the original intent of the framers, they have no more basis in the Constitution than the latest football scores. To be sure, even the most conscientious effort to adhere to the original intent of the framers of our Constitution is flawed, as all methodologies and human institutions are; but at least originalism has the advantage of being legitimate and, I might add, impartial."
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:35 PM
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 and causes absolute infiltration into every cell of his body towards Collectivist thought, acts, and deeds.
I tremble for my country when I think about this man being our President.
Restore America's Reputation in the world? Hardly. He will allign with every two bit Socialist and shove the US into the World Collective where the American Constitution and Individual Freedom and Liberty will be shoved out of the picture and We The People become cogs in the world government machine.
For you mothers out there, the world government types have one major goal for all of our families, and it basically boils down to sterilizing and murdering most of our children and grandchildren. Control who gets to have babies with licensing and our society, like China, will become a melting pot of forced abortions and sterlizations.
The other truly heinous side of Collectivism is how it nurtures neighbor hatred and envy. Jung Chang, in her Mao Biography outlined how Mao would encourage the worst in human nature with neighborhood denunciations and meetings. She said that China never developed a true police state because there was no need for a KGB style force to root out Capitalists and Rebels in her society. Mao simply kept the people watching over each other like so many social workers and tattling to the authorities when ANY elitist behavior was exhibited. When those denunciations led to individuals being imprisoned or murdered, the sheer terror that accompanied the thought control was all that was needed to keep the people quiet.
America is a nation ruled by Laws. Period. When those laws are tossed out of the window and the collective takes over...God help us all. Please take a few hours to truly educate yourself before you vote.
From the information on the video:
"In a recent interview, Obama called his mother "the dominant figure in my formative years. . . . The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics."
While in high school, Stanley Ann Dunham drifted to the radical left. Her mother described Stanley Ann as an "Adlai Stevenson liberal." In point of fact, she was a a typical 60's radical in the 1950s. Mercer island High School was the subject of an investigation by the House Un-American Activities Subcommittee when it was learned that the Communist Party, USA had infiltrated the school and several faculty members were Marxists.
In 1955, the chairman of the Mercer Island school board, John Stenhouse, testified that he had been a member of the Communist Party.
Two of Dunham's teachers, Jim Wichterman and Val Foubert, were active Marxists who brainwashed many of the students before they were discovered.
Ann was an zealous atheist and she would debate atheism with anyone who wanted to challenge her views.
From high school on, Dunham was attracted only to African American males and, according to one of her high school friends, Susan Blake, she never dated white boys.
Here is a link to just one of over 8,000 articles on this subject.
If you would like to understand how the communists who infiltrated American Education have taken over our minds and hearts to the point where we are on the cusp of electing a complete fraud as Commander in Chief, please watch this video with a KGB officer.
And this essay from the American Thinker explains why the American People are so naively stupid about Communism.
Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines
QUOTE:
"Of all the lectures that I do around the country, none seem to rivet the audience as much as my discourse on the horrors of communism. In these lectures, which are usually connected to my books on Ronald Reagan, I do a 10-15 minute backgrounder on the crimes of communists-from their militant attacks on private property, on members of all religious faiths, and on basic civil liberties, to their total death toll of over 100 million bloodied, emaciated corpses in the 20th century."
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 11:56 AM
October 15, 2008
It's the COMMUNISM stupid, (Marxism, Collectivism, Class Envy, Socialism etc etc)
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 and causes absolute infiltration into every cell of his body towards Collectivist thought, acts, and deeds.
I tremble for my country when I think about this man being our President.
Restore America's Reputation in the world? Hardly. He will allign with every two bit Socialist and shove the US into the World Collective where the American Constitution and Individual Freedom and Liberty will be shoved out of the picture and We The People become cogs in the world government machine.
For you mothers out there, the world government types have one major goal for all of our families, and it basically boils down to sterilizing and murdering most of our children and grandchildren. Control who gets to have babies with licensing and our society, like China, will become a melting pot of forced abortions and sterlizations.
The other truly heinous side of Collectivism is how it nurtures neighbor hatred and envy. Jung Chang, in her Mao Biography outlined how Mao would encourage the worst in human nature with neighborhood denunciations and meetings. She said that China never developed a true police state because there was no need for a KGB style force to root out Capitalists and Rebels in her society. Mao simply kept the people watching over each other like so many social workers and tattling to the authorities when ANY elitist behavior was exhibited. When those denunciations led to individuals being imprisoned or murdered, the sheer terror that accompanied the thought control was all that was needed to keep the people quiet.
America is a nation ruled by Laws. Period. When those laws are tossed out of the window and the collective takes over...God help us all. Please take a few hours to truly educate yourself before you vote.
From the information on the video:
"In a recent interview, Obama called his mother "the dominant figure in my formative years. . . . The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics."
While in high school, Stanley Ann Dunham drifted to the radical left. Her mother described Stanley Ann as an "Adlai Stevenson liberal." In point of fact, she was a a typical 60's radical in the 1950s. Mercer island High School was the subject of an investigation by the House Un-American Activities Subcommittee when it was learned that the Communist Party, USA had infiltrated the school and several faculty members were Marxists.
In 1955, the chairman of the Mercer Island school board, John Stenhouse, testified that he had been a member of the Communist Party.
Two of Dunham's teachers, Jim Wichterman and Val Foubert, were active Marxists who brainwashed many of the students before they were discovered.
Ann was an zealous atheist and she would debate atheism with anyone who wanted to challenge her views.
From high school on, Dunham was attracted only to African American males and, according to one of her high school friends, Susan Blake, she never dated white boys.
Here is a link to just one of over 8,000 articles on this subject.
