by AmerPundit
John McCain hasn’t even announced his choice for VP yet, but that hasn’t stopped Democrats from launching an entire site dedicated to attacking his top potential nominees. How? They’re already equating each and every one of them with Dick Cheney.
The top quote on the site is from John McCain, who had this to say about to the current VP:
“With a little more luck, I might have been able to ask you to be my Vice-President.”
The quote’s date? October 2001 — a time when Bush was enjoying some of the highest approval ratings in American history and Democrats were standing solidly by the Bush Administration.
Anyway, the attack centers on the following people: Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Charlie Crist, John Thune (how man people have mentioned him?), Carly Fiorina, Fred Smith, and Eric Cantor. They accuse Crist of calling Bush his hero, though they’re apparently unable to provide a quote substantiating that. Romney gets slammed for changing positions, which probably isn’t a great line of attack when your own nominee is flip-flopping by the day. Fred Smith gets attacked for saying this back in July:
‘I don’t think we’re in a recession,’ Smith said Monday in a Bloomberg Television interview. ‘We’re in a period of extremely low growth brought on by high fuel prices and the financial meltdown.’”
I don’t mean to get technical here, but we’re not in a recession. We continue to experience positive growth and the numbers just released by the feds are better than the previous month’s. We happen to be in, uh, a time of extremely low growth that was sparked by a financial meltdown and high fuel prices. Apparently Smith is wrong because he doesn’t agree with the DNC’s unsubtantiated talking points.
But remember: It’s the Republicans responsible for negative campaigning. That damn Karl Rove!
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Whitey Need Not Apply
By Patrick Buchanan
"Will race be an issue in this campaign?"
Hearing the cable talk-show host solemnly pose the question, I could not suppress a belly laugh.
For the anchor was fearful that some white folks might reject Obama because he is African-American -- even as a Rasmussen poll was reporting that Barack is beating McCain among black voters 94 to 1.
What, other than race, explains how Barack rolled up 90-10 margins among black voters while running against Hillary Clinton, wife of the man novelist Toni Morrison dubbed "our first black president"?
Indeed, so one-sided was the primary coverage in favor of Barack as the first African-American with a real chance to be president, even "Saturday Night Live" took to mocking the mainstream media.
As for black radio, on "The Tom Joyner Morning Show," "Michael Baisden Show" and "The Steve Harvey Morning Show," which together may reach 20 million folks, there is "little pretense of balance," writes Jim Rutenberg of The New York Times. "More often than not the Obama campaign is discussed as the home team."
Black Entertainment Television plans to carry Barack's speech to the Democratic convention live, but has no plans to carry McCain's. Barack's speech "is an historic occasion," says BET Chairman Debra L. Lee, "so that demands some special treatment from us."
As the mainstream media have moved left and talk radio right, and cable is breaking down along political and ideological lines, there is something else afoot now -- the racial Balkanization of the newsroom.
Consider. On Sunday, 6,800 folks showed in Chicago for the 2008 quadrennial convention of UNITY: Journalists of Color. McCain declined an invitation. Bush had been booed at UNITY 2004, while John Kerry got a standing ovation. Featured speaker: Barack. Major concern of the journalists running the show: that their colleagues would lift the roof off the McCormick Place convention center when Barack arrived.
Said Luis Villareal, a producer of NBC's "Dateline," "I don't think it's such a bad thing if for 15 minutes you take off your reporter hat and respond to (Obama) as a human being at an event where you're surrounded by people of color and you're here for a united cause."
And exactly what "cause" might the 10,000 members of UNITY be united behind? The hiring and advancement of journalists of color in all major news organizations in America.
For, as its emblem depicts, UNITY comprises four alliances: the Asian American Journalists Association, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, the Native American Journalists Association and the National Association of Black Journalists.
"A New Journalism for a Changing World" is UNITY's motto. And the title of its July 22 press release reveals what the "new journalism" is all about. "Aim of New UNITY Initiative Is More Diversity in Top Media Management."
