About Me

Name: Doug
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

My Post-Election Thoughts

Posted by Doug on Saturday, November 08, 2008 7:09:50 AM
It is indeed a great day when an African American can ascend to the highest office in this land. I offer congratulations to President-Elect Obama for his well run campaign and his election victory.
 
That said, I can think of OTHER black candidates I would have preferred, on policy and experience criteria. In fact, prior to the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate, I had lobbied the McCain campaign to select the former Lt Governor of Maryland, Michael Steele - also an African-American!
 
However:
 
Unlike the "Bush Derangement Syndrome" treatment which the left gave President Bush thru both terms - opposing every word out of his mouth and undermining him at every turn - I will give Barack my full allegiance and encouragement. For the sake of the country, I wish him a successful presidency. However, as I believe a number of stated policies and proposals will be harmful to the country, I will speak in opposition to those initiatives.
 

I will applaud President-Elect Obama when he does what I believe to be the right thing. I will remain the loyal opposition where he moves in a direction to do what I believe is not. Some ask, "Will McCain supporters unite with Democrats and lead this country in a new direction?" The short answer is "That depends on WHAT the new direction IS!!"

I will offer Obama the respect due to the office of the presidency. I will not compromise my conservative principles for the sake of Kumbaya "unity". People with opposing viewpoints can respectfully disagree on policy and programs. I believe strongly that this is appropriate, and is why the founders wisely established a system of checks and balances.
 

I certainly understand the elation and pride the African American community is presently experiencing. It remains to be seen whether Obama can govern effectively, and whether he will "change" the nation for the better or the worse.

Sadly, "change" is not a policy, a program or a plan. Change for its own sake is also not automatically positive. Whenever one speaks of change, it is wise to ask, "From what, to what?"
 
If the change Obama wishes to implement is to circumvent or weaken the founders' intentional constitutional restrictions on Government, as Obama wished the Warren court would have gone further in doing (check out his own words from 2001: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck ) or if his agenda and initiatives are shaped by his socialistic background ( evidenced in my prior article: http://starboard.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/31/obamas_socialist_roots_run_deep.thtml), this would NOT be what I would consider to be "change" in a positive direction!
 
The ball is now exclusively in the Democrats and Obama's court. How they play it will determine the future of the country for better or worse for years to come. 
 
And we of the loyal opposition, conservatives in exile, will be watching, recording, remembering, and reporting.
 

Copyright © 2008 by Doug Edelman

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

An Open Letter to America's African-American Community

Posted by Doug on Monday, November 03, 2008 8:32:24 AM
First off, let me say that is truly is a great day in America when a person of color can stand at the very threshold of the presidency of the United States!  This is testimony indeed of the great strides made by our population as a whole towards a color-blind society.  We are moving past the ignorant bigotry and intolerance of previous generations.
 
With that said, however, we must now question whether the African-American community is themselves falling short of Martin Luther King's dream that one day his children would "be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
 
Barack Obama enjoys almost monolithic support (around 90%) within the black community.  Is this based on anything more than ethnic identity?  Is it any less repugnant for the black community to embrace a candidate BECAUSE he's black than it would be for the white community to OPPOSE a black candidate for the same reason?  Isn't it more appropriate to support one candidate or another based on the criteria of character, experience, policies and past performance?
 
Now, I am NOT telling you not to support Barack Obama.  I'm asking you, WHY do you support Barack Obama?  If it's nothing more than ethnic kinship, I would ask that you honestly examine both candidates on the other criteria before deciding soley on the color of a man's skin!  You KNOW what it's like to be judged on that basis!  It is no less rediculous to assign VIRTUE based on skin color than it is to presume dishonor or unworthiness soley on skin color.
 
And if you are determined to vote for a "black man" just because he IS a "black man... Have you ever realized that Obama is only 1/16 Black African, and has no "slave blood" at all?  He is 50% white.  His father was 7/8 North African Arab (think Khadaffi) and 1/8 Black African (think Mandella or Tutu).  So you are not even voting on the basis of RACE!  You're voting on the basis of high melanin pigmentation!  Would you vote for ME if I sat long enough under a sunlamp?
 
Let me appeal to your intellect.  WHY do you support Barack Obama?  For that matter, why do you support DEMOCRATS?
 