If you would like to understand how the communists who infiltrated American Education have taken over our minds and hearts to the point where we are on the cusp of electing a complete fraud as Commander in Chief, please watch this video with a KGB officer.
And this essay from the American Thinker explains why the American People are so naively stupid about Communism.
Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines
QUOTE:
"Of all the lectures that I do around the country, none seem to rivet the audience as much as my discourse on the horrors of communism. In these lectures, which are usually connected to my books on Ronald Reagan, I do a 10-15 minute backgrounder on the crimes of communists-from their militant attacks on private property, on members of all religious faiths, and on basic civil liberties, to their total death toll of over 100 million bloodied, emaciated corpses in the 20th century."
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 6:36 AM
October 10, 2008
Rev. James Manning, Larry Sinclair, Jeff Rense discuss Barack Obamas Criminal Past and the MEDIA COVERUP that is ongoing around the death of Donald Young.
Does anyone for one minute think that if Sarah Palin or John McCain had a dead lesbian or gay lover in their past that it would have been ignored by the media for as long as Donald Youngs Death has been ignored as a story pertinent to this election?
Or is it OK to silence/kill a homosexual man in Chicago because his past relations with Barack Obama may prove problematic? I am so sick of the double standard the media has between republicans and democrats. Sure they can run a DUI story about President Bush a couple days before the election, but they cannot be bothered to go do some serious investigative journalism connecting the dots between Donald Young, Rev. James Manning, and Larry Sinclair.
Look you parasitic nothings in the press, go send some of the attack dogs you sent to Alaska to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin to Chicago and then REPORT the truth to the American People.
Larry Sinclair on Jeff Rense radio show discussing his lie detector test.
Larry Sinclair deleted from Blog Talk Radio
I believe the claims of Larry Sinclair. I believe Donald Young was murdered by associates of Barack Obama. I believe the American Voters need to wake up and realize we have criminals attempting to take over the White House AGAIN!
No More Criminals in the White House!
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:55 AM
October 1, 2008
Stupid is as stupid does (When you mock Sarah Palin, you mock all of us who love her)
Go Here to read the Free Republic Thread on this Entry
I just arrived home after driving my sons to school. Usually we listen to music as we drive, but today I insisted that we listen to talk radio. I like to flip around between the liberal and conservative radio stations as I drive to hear what the talk show hosts and my fellow americans are chatting about.
When I switched to Jay Marvins show on AM 760 here in Boulder, he was talking about Sarah Palin having the intelligence of a 16 year old. Then a woman called in and righteously claimed that his analogy was "insulting to sixteen year old girls"..ha ha ha, aren't we so smarmy smart?
I suppose the female caller and talker Jay do not understand that by insulting Sarah Palins intelligence, they are also insulting the intellect of those of us who love her and her politics. Perhaps they don't care if contempt for her translates into insult to us and our ability to weigh the issues, think, and vote for a ticket that is more in line with our values than some yuk yuk on The Daily Show or Saturday Night Live.
It is a truism in politics that as soon as a republican throws his or her hat into the ring, the talking heads all assume a loss of fifty or more IQ points.
In attempting to brush Sarah Palin with the broad strokes of the Dan Quayle school of "Duh" journalism, the Media is also sending a message to those of us who have been energized by her willingness to run on the presidential ticket, "Listen up you blockheads, boobies, cretins, dimwits, dolts, dopes, dorks, dullards, dunces, fools, imbeciles, morons, nitwits, and stupid twits: YOU American Voters don't get to decide who the next president is. We do! And we will tell you who is intelligent, smart, and ready to lead, even if all evidence points to our guy being a know nothing, immoral crack head, brainwashed in cradle to grave marxism by his earliest mentors to his days in the Ivy League."
Mark Goldblat at National Review Online had some choice words for Gwen Ifill from a fictitious Sarah Palin in his most recent column:
"Ever since Senator McCain made that selection, by the way, I’ve been working hard to get up to speed on foreign policy and global issues. The reason I wasn’t up to speed beforehand is that, curiously enough, I’d been focusing all my energy on doing the jobs I’d been elected to do. When I was elected mayor of Wasilla, I tried to be a good mayor. When I was elected governor of the Alaska, I tried to be a good governor. I didn’t regard either position as a stepping stone to anything else. I saw no need to go on fact-finding tours, at taxpayers’ expense, to foreign countries in an effort to bolster my geopolitical credentials for higher office.
By the time John McCain and I take office in January, rest assured I will be up to speed on geopolitics. I will be altogether qualified to be a heartbeat from the presidency. And I’ll surround myself with altogether qualified advisers and staff, not yes-men and yes-women. Because I know from experience — the very experience my opponent, Sen. Biden, lacks — what it is like to make an executive decision. I know what it is like, after the legislative wrangling is done, after the wheeling and dealing by party hacks who are determined to maintain political cover and plausible deniability, to have the buck stop at my desk, to enact a law by my signature, to put my name on the bottom line.
So no, Ms. Ifill, I think I’ll keep my seat. You can take down your blank map. I came here tonight to discuss, to the best of my abilities, the international and domestic issues that confront the United States and to provide the American people with an insight into my governing philosophy. I didn’t come to convince voters that I could be a Jeopardy champion. If that’s the main qualification for the vice presidency, then I’d suggest both Sen. Biden and I step aside for Ken Jennings.
I plan to vote for John McCain because I would like to see Sarah Palin as our first female president. I believe she has the strength and the courage to take on the difficult task of busting up the special interests and financial waste that defines our national government. I see her willing, based on her past executive experience, to make the diffcult choices in all areas of Executive Government.
