OBAMA'S MEDIA LAP DOGS

The meek manner in which the press is handling the news that Barack Obama’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, is here in the US ILLEGALLY living in Boston public housing ILLEGALLY, and has contributed money to the Obama campaign ILLEGALLY is a testament to the effectiveness of Obama’s anti-free speech thugs. During this campaign the Obama organization has threatened radio stations with legal action, boycotted television stations for asking probing questions, and kicked daily newspaper reporters off the candidate’s aircraft in favor of ethnic monthly entertainment magazines. Half the press is afraid of being branded racist and the other half is afraid of losing access.

Well, we are not afraid. We are mad. Let’s take a look at the story of Obama’s aunt. Onyango, a Kenyan citizen, was reportedly denied political asylum in the US four years ago. This is a subject we know something about, having served as the Political Asylum Officer for the San Francisco District Office of the US Immigration Service. The Obama campaign has released a statement which says, in part, "Senator Obama has no knowledge of her status but obviously believes that any and all appropriate laws be followed…" No knowledge, huh, now that sounds familiar. “I never heard Reverend Wright say anything anti American, anti-Israel, or anti-white.” “I never knew William Ayers was an unrepentant terrorist.”

Well, the Obama campaign admits that Onyango attended Obama’s US Senate swearing in ceremony two years ago, has been a guest in the Obama’s home, but has not spoken to Obama, “…for a few months.” OK, follow this logic closely, we don’t want to lose any of you. Barack Obama is an attorney, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, former law professor at the University of Chicago Law School, but he has no knowledge of the immigration status of a near family member whom was a guest in his home and an invited visitor to his swearing in? Either he is the most inept Harvard lawyer ever (we doubt it) or he is a bold faced liar (we suspected it all along) or he believes that his followers are the stupidest sheep ever to cast a ballot (we are certain of it).

WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS

SEEING THROUGH THE SMOKE

US Navy ships are equipped with anti-missile defenses that spew chaff, metal confetti, into the air to confuse the radar of incoming missiles. We couldn’t help but see the comparisons in the clogging of the media this weekend with pro-Obama propaganda. We hope the American voter will see through the smoke and see the stark reality of their choice, the clearest choice given to the electorate in 50 years. Up front we will admit that both candidates are flawed. Neither was our first choice. However, in the cold, clear light of morning, it comes down to a few criteria:

USS Howard

• Experience. We have one man with a long public record of selflessness and honorable service and we have one man with a past shrouded in mystery and a resume that fits on an index card.
• Who is more centrist? One man has a three decade long record of bi-partisan efforts and has frequently defied his party when it veered too far from the center. One man’s record is remarkable only for it’s brevity and extreme adherence to radical, leftist ideology.
• Trust. One demonstrated his loyalty to his fellow Americans by refusing to leave their side even when it meantt his imprisonment under the most inhumane conditions. One man has repeatedly turned his back on those who nurtured him for years, all for political expediency.
  

It’s the last criterion that we can’t shake. Whatever anyone says about John McCain, we feel confident we know what he will do. Whatever Barack Obama says, no one knows what he will do. Pretty simple.

FANTASY CANDIDATE

A guest pundit on Fox News recently likened the rationale used by Barack Obama’s supporters to explain his continued association with an army of unsavory characters to a “Jedi Mind Trick”. For you who are not fluent in Star Wars terminology the Jedi mind trick is a ruse used to convince the weak minded to ignore the facts and accept the Jedi version of reality. For many of us it is the only possible explanation of a nation’s rush to elect the least qualified President in US history, a man whose past is largely a mystery, a man who counts among his associations a spokesperson of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from its terrorist years, a former domestic terrorist who escaped, on a technicality, conviction for bombing a police station and the Pentagon, and a hate mongering pastor whose congregation danced in the aisles while he chanted “God damn America”.

In the past few days we have had revelation after revelation, peeks under the candidate’s mask, giving us a glimpse of the real man.

• Obama tells “Joe The Plumber” things are better when, “…we spread the wealth around.”
• Tape of Obama telling public radio the civil rights movement had not gone far enough because, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.”
• The admission of the existence of a video tape of Obama at a party honoring the aforementioned PLO spokesperson, attended by the aforementioned domestic terrorist, at which anti-Israeli remarks went unchallenged by Obama.
  

