PROOF OF A SOCIALIST OBAMA?

Just when we thought we would make it through this month’s Presidential campaign without the long predicted October Surprise comes this bombshell, proof positive that Democrats’ Presidential nominee once belong to the Socialist Party. The New Zeal blog has dug up a copy of the spring 1996 newsletter of the Chicago based New Party, listing Barack Obama among New Party members winning election from the Chicago area. The New Party is affiliated with the organization, Democratic Socialists of America, who reported on the New Party’s successes in the 1996 elections:

“The Chicago New Party is increasely (sic) becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics….the NP's '96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. “

Should any of you doubt that the DSA’s true socialist roots, see their website, which includes this statement:

“We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources,…”

We hope and pray that the American press will wake up prior to November 4th and seriously investigate these allegations before our worst fears are realized, that Obama IS a modern day Manchurian Candidate, a dedicated socialist that has been slickly marketed by older, experienced Marxists, both here in the US and abroad. No amount of candy coating is going to make palatable this radical, leftist candidate, who represents the most serious threat to the traditional American way of life in our experience.

CLOTHES DO NOT A MAN MAKE, BUT A WOMAN?

We admit it. We cling to tradition. We prefer a Jesuit education, classic movies, opera, and paintings by the old masters. We also love a well dressed woman. As much as we admire Hillary Clinton and wish she were the Democrats' nominee for President, we hate her pants suits. We are, therefore, not surprised the McCain campaign has spent some $150,000 on clothes, hair, and makeup for their Vice Presidential nominee, Sarah Palin. We appreciate the fact that Palin, a former beauty queen, is the country’s most visible hope a woman can have it all…career, family, youth, and looks. While we would prefer $150,000 had been spent on sending Palin on a worldwide visit with the world’s most influential leaders, we understand the Republicans putting their money where they think the American public interest lies. However, the media has romped all over the story, feigning shock and outrage. In the meantime, we hear no mention of Barack Obama’s $1,500 suits or the Obama’s room service lunch of lobster, caviar, and champagne at the Waldorf Astoria last week, all at his campaign donors’ expense. We recognize the attacks for what they are, misogynistic and self serving. Perhaps the Obama campaign wishes they had the foresight and forked out some cash to get Joe Biden a decent hair weave?

A FREE PRESS?

One of our reasons for starting this blog was we wanted an outlet to vent out frustration over what passes for journalism today. At one point in our life we wanted to be a journalist, like many other concerned, involved citizens who worked on high school and university papers in their youth or on church and club newsletters in their leisure time, or even on professional journals in the pursuit of careers. We even had the opportunity to take a course in journalistic ethics during our college years, where we learned the principles that Murrow and Cronkite employed in their daily reports.

It wasn’t too long ago that we could trust a Brokaw, a Rather, or a Turner to tell us something akin to the truth. Are we befuddled by age, isolation, or social class, or has there been a distinct abandonment of journalistic objectivity since the beginning of this Presidential season some 18 months ago? We began to suspect something afoot when Bill and Hillary Clinton came under attack during the primary season, two people who have done as much for the rights of African Americans and women as anyone during the last 25 years. The press, to whom we look to champion the rights of the disenfranchised, enthusiastically engaged in sexist and racist behavior, joining people who owe their political careers to the Clintons in a chilling demonstration of political cannibalism.

In the last week the press has totally abandonment any attempt to appear objective or unbiased. Unashamedly embracing a Hearst-like yellow journalism, CNN gave us these four audition tapes for position of official Obama propganda network:

• A piece on the “Black McCains” a shameless attempt to paint John McCain as a descendant of racist plantation owners who sexually abused their slaves.
• A new math lesson by Jack Cafferty converting a poll showing 30% of non-US citizens favoring Obama to a poll showing Obama preferred by the rest of the world 4 to 1.
• Another Cafferty rant against Sarah Palin, calling her “sleazy” and “opportunistic” for using official funds to pay for her children to accompany her own her travels, a legitimate expenditure practiced by John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton before her, all the time ignoring the obvious question of who was funding the travel of the Obama children.
• The misrepresentation by Drew Griffin of a Byron York column in the National Review criticizing the press’ reporting on Governor Palin, falsely claiming that York had called Palin, “…incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt or all of the above.”, a deliberate lie.