The Democrats have talked for 50 years about "the poor" and have been presumed to be the champions of the minority community.  What have they done to enable and facilitate the success of the black community?  Don't you find it DEMEANING when liberals talk about the black community as though they are incapable and must be "helped" by the "parenting" of government?  Don't you resent if people wonder whether you EARNED your degree or your position at work, or whether some Affirmative Action program elevated you above your qualifications?  Doesn't it bother you that the "soft bigotry of low expectations" permeates Democratic thought and policy when it comes to the black community?  Don't you feel taken for granted when the Democrats PRESUME upon your vote because you are expected to vote nearly unanimously to keep them in power?
 
Liberals define "compassion" by the number of dependent people they dole out meager government "help" to.  Conservatives define "compassion" by the number of people enabled to be no longer dependent and who don't need governmental help!
 
Do you realize that the most vocal OPPONENTS of the Civil Rights Act were Democrats?  Do you realize most Civil Rights Legislation would not have passed if it were not for the strong support of Republicans?  Did you know that LINCOLN, who freed the slaves, was a REPUBLICAN?  George Wallace, the segregationist, was a Democrat!
 
What has Obama done?  Can you name an accomplishment?
 
Did you know that John McCain has a long list of legislative credits, with a history of coalition building and working across the aisle?  Did you know Obama has never introduced a single piece of legislation in the Senate?
 
Does "community organizing" qualify one to be president?  What is a community organizer? - Think ACORN.  Are you concerned about ACORN's activities?  Do voter-fraud and racketeering investigations give you pause to consider that maybe there's something fishy going on there?
 
Does Rev. Wright represent your thinking?
 
Do you support abortion up to (and beyond) the moment of birth?  Would you deny medical care for an infant born alive in a failed abortion?
 
Why is it ok to pursue the American Dream... but as soon as you achieve it, it's ok for the Government to take it away from you?
 
Robbing Peter to pay Paul may sound like a great idea, if you're Paul... but isn't the one doing it nothing more than a benevolent THIEF?
 
Do you know what Socialism or Marxism is?  Do you believe it to be a BAD thing for America?  Would you recognize a Socialist when you see one?  If not, check out:  http://starboard.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/31/obamas_socialist_roots_run_deep.thtml
 
Did you know Obama views our Constitution as an OBSTACLE to his policies?  I thought the President is sworn to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution.  Obama views the RESTRICTIONS on Government placed in the Constitution by our founders to be a TRAGEDY!  Don't believe it?  Check it out:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck 
 
If the so-called "Trickle Down" theory of economics isn't valid, then why are you worried about the Wall Street Collapse, the Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis, or failures of insurance companies, banks and brokers?  Maybe it's true that when Business does poorly, EVERYONE does poorly and when business does well, EVERYONE does well.
 
Barack says his tax plans won't raise taxes on 95% of "small businesses".  What he doesn't tell you is that the 5% of small businesses that he WOULD be raising taxes on are the source of nearly EVERY new job created in the last decade!!  Sure, there are a large number of smaller businesses that make under $250K a year, but these businesses also do not employ more than a few people.  The 5% of "small businesses" (defined as those that are privately held and employ under 500 people) that WOULD experience increased tax burdens are the ones that employ 100, 200, 500 workers.  THEY have been hiring over the last decade while the big fortune 500 corporations have been simply maintaining, outsourcing or downsizing.  Do you work for an employer who is NOT on the Fortune 500 list?  HE will probably get hit in the wallet.  What happens when a small businessman sees his cost of doing business go up?  He must do one of two things.  Either he will raise the prices of his goods and services to cover the increased expenses, or he will cut his costs where he can.
 
In a down economy, raising prices may be impossible, as the market may not be able to sustain a price increase and his customers will stop buying.  If he does raise prices, that is an added cost to everyone who buys his product or service.  But if he doesn't raise prices, his options to cut costs are limited, and usually fall to workforce reduction.  YOUR JOB maybe!
 
So, if Barack wants to "soak the rich" by taxing those making over $250K - he may be costing YOU your JOB!
 
Remember, too, that the government doesn't tax "wealth" it taxes "income".  The wealthy HAVE money.  Tax policy doesn't take that away (until you die).  The wealthy make still more money by investing.  Sometimes they invest in municipal bonds, which fund local government projects like roads (that helps YOU).  Those investments are tax free.  Sometimes they invest in the Stock Market.  Those earnings are Capital Gains, which are taxed differently than ordinary income.  And those investments are the engine which enables companies to expand an create jobs.  And finally they invest OFFSHORE where the tax man doesn't get his hands on it.  Who bears the biggest burden of "Soak the Rich" policies?  The small businesses that employ the vast majority of US!
 
