Friday, October 31, 2008

A Word About Obama and Marxism

Many of you might be wondering if I've gone off the deep end by drawing a connection between what appears to be our future president in Barack Obama, and Marxism. Even Obama himself has been mocking such comparisons, aided and abetted by his fawning media.

The problem is that Obama has no one to blame but himself for such perceptions. Quite frankly, the perception could indeed be reality if you just look at the man's associations, as well as his own writings and public statements. Why people don't get it is astounding.

Obama's church teaches Black Liberation Theology, a known Marxist philosophy. He was there and absorbed Rev. Jeremiah Wright's rantings for 20 years. Obama's closest associates -- despite his current denials -- are among the most hardcore left Marxists possible. Read the philosophy of the Weather Underground and William Ayers and find out for yourself. As an FBI plant within the Weather Underground said in his testimony, this group of radicals fully expected to "eliminate" about 25 million Americans should they eventually grasp the levers of power. All because this huge number of people would be too resistant to the Marxist takeover of our nation. It's all on the record.

Out of Obama's own mouth on National Public Radio, he openly talked about redistribution of wealth --a key Marxist-Socialist principle. He openly criticized America's Founding Fathers and called our Constitution flawed from the beginning. He criticized the liberal Warren Court for not being liberal enough, and for not being willing to sidestep or "reinterpret" the Constitution to advance leftist goals.

Addendum as of 12:32 p.m. I should have also mentioned how, in his writings, Obama openly confessed to cultivating friendships among ultra-left and Marxist professors etc. while in college. He actually used the term "Marxist." Shouldn't that raise a few eyebrows, at a minimum?

Again, it's all on the record for anyone to see if they're willing. But they're not willing. They don't want to see it, or they gloss it over because they've been seduced.

Should he be elected to the presidency, will Obama succeed through smooth talk to transform this nation into a dictatorship of the proletariat? It's hard to say. Once I would have said "no way," but today I am not so sure. He'd have a Congress ready to march in lockstep with him. I am sure there would be roadblocks and resistance in some quarters, but I really fear much of the nation has gone to sleep or are so indolent that they'll let it happen. Interesting things can happen if there is suddenly a national state of emergency.

Just the fact that we're willing to elect someone to the Oval Office who holds, or is strongly influenced by, those philosophies is troubling enough.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Sowell: Obama Presidency Would Be Tragedy

African-American scholar Dr. Thomas Sowell is usually a prescient man, and I always enjoy reading him. In this column, Dr. Sowell sounds a serious warning about electing Barack Obama to the White House.

I can imagine the hate from the far left will start pouring into his mailbox shortly.

P.S. Here's more words of wisdom from David Kupelian.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

The People's Republic of Amerika?

I posted the comment below on my friend Robert's blog, and liked my point so much that I decided to repost it here.

I find it tragic that more people don't seem to be aware of -- or care about -- the very clear trail of Marxist/Communist influence and ideology with Obama. The mainstream media bears a lot of responsibility for this, but the American public also bears responsibility because they don't exercise due diligence. Instead, they look at you like you're crazy, despite the fact that you can prove it in their own comments and writings.

Ronald Reagan defeated communism and ended the Cold War without firing a shot, and here we're about to let a bunch of radical Marxists take over in the United States and do what Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko and Gorbachev only dreamed of doing.

What would the Gipper think of us now?

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Rush Limbaugh Confirms An Old Suspicion

On Greta Van Susteren's program yesterday evening, Rush Limbaugh revealed something about establishment Republicans that I have long suspected and have told people privately for a long time.

He was at a party attended by a bunch of GOP bigwigs (at the Hamptons), when a man came up to him and said, "What are we going to do about these Christians in the Republican Party? They're killing us!"

Rush responded with incredulity, saying quite rightly that this man was dismissing 25 million voters with such a statement. They discussed the reasons that the man felt that way, but the key thing is that this attitude was held.

I've said for years that the Eastern Establishment GOP has long yearned for Christian influence in the party to wane, and that might well cause them to help sabotage truly conservative candidates.