In the end, we believe that the American people will see through this blatant attempt to push a modern day snake oil salesman into the oval office.

CNN MATH

This afternnoon Jack Cafferty, who’s been taking smirking lessons from Keith Olbermann, reported that citizens of foreign nations preferred Barack Obama over John McCain by a margin of four to one. While a “4 to 1” graphic remained on the screen Jack hypothesized on the reasons Obama was so popular around the world, save for backward places like the Philippines (Jack, have you checked the number of voters of Pacific Islander background in California lately?). What Jack hiccupped over was the actual number logged by the Gallup organization, 30% of those surveyed preferred Obama, 8% preferred McCain, 62% did not have an opinion. Here’s our take on Gallup’s poll. Two thirds of the world doesn’t care who wins the US Presidential election. So much for Obama’s claim that his election will change the world.

OBAMA, YOU'RE NO JACK KENNEDY

Everywhere we turn, we read/hear/see comparisons of Barack Obama to John F. Kennedy, both young, attractive, charismatic men, who inspired a generation; both history making candidates, one African-American. one Roman Catholic. The Obama campaign would like us to believe that JFK was also a young, inexperienced candidate. JFK served in the US Navy for four years, in the House of Representatives for six years and in the US Senate for eight before entering the White House. And whatever, one thinks of the Kennedy legacy, Joe Kennedy’s sons were raised to lead. From the time they were children, they shared their dinner table with the greatest minds of the day. Obama himself often cites Kennedy’s own words, “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.” as rationale for negotiating with renegade countries. What Obama doesn’t say, perhaps doesn’t know, is that that attitude led to a disastrous meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, then the leader of the Soviet Union, which in turn led to the Cuban Missile Crisis, the closest point to a nuclear war this world has ever seen. Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, this weekend told a roomful of well healed Democratic contributors in Seattle that, "Mark my words, it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy… Watch. We're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.” We remember the near panic of the missile crisis, the “duck and cover” drills in elementary schools, the makeshift bomb shelters on every block. We have no desire to walk with Obama through such a scenario.

We actually see more parallels to another President elected on a wave of hope and optimism, James Earle Carter, Jr. Jimmy Carter is a brilliant man, reportedly the highest IQ of any US President, graduated from the US Naval Academy with a degree in physics. He served in the US Navy from 1946 to 1953, ran his late father’s business in Georgia and served on several local community boards, like Obama, before being elected to the State Senate, like Obama. He ran for Governor unsuccessfully in 1966, and was elected Governor in 1970, an executive position he held until becoming President in 1976. To this date, he is considered to be a good, sympathetic man, known for a lifetime of good works. Like Obama, a press weary of the Imperial Presidency of Richard Nixon, lionized him. Who can forget the sycophantic Barbara Walters interview. Like Obama, he ran as a Washington outsider and he was, bringing to Washington, DC, a group of adviser woefully ignorant of the ins and outs of Capital politics. The administration will be remembered for 15% mortgage rates and the humiliating Iranian hostage crisis, and lower popularity ratings than Nixon or George W. Bush. Obama hasn’t the IQ or moral character of Carter nor the experience or family history of Kennedy. Why should we expect a more favorable experience if/when Obama matches wits with a foreign adversary. We close with a paraphrase from the 1968 Peter O’Toole/Katherine Hepburn film, “A Lion In Winter”

We know. You know we know. John McCain knows you know we know. We’re a very knowledgeable bunch. On the other hand, Barack Obama….