Don't try to convince me that she is stupid and that I am dumb to want someone like her as my Commander in Chief.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:26 AM
September 28, 2008
Is it the Economy Stupid, or do we have to be concerned about Barack Obama's Sexual Orientation??
Quote from Ron Paul:
"Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike."
Our family attended a debate party last night. I thought overall it was pretty boring, with predictable answers from both sides, and a little bit of back handed smacking going on.
As for who won, I really don't care. I thought they both looked pretty good, had good answers prepared for each question, and used good debate skills to score points with the base, whoever they were playing to.
After the debate we got into a little chat about the economy and had a good conversation about the war and who has the character to lead. My friends got upset when I mentioned Obamas crack cocaine use and his sexual immorality. This story has been completely suppressed by the media. Only republican homosexuals are outed by the media.
The heated exchange with such wonderful friends reminded me of a conversation/political debate that took place in my home months before Bill Clinton was nominated as a presidential candidate. I had been reading some claims about Bill's cheatin' heart and I tried to inform my friends who were planning to vote for him, that Bill Clinton had serious immorality issues and was a known child rapist and womanizer. It was sort of like I had all of a sudden stood up and yelled to my mormon friends, "the church is a lie, the gospel is a fraud, and you are all a bunch of know nothing dupes!"
The way they responded then and again last night was total indignation and disbelief. Sort of a "you can't say that" stance. My response to anyone in my life who says to me, "you can't say that", is generally "Watch me."
And so in a spirit of wanting to share the ugly truth, no matter how painful it may be for some to see, here is a video that explains the sexual immorality of Barack Obama.
A five minute google search will confirm this story is being talked about all over the web.
I don't share this to be mean, or in your face, or prove to you that you are dumb. I share it out of a deep concern that a man who will cheat on his wife will in fact cheat on his country when he is President. Bill Clinton was the most corrupted individual to ever set foot in the White House, run the oval office, and play the role of commander in chief. I do no think Obama is as evil as Clinton, but I do think we would do well to put someone at the helm of our great country who is faithful to his family. This should be the ultimate test of all of our politicians.
The Honorable James David Manning explains why Sen. Barack Obama would not make a good president. This message was originally preached on 26 April 2008.
Here is a link to a blog that agrees with James Mannings views on Obamas Men
"Now, to the issue at hand. Several months ago, Pastor James Manning of Atlah Worldwide YouTube infamy, discussed the fact that many of these same Black men chasing behind Obama are not handling their responsibilities where their children or their wives are concerned. Instantly, he was vilified. Now, what do you all have to say? Now that CNN has done nothing but regurgitate the same information? Will you shout from the rooftops that they are lying? That it isn't true? That they are "haters"? Oh, but the information is true my friends. It is true and I know the truth hurts, but pain doesn't make it a lie.
I talked to Spice at length about this tonight and I'm glad we had the conversation. We haven't had a good discussion about race issues in a while. I'm sure due to her lingering belief that I'm a sellout for not supporting Barack Obama, but I'm glad we talked about these things like we used to do way back in the day. Besides, the truth will finally be accepted by African-Americans about him too. As I said before, I will never turn away the people I love and respect when they come around and utter the words, "Gosh Sugar, you were right about him." I will do my best to not utter "I told you so's", but it will be tough.
Now, let's let Pastor Manning tell us all one more time about these Obama men (see below). Trust that I do not believe that all Black men are miserable failures. I do not and I love my brothers with all of my heart from the pits of my soul, but there is a problem and we can't keep acting as though it doesn't exist. This s*** that CNN did...playing us for sweeps revenue is sick, but even at that, the facts remain... --SUGAR"
Pastor Manning asks if the black men with Obama paying child support?
This message was preached on 23 February 2008
The Hon. James David Manning says Oprah Winfrey, Barack Hussein Obama, and Jeremiah Wright are the Trinity of Hell. This message was preached on 10 May 2008.
Michael Savage interviews Rev. James Manning Part 1
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 10:40 AM
September 22, 2008
The Speech Palin was supposed to give...
Anti Iran Rally turns into Anti Obama Rally
Jewish groups dis invite Palin to Anti Iran Rally
Everyone in the world would be safer if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was locked up. We all know where he is going to be tomorow. Why don't we just arrest him at the UN???
UPDATE:
Elie Wiesel Urges U.N. to Indict Ahmadinejad
QUOTE:
UNITED NATIONS —
"Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel urged the United Nations on Monday to indict Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for inciting genocide rather than allow him to speak at the U.N. General Assembly."
Great idea Mr. Wiesel! Please, someone lock him up!
The Speech Palin was prepared to give:
I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country - leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.
Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York - to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan - and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.
Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.
He must be stopped.
The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" - the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation."
Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman -not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.
The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.
The world has condemned these activities. The United Nations Security Council has demanded that Iran suspend its illegal nuclear enrichment activities. It has levied three rounds of sanctions. How has Ahmadinejad responded? With the declaration that the "Iranian nation would not retreat one iota" from its nuclear program.
So, what should we do about this growing threat? First, we must succeed in Iraq. If we fail there, it will jeopardize the democracy the Iraqis have worked so hard to build, and empower the extremists in neighboring Iran. Iran has armed and trained terrorists who have killed our soldiers in Iraq, and it is Iran that would benefit from an American defeat in Iraq.
If we retreat without leaving a stable Iraq, Iran's nuclear ambitions will be bolstered. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, they could share them tomorrow with the terrorists they finance, arm, and train today. Iranian nuclear weapons would set off a dangerous regional nuclear arms race that would make all of us less safe.