Well, they could well be about to get their wish, and then some. Just wait until they've lived through an Obama Administration and a radical left Congress for a few years.

Monday, October 27, 2008

Is Anybody Listening About Obama?

As this clip -- first highlighted by Matt Drudge -- reveals, Barack Obama is pretty clear about his redistributionist views. The clip is from a 2001 interview on Public Radio.

What's even more amazing is Obama's view of our Constitution. It's outdated and gets in the way of his grand schemes to remake this country in the socialist/Marxist image from the ground up. I've always been aggravated with liberals and their view of a "living, breathing document" (read that to mean bend me, shape me, anyway you want me), but Obama goes much further than that.

Rather than revering the wisdom of our Founding Fathers and the remarkable foundation that they left us, Obama apparently thinks they made a huge mistake, and that their hard labors need to be trashed. Think the mainstream media will draw attention to that? I doubt it.

All I can say at this point is that if this country is stupid enough to elect this radical, this country deserves just what it's going to get. I would laugh, but it's really not very funny. The thought of the United States becoming like a Warsaw Pact nation doesn't fill me with very much pleasure.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

God Is Still On The Throne

It is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men and knowledge to men of understanding (Daniel 2:21).

With our nation (and world) in such turmoil, I think it's important on this Lord's Day to remember that we serve a sovereign God who is firmly in control of the affairs of His universe. Believers are never guaranteed a rose garden, but we do have His guarantee that He will never leave or forsake us. He will ultimately see us safely through whatever crisis arises. We have the opportunity to serve and glorify Him in the presence of His enemies. We have the opportunity to demonstrate before a skeptical world the peace that passes understanding.

The results are in His hands.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Barney Fife (Frank) Strikes Again

Oh, Barney.

This morning, the news broke that Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass) wants to cut defense spending by 25%. A huge cut in defense when we're in the middle of a two-front war, and while Barack Obama's running mate is guaranteeing an international crisis in the first months of Obama's term -- should he be elected. Brilliant, isn't it?

This is the same Barney Frank whose gay lover was running a call-boy operation out of Frank's house a number of years ago. It is the same Barney Frank who, along with Chris Dodd, helped push the low-income loan scheme that snowballed into the current financial crisis . . . and the same Barney Frank who apparently had another former gay lover who was an executive with Fannie Mae. Talk about a conflict of interest.

Why this national disgrace keeps getting elected is beyond me. If he was just affecting his home state of Massachusetts, I guess it wouldn't bug me as much because they get what they pay for. However, Frank's moronic behavior and views are impacting the entire nation.

He should have been removed from office long ago. Jail wouldn't be a bad idea, either.

Friday, October 24, 2008

More Hate

This is the latest in connection with my interrupted "vacation" post Tuesday. Sad and troubling.

Note the way the media headlined the story with "inconsistencies" in the young McCain volunteer's story. Take a look at her black and blue face. I wouldn't be surprised in the least that she had inconsistencies. But the media must try to discredit anyone who opposes Barack Obama. Sometimes they try it head on, other times they are more subtle.


Update: It appears now that this young woman did indeed make up the story. That's more than sad and shameful because the Democrats will now milk this for all it's worth. Almost makes me wonder if the woman really was a McCain supporter.

Regardless, my main point still stands -- the media continue their shilling for Obama. Even if the story had been true, they still would have highlighted the inconsistencies to throw doubt on the story. They do it all the time.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

"Hate" Demands an Interruption . . .

I wasn't going to do it, but I had to. Even though my "vacation" isn't really a pleasure trip (long story), I did intend to ignore politics and current events as much as possible. Well, it wasn't possible. I have to rant.

I've been watching things as the election draws nearer, and we're hearing a lot of caterwauling about "hate" and "ugly politics." Interesting how telling the truth about a candidate or asking legitimate questions gets called "ugly" and a "smear campaign," but what else is new?

Barack Obama's supporters are squealing loudly because questions are being raised about his radical associations. We're raising questions, but how are they acting? Let's review some of the news stories in recent days.