Are you willing to consider that while America may finally be ready to elect a black President, perhaps Barack Hussein Obama shouldn't be that one?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Socialist Roots Run Deep

Posted by Doug on Friday, October 31, 2008 5:46:38 AM
As a candidate, Barack Obama presents more questions than answers:  questionable associations, rhetorical gymnastics, style over substance, questions over experience, even questions over eligibility and citizenship.  But when it comes right down to it in the home stretch, it's all about meat & potato economic issues.  As Clinton made his mantra "It's the economy, stupid", so this election is turning on the perception of the candidates' views and plans regarding the current economic woes.
 
Recently, Obama was leading comfortably in the polls.  But then "Joe the Plumber" dropped out of the sky and breathed new life into the McCain Campaign.  So what happened?  Joe just asked a question.  It was Obama's answer that woke people up and changed the dynamic of the campaign.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDVM7ODUBn8 
 
Obama revealed a socialist agenda.  "Spreading the Wealth" is his tax policy.  (Conservatives view tax policy as a means to raise necessary revenue for necessary services.  Liberals view tax policy as a means to raise necessary revenue, and to direct behavior.  Socialists and Marxists view tax policy as a means to redistribute wealth and restructure society!)  A large portion of Americans still find socialism distasteful.
 
Robbing from Peter to pay Paul may seem like a great idea to Paul.  (And frighteningly, we have an increasing population of "baby birds" sitting in their nest waiting with their mouths wide open.)  But Peter may not think so highly of the concept.  One might dismiss his objections as he has a vested interest, but the objective observer who is neither Peter nor Paul would have to acknowledge that Robin Hood is, in reality, no more than a thief.
 
So, was the "Joe the Plumber" just an isolated statement that too much is being made of?  Hardly.  It was a crack in the armor that revealed the true core beliefs of Barack Obama, which had been well cloaked before they came to light with his answer to Joe.
 
Back in 2001, Obama lamented that the Constitution RESTRICTS Government and stands in the way of the REDISTRIBUTIVE change he'd like to make!  The audio is SHOCKING and should be heard by every voter before heading to the polls.  So here it is!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck 
 
This is not surprising, given the Socialist, Marxist, and radical bent of so many of the cloud of questionable associates swirling around Barack Obama.  While Ayers and Wright got the press, they are just the tip of the iceberg.  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1445/pub_detail.asp
 
Is it coincidental that Obama is surrounded by such a motley crew of associates?  Hardly.  In his own words from his book "Dreams of My Father":
 
To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,I chose my friends carefully.The more politically active black students.The foreign students.The Chicanos.The Marxist Professors and the structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.
 
You can hear the audio here:  http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/barack-obama-admits-i-chose-my-friends.html
 
So, since COLLEGE he's sought out Marxists and Structural Feminists?  And he chose his friends carefully?  (I refer you back to WHO are his friends!)
 
And just what IS a "Structural Feminist"?  Well, there are many different varieties and branches of feminism.  Obama was specifically drawn to the "Structural Feminists".  As explained at http://edrev.asu.edu/reviews/rev108.htm:
 
Structural feminist theory focuses on social structures, notably patriarchy and capitalism that oppress women. Theorists in this tradition emphasize the dominating influence of these social structures, but by doing so they also tend to construe women as passive. Despite their somewhat deterministic view of women's circumstances, structural feminists nevertheless call for resistance toward the mechanisms in families, schools, and workplaces that serve to reproduce oppressive relations of power.
 
So, of all the varieties of Feminism, he sought out the branch that is AntiCapitalist and Anti-Establishment.
 
Obama is and always has been a radical socialist if not Marxist.  It is who he is.  It is his foundational core. 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tax Facts!

Posted by Doug on Sunday, October 19, 2008 7:30:43 PM
 Sure, Barack Obama's associations are troubling and raise questions of his values, world view, judgment, character and honesty... and Bill Ayers isn't the half of it. 

But for so many of us today, these issues are just so much "talking heads" noise. The American public is much more focused, in this day of financial turmoil, on "meat and potatoes" issues of the economy. And the health of Wall Street isn't as significant as the "Main Street" viewpoint of "what about my job, my healthcare, my TAXES?"