"With more than 50 percent of the population projected to be people of color in less than a generation," says UNITY President Karen Lincoln Michel, "the nation's news organizations continue to generate dismal diversity numbers year after year. ... 'Ten by 2010' is a significant step in the right direction."
What is Ten by 2010?
UNITY is demanding that 10 major U.S. news organizations, by mid-2010, elevate to a senior management position in the newsroom at least one journalist of color and provide "customized training to help prepare them."
The journalist may be Asian, African-American, Native American or Hispanic, which rules out journalists of Irish, English, Polish, Italian, German or Jewish ancestry, since they are white.
Is this what we have come to 50 years after the triumph of the civil rights movement? Flat-out demands, by American journalists, for the hiring and promotion of colleagues based on race and color?
Is there any evidence major news organizations in this country have engaged in systematic discrimination to keep out men or women of color this last half century? The reverse seems true. They have bent over backward to advance minority journalists.
And if journalists have been hired and promoted based on ability and merit, why in the 21st century should these criteria be thrown out as the standards for advancement -- in favor of race and color?
Isn't this what they did in the days of Jim Crow -- hire and promote based on race? What UNITY is calling for is a return to the old rules but with new beneficiaries -- blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Native Americans -- and new victims, all of whom will be white.
On Sunday, McCain came out in favor of an Arizona civil rights initiative that would outlaw any state discrimination either for or against folks, based on race, gender or national origin. Barack said he was "disappointed" with McCain and told UNITY he favors affirmative action "when properly structured."
The Arizona referendum banning preferential treatment based on race is also on the ballot in the swing state of Colorado. It won in California in 1996, in Washington in 2000 and in Michigan in the great Democratic sweep of 2006. It has never lost, and may just win McCain Colorado, and with it the nation.
"Will race be an issue in this campaign?"
Hearing the cable talk-show host solemnly pose the question, I could not suppress a belly laugh.
For the anchor was fearful that some white folks might reject Obama because he is African-American -- even as a Rasmussen poll was reporting that Barack is beating McCain among black voters 94 to 1.
What, other than race, explains how Barack rolled up 90-10 margins among black voters while running against Hillary Clinton, wife of the man novelist Toni Morrison dubbed "our first black president"?
Indeed, so one-sided was the primary coverage in favor of Barack as the first African-American with a real chance to be president, even "Saturday Night Live" took to mocking the mainstream media.
As for black radio, on "The Tom Joyner Morning Show," "Michael Baisden Show" and "The Steve Harvey Morning Show," which together may reach 20 million folks, there is "little pretense of balance," writes Jim Rutenberg of The New York Times. "More often than not the Obama campaign is discussed as the home team."
Black Entertainment Television plans to carry Barack's speech to the Democratic convention live, but has no plans to carry McCain's. Barack's speech "is an historic occasion," says BET Chairman Debra L. Lee, "so that demands some special treatment from us."
As the mainstream media have moved left and talk radio right, and cable is breaking down along political and ideological lines, there is something else afoot now -- the racial Balkanization of the newsroom.
Consider. On Sunday, 6,800 folks showed in Chicago for the 2008 quadrennial convention of UNITY: Journalists of Color. McCain declined an invitation. Bush had been booed at UNITY 2004, while John Kerry got a standing ovation. Featured speaker: Barack. Major concern of the journalists running the show: that their colleagues would lift the roof off the McCormick Place convention center when Barack arrived.
Said Luis Villareal, a producer of NBC's "Dateline," "I don't think it's such a bad thing if for 15 minutes you take off your reporter hat and respond to (Obama) as a human being at an event where you're surrounded by people of color and you're here for a united cause."
And exactly what "cause" might the 10,000 members of UNITY be united behind? The hiring and advancement of journalists of color in all major news organizations in America.
For, as its emblem depicts, UNITY comprises four alliances: the Asian American Journalists Association, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, the Native American Journalists Association and the National Association of Black Journalists.