A McCain supporter gets feces thrown in the bed of his truck by an Obama-supporting neighbor. Obama-supporting officials in Missouri threaten people with legal action for raising questions about Obama. Vicious slurs about Sarah Palin's family, including who fathered her children. Officials are forced to investigate alleged ACORN voter registration fraud in several states, while ACORN representatives openly say they're pushing Obama despite their official non-partisan status.

Pro-Obama entertainers vilify, smear, insult, and get outright vulgar -- if not obscene -- toward McCain, Palin and conservatives in general. Christian conservatives especially are on the receiving end of vile attacks.

Who is hating who here? In general, you're not going to find these types of vulgar, hateful, and not to mention false, smears coming from traditional conservatives. The genuine hate and outright vulgarity is coming from the left, in droves.

Make no mistake. They are bound and determined to win this election by hook or by crook. And not only that. They are on a bloodlust for revenge. President Bush's Electoral College win in 2000 has festered and gone to gangrene. The conservative takeover of Congress in 1994 has been festering with them even longer than that.

The left truly believes that they are entitled to power. Deny them that power, and they're angry. Resentful. Vengeful. Outraged. How dare you stand in the way of their Utopian Brave New World?

They view us as the great unwashed. We can't govern ourselves. We need them to govern us, you see. They think -- as does Obama -- that we are hillrod rubes clinging to our faith and our guns.

Our money belongs to them for redistribution as they see fit. They think they have the right to dictate every aspect of our lives and our commerce. They really don't like private enterprise all that much, only as much as it helps to enrich government coffers. The Constitution is an inconvenience unless they can morph what it says like Silly Putty. That's why postmodern concepts of truth are so popular with this crowd.

And they really, REALLY hate traditional, biblical faith. Liberation Theology or liberal "Christianity" they don't mind, because it is no threat to them. Such theology has nothing to say about moral issues such as homosexuality or abortion, other than they are to be celebrated. In fact, both Liberation Theology and liberal "Christianity" are socialist/Marxist-friendly, and are usable as means to an end. The real hardcore leftists (they're basically communists, but we can't say that) consider these fellow-travelers useful idiots. They're usually the first ones shot when the radicals come to power, along with intellectuals and entertainers.

The radical left is intent on doing whatever they have to do to silence, smear and discredit their traditional, conservative opponents once and for all. If Obama wins and the Democrats capture both houses of Congress in sufficient numbers, Katie bar the door. Expect them to crack down on alternate views, talk radio, the Internet, and any other voice that opposes their agenda. No other views are tolerable.

Expect even worse outrages in public schools and universities. You see, you don't have the right to direct your children's upbringing. Your children aren't yours. They're the property of the liberal state. Better teach them and govern them according to orders, or they'll probably be taken away. You might even get sent to mandated re-education yourself. Don't think it can happen? Think "sensitivity training."

You wanted change, America? You're about to get it.

Don't say you weren't warned.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

On "Vacation"

I have to be away until the end of this week. The Seventh Sola will resume around October 25th or so.

Have a great week.

Friday, October 17, 2008

David Limbaugh Says the "S" Word

Kudos to David Limbaugh, who penned this column today on the subject of Barack Obama's socialism and its implications for the country.

I don't know why only a select few have been willing to openly say socialism in connection with Obama. I'd go even further and say "Marxism." Yeah, I know. The media and Obama would try to conjure up images of McCarthyism and the so-called "witchhunts" of the 1950s. Unfortunately, history has shown that many of the witchhunts found some real witches with red underwear. Also, Obama's Marxist sympathies and influences are open and abundant. Only in today's Alice in Wonderland media can people so easily deny the obvious even when the obvious is blazing forth with arc light and neon.

Anyway, good on you today, David!

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Taking Control Again . . . Starting With Debates

First, I apologize for my dearth of posts lately -- not in number, but in substance. I have been so busy of late that I haven't had time for writing of this nature. I've posted a lot of clips, nuggets and links, but my own commentary has been rather sparse.

Next week, I will be out of town and my posts will be even more sparse for a while. Hopefully things will settle down in time and I can make this blog more of what I intended it to be. But until then . . .