The discussion of taxes occupied a prominent portion of the final debate and "Joe the Plumber" has become a phenomenon!

Unfortunately, neither candidate clearly articulated their own or their opponent's tax policies clearly or concisely enough that the casual viewer could possibly extract a lucid understanding of how their policies would or could affect U.S. It then falls to analysts and commentators to distill it all down for public consumption.

So, here are some Tax Facts to bear in mind as you evaluate the candidates and their statements on taxes.

* Remember that there are scores of taxes imposed on the American people... not just the income tax. Your net buying power is affected by the sum total of them, and not just the income tax. So if you have your income tax reduced, but taxes on the goods and services you buy increase, you may see a net reduction in your purchasing power though you have more dollars in your pocket. Moreover, if tax policies result in higher prices, this is effectively a hidden tax as your purchasing power erodes.

* 30% of Americans have no income tax liability! They pay no income tax. When Obama offers "tax relief" to 95% of the people, 1/3 of those people will get "relief" in the form of a check when they paid nothing into the system! This is classic socialistic redistribution of wealth. Obama unwittingly revealed this intent in his "Joe the Plumber" conversation.

* Even if it were so that 95% could or would receive a tax cut, the top 1% of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2% of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4% of all federal income taxes. Yes, almost 40% of all income taxes are already paid by the top 1%. Based on these numbers, is further soaking the "rich" sustainable?

* Tax cuts for the rich? You are in the top 25% of income earners if you bring in more than $62,068 a year. (Bet you didn't know that means you're rich…) The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5% of nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86%). (source) This means that the bottom 75% of earners already bear only 14% of the burden despite earning almost 1/3 of all the income. Who needs tax relief? If you're in the top 25% at $62K, how low must your income be to be considered by some to be "middle class"? Low enough to be one of those not paying income taxes at all?

* Tax cuts don't reduce federal revenues; they stimulate economic growth which results in increased revenues to the federal government! It happens every time it's tried.  Kennedy's tax cuts raised revenues. Reagan's tax cuts doubled revenues. Bush's tax cuts also increased revenues. (Spending is another issue entirely.)

* Tax breaks for corporations that send jobs overseas: The implication, of course, is that there is some policy, implemented or proposed, to reward companies for sending jobs abroad. There is not. A generalized policy toward tax relief on business in general (which would positively impact the economy as a whole) would be a tide that lifts all boats – including those who might outsource – but there is no concerted effort to inventivize shipping jobs offshore.

* On the other hand, there are dis-incentives in the tax code to bring overseas jobs back home. Removing these barriers has been painted as a "tax break" for companies who have overseas operations, even though doing so would bring these operations back home. Currently, the U.S. has the second highest tax rates on businesses in the world, something mentioned by John McCain during Wednesday’s debate. When a company has overseas operations, they pay the prevailing tax rate in the country of the operations. Here is the conundrum: Whatever the difference is between that overseas tax burden and our U.S. rates is required to be paid to the US, but is deferred as long as the operations remain overseas. Upon repatriating these operations back to the U.S., the cumulative difference is immediately due. Therefore, companies can avoid paying this accrued tax by remaining overseas. (These policies have been in place since long before George W. Bush, by the way.) If this barrier to returning home could be mitigated, many operations would be repatriated, creating domestic jobs and stimulating our economy. This could be accomplished by a moratorium on collecting the accrued difference, by allowing the accrued difference to be amortized over a number of years, or by removing the requirement to pay the difference at all. Furthermore, the current high corporate tax burden in the U.S. drives business overseas to pay the lower rates and defer the difference, so cutting the rate to a rate more competitive with the global market would keep more business at home in the first place.

* Corporations don't pay taxes? The fact is that corporations consider taxes part of their cost of doing business, and so they respond to increased taxes in one of two ways: they either increase the cost of the goods and services they provide (impacting their customer's buying power) or they reduce other costs by cutting jobs. When we say we will reduce taxes for the "middle class" and increase taxes on those earning over $250,000 (which are primarily small businesses who employ people), we will see higher prices – which reduces buying power and therefore hurts the "middle class."

Sadly, most Americans do not understand these facts, and are therefore easily swayed by eloquent "we're going to take care of you" speeches. Whenever a politician promises you a free goodie, please: ask “how?”
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Joe the Plumber: Destroy Him!!