But Iran is not only a regional threat; it threatens the entire world. It is the no. 1 state sponsor of terrorism. It sponsors the world's most vicious terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah. Together, Iran and its terrorists are responsible for the deaths of Americans in Lebanon in the 1980s, in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, and in Iraq today. They have murdered Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Muslims who have resisted Iran's desire to dominate the region. They have persecuted countless people simply because they are Jewish.
Iran is responsible for attacks not only on Israelis, but on Jews living as far away as Argentina. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are part of Iran's official ideology and murder is part of its official policy. Not even Iranian citizens are safe from their government's threat to those who want to live, work, and worship in peace. Politically-motivated abductions, torture, death by stoning, flogging, and amputations are just some of its state-sanctioned punishments.
It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad's rule, Iranian women are some of the most vulnerable citizens.
If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed. If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.
But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian women have sought better treatment through the "One Million Signatures Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws." The authorities have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women's rights activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison for committing the crime of "propaganda against the system." After international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to "only" 10 lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.
Earlier this year, Senator Clinton said that "Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is in the forefront of that" effort. Senator Clinton argued that part of our response must include stronger sanctions, including the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization. John McCain and I could not agree more.
Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans. Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Period. And in a single voice, we must be loud enough for the whole world to hear: Stop Iran!
Only by working together, across national, religious, and political differences, can we alter this regime's dangerous behavior. Iran has many vulnerabilities, including a regime weakened by sanctions and a population eager to embrace opportunities with the West. We must increase economic pressure to change Iran's behavior.
Tomorrow, Ahmadinejad will come to New York. On our soil, he will exercise the right of freedom of speech - a right he denies his own people. He will share his hateful agenda with the world. Our task is to focus the world on what can be done to stop him.
We must rally the world to press for truly tough sanctions at the U.N. or with our allies if Iran's allies continue to block action in the U.N. We must start with restrictions on Iran's refined petroleum imports. We must reduce our dependency on foreign oil to weaken Iran's economic influence.
We must target the regime's assets abroad; bank accounts, investments, and trading partners.
President Ahmadinejad should be held accountable for inciting genocide, a crime under international law.
We must sanction Iran's Central Bank and the Revolutionary Guard Corps -which no one should doubt is a terrorist organization. Together, we can stop Iran's nuclear program.
Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.
Thank you.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:36 PM
September 18, 2008
WND: Jerome Corsi: What Obama didn't dispute in my book
Corsi responds to the Obama Campaigns response to his number one best seller, which I ordered from WND yesterday! Jenny Hatch
NEW YORK – The Obama campaign, in its 40-page "Unfit for Publication" commentary, alleged my book, "The Obama Nation," contains lies, but as I documented in a rebuttal published on WorldNetDaily on Sept. 7, there is no substance to the allegations.
Now the campaign has failed to respond to my rejoinder, and except for some minor changes that will be made in the next printing of the book, I assume the Obama campaign agrees that my rejoinder arguments were convincing.
Moreover, I assume the Obama campaign took its best shot with "Unfit for Publication," refuting every point in "The Obama Nation" that the Obama campaign considered false.
The result here is the chapter-by-chapter arguments from "The Obama Nation" that were not disputed in "Unfit for Publication." Because the Obama campaign did not even attempt to refute these substantive arguments, I now assume the Obama campaign is conceding their truth.
Chapter 1: "Myths from My Father"
I consider the following arguments from "Myths from My Father," the first chapter of "The Obama Nation," are now conceded by "Unfit for Publication":
Obama's autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," is a psychological autobiography that presents his life in a non-chronological fashion, invents dialogue, creates composite characters and changes the names of key people to hide their true identity from the reader. [pages 13-14]
Obama's father was a polygamist who failed as a bureaucrat in Kenya and killed himself in the last of a series of drunk-driving incidents in Nairobi. [pages 16-21]
Obama's father abandoned him and his mother to accept a scholarship at Harvard that would not pay his family expenses when he had an offer from the New School in New York City that would have paid for Obama Senior to bring his wife and son with him. [page 18]
The number of wives Obama Senior had, or women with whom he had children, is uncertain. [pages 26-27]
The number of half-brothers and half sisters Sen. Obama has is also uncertain.[pages 26-27]
Obama's story that John Kennedy helped his father get to the United States to study is a lie. JFK had nothing to do with the 1959 Tom Mboya-organized "first flight" of Kenyans headed to the U.S. for study. [pages 32-33]
Obama's story that the 1965 Selma march was responsible for his conception is also a complete fabrication. [pages 33-34]
"Unfit for Publication" also fails to challenge the discussion of Kenyan journalist Philip Ochieng that Sen. Obama is "lal," or "lost" from his African roots in the alienation he feels from being abandoned by his Kenyan father when he was yet a small child. [pages 36-37]
These points were not disputed in "Unfit for Publication."blockquote>
Read the whole piece it is absolutely damning.Jen
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 10:17 AM
September 17, 2008
NRO: True Lives - An abortion survivor takes on Barack Obama
True Lives
An abortion survivor takes on Barack Obama.
An NRO Q&A
Barack Obama, meet your nightmare? On Monday night, BornAliveTruth.org, a new 527 released an ad starring Gianna Jessen, a 31-year-old woman who survived a saline abortion.
“I’m a survivor, as are many others . . . but if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn’t be here,” Jessen says in the ad. “Four times, Barack Obama voted to oppose a law to protect babies left to die after a failed abortion. Senator Obama, please support born alive infant protections. I’m living proof these babies have a right to live.”