I've been pretty riled this election season, for a host of reasons. It bothers me to see the country I love about to commit national suicide. But, as Kurt Vonnegut once said, "so it goes." Right now, I want to talk about the so-called "debates" on the eve of the last one this season.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. These are not debates. These are glorified news conferences governed by a biased media and a ridiculous "Debate Commission." The talking points are well rehearsed, and you can get very little of substance out of any of the candidates.

In future, I would like to see the public demand a real debate in real time. Take it away from the news media "moderators." Take it away from the "Commission." The two candidates going at it one on one as it was done with the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates. Here were the rules as they were back then:

The format for each debate was: one candidate spoke for 60 minutes, then the other candidate spoke for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate was allowed a 30-minute "rejoinder." The candidates alternated speaking first. As the incumbent, Douglas spoke first in four of the debates.

No one knew what would be said in advance. There were no moderators to pick questions and steer the discussion. No one was concerned about time. And people actually paid attention.

Oh, yes. I can hear the caterwauling and objections already. The media won't like it. The public won't like it. They can't pay attention that long. It won't work in today's society.

Too bad. Do it anyway. If people want to know badly enough, they'll listen. And if they don't listen, they'll pay the piper later to the point that they'll listen the next time around.

And there should be some sort of sanction for media that don't report fairly or accurately. I'm really sick of the media, and I say that as a former "media."

But then, I'm a meanie.

P.S. By the way, everyone talks about polls and what they show. I've never been called for a poll in an election. Most of the people I know have never been called for a poll in an election. Who is being polled and where?

Don't you find that curious?

Here's to the Presidents of Smaller Banks . . .

Check this article out. In essence, the smaller banks who are in decent financial shape don't want federal handouts or interference in their business. If it isn't broken in their case, don't fix it, in other words.

But the feds are insistent, it appears. Not satisfied with wrecking havoc with the big boys, they have to get their hooks into our local financial institutions who have been largely very prudent.

I am beginning to think we need another Boston Tea Party.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Obama and Marx: Need I Say More?

Dialogue between Barack Obama and a plumber:

PLUMBER: Why are you going to raise my taxes?"
OBAMA: "We want to spread the wealth around a little."


From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. (redistribution of wealth)

I don't have time to give lessons on communism, the Communist Manifesto or Marxism. I can say this quickly enough. I have personally visited former communist countries where Marx's principles were lived out in all their oppressive glory. They gain power by playing on class warfare and demagoguery. Then, after they take power, the people know nothing but oppression and poverty. Communism doesn't work.

Do we really, really want that here?

Monday, October 13, 2008

Michael Barone - The Coming Thugocracy

If there was a must-read article today, this is it. Written by the respected Michael Barone, it is a sober warning about what liberals really think of free speech, and how Barack "The One" Obama's acolytes are out to get anyone who dissents.

Spread the word.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Oscar Wilde and the Emergent Church

Every time I see the following dialogue in Oscar Wilde's play, "The Importance of Being Earnest," I can't help but think of some clerics in the Emergent Church. The scene is where Jack announces the death of his fake profligate brother, Ernest. The local Anglican priest, Dr. Chasuble, offers to make application in his Sunday sermon . . .

JACK: He seems to have expressed a desire to be buried in Paris.

CHASUBLE: I fear that hardly points to any very serious state of mind at the last. You no doubt would wish me to make some slight allusion to this tragic domestic affliction next Sunday. (Jack presses his hand convulsively) My sermon on the meaning of the manna in the wilderness can be adapted to almost any occasion, joyful, or, as in the present case, distressing. (All sigh) I have preached it at harvest celebrations, christenings, confirmations, on days of humiliation and festal days. The last time I delivered it was in the Cathedral, as a charity sermon on behalf of the Society for the Prevention of Discontent among the Upper Orders. The Bishop, who was present, was much struck by some of the anologies I drew.

Rich, isn't it?

Saturday, October 11, 2008

The Final Question

. . . you have been weighed on the scales and found deficient (Daniel 5:27).