Posted by Doug on Friday, October 17, 2008 11:28:05 AM

Isn't it interesting how predictable the American Left is? When someone scores an indisputable point against "the One", they ignore the message and attack the messenger! "Joe the Plumber" has revealed and highlighted Obama's socialistic agenda – and it's had an impact on Obama's support! So he must be destroyed.

First, we heard the immediate "I don't know any plumbers making $250,000" argument. I'm still not sure what the purpose of such a statement could possibly be, but the dismissive tone accompanying the statement is obviously intended to attempt to ridicule Joe away! But the statement is completely disingenuous, as Joe didn't even say he was a plumber, nor that he makes $250K.  He said he's considering buying a PLUMBING COMPANY, which EMPLOYS plumbers, and which GROSSES around a quarter mil. He didn't say he makes $250K. He didn't say he'd EARN 250K after buying the business. The business grosses $250K. The business pays it's employees. The business maintains its vehicles. The business buys its materials. The business pays for its office, phones and utilities. The business pays its taxes. The business pays to advertise. After all that, the business owner can take a salary.

Next the LeftMedia lights up with the accusation that Joe isn't even a registered voter. Aside from the fact that this is blatantly false… Joe is registered and voted in the OH primaries… what possible relevance would this have? I thought ACORN has, as its purpose, to get unregistered people interested, active and REGISTERED now! So here's a guy who's now very interested and engaged in the political process. We should rejoice!

So then the thugocracy dispatches their investigators to dig dirt on Joe. They claim he's not licensed… But he doesn't need one presently, and the company he works for has one! From the Toledo Blade, "According to Lucas County Building Inspection records, A. W. Newell Corp. does maintain a state plumbing license, and one with the City of Toledo, but would not be allowed to work in Lucas County outside of Toledo without a county license." Does he even need one to OWN a plumbing company that EMPLOYS plumbers?   And again, how is this relevant to Obama's Socialism?

Finally, the thugs discover that Joe has a tax lien on about $1100 he owes in back taxes. Does this mean he's not credible to ask Obama a question on the impact of his tax policies? Does this have bearing on the fact that Obama's answers reveal him to be a Robin Hood Socialist bent on redistribution of wealth? It would seem that someone struggling to meet his CURRENT tax liability would be uniquely appropriate to question how Obama's policies might make matters worse!

You may have heard the phrase, "Don't kill the messenger."  This phrase is usually attributed to the ancient Greek and then later Roman custom of employing messengers to carry news throughout the empire. The law PROTECTED these messengers, and decreed that they should be allowed to pass unharmed as they carried out their duty, even if the recipients found the message distasteful.

Sadly, Obama and his minions DO try to destroy anyone who can bring a message critical or damaging to the campaign. Live long and prosper, Joe!

Copyright © 2008 by Doug Edelman
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ayers Isn't The HALF Of It!

Posted by Doug on Monday, October 13, 2008 8:46:35 AM
The Obama defenders are complaining that William Ayers’ radical bombings in the late 1960s and early 1970s are dismissible as "old news." They declare Obama's associations to be "irrelevant." (Somehow I'm prompted to wonder what they'd say if McCain were a friend of a 1940s Nazi prison camp guard.) Yet Obama's associations are relevant, as they are in fact current news, and they speak to his judgment, character and to his political proclivities and inclinations.  And we can never forget that a man is known by the company he keeps.
 
Here is a brief accounting of over a dozen of Obama’s long-time colleagues, associates and friends.
 
Khalid al-Mansour: the anti-Semite Black Nationalist racist who changed his name from Don Marshall and converted to Islam, was a patron of Obama’s and helped advance Obama’s candidacy to law school. He was instrumental in starting the violent Black Panthers group, reportedly became Kind Saud’s attorney and represents OPEC. No wonder Obama doesn't want to drill anywhere, although he changed that tune in last Tuesday's debate in an apparent attempt to drill for votes. 
 
As an article in FrontPageMag.com reported, “And why is it that black racists such as al-Mansour constitute a significant proportion of these hate mongers? In large part, it is because blacks have been specifically and aggressively targeted for recruitment by leaders of the worldwide jihad, just as they were targeted for recruitment by the Communist Party USA in the 1920s. Black grievance, combined with the evangelism of the Nation of Islam over the last seventy years, has established an audience for the ideology of hate.”
 
It is notable that Khalid al-Mansour is an advisor and friend to Prince al-Walid bin Talal, the Saudi sheik to whom Mayor Rudy Giuliani returned a $10 million checkright after 9/11 because bin Talal stated that America brought the bloodthirsty attack on itself due to our foreign policy.
 