...Lopez: What do you make of Sarah Palin?Stanek: Sarah Palin offers such a contrast to Obama on this issue. She carried her Down Syndrome baby to term despite a medical recommendation otherwise and declared him “perfect” at birth. Obama heard testimony three years running of at least one baby with Down Syndrome who was set to languish alone in a soiled utility room to die, and that was acceptable to him — Culture of Life vs. the Culture of Death in a nutshell.
This is the only one of my five births that we caught on video. It is difficult for me to imagine a mother being willing to allow her child to be induced and then just left to sit alone and die in some corner of the hospital after a botched abortion. I have serious issues with Obamas Socialism and his other big government plans that will ruin our economy and run our society into the ground socially, but the biggest issue I have with him being our president is the FACT that he has been a promoter of infanticide for those children who happen to be born alive after an abortion. The following interview is damning information and should be seriously considered by all of the voting public.
As a rape survivor, I am supportive of women having the option to a very early abortion if they become pregnant after Rape or Incest, and if the life of the mother is in jeprody and she feels she can live with herself by allowing her child to be aborted, I am supportive of her having that choice, but this infanticide side of abortion goes so far beyond those options for mothers that I have to just stand up and YELL, THIS IS WRONG!!!!
I am troubled by Mr. Obamas unwillingness to own his past votes and I am completely dismayed that he continues to believe partial birth abortions are somthing that should be legislated and fought for at the state and national level of our government.
One of the main reasons that I evolved to unassisted childbirth is because I was friends with a nurse at our local Boulder Hospital and she told me that she was being forced to asist with abortions at the Boulder Abortion Clinic where the partial Birth Abortion was pioneered.
She eventually quit her job as it absolutely violated every principle of life she held dear to be involved in the murders of little babes.
When I became informed about this issue, I decided that I did not want any medical professional who had assisted with an abortion touching me or my children when they were born. I did not want the first hands that touched my child to be the hands of an abortionist. It felt right to give birth to my last two babes at home alone, with just my sweet husbands hands the first to touch.
Since this blog and all of my online work is devoted to the babies who will be born in future generations and since I am all about life, I could never in a million years endorse or support Barack Obama for president. The culture of death would be given a jolt of electricity and power as supreme court judges and federal judges would be appointed who would take all bans off of the killing of the unborn. And with socialized medicine, it would be my tax dollars that would help pay for these abominations.
Excerpt of presentation by Dr. William Lile. More information on the video: Click Here. To Order the whole video go here.
Here is the rest of the interview from NRO:
The ad is meant to highlight Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act while he was in the Illinois legislature. An extreme position — for which he argued passionately; he argued that a child surviving an abortion should not be protected because that would be akin to saying that “they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term.” Well, exactly.
Jill Stanek is a former nurse at Christ Hospital in Illinois, where this all started. There she witnessed children being left to die after surviving botched abortions. Her testimony was the catalyst for the legislation in the Illinois statehouse. Stanek talked to National Review Online editor Kathryn Lopez about the ad and Obama.
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Who is Gianna Jessen and why do you want Americans to hear her story?Jill Stanek: Gianna Jessen is a 31-year-old saline abortion survivor. I’m attaching her unbelievable birth certificate and medical information. Also note on second document her “physician” is listed as infamous abortionist Edward Allred.
Lopez: Where will your ads be running?Stanek: The first-phase media buy includes Ohio and New Mexico.
Lopez: Who is paying for your ads?Stanek: BornAliveTruth.org is a 527 nonprofit political organization. Pro-Life philanthropists, including Ray Ruddy, are financially supporting the effort as well as other pro-life folks.
Lopez: Have you coordinated with the McCain campaign at all?Stanek: No, absolutely not. We are purely an educational group wanting to educate the public on Barack Obama’s opposition as state senator to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
Lopez: Is this just about an election for you? A job at HHS in a McCain-Palin administration perhaps? When was it that you first spoke out the Born Alive Act and Obama?Stanek: My husband wouldn’t be happy if I moved to D.C., because he’s sure not going to!
I first spoke out against late-term abortions that sometimes resulted in babies being abortion alive in 1999. In 2001 I testified before an Illinois state senate committee and a no-name state senator named Barack Obama. The focus during the early days was on the abortion procedure itself (induced-labor abortion) — previously unknown to the public — and Christ Hospital’s involvement, where I worked — blasphemy to many, including me.
Barack Obama’s opposition to Born Alive became a focus during his 2004 U.S. Senate race against Alan Keyes. I’ve been writing about his involvement ever since. But four weeks ago his opposition to Born Alive exploded on the national scene when the National Right to Life Committee discovered Obama had actually voted against an identical version of Born Alive in Illinois as passed on the federal level overwhelmingly (98-0 in U.S. Senate; NARAL went neutral). For four years he had been misrepresenting his vote, saying the two bills were not identical and had they been he would have voted for the Illinois version.
In an interview following the Saddleback Forum on August 16, Barack Obama told CBN’s David Brody that NRLC and the rest of us were lying. By August 18 his staff had to admit to the New York Sun that NRLC was telling the truth. That false indignation coupled with Obama’s “above my pay grade” statement, got Obama/Born Alive tons of negative PR.
(P.S. Note that Warren asked when does a “baby” get human rights? Not “fetus” or “embryo.”)
Lopez: Why should we believe you about Christ Hospital?Stanek: I couldn’t answer this any better than Doug Johnson (from the National Right to Life Committee) did yesterday on a blog:
"More than one nurse collaborated the accounts of how babies born alive during induced-labor abortions were being treated. Two nurses, Jill Stanek and Allison Baker, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary subcommittee at the first hearing on the federal bill. Their testimony was found credible by the Judiciary Committee and is referred to as such in the official committee report, which was issued when the committee approved the bill on a vote of 22-1, transcript here."The House Judiciary Committee reports on the federal legislation also explained other compelling justifications for clearly establishing the “personhood” of all live both humans, including those born alive during abortions. The 2001 report is here.