Two nights ago, comedian Dennis Miller put Obama’s relationship with radical pastor Jerimiah Wright in perspective. He said that his moment of disenchantment came when Obama stated that he went to church twice a month on average. You mean that he sat in the pew listening to Reverend Wright, twice a month for 20 years, listened to nearly 500 sermons, yet claimed he never heard was aware of Wright’s animosity toward whites, the American government, and the state of Israel? Either he is the dumbest man ever to run for US President or he is the most accomplished liar to ever run.

Yesterday evening Sean Hannity reported that Obama associate William Ayers published a terrorist manifesto in 1974 which he dedicated to “political prisoners”, including in the dedication Robert Kennedy’s assassin, Sirhan Sirhan. How much more do American voters need before they wake up from this electoral stupor. How much longer will they accept O-B-One-Obama saying, “You never read those words Barack wrote. You never heard Barack say those things. You never saw photos and video showing Barack with those people. These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” The force be with you. You’re gonna need it.

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS

We are conservative and we don’t like George W. Bush. Now that may see a paradox to you. Perhaps because so many people who don’t like the younger Bush are supporting Barack Obama in a mass exhibition of biting off one’s nose to spite one’s face. However, we are conservative, no, not one of those people who want to force their political and religious beliefs on others, but truly conservative. We don’t want to force our beliefs on others and in return we ask that they and their government stay out of our bedroom and out of our bank account. President Bush has transgressed on both. He has raided our purse. In the first nine months of his administration the S&P lost 40 percent of it’s value and we lost 40 percent of our savings. He has invaded our privacy. He and his henchmen at Homeland Security have limited our freedom while claiming to protect us from terrorists.

However, as much as we dislike George W. Bush, we know which of the candidates is likely to be more damaging to our personal finances and liberties. We cannot understand, therefore, why two major constituencies, one traditionally Republican, one traditionally Democratic, are supporting Barack Obama. Why are Roman Catholic and Jewish voters leaning toward Obama? Obama’s extreme position on the issue of abortion frightens even most Pro Choice voters. Whatever you have read, it is a matter of record that he enabled physicians in causing the death of babies that survived near term abortions. Some call it murder. Some call it infanticide. Call whatever you like, it won’t make such a monstrous act acceptable. How can any Roman Catholic cast a ballot for such a man?

For over 20 years, Obama has associated with people who have sought the destruction of Israel. He may claim his eternal allegiance to the Jewish state, but his history fails to reassure us. Chief among these associations is Rashid Khalidi, whom Obama has known for over 25 years. Khalidi, a Palestinian with reputed ties to a PLO terrorist past, is a well known a professor at Columbia Univesity and an expert on Israeli-Palestinian matters. While there are no copies of Khalidi’s PLO membership card, his writings leave do doubt of his opinion of Israel. He has stated that Palestinians have a right to kill Israeli soldiers. Obama has repeatedly stated that Khalidi has had a influence on his beliefs. At minimum Obama has been inconsistent in his statements in support of Israel. If you are Jewish, do you take him at his word and ignore his associations and his previous statements? We think not.

When you cast your vote next Tuesday, ask yourself, “Do I trust Obama to protect the lives of those unfortunate children and those Israeli citizens?” We don’t.

CHANGE WE CAN'T BELIEVE

We, like may in the mainstream video, thought a bit too much was made of Barack Obama’s verbal misstep when he responded to “Joe, the Plumber” that things work better when we redistribute the wealth, that it was just an unfortunate turn of phrase. However, this morning a 2001 radio interview with Obama has surfaced. The program, entitled “Slavery and the Constitution”, included some shocking comments by sometimes constitutional law lecturer Obama.

Most of the conservative pundits have seized on the repeated concept of redistributing wealth as anti-capitalism, maybe downright socialist. In the 2001 interview Obama stated that, “"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.” This comment is important for two reasons. First, it proves that Obama’s comment to Joe the Plumber was no mere slip of the tongue. Secondly, it indicates a dedication to a “share the wealth” philosophy that goes beyond the simple progressive income tax.

However, this was not the comment that startled us. Anyone that doubts that Obama is a big spending liberal at best, if not a for real Marxist, has had an extra helping of Kool-Aid. This reputed expert on the US Constitution said it was a tragedy that the US Supreme Court, “didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution.” We interpret that statement to mean that a President Obama, backed by a Democrat dominated Congress, would try to legislate changes not intended by the Constitution. Now that’s change you can’t believe.