CNN PLAYS THE RACE CARD

Today CNN aired a less than subtle propaganda piece titled the “Black McCains“, featuring an African American woman, Lillie McCain, who claims to be a descendant of slaves once owned by John McCain’s ancestors. Also included in this so called “news” piece, was Douglas A. Blackmon, author of a race-baiting book titled "Slavery By Another Name". Blackmon is a native Mississippian and the Atlanta Bureau Chief of the Wall Street Journal. Mr. Blackmon’s book focuses on the second class citizen status of African Americans during the period prior to WWII.

No American is proud of this country’s past treatment of African Americans. However, CNN’s thinly veiled attempt to connect John McCain to this shameful period of US history is slanderous. Especially offensive, was Ms. McCain’s assertion that she had no doubt that she and John McCain shared the same gene pool, implying that John McCain’s ancestors were not only slave owners, but rapists as well. Whatever, the status of McCain’s relatives of two centuries ago, we know that he is a man of unimpeachable character, who has contributed more to the freedom enjoyed by Lille McCain and every other American than a thousand muck raking authors like Mr. Blackmon could ever hope.

This report has removed any doubt we had concerning CNN’s journalistic integrity.

STRANGE BEDFELOWS, POWELL AND OBAMA

Having worked with the military for over 20 years, we have a great respect for our service members. Whatever one may think about the morality of war, it is a fact that a US four star general or admiral is the peer of any major CEO. A former Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest military position in the US, is in the company of the heads of General Motors, Exxon, and US Steel, the crème de la crème. Colin Powell is not only a former Head of the Joint Chiefs, he is a former Secretary of State and probably the most distinguished African American ever to serve in public office, rivaled only by Thurgood Marshall. We are, therefore, gravely disturbed and more than a little confused by Gen. Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama today.

Gen. Powell gave three major reasons for eschewing his fellow military officer, John McCain, in favor of the much less experienced junior Senator Obama:

• Obama’s ability to inspire not only the US citizenry, but the world at large,
• McCain’s perceived lapse of judgment in choosing Governor Sarah Palin, and
• The extreme conservative focus of the Republican Party.

We don’t see it quite that way.

• We don’t find Obama inspiring, but frightening in the same way we were frightened by Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Reverend Sun Jung Moon.
• We don’t consider Governor Palin’s choice as running mate to be poor judgment, but evidence of political genius and amazing perception. Her critics fail to recognize that she is a Governor, one of 50 chief executives, one of eight female Governors, and the most popular Governor in the US. The pundits and late night stand ups would have us believe that their judgment trumps that of the Alaskan people who know Governor Palin’s ability better than any of us. While we wish Palin was more moderate, we do not question her experience or potential.
  
• We believe the Republican Party to be far more centrist than the Democratic Party. Senator’s McCain’s nomination is evidence of the GOP’s retreat from the dark days of the Moral Majority and Newt Gingrich. Obama’s purge of Clintonians and the hijacking of the party’s credentials committee heralds the leftist extremism to come.
  

Because we don’t believe General Powell lacks judgment, experience, or intelligence, we are left with some ugly alternative conclusions.

• Gen. Powell is more embittered by his treatment at the hands of the Bush administration that previously believed. Without question, his unwitting involvement in the scam that was the selling of the Irag invasion severely damaged his legacy and his ego. With this endorsement he does a one finger wave good-bye to the Republican Party.
  
• Age and circumstances have robbed Gen. Powell, and all of us, of the preferred first African American President of the United States. Through this endorsement Gen. Powell, hopes to share in making history. We have no doubt that Obama will show him the same gratitude that he has shown Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson, and the other elders of the civil rights movement.
  
• As a retired Army General, Powell, sees retired Navy Captain, McCain, as less than a top level candidate. Had McCain followed in the footsteps of his Admiral father and grandfather, no doubt Powell would hold him in higher regard.
  

Whatever, Gen. Powell’s real reasons for endorsing Barack Obama, we are certain that it relegates Powell to being a footnote in history.