The purpose of the legislation was not to spell out exactly how babies are to be treated in this or that situation, but to make it clear that all live-born humans are to be treated as human persons, and treated the same, regardless of whether they achieved live-born status during the abortion.There have been many reports over the years, in diverse, locations, of babies being alive during abortions and being treated in ways very different from babies who are spontaneously born prematurely.Lopez: Why should Barack Obama be held responsible for what you experienced at the hospital? Is it really fair to put Gianna’s story up against his campaign?
Stanek: Here we have a man who voted four times against Born Alive and was the sole senator to speak on the senate floor two years in a row. He took a leadership role opposing Born Alive. How disturbing is that? Furthermore, he includes a quote on his website by Pam Sutherland, the CEO of Planned Parenthood in Illinois at the time, who bragged Obama “approached her” to strategize to defeat the Born Alive and PBA bans. He approached her! How disturbing is that?
Lopez: Isn’t this all just a rarity? Isn’t it ridiculous to make this a presidential-campaign issue?Stanek: Call Gianna Jessen and tell her that abortion survivors are rare and insignificant. Furthermore, Christ Hospital told the Chicago Sun-Times on March 31, 2001, that 10 to 20 percent of babies aborted by the induced-labor abortion procedure survive for a time. That’s a significant percentage.
Lopez: Is it your position that Barack Obama is pro-infanticide?Stanek: An audio clip of Obama’s 2002 state senate floor speech was recently released. In it he admits babies may be aborted alive but a second physician shouldn’t be called to assess and treat abortion survivors because it would be a “burden” to the mother’s “original decision.” In other words, he thought babies marked for abortion but surviving should be allowed to die. What do you call that?
Lopez: Of Obama’s record, what would you like all Americans to know?Stanek: Barack Obama is to the left of all of his Senate colleagues and even NARAL on the abortion issue, and he misrepresented his vote on Born Alive for four years.
Lopez: Why does this really matter? Will the president really be able to save the lives of future Giannas?Stanek: As president, Obama could greatly influence this issue. Born Alive needs enforcement measures added. It is just a definitions bill now.
Lopez: What do you make of Sarah Palin?Stanek: Sarah Palin offers such a contrast to Obama on this issue. She carried her Down Syndrome baby to term despite a medical recommendation otherwise and declared him “perfect” at birth. Obama heard testimony three years running of at least one baby with Down Syndrome who was set to languish alone in a soiled utility room to die, and that was acceptable to him — Culture of Life vs. the Culture of Death in a nutshell.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 8:42 AM
September 16, 2008
Meridian Mag: Maurine Jensen Proctor: The Presidential Candidates and Family Values. Where do they stand?
The Family Research Council has researched both candidates extensively, including their comments, their former votes and news reports to compile a voter scorecard on where John McCain and Barack Obama stand on family issues. It is a highly-detailed voter guide that drills down “on the issues important to the family so as to discover not only a candidate's position, but the depth of that position.” Footnotes and reference guides are given for further reading.
This scorecard certainly does not claim to cover every family issue, but does look at many of the ones that are or will be considered by the government. Though, in this scorecard, questions about poverty are not directly asked, by far the most significant influence on whether a child will grow up in poverty is his or her family structure. Children who grow up in intact families with married fathers and mothers are much less likely to experience poverty.
You can download a copy of this scorecard by clicking here. To see it requires a simple registration.
Here's a sample of the questions and positions:
Women's Health
Would you support a federal law prohibiting both human reproductive cloning and cloning for research?
McCain: Yes
Obama: NoDo you support Medicaid-funded abortions?
McCain : No
Obama : Yes.Abstinence Education
Would you support or oppose a federal parental notification law before a minor receives an abortion?
McCain: Support
Obama : OpposeWould you fight to protect the integrity of federally defined abstinence-until-marriage education?
McCain: Yes
Obama: NoPromoting Stronger Marriages
Do you support a U.S. constitutional amendment to define and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman?
McCain: No
Obama: NoIf you do not support a U.S. constitutional amendment to define and protect marriage now, would any of these hypothetical future circumstances allow you to support such amendment?
*if one or several state supreme courts require their states to recognize same-sex marriages from another state.
McCain: Yes
Obama: No*if the U.S. Supreme Court requires states to recognize same-sex marriages from another state (thus overturning a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act)
McCain: Yes
Obama: No*if the U.S. Supreme Court requires the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages and/or partnerships for any purpose under federal law (thus overturning a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act)
McCain: Yes
Obama: No*if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage is a right under the U.S. Constitution
McCain: Yes
Obama: NoThe Federal Defense of Marriage Act (1996) declares marriage to be the union of one man and one woman for all purposes of the federal government and declares that states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. Which of the follow describes your position on the federal DOMA?
*I would veto any bill that would weaken any provision of the federal DOMA
McCain
*I would support repeal of the provision of DOMA that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for all federal purposes, thus freeing the federal government to give marital benefits to same-sex couples.
Obama
*I would support repeal of the provision of DOMA that declares states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, thus leaving courts free to require such recognition under the Constitution's “full faith and credit” clause.
Homosexuality and Special Rights
Which of the following comes closest to your position on the Employment Non-Discrimination ACT (ENDA) which would grant federal civil rights protection on the basis of sexual orientation?
*I would veto any bill to provide federal civil rights protection on the basis of sexual orientation.
McCain
*I would sign a bill to give federal civil rights protection based on sexual orientation and “gender identity”.