Rashid Khalidi: an enthusiastic supporter of the Palestinians, fervent critic of Israel (which he calls a destructive “racist” state), an admirer of suicide bombers and a driving force behind the Arab American Action Network (AAAN). This so-called pro-Palestinian “community organization” in Chicago is another beneficiary of the Obama-Ayers team at the Woods Fund. It promotes an agenda that would horrify Obama’s Jewish supporters and any normal person. In fact, both Sen. Obama and Mr. Ayers actually spoke at a testimonial dinner for Rashid Khalidi.
 
According to Jack Kelly in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “ ‘Khalidi and Obama lived in nearby faculty residential zones and the two families dined together a number of times," a source on the University of Chicago faculty told WorldNet Daily. "The Obamas even babysat the Khalidi children.”
 
Ingrid Mattson: President of the troubling Islamic Society of North America, a group named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist trial, and a woman whom Obama invited to lead prayer at the Democrat Convention, which she did.
 
Frank Marshall Davis: another of Obama's mentors mentioned in his book, a well-known Stalinist Communist whose devotion to the Soviet Union and hatred for an America which he described as racist and imperialistic put him under FBI surveillance for at least 19 years. It is quite possible that Davis did more to shape Obama’s world view than many in his entourage.

Tony Rezko: convicted felon of fraud and shady dealings, he and Obama were very close. Rezko helped get Obama a sweetheart mortgage, and he bundled tons of money for Obama’s campaign. Rezko bought property (under another sweetheart deal) to be Obama's neighbor. As of today, it appears Rezko is willing to talk to reduce his sentence.
 
William Ayers: Ayers is still today (this is not an “old news” story) an unrepentant terrorist.  He was quoted (coincidentally on September 11, 2001, in the New York Times) as being proud and unapologetic for the bombings of the Pentagon, the Capitol and the New York City Police where several police officers were murdered as a result. In fact, he stated that his only regret was that they hadn't done more.  For a smug thug like this, Sen. Obama – unbelievably – did the favor of writing a dust-jacket blurb forMr. Ayers' 2001 book, "Fugitive Days". 
 
Ayers and Obama served on the board of the Annenberg Foundation together, overseeing the expenditure of tens of millions of dollars. Currently, or rather, inexplicably, all the related records remain "unavailable."
 
Interestingly, the Annenberg Foundation runs the "Factcheck.org" site that Obama uses as his only source of "facts" on his "fight the smears" website. Why or how factcheck.org is given any mainstream media credibility as a fact source is laughable. The mainstream press should be ashamed of itself for using them.
 
Saved from jail, unfortunately, by legal technicalities, Ayers is married to Bernardine Dohrn, another Weathermen terrorist once on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List, who did serve time for refusing to testify about the death of other Weathermen when a bomb they were building blew up prematurely.  J. Edgar Hoover called her ''the most dangerous woman in America'' and ''la Pasionara of the Lunatic Left.''
 
Bernardine Dohrn, who in the 80’s worked at the same time with Michelle Obama for the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin,was also a fan of Charles Manson:
 
At a 1969 "War Council" in Flint, Michigan, Dohrn gave her most memorable and notorious speech to her followers. Holding her fingers in what became the Weatherman "fork salute," she said of the bloody murders recently committed by the Manson Family in which the pregnant actress Sharon Tate and a Folgers Coffee heiress and several other inhabitants of a Benedict Canyon mansion were brutally stabbed to death: "Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!" The "War Council" ended with a formal declaration of war against "AmeriKKKa," always spelled with three K's to signify the United States' allegedly ineradicable white racism.
 
ACORN: An organization so fraught with voter fraud they should be closed down and indicted under RICO. Where you're never too dead to vote twice. Ever wonder what a "community organizer" is?  Think ACORN.  For whom was Obama a "constitutional lawyer"? ACORN.  Currently, numerous ACORN offices are being raided by the FBI and investigated for ongoing and major voter fraud.
 
Fannie/Freddie: Obama was the number two campaign contribution recipient from Freddie and Fannie execs, behind Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd. And bear in mind, those are numbers compiled over nine years. Obama has been a senator only for four of those years and raked in almost as much dough as Dodd did in all nine years.
 