I've been watching a lot of politics lately, as most of us have. Aside to those stories, I keep hearing a litany of ugly news. Courts upholding homosexual marriage. Government bailouts. Voter fraud. The beat goes on.

I guess I have to ask America some serious questions.

Do you really want socialism?

Do you really want a Marxist elected president?

Do you want an overwhelming majority of Marxist socialists in charge of Congress (including the Senate)?

Do you really want homosexuality recognized as a civil right?

Do you really want the government deciding how you raise your children, what health care you're allowed to have, what you can and can't say politically, what you can eat and every other potential nanny state idea out there? I could go on with this, but you get the idea.

I wish I could just blame Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Barney Sodomite (I mean Frank), Chris Dodd and the rest. But limp-wristed Republicans are just as much to blame. Republicans are supposed to be the free market, individual liberty, traditional morals party. Republicans are supposed to be against global government and in favor of national sovereignty. But here we have Republicans and supposed conservatives in favor of nationalizing industry, our financial system and the economy. Everyone seems to want the New World Order these days.

Folks, better wake up. You're about to lose your country.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Thursday, October 09, 2008

McDonalds Boycott Ends

As I made a post commenting on the beginning of the McDonald's boycott (launched because they stepped into open advocacy of the homosexual movement), I felt I should make another one because the boycott has now been called off by the American Family Association and other concerned groups. Here is founder Don Wildmon's announcement:

AFA ends boycott: McDonald's agrees to changes

October 9, 2008

Great news! Because of AFA supporters like you, McDonald’s has told AFA they will remain neutral in the culture war regarding homosexual marriage. AFA is ending the boycott of McDonald’s. As you know, AFA called for the boycott in May after McDonald’s joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC).

McDonald’s said McDonald’s Vice President Richard Ellis has resigned his position on the board of NGLCC and that his seat on the board will not be replaced. McDonald’s also said that the company has no plans to renew their membership in NGLCC when it expires in December.

In an e-mail to McDonald’s franchised owners the company said, “It is our policy to not be involved in political and social issues. McDonald’s remains neutral on same sex marriage or any ‘homosexual agenda’ as defined by the American Family Association.”

We appreciate the decision by McDonald’s to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations. You might want to thank your local McDonald’s manager.

I think the point needs to be stressed again. This had nothing to do with discrimination on hiring homosexuals or allowing them to patronize the restaurant chain. This had everything to do with the McDonald's Corporation openly advocating and funding advocacy of the movement. Big difference.

While this might seem to be a victory, I wouldn't let the guard down. These people (the gay rights movement) are persistent and militant. They won't give up.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Debate? What Debate?

I am apparently not the only one who thought last night's "debate" between John McCain and Barack Obama was a disappointment. I could have debated Obama more effectively and with much sharper rejoinders than McCain used. He missed so many opportunities to pop Obama's bubble.

What McCain Should Have Said

Here's just one example of a missed opportunity. Obama disdained George Bush for telling people to "go shop" after 9-11. I yelled at the television, and yelled even louder when McCain let it pass. Here's what I would have said . . .

Here again, Senator Obama shows his naivete in dealing with incidents such as September 11th on the world stage. The reason President Bush told people that was to send a strong message to the terrorists. "We will not allow you to change our way of life through fear and terror. We will continue on as we have with our normal lives. You will not win." If Mr. Obama doesn't understand even this simplest of concepts -- often proven by the Israelis and the British when subjected to terrorist attacks -- how can we expect him to understand even more complex situations. Barack Obama is not ready to be the president of the United States."

But no. McCain missed the opportunity, and a whole host of others. It really isn't that difficult.

I am afraid that this Bob Dole reprise is throwing the election away handily. May God grant us a miracle.

Obama and the Strategy - A Manufactured Crisis

If you don't read any other political article, you've got to read this!

It is a longer article, but it is sobering and meticulously researched. After you read it, think long and hard if you really want Barack Obama in the White House, not to mention the rest of the hard-left Democrats.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Where Are We Failing?