Obama
Which of the following comes closest to your position on the proposed federal “hate crimes law, which would allow the federal government to prosecute any “hate crime” anywhere in the country?
*I would veto any federal “hate crimes” law, and leave prosecution of such cimres to state and local authorities.
McCain
*I would sign a federal hate crimes law that included protections based on sexual orientation and “gender identity.”
Obama
Neither candidate has been aggressive in pledging to see that obscenity is prosecuted aggressively through the Department of Justice.
Another Scorecard
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 9:25 AM
September 12, 2008
Phyllis Schlafly: The Republicans' Call to Arms
We recall the words of the old popular song, "What a Difference a Day Makes; 24 Little Hours." In this political year, it was actually 38 hours, but the poetry is the same.
That's the time-spread between the locking up of the 2008 Republican Platform on Wednesday at 8 p.m. and the selection of conservative Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as John McCain's Veep choice at 10 a.m. on Friday. In just 38 hours, disheartened conservatives were transformed into enthusiastic Republicans, armed and ready to storm the pseudo Greek temple that Barack Obama erected in the mile-high city of Denver.
It's hard to exaggerate the turnaround in the attitude of grassroots Republicans; a CNN reporter expressed herself as "shocked." Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air to John McCain's campaign.
The Republican Party Platform, hammered out by a grassroots committee with representatives from every state, gives Republicans a basis on which to rebuild their party. It's a "call to arms," a platform of bold colors with no pastel shades, just as Ronald Reagan described the 1976 Platform that Delegates adopted after rejecting the Ford-Kissinger platform.
This year's Platform is a complete break from the ponderous 2004 Platform, which strung together 40,000 tiresome words. The 2008 Platform isn't about personalities; it's about principles.
The 2004 Platform had endorsed the "Free Trade Area of the Americas," a foolish notion to bring about the economic integration of the Western Hemisphere and allow cheap labor to replace American jobs. The 2008 Platform sensibly calls for "a Western Hemisphere of sovereign nations with secure borders," and the committee unanimously rejected the goal of a "North American Union" modeled on the European Union.
This year gave us a clear improvement over the previous Platform in regard to the English language. In 2004, Republicans called English "our nation's common language" and endorsed bilingual education, but the 2008 Platform supports "English as the official language in our nation" because it is "essential as a unifying cultural force" and omits mention of bilingual ed (often called language apartheid).
The 2004 Platform had lined up with the now-defeated amnesty plan of the U.S. Senate. It endorsed a "new temporary worker program" and allowing illegal aliens currently holding jobs in the U.S. "to apply for citizenship in the same manner as those who apply from outside the United States." In a clear break, the 2008 Platform calls for building the border fence, securing our ports, enforcing existing laws against "illegal workers and lawbreaking employers," requiring the use of E-Verify, deporting criminal aliens, denying federal funds to sanctuary cities, and refusing driver's licenses, in-state college tuition rates, and Social Security benefits for illegal aliens.
The 2008 Platform marks a refreshing break from the previous Platform's obsequious kowtowing to the United Nations and other international bureaucrats. The 2004 Platform had said that the United States is "committed to lasting institutions like the United Nations and the World Trade Organization."
The 2008 Platform doesn't mention the WTO and includes several paragraphs of criticism of the United Nations, citing its "scandal-ridden and corrupt management," the "disproportionate" dues we are forced to pay, and its discrimination against Israel and the Vatican.
The 2008 Platform specifically rejects the United Nations Treaty on Women and the UN Treaty on the Rights of the Child, and expresses "deep reservations" about the UN Law of the Sea Treaty.
The 2008 Platform recognizes that energy independence is vital to our national security. The Platform calls for drilling in "new oilfields" in Alaska and elsewhere, as well as developing nuclear power and clean coal.
The 2008 Platform demands that "the risk of climate change" be based on "sound science without succumbing to no-growth radicalism." The Platform also cautions against "doomsday climate change scenarios."
The plank affirming that "the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed," which has been part of the Republican Platform since 1984 was, of course, included again this year. The 2008 Platform becomes the most pro-life ever by endorsing the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and the ban on partial-birth abortion, both of which identify a sharp division with Barack Obama's legislative record.
Four years ago, many grassroots Republicans were offended by a Platform that called public schools "a foundation of a free, civil society" and bragged about having given us "the largest increase in federal education funding in history."
The 2008 Platform better represents Republicans by standing up for parents' rights to use vouchers, tax credits, private schools, or homeschooling, and to stop public schools from forcing students to answer personal, non-academic questionnaires without prior parental consent.
Sarah Palin and the 2008 Platform have given Republicans a new lease on life and put John McCain on the road to victory.
Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:01 PM
September 11, 2008
American Thinker: Sarah Palin is sounding the death knell to Feminism as we know it
Awesome article with which I wholeheartedly agree!
Quotes:
"The National Organization of Women even went so far as to declare that Sarah Palin is more like a man than a woman because even though, as a working mother juggling career and family she can speak to many women, her pro-life stance means she cannot speak FOR women.
It just goes to show that feminism is a crock.
You see, Sarah Palin is the "wrong kind" of woman for several reasons. She didn't attend elite colleges. She didn't abandon her small-town roots in search of more enlightened climes, like New York or Los Angeles. (I mean, Alaska...who the heck would want to live out there in the boondocks? Do they even have Starbucks?) She believes all life is sacred and therefore doesn't approve of abortion unless it is to save the mother's life. And finally, she got where she is today not only by not following the rules set forth by feminists, but she did it without bashing men. She understands that to play successfully in the big boys' sandbox, whining and crying about sexism and being treated differently isn't going to cut it."Posted by Jenny Hatch at 7:48 AM
September 4, 2008
Glorious Sarah! The Hatch Family LOVES Sarah Palin!
Sarah Palin has raised her children in a way that I personally would not choose to live. I feel that it is important to be home, cooking whole foods from scratch, and very focused on my babies until they are at least three years old. Because I believe in extended breastfeeding, and have nursed my last four children on demand for 3, 4, and 51/2 years, I have felt passionate about being home to nurture and care for my little ones.
I believe these choices are important for the long term development of my childrens bodies and hearts. But I do not think that every woman has to make the same decisions I do regarding how to raise and nurture a family, and I do not believe it is fair to be dumping on Sarah because she has made the choice to work in politics while raising her children. The fact that it is mostly democrats who are doing the dumping just makes the hypocrisy factor that much more hilarious. Keep on people! You are just helping to get the word out to the people who vote in this country! The more you try to blacken her name the more you will make your own true colors shine darkly through the media stories whipping around the web right now. I get the feeling she likes a fight and will take you all on, no holds barred.
Here is Ann Coulters take on things:
Ann Coulter: THE BEST MAN TURNED OUT TO BE A WOMAN
"Barring some all-new, trivial and probably false story about Palin -- her former hairdresser got a parking ticket in 1978! -- the media apparently intend to keep being hysterical about McCain's alleged failure to "vet" Palin properly. The problem with this argument is that it presupposes that everyone is asking: "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?"No one's saying that.Attacks on McCain's "vetting" process require the media to keep claiming that Palin has a lot of problems. But she doesn't have any problems. Remember? Those were all blind alleys.Unfortunately, for the ordinary TV viewer hearing nonstop hysteria about nonspecific "problems," it takes a lot of effort to figure out that every attack liberals have launched against Palin turned out to be a lie.It's as if a basketball player made the winning shot in the last three seconds of the game and liberals demand that we have a week-long discussion about whether the player should have taken that shot. WHAT IF HE MISSED?With Palin, McCain didn't miss."The Full Text is below:
Mr. Chairman, delegates, and fellow citizens: I am honored to be considered for the nomination for vice president of the United States.I accept the call to help our nominee for president to serve and defend America.
I accept the challenge of a tough fight in this election against confident opponents at a crucial hour for our country.
And I accept the privilege of serving with a man who has come through much harder missions ... and met far graver challenges and knows how tough fights are won — the next president of the United States, John S. McCain.
It was just a year ago when all the experts in Washington counted out our nominee because he refused to hedge his commitment to the security of the country he loves.
With their usual certitude, they told us that all was lost — there was no hope for this candidate who said that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war.
But the pollsters and pundits overlooked just one thing when they wrote him off.
They overlooked the caliber of the man himself — the determination, resolve, and sheer guts of Sen. John McCain. The voters knew better.
And maybe that's because they realize there is a time for politics and a time for leadership ... a time to campaign and a time to put our country first.
Our nominee for president is a true profile in courage, and people like that are hard to come by.
He's a man who wore the uniform of this country for 22 years and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who have now brought victory within sight.
And as the mother of one of those troops, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief. I'm just one of many moms who'll say an extra prayer each night for our sons and daughters going into harm's way.
Our son Track is 19.
And one week from tomorrow — Sept. 11 — he'll deploy to Iraq with the Army infantry in the service of his country.
My nephew Kasey also enlisted and serves on a carrier in the Persian Gulf.
My family is proud of both of them and of all the fine men and women serving the country in uniform. Track is the eldest of our five children.
In our family, it's two boys and three girls in between — my strong and kind-hearted daughters, Bristol, Willow and Piper.
And in April, my husband, Todd, and I welcomed our littlest one into the world, a perfectly beautiful baby boy named Trig. From the inside, no family ever seems typical.
That's how it is with us.
Our family has the same ups and downs as any other — the same challenges and the same joys.
Sometimes even the greatest joys bring challenge.
And children with special needs inspire a special love.
To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters.
I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House. Todd is a story all by himself.
He's a lifelong commercial fisherman ... a production operator in the oil fields of Alaska's North Slope ... a proud member of the United Steel Workers Union ... and world champion snow machine racer.
Throw in his Yup'ik Eskimo ancestry, and it all makes for quite a package.
We met in high school, and two decades and five children later he's still my guy. My mom and dad both worked at the elementary school in our small town.
And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.
My parents are here tonight, and I am so proud to be the daughter of Chuck and Sally Heath. Long ago, a young farmer and haberdasher from Missouri followed an unlikely path to the vice presidency.
A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.
I grew up with those people.
They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America who grow our food, run our factories and fight our wars.
They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.
I was just your average hockey mom and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education better.
When I ran for City Council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.
Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.
And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.
We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.
As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man. I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment. And I've learned quickly, these past few days, that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.
But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.
Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests.
The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.
No one expects us to agree on everything.
But we are expected to govern with integrity, good will, clear convictions, and ... a servant's heart.
I pledge to all Americans that I will carry myself in this spirit as vice president of the United States. This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office, when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau ... when I stood up to the special interests, the lobbyists, big oil companies, and the good-ol' boys network.
Sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.
But with the support of the citizens of Alaska, we shook things up.
And in short order we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.
I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.
While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for.
That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay.
I also drive myself to work.
And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef — although I've got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her. I came to office promising to control spending — by request if possible and by veto if necessary.
Sen. McCain also promises to use the power of veto in defense of the public interest — and as a chief executive, I can assure you it works.
Our state budget is under control.
We have a surplus.
And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending: nearly half a billion dollars in vetoes.
I suspended the state fuel tax and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress.
I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Bridge to Nowhere.
If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves. When oil and gas p