"A New Journalism for a Changing World" is UNITY's motto. And the title of its July 22 press release reveals what the "new journalism" is all about. "Aim of New UNITY Initiative Is More Diversity in Top Media Management."
"With more than 50 percent of the population projected to be people of color in less than a generation," says UNITY President Karen Lincoln Michel, "the nation's news organizations continue to generate dismal diversity numbers year after year. ... 'Ten by 2010' is a significant step in the right direction."
What is Ten by 2010?
UNITY is demanding that 10 major U.S. news organizations, by mid-2010, elevate to a senior management position in the newsroom at least one journalist of color and provide "customized training to help prepare them."
The journalist may be Asian, African-American, Native American or Hispanic, which rules out journalists of Irish, English, Polish, Italian, German or Jewish ancestry, since they are white.
Is this what we have come to 50 years after the triumph of the civil rights movement? Flat-out demands, by American journalists, for the hiring and promotion of colleagues based on race and color?
Is there any evidence major news organizations in this country have engaged in systematic discrimination to keep out men or women of color this last half century? The reverse seems true. They have bent over backward to advance minority journalists.
And if journalists have been hired and promoted based on ability and merit, why in the 21st century should these criteria be thrown out as the standards for advancement -- in favor of race and color?
Isn't this what they did in the days of Jim Crow -- hire and promote based on race? What UNITY is calling for is a return to the old rules but with new beneficiaries -- blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Native Americans -- and new victims, all of whom will be white.
On Sunday, McCain came out in favor of an Arizona civil rights initiative that would outlaw any state discrimination either for or against folks, based on race, gender or national origin. Barack said he was "disappointed" with McCain and told UNITY he favors affirmative action "when properly structured."
The Arizona referendum banning preferential treatment based on race is also on the ballot in the swing state of Colorado. It won in California in 1996, in Washington in 2000 and in Michigan in the great Democratic sweep of 2006. It has never lost, and may just win McCain Colorado, and with it the nation.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Al Gore’s Carbon Empire: Cashing in on Climate Change
Download a copy of the entire report here:
http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1217525953.pdf
By Fred Lucas, Capital Research Foundation Watch
Al Gore says everyone will benefit when new government rules require companies to pay to reduce global warming. But some people will benefit more than others, as will some companies. Benefiting most are those like the ex-vice president who can set up and invest in companies that will profit from the federal regulations imposing heavy costs on others.
Who pays for Gore’s crusade? In accounting for the $300 million in costs for the public education campaign of the Alliance for Climate Protection, the group’s website says that Al Gore pays for much of the project himself using the proceeds from his film and book, An Inconvenient Truth, and the $750,000 cash prize attached to the Nobel Peace Prize. It adds that he “has since received additional support in the form of private donations from those concerned about solving the climate crisis.”
Andrew C. Revkin of the New York Times reported on the newspaper’s Dot Earth blog March 31 that the Alliance raised half the sum - $150 million - for the ad campaign. But from whom? Gore says he put up about $3 million, but when asked the question on TV’s “60 Minutes,” he would not identify other funders. Solar and wind power companies? Hedge funds and venture capitalists? Gore’s own company, Generation Investment Management?
Gore and the global warming crowd are usually quick to challenge the credibility and sincerity of any scientist, climatologist or policy organization skeptical of man-made global warming. They call skeptics “shills” for Big Oil or, worse, “deniers,” invoking the term used against anti-Semites who deny the Holocaust. But they refuse to acknowledge their own growing financial interest in the carbon control industry. Barack Obama has said if he is elected president, he will be sure to find a prominent role for Al Gore in his administration. If that happens, will anyone raise questions about Al Gore’s conflict of interest?
Since leaving public office, Al Gore has become a one-man conglomerate: He writes books, stars in a movie, commands massive speaking fees, and sits on numerous corporate boards. According to Bloomberg News, Gore had less than $2 million when he left the vice presidency in 2001. Today his fortune is more than $100 million (Fast Company, July 2007) and the prospects are that he will grow even richer mounting his crusade against global warming.