Note: This article is from the general director of SGA/UK. He graciously allowed me to reproduce it here at The Seventh Sola. A very timely word.

By William Smylie

As we view the church scene at home, and in some places abroad, it would generally be agreed that it is failing to make a significant impact on society. There is much activity and organisation, yet the fruit and influence are minimal.

Amazingly, in trying to analyse why this is so, some look back to the times of Wesley, Whitfield, Spurgeon, and in more recent times, Dr Martyn Lloyd Jones, and use them as scapegoats for the ills of the church of our day. They maintain that these servants of God failed to prepare the church for the future, by failing to lay sound foundations and were only interested in getting their own generations into the kingdom. Blaming the past is to level accusations against servants of God. The reality is that by any standards their ministries, under God, were exceptionally fruitful in their generations, as they brought the Gospel to multitudes and society was impacted as a result.

Instead of learning important spiritual lessons from them, and being inspired to look to the Lord prayerfully and expectantly that He would be pleased to bestow His blessing upon us as He did upon them, their critics fail themselves to address the real cause of our present situation … the weakness of preaching in our day. The preachers of past generations were not afraid to name and confront the sins of their day and preach against them. Today when sin is mentioned, if it is mentioned at all, it is spoken of in a doctrinal way, thus giving a theoretical adherence to its existence.

There may even be a willingness to emphasise that the Lord Jesus died as a sacrifice for sin, which is of course correct, but too often there is a failure to enunciate what sin is in the individual life. Seldom do we hear evangelicals speak out against the immorality and greed of our day. That is not to say that they are worse than other sins but they are sins that are rampant in today’s church.

What we see instead is that such sin is often ignored, even condoned, to the point that it has become accepted as the norm and part of church life in today’s society. Surely we need to get back to the reality of calling sin what it is … SIN, and sending out a clarion call to repentance, not only to the sinner but also to Christians.

In reading the biographies of Godly men of past generations, and the history of their period of the Christian church, we cannot fail to notice that their strong stand against, and intolerance of sin, brought about deep conviction and true repentance. Our predicament stems, not from failure on the part of these men of past generations, but from our failure in departing from their teaching and stance against sin.

Let us not be those who blame past faithful servants of God for our barren spiritual situation today, but let us return to true faithful preaching against sin without fear or favour. Every generation of Christians has a responsibility to their own generation.

We have that responsibility to our generation.

Monday, October 06, 2008

Young Conservatives? What Conservatives?

Take a good look at this USA Today front page article. The article grabbed me from the outset with this . . .

Some voters under 30 are conservatives. An equal number are liberals. But a striking majority of the Millennial generation agrees on one thing: who should be the next president.

A USA TODAY/MTV/Gallup Poll of registered voters 18 to 29 years old shows Democrat Barack Obama leading Republican John McCain by 61%-32%, the most lopsided contest within an age group in any presidential election in modern times. Obama's margin is overwhelming across four groups of younger voters, divided by their engagement in the election, their optimism about the future and other factors.

First, let's review the math. "Some" under 30 are conservatives. An equal number are liberals. But 61% of voters 18 to 29 want to put Obama in the White House? If that is the case, those young skulls full of mush are NOT conservatives.

Let me be clear. I don't think all young people are "skulls full of mush." Far fromt it. Many think quite deeply despite the lack of years under their belts. The Apostle Paul encouraged Timothy not to let people despise him because of his youth. There are many fine young conservatives out there who are intent on making a difference. I think of the folks at Rebelution. I think of Palm Boy and his friends over at Pushing Back the Frontiers of Ignorance. I should note that they are all Christians as well as conservatives. But for our purposes, I am emphasizing "conservatives."

There is no way a genuine conservative who is sound on his or her principles will be voting for Barack Obama. Barack Obama is the diametric opposite of everything conservatives stand for. Voting for Barack Obama in tandem with a leftist, Democratic Congress will ensure the conservative movement gets set back generations.

This article makes much of the idea that Obama "understands this generation" better than John McCain. He certainly must, because if this story is accurate, he's managed to push the right buttons and con a lot of young people excited by the rock star aura of the candidate. They're so excited that they're failing to think about the ramifications of what they're about to do.