Franklin Raines/Jim Johnson: Former heads of Fannie Mae, both men were removed for impropriety. Both made tens of millions of dollars from their time at the helm, helping to pilot the economy onto the rocks. Are there two people more responsible for the current economic mess? Besides Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, they may have had more to do with creating the problem than anyone else... and they're in Obama's inner circle giving economic advice; Jim Johnson was actually chosen to vet Obama's VP Pick.
 
Rev. Wright and  Father Pfleger: radical, fervently anti-American, and anti-Semitic. The Rev. Louis Farrakhan, also an anti-Semite and black racist, was recently honored by Rev. Wright for “Lifetime Achievement”. And Obama called them mentors, friends and/or spiritual advisors. What did he learn from them over the decades of their association? And why did he not reject their views until it was politically expedient for him to do so?
 
Michelle Obama:  Mrs. Obama seems to hold radical separatist views consistent with a 20-year attendance and tutelage under Rev. Wright. Her college thesis was on assimilation vs. "the black culture,” and she was openly dismayed that so many blacks were choosing to assimilate into the American melting-pot culture. She also stated on the campaign trail that for the first time in her adult life she was proud of her country.  This, from a possible First Lady of the land.
 
From anti-American at best, to virulently anti-American and criminal anti-American at worst, this is the rag-tag crowd with whom Obama has chosen to build his career and personal relationships for the past few decades. That such a person – and crowd - could end up holding the fate and deepest secrets of our most precious jewel, America, in their hands – as well as all our futures - is deeply troubling, to say the least, and it would be an unspeakable tragedy if it were to transpire. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Goodbye USA, Hello USSA!

Posted by Doug on Monday, September 22, 2008 12:07:02 PM

Welcome to the United Socialist States of Amerika!!

The Wall Street Bailout as currently proposed is going to cost taxpayers $700 Billion. A $700 BILLION Bailout??? Half the Federal Annual Budget??

Let's see... wasn't it just 4 years ago that $87 Billion could run a WAR for a YEAR? And Congress balked at that figure ("I voted FOR the $87 Billion before I voted against it..."). What have we spent IN TOTAL on Iraq? I don't think we've gotten close to $700 Billion yet, and now they want to spend that amount on bailing out a bunch of misbehaving children on Wall Street??

I thought investors understood that they're putting their money at RISK, and that RISK was part and parcel of the opportunity for high returns! Why is it now the responsibility of the average taxpayer to bail out those who managed their money with less responsibility than a drunken sailor? (With apologies to our sober and responsible men and women at sea!)

Understand this: It was not DEREGULATION that caused this meltdown of the markets. It was Democrat Do-Gooding REGULATIONS that caused it!

When congressional pressure was brought to bear on the Mortgage Industry to put more “disadvantaged” people into houses, it became necessary to reduce the creditworthiness standards required to qualify for the loans – as these people could not qualify under reasonable risk assessments for conventional lending at the time. So money became cheaper, and the “sub-prime” mortgage market was created with relaxed creditworthiness requirements. Teaser rates were offered to get people INTO houses they couldn’t afford. Adjustable rate mortgages were originated, making money for brokers – and then sold off to bigger players like Countrywide. With Fannie and Freddie saying “Go, Go, GO” while relying on government backing. This house of cards was BUILT by the Democrats trying to put unqualified people into houses. The Democrats could not abide the reality that SOME PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD HOUSES! To them, the right to homeownership meant more than the right to purchase what you can AFFORD to buy. For these utopian dreamers, the right to home ownership was akin to the right to an attorney… “If you so desire and cannot afford, one will be provided for you…”

It is a fascinating exercise to lay Obama next to McCain on the issue of the collapse of Fannie/Freddie...

From Barack Obama:

We're told that the current financial crisis and the collapse/bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the result of "Bush/McCain Policies."

It seems like all he has to offer is to paint McCain as Bush 44... and exploit Bush Derangement Syndrome!

(Isn’t it interesting to note that behind Sen Dodd - the chairman of the powerful banking committee - Barack Obama received more money from Fannie/Freddie than any other lawmaker of the over 300 who received contributions between 1989 and 2008... and Obama was only in the Senate for 3 of those years!)

On the other hand; John McCain, who has never taken an earmark and has campaigned actively against them, sought to reign in the abuses of Fanny/Freddie in 2005 by co-sponsoring the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 1 90 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190 - which was shot down by Democrat resistance!