The prospect of carbon regulation is why major corporations have latched onto Gore. He is the environmental movement’s bullhorn to the world, proclaiming the crisis of planetary warming. But the truth is that Gore also has become a bullhorn for corporations that are ready to cash in on the hysteria.
http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1217525953.pdf
By Fred Lucas, Capital Research Foundation Watch
Al Gore says everyone will benefit when new government rules require companies to pay to reduce global warming. But some people will benefit more than others, as will some companies. Benefiting most are those like the ex-vice president who can set up and invest in companies that will profit from the federal regulations imposing heavy costs on others.
Who pays for Gore’s crusade? In accounting for the $300 million in costs for the public education campaign of the Alliance for Climate Protection, the group’s website says that Al Gore pays for much of the project himself using the proceeds from his film and book, An Inconvenient Truth, and the $750,000 cash prize attached to the Nobel Peace Prize. It adds that he “has since received additional support in the form of private donations from those concerned about solving the climate crisis.”
Andrew C. Revkin of the New York Times reported on the newspaper’s Dot Earth blog March 31 that the Alliance raised half the sum - $150 million - for the ad campaign. But from whom? Gore says he put up about $3 million, but when asked the question on TV’s “60 Minutes,” he would not identify other funders. Solar and wind power companies? Hedge funds and venture capitalists? Gore’s own company, Generation Investment Management?
Gore and the global warming crowd are usually quick to challenge the credibility and sincerity of any scientist, climatologist or policy organization skeptical of man-made global warming. They call skeptics “shills” for Big Oil or, worse, “deniers,” invoking the term used against anti-Semites who deny the Holocaust. But they refuse to acknowledge their own growing financial interest in the carbon control industry. Barack Obama has said if he is elected president, he will be sure to find a prominent role for Al Gore in his administration. If that happens, will anyone raise questions about Al Gore’s conflict of interest?
Since leaving public office, Al Gore has become a one-man conglomerate: He writes books, stars in a movie, commands massive speaking fees, and sits on numerous corporate boards. According to Bloomberg News, Gore had less than $2 million when he left the vice presidency in 2001. Today his fortune is more than $100 million (Fast Company, July 2007) and the prospects are that he will grow even richer mounting his crusade against global warming.
The prospect of carbon regulation is why major corporations have latched onto Gore. He is the environmental movement’s bullhorn to the world, proclaiming the crisis of planetary warming. But the truth is that Gore also has become a bullhorn for corporations that are ready to cash in on the hysteria.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Democrats impede U.S. on energy
They should drop their objections and let new off-shore oil drilling proceed.
By Rick Santorum
It's the gas prices, stupid.
Every politician knows Americans want relief at the pump for their own sake and the sake of the broader economy. The Senate's continued inaction on this issue provides an insight into how the two parties hope to appeal to anxious voters and, more important, how they view high energy prices.
Democrats, including Barack Obama, support increasing taxes and regulatory costs (environmental) on energy producers and consumers (you), limiting exploration for new oil and natural-gas supplies, and mandating conservation. Liberals like Obama have long argued for higher gas prices to force conservation and reduce emissions. The only concern he has expressed recently is that prices have not gone up gradually and that the sudden spike has hit Americans hard.
It's no surprise, then, that the High-Priced-Energy Party has focused on finding a scapegoat for the rapid rise in prices. The culprits? For starters, greedy Wall Street speculators. So, the High-Priced-Energy Party tried to pass a don't-blame-us bill that further regulates the energy futures market, even though the trading activity on these exchanges during the crisis is at or below normal levels. Interestingly, the bill doesn't cover gold or silver speculators, whose commodities have seen similar price spikes.
Republicans, by contrast, favor lower oil and gas prices. Last week, they wanted to offer an amendment to the oil-speculator bill that would allow states to open up areas at least 50 miles off their shores for oil and gas exploration.
The Minerals Management Service estimates that 1.5 billion barrels of oil and 15.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas lie off the Mid-Atlantic coast. This is just a fraction of what could be produced if we allowed exploration and drilling along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Because these estimates are more than two decades old and based on 1970s-era technologies, these reserves may be underestimated by as much as 50 percent, if history is any guide.
But, no. Up to this point, High-Priced-Energy Party Leader Harry Reid has blocked a straight up or down vote on drilling. The Nevada Democrat's reasoning? Only about 25 percent of leases currently held by energy companies are being explored for development. You see, it's not just oil speculators who are to blame for high prices; it's the oil companies themselves. So High-Priced-Energy Democrats proposed a bill requiring that oil companies drill on their current leases before they gain access to other locations.
Why, you might ask, are energy companies not drilling on current leaseholds? Because they discovered there isn't sufficient oil or gas on these lands to justify drilling. So, the Democrats' second answer to high energy prices is to force energy companies to drill, but only on unprofitable poor-producing fields.
The High-Priced-Energy Democrats have used this unused-leases canard to block the More-Energy-Now Republicans' offshore-drilling amendment, and why not? It's a high-octane blend of politics and policy for them. High-Priced-Energy Democrats score cheap political points by beating up on Wall Street and Big Oil while blocking any price-lowering increase in domestic supplies of oil and natural gas. Neat if you don't have to worry about filling your tank or heating your home.
Securing an adequate energy supply is critical to the nation as a whole, but could prove especially important to the Delaware Valley in particular. Environmentally friendly exploration off our coast would mean economic development across our region. New Jersey and Delaware would see an infusion of oil and natural-gas jobs. Southeast Pennsylvania - already home to three oil refineries - would see an expansion of this key sector of our local economy. The ports of Philadelphia and Wilmington, as well as nearly every other port along the Eastern Seaboard, would see increased activity and employment growth.
Yes, it would take a few years for new refineries to come online. But by opening these areas to exploration, the price of crude oil would drop. It would signal to tyrants like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and commodities speculators that we are serious about reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. Once online, millions of barrels of our oil and natural gas would flood the commodities markets, allowing the economic laws of supply and demand to work in our favor.
Even more, the added influx of oil and natural gas would buy our nation time to develop the next wave of energy technologies. We need to use our vast coal reserves and encourage advancements such as waste coal-to-liquid fuels and coal gasification to strengthen our electrical grids. We need to invest in the next generation of biofuels to ensure they are energy efficient and not a cause of escalating food prices. And we need to follow the lead of France - yes, France - and build additional nuclear power plants, something we have not done in 30 years.
Now that would be a change in energy policy we could believe in.
E-mail Rick Santorum at rsantorum@phillynews.com.
By Rick Santorum
It's the gas prices, stupid.
Every politician knows Americans want relief at the pump for their own sake and the sake of the broader economy. The Senate's continued inaction on this issue provides an insight into how the two parties hope to appeal to anxious voters and, more important, how they view high energy prices.
Democrats, including Barack Obama, support increasing taxes and regulatory costs (environmental) on energy producers and consumers (you), limiting exploration for new oil and natural-gas supplies, and mandating conservation. Liberals like Obama have long argued for higher gas prices to force conservation and reduce emissions. The only concern he has expressed recently is that prices have not gone up gradually and that the sudden spike has hit Americans hard.
It's no surprise, then, that the High-Priced-Energy Party has focused on finding a scapegoat for the rapid rise in prices. The culprits? For starters, greedy Wall Street speculators. So, the High-Priced-Energy Party tried to pass a don't-blame-us bill that further regulates the energy futures market, even though the trading activity on these exchanges during the crisis is at or below normal levels. Interestingly, the bill doesn't cover gold or silver speculators, whose commodities have seen similar price spikes.
Republicans, by contrast, favor lower oil and gas prices. Last week, they wanted to offer an amendment to the oil-speculator bill that would allow states to open up areas at least 50 miles off their shores for oil and gas exploration.
The Minerals Management Service estimates that 1.5 billion barrels of oil and 15.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas lie off the Mid-Atlantic coast. This is just a fraction of what could be produced if we allowed exploration and drilling along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Because these estimates are more than two decades old and based on 1970s-era technologies, these reserves may be underestimated by as much as 50 percent, if history is any guide.
But, no. Up to this point, High-Priced-Energy Party Leader Harry Reid has blocked a straight up or down vote on drilling. The Nevada Democrat's reasoning? Only about 25 percent of leases currently held by energy companies are being explored for development. You see, it's not just oil speculators who are to blame for high prices; it's the oil companies themselves. So High-Priced-Energy Democrats proposed a bill requiring that oil companies drill on their current leases before they gain access to other locations.
Why, you might ask, are energy companies not drilling on current leaseholds? Because they discovered there isn't sufficient oil or gas on these lands to justify drilling. So, the Democrats' second answer to high energy prices is to force energy companies to drill, but only on unprofitable poor-producing fields.
The High-Priced-Energy Democrats have used this unused-leases canard to block the More-Energy-Now Republicans' offshore-drilling amendment, and why not? It's a high-octane blend of politics and policy for them. High-Priced-Energy Democrats score cheap political points by beating up on Wall Street and Big Oil while blocking any price-lowering increase in domestic supplies of oil and natural gas. Neat if you don't have to worry about filling your tank or heating your home.
Securing an adequate energy supply is critical to the nation as a whole, but could prove especially important to the Delaware Valley in particular. Environmentally friendly exploration off our coast would mean economic development across our region. New Jersey and Delaware would see an infusion of oil and natural-gas jobs. Southeast Pennsylvania - already home to three oil refineries - would see an expansion of this key sector of our local economy. The ports of Philadelphia and Wilmington, as well as nearly every other port along the Eastern Seaboard, would see increased activity and employment growth.
Yes, it would take a few years for new refineries to come online. But by opening these areas to exploration, the price of crude oil would drop. It would signal to tyrants like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and commodities speculators that we are serious about reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. Once online, millions of barrels of our oil and natural gas would flood the commodities markets, allowing the economic laws of supply and demand to work in our favor.
Even more, the added influx of oil and natural gas would buy our nation time to develop the next wave of energy technologies. We need to use our vast coal reserves and encourage advancements such as waste coal-to-liquid fuels and coal gasification to strengthen our electrical grids. We need to invest in the next generation of biofuels to ensure they are energy efficient and not a cause of escalating food prices. And we need to follow the lead of France - yes, France - and build additional nuclear power plants, something we have not done in 30 years.
Now that would be a change in energy policy we could believe in.
E-mail Rick Santorum at rsantorum@phillynews.com.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Obama's Missing Ingredient: TRUTH
1.) Selma Got Me Born – TRUTH: Your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965.
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - TRUTH: Father was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - TRUTH: Father was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.
4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - TRUTH: Your cousin, Raila Odinga, has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007 in Kenya. It was the first widespread violence in decades.
5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been a Christian - TRUTH: She does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn’t allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) My Name is African Swahili - TRUTH: ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means ‘blessed’ in Arabic. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
7.) I Never Practiced Islam - TRUTH: He practiced it daily at school, where he was registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until his wife convinced him to change so that he could run for office.
8.) My School in Indonesia Was Christian - TRUTH: He was registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (according to his book).
9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - TRUTH: Not one of his teachers say he could speak the language.
10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - TRUTH: He was there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn’t even speak the language. He did learn how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.
11.) I Am Stronger on Foreign Affairs - TRUTH: Except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), he has never been anywhere else on the planet and thus has NO experience with our closest allies or any other foreign government.
12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - TRUTH: He was quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - his classmates said he was just fine.
13.) An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - TRUTH: Ebony has yet to find the article he mention in his book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.
14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook on Life - TRUTH: Life has yet to find the article mentioned in his book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.
15.) I Won’t Run On A National Ticket In ‘08 - TRUTH: Here he is, despite saying, live on TV, that he would not have enough experience by then, and he was very clear in needing more experience first.
16.) “Present” Votes Are Common in Illinois - TRUTH: They are common for BHO, but not many others have 130 “Present” votes.
17.) Oops, I Mis-voted - TRUTH: Only when caught by church groups and democrats, did he beg to change his mis-vote.
18.) I Was A Professor of Law - TRUTH: He was a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - TRUTH: He was a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - TRUTH: He didn’t write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.
21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard to Pass - TRUTH: It took just 14 days from start to finish.
22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - TRUTH: His bill was rejected by his own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of his nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.
23.) I Have Released My State Records - TRUTH: As of March, 2008, state bills he sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, so nobody can see any special interests or pork hidden within.
24.) I Took On the Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - TRUTH: He was part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. He failed to mention anyone else but himself in his books.
25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - TRUTH: His 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even he voted against his own bill.
26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - TRUTH: Even his own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on his part.
27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - TRUTH: They were not his bills, but rather handed to him, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist him in a future bid for higher office.
28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - TRUTH: The Canadian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation his campaign had with them.
29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - TRUTH: He missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and his good friend, Ali Abunimah, supports the destruction of Israel.
30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - TRUTH: After the NAFTA Memo, a dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter stating how BHO and he were working together on getting FARC recognized officially.
31.) I Didn’t Run Ads In Florida - TRUTH: He allowed national ads to run 8-12 times per day for two weeks – and he still lost.
32.) I Won Michigan - TRUTH: He didn’t.
33.) I won Nevada - TRUTH: He didn’t.
34.) I Want All Votes To Count - TRUTH: On the record, he said, “Let the delegates decide.”
35.) I Want Americans To Decide - TRUTH: He prefers caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.
36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - TRUTH: He passed 26, most of which he didn’t write himself.
37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - TRUTH: His friend is threatening to sue if he does not stop saying this. UPDATE: Obama has now stopped saying this.
38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - TRUTH: He used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against him.
39.) I Don’t Take PAC Money - TRUTH: He take loads of it.
40.) I don’t Have Lobbyists - TRUTH: He has over 47 lobbyists, and counting.
41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - TRUTH: His own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.
42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - TRUTH: Tom, who started MySpace, issued a warning about his advertising to MySpace clients.
43.) I Inspire People With My Words - TRUTH: He inspires many people with other people’s words.
44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - TRUTH: He has passed ONE BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa. NO bills for the benefit of any Americans.
45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - TRUTH: He wasn’t in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time, unlike Kucinich. He is also stepping back from his departure date - AGAIN.
46.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - TRUTH: His plan leaves the majority of us to pay for the 15,000,000 who don’t have to buy it.
47.) I Only Found Out About My Investment Conflicts Via Mail - TRUTH: Both companies he sites as having sent him letters about this conflict have no record of any such letter ever being created or sent.
48.) I Am As Patriotic As Anyone - TRUTH: He won’t wear a flag pin and he doesn’t put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem.
49.) My Wife Didn’t Mean What She Said About Pride In Country - TRUTH: His wife’s words follow lock-step in the vein of Wright and Farrahkan, in relation to their contempt and hatred of America.
50.) Wal-Mart Is A Company I Wouldn’t Support - TRUTH: His wife has received nearly a quarter of a million dollars through Treehouse, which is connected to Wal-Mart, so they support him.
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - TRUTH: Father was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - TRUTH: Father was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.
4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - TRUTH: Your cousin, Raila Odinga, has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007 in Kenya. It was the first widespread violence in decades.
5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been a Christian - TRUTH: She does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn’t allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) My Name is African Swahili - TRUTH: ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means ‘blessed’ in Arabic. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
7.) I Never Practiced Islam - TRUTH: He practiced it daily at school, where he was registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years, until his wife convinced him to change so that he could run for office.
8.) My School in Indonesia Was Christian - TRUTH: He was registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (according to his book).
9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - TRUTH: Not one of his teachers say he could speak the language.
10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - TRUTH: He was there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn’t even speak the language. He did learn how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.
11.) I Am Stronger on Foreign Affairs - TRUTH: Except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), he has never been anywhere else on the planet and thus has NO experience with our closest allies or any other foreign government.
12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - TRUTH: He was quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - his classmates said he was just fine.
13.) An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - TRUTH: Ebony has yet to find the article he mention in his book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.
14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook on Life - TRUTH: Life has yet to find the article mentioned in his book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.
15.) I Won’t Run On A National Ticket In ‘08 - TRUTH: Here he is, despite saying, live on TV, that he would not have enough experience by then, and he was very clear in needing more experience first.
16.) “Present” Votes Are Common in Illinois - TRUTH: They are common for BHO, but not many others have 130 “Present” votes.
17.) Oops, I Mis-voted - TRUTH: Only when caught by church groups and democrats, did he beg to change his mis-vote.
18.) I Was A Professor of Law - TRUTH: He was a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - TRUTH: He was a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - TRUTH: He didn’t write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.
21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard to Pass - TRUTH: It took just 14 days from start to finish.
22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - TRUTH: His bill was rejected by his own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of his nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.
23.) I Have Released My State Records - TRUTH: As of March, 2008, state bills he sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, so nobody can see any special interests or pork hidden within.
24.) I Took On the Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - TRUTH: He was part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. He failed to mention anyone else but himself in his books.
25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - TRUTH: His 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even he voted against his own bill.
26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - TRUTH: Even his own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on his part.
27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - TRUTH: They were not his bills, but rather handed to him, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist him in a future bid for higher office.
28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - TRUTH: The Canadian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation his campaign had with them.
29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - TRUTH: He missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and his good friend, Ali Abunimah, supports the destruction of Israel.
30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - TRUTH: After the NAFTA Memo, a dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter stating how BHO and he were working together on getting FARC recognized officially.
31.) I Didn’t Run Ads In Florida - TRUTH: He allowed national ads to run 8-12 times per day for two weeks – and he still lost.
32.) I Won Michigan - TRUTH: He didn’t.
33.) I won Nevada - TRUTH: He didn’t.
34.) I Want All Votes To Count - TRUTH: On the record, he said, “Let the delegates decide.”
35.) I Want Americans To Decide - TRUTH: He prefers caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time.
36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - TRUTH: He passed 26, most of which he didn’t write himself.
37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - TRUTH: His friend is threatening to sue if he does not stop saying this. UPDATE: Obama has now stopped saying this.
38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - TRUTH: He used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against him.
39.) I Don’t Take PAC Money - TRUTH: He take loads of it.
40.) I don’t Have Lobbyists - TRUTH: He has over 47 lobbyists, and counting.
41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - TRUTH: His own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.
42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - TRUTH: Tom, who started MySpace, issued a warning about his advertising to MySpace clients.
43.) I Inspire People With My Words - TRUTH: He inspires many people with other people’s words.
44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - TRUTH: He has passed ONE BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa. NO bills for the benefit of any Americans.
45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - TRUTH: He wasn’t in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time, unlike Kucinich. He is also stepping back from his departure date - AGAIN.
46.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - TRUTH: His plan leaves the majority of us to pay for the 15,000,000 who don’t have to buy it.
47.) I Only Found Out About My Investment Conflicts Via Mail - TRUTH: Both companies he sites as having sent him letters about this conflict have no record of any such letter ever being created or sent.
48.) I Am As Patriotic As Anyone - TRUTH: He won’t wear a flag pin and he doesn’t put his hand over his heart during the National Anthem.
49.) My Wife Didn’t Mean What She Said About Pride In Country - TRUTH: His wife’s words follow lock-step in the vein of Wright and Farrahkan, in relation to their contempt and hatred of America.
50.) Wal-Mart Is A Company I Wouldn’t Support - TRUTH: His wife has received nearly a quarter of a million dollars through Treehouse, which is connected to Wal-Mart, so they support him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)