Just why this sort of political tsunami is taking place -- if it is -- will merit much study. Perhaps it might be because traditional American history and values increasingly aren't taught in public schools or universities without disdain. Perhaps it might be because we have an increasingly me-first, self-centered generation (and plenty of baby boomers fit that description, believe me). Perhaps it's the influence of the media and rock stars, the majority of which sing the leftist song and dance. Perhaps it's because conservative leaders in Congress and the White House stopped governing like conservatives and failed to lead by true conservative principles. That might have made the younger generation think those values are bankrupt. They're not. They just weren't followed.

I'm sure there are many factors. But in a nutshell, this country is about to make a very, very profound mistake.

You want higher taxes? You want lax national security? You want genuine loss of freedom? You want Islam to have a deeper root in our society? You want socialized medicine and all that entails? You want America governed by values foreign to our society and foreign to our founding principles? Okay. Push the button for Obama. Go right ahead. You'll be sorry in the long run.

You've been warned.

Obama and Chicago Politics

This is today's must-read column. In it, John Kass of the Chicago Tribune draws a pretty clear picture of what lies behind Barack Obama's meteoric ascent to the top of the political world.

Take it from an Illinois resident. You don't want Chicago politics running the country.

Sunday, October 05, 2008

What Went Wrong Economically - Diana West

Washington Times columnist Diana West recently wrote a book (pictured) called "The Death of the Grown-up." The excerpts I've seen are pretty salient in their analysis, so when I saw that Diana had written a column about the economy this weekend, I knew it would be pretty good. Here are some excerpts . . .

The fact is, if American citizens become too widely acquainted with the fact that race-based social engineering virtually created the sub-prime mortgage industry that has turned the U.S. economy into the Titanic, Obama will sink in the polls. That's because race-based social engineering is what Obama both advanced as a so-called community organizer, and later funded as an official of Chicago's Woods Fund, where he served alongside unrepentant terrorist and political ally William Ayers -- another phantom political fact citizens now pondering their presidential votes are not supposed to consider.

But I digress. The question is, how exactly did the government overlay of race-based goals onto the real estate marketplace help create the sub-prime mortgage industry, which, having imploded, triggered the current economic crisis, and what did Obama have to do with it?

The answer goes back to one of those totalitarian drawing boards where social engineers draft their human havoc. Not "enough" minorities owned homes, the social engineers decided, because not "enough" minorities were eligible for mortgages, the social engineers concluded. Therefore, in the bean-counting name of what "should" be, the social engineers effectively junked all bottom-line, non-racial markers of mortgage eligibility, from steady employment and clean credit to the all important down payment, that banks have traditionally relied on to determine the difference between a good and a bad credit risk. This paved the way for increasingly unconventional "sub-prime" loans for all (including rubber check-writing deadbeats, speculators and novices-in-over-their-heads of all races). The social engineers claimed victory for what they called "affordable housing" — which also paradoxically created a vast market of extremely unaffordable housing — but it was just a house of cards. The real estate bubble popped, the bad loans came crashing down, and the world markets came tumbling after."

There is more of the same brilliant analysis in Diana's column. She quotes Stanley Kurtz's work in exposing the techniques of "community organizers" in intimidating banks into making bad loans . . .

"In the name of fairness to minorities, community organizers occupy private offices, chant inside bank lobbies, and confront executives at their homes -- and thereby force financial institutions to direct hundreds of millions of dollars in mortgages to low credit customers." He continued, "In other words, community organizers help to undermine the U.S. economy by pushing the banking system into a sinkhole of bad loans. And Obama has spent years training and funding the organizers who do it."

Folks, this is right out of the communist playbook. And lest you try and compare us to wild-eyed right-wing vigilantes, all you have to do is read The Communist Manifesto and other writings by radical Marxists. It's right there, in their own words. They have an interest in the capitalistic system's destruction, all so they can force through their little socialist utopia. They don't care how it gets done either. The end justifies the means, in their view.

Why did the banks or office executives not have security pounce on these clowns like ducks on June bugs? They should have been ejected, and I mean forcefully. They should have been prosecuted, and their sending organizations -- be it ACORN or any other radical leftist group -- should have been sued into bankruptcy. It's time to get very, very tough with nonsense like this. We're paying the price now for closing our eyes to it for so long.

Just wait until ACORN and these groups help push through a fraudulent election. If you think it's bad now, just wait until you have a radical left president aided and abetted by a radical left Congress.

Saturday, October 04, 2008

A Bit of Populism

This was so good I had to pass it on. Enjoy!


545 PEOPLE - By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement lam not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom
They can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

1. You can send this to everyone in your address book, and hope they do something about it.

2. You can agree to vote against everyone that is currently in office, knowing that the process will take several years.

3 You can decide to run for office yourself and agree to do the job properly.

4. Lastly, you can sit back and do nothing, or re-elect the current bunch.

Friday, October 03, 2008

The Palin-Biden Debate and Media Spin

Just when you thought you were irritated enough at the media, here comes this little bit of reportage. What irks me about it is this. If you read the article, you'd come away thinking Joe Biden defeated Sarah Palin in last night's debate. The AP uses two polls -- one from CNN and the other from CBS -- to reach that conclusion. Funny, but when you look at other polls, you get a different conclusion.

Isn't it also interesting that when people registered their viewpoints by calls, text messages, and especially focus groups broadcast live on television — places where the results couldn't readily be filtered by interested individuals — Sarah Palin gets the nod as having won the debate.

You see, the media think that Obama is god, and they're going to ram him down our throats whether we want him or not. Don't get me wrong. I think Joe Biden performed well and didn't make any of the gaffes he usually makes. But Sarah Palin could have left the Delaware senator in a gibbering heap, and it wouldn't have mattered one iota to the media. They can't give Palin anything more than the damnation of faint praise.

Between the Iron Curtain of a hostile left wing media, and groups like ACORN and others intent on gaming the voting booth, it is obvious that the left is going all out to make sure they win this time.

If they do, we'll be sorry. Big time.

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Bailout? Is That What It Is?

By now, I imagine most of you are sick of watching our beknighted lawmakers deal with the financial crisis. The concerns I have about this whole affair have been expressed by many others, and it seems like no one is listening.

1. The Democrats deserve to have this tar baby glued to them, along with a lot of feathers. They have been the main driving forces behind Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and their cronies in those institutions have made an awful lot of money. They helped push financial institutions into making politically correct bad loans for the purposes of social engineering and getting the votes of minorities. And we're going to trust Barney Frank and Chris Dodd to lead the charge in cleaning this up?

2. Congress, led by the Democrats, is using this situation and the bailout legislation to add on all sorts of things they probably couldn't get otherwise. Bush ought to veto the legislation unless they send him a clean bill.

3. The bill ought to be dominated by free market solutions and stiff accountability measures. There ought to be prosecutions, and some of these fat cats who gamed the system and led their institutions to ruin ought to be forced to pay restitution.

All these are just the basics. I am no economist, but I think the things that helped cause this situation are obvious to anyone willing to look closely enough.

Another thing. This is old stuff when it comes to politicians, but it still makes me mad. I have heard ad nauseum that the only reason many politicians voted against this bailout the first time is because they face re-election. In other words, if they weren't up for re-election, they'd ignore their constituents and pass the bill? If that's how they listen to the people who voted for them, all of them ought to get turned out on their ears or keisters. I vote for Representatives in the House and Senators in the Senate to represent me, not ignore me.

I wish the level of anger people have right now at all branches of government would stay where it is or get even hotter. We just might see something done that's actually beneficial for the country in the long term.

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

I Goofed!

On Monday, I noted the drop of the Dow by 777 points. That was correct, but I mistakenly referred to the Jewish Day of Atonement, which is actually Yom Kippur. Monday/Tuesday's event was Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year/Feast of Trumpets. I have no idea how I got that mixed up.

I hang my head in shame!