Note his statement from the Congressional Record, quoted below, in support of the Bill. Seems he had a crystal ball!! (This from a guy who stated self-effacingly that he doesn't understand the economy as well as he'd like! If only more people understood it as well as he does!)

Statement by John McCain (R-AZ) May 25, 2006

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

 

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

 

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

 

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

 

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 1 90 <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190> , to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

 

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

Think about this for a moment. Suppose you are a family earning $100,000 a year. You are $400,000 in debt including your mortgage. You live paycheck to paycheck, meeting current expenses and making payments on your debt – and putting money into savings or investments is a nice goal, but hardly a reality. You have a wild and irresponsible child who has run himself into $50,000 debt with drunken gambling. You then take a loan to hand him a $50,000 check to bail him out.

Is that SANE?? Yet that’s exactly what we, as taxpayers, are about to do if the proposed bailout goes through!

Our Manufacturing Industry has already been taxed and regulated into moving off-shore. Maxine Waters revealed that she wants to take over the Oil Industry. Hillary wants to take over the Health Care Industry. And now the Financial Industry is in the process of being taken over. Socialism IS conquering us!

Paulson and Bernake are about to END the USA as we knew it. Good bye, America... you've had a nice run.

Property values in New Zealand are now going to climb thru the roof!

Copyright © 2008 by Doug Edelman

Doug Edelman is a conservative political commentator and a contributing editor for The Conservative Voice.  His work is also seen on News By Us, The American Daily, The Post Chronicle, New Media Journal, Capitol Hill Coffee House etc. For the support of his family, however, he is also an IT Consultant/Contractor and owner of a Computer Services Business.  He has taught PC Maintenance & Repair and Networking at his local Community College, and maintains a blog at http://edeldoug.blogs.com/. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ADVISORY; Political Storm Obama

Posted by Doug on Thursday, July 24, 2008 4:55:08 AM

ADVISORY: Political Storm Obama

 

Disclaimer: This piece is political humor and parody. (I don’t want any misunderstandings like the New Yorker recently experienced!)
 
Dateline: July 2008
 
The National Climate Agency has been tracking a new political storm which is rapidly becoming so powerful it threatens to change the landscape of the entire nation! Political Storm Obama is predicted by some to make landfall in November, triggering potential landslides. Some are calling this a history maker.
 
First, some background on this gathering storm:
 
Political Storm Obama first formed off Africa as a minor depression.  This is the first time such a storm originated from there. Then it loitered as it did some organizing before rapidly moving to the left of the Congressional Isle.
 
There, it spun aimlessly for a time – gaining strength and drifting ever further left.
 
Recently Obama’s track has become more difficult to predict, as it seems to zig and zag randomly left and right… even paying a visit to the Middle East.
 
Fortunately, not too much damage was done there. Some fear a return visit – but strangely, others would welcome one, saying Obama might help their efforts to scour the eastern Mediterranean coast of what they classify as pollutants.
 
But for now, Obama continues its leftward path toward Washington, and if predictions hold and Obama continues on its present track, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will take a direct hit on January 20. Damage is expected to be severe.
 
Despite coming ashore in the Nation’s Capitol – risk assessments are indicating widespread danger to refineries, offshore oil rigs in the Gulf, Nuclear Power Plants nationwide, and coal mines ranging from West Virginia to Wyoming! This storm threatens our very way of life and could return us to the days of beeswax candles and buggy whips if it unleashes its full fury! Healthcare providers are anticipating being taxed beyond their limits. Utilities are also nervous about their ability to continue to provide adequate service.
 
Citizens are urged to prepare by stocking up on non-perishable food, firewood, and antidepressants. They may need to hunker down for an extended period.
 
Some contrarian forecasters did try to offer an alternative, more optimistic scenario: that Obama would run out of steam before coming ashore. This scenario is generally ridiculed by the mainstream.
 
All agree, however, that while Obama’s track may waffle a bit, a real turn to the right is virtually impossible.
 
Copyright © 2008 by Doug Edelman
 

Doug Edelman is a conservative political commentator and a contributing editor for The Conservative Voice.  His work is also seen on News By Us, The American Daily, The Post Chronicle, New Media Journal, Capitol Hill Coffee House etc. For the support of his family, however, he is also an IT Consultant/Contractor and owner of a Computer Services Business.  He has taught PC Maintenance & Repair and Networking at his local Community College, and maintains a blog at http://edeldoug.blogs.com/. 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »