WELCOME!
Found a foreign policy or cultural topic that people should read? Post it here.
Enter the link, your name and your website (if you have one), then talk about it and add your comments.
The "Hot Topic" will appear on Taylor's homepage. It's a way to let people know what the real HOT TOPICS are of the day.
Now with comments! Use the Comment link under each post to add to the discussion.
When embedding links in your Hot Topics Diary or comments, please use Tiny URLs for longer links. Extended links in diaries will be
deleted: http://tinyurl.com/
Now, I just have to share this.
An old, old Jewish guy, grandfather of a friend, who heard us talking on the phone and couldn’t resist, once again, taking the phone out of her hand to give me his take on our conversation. It went something like this:
“[....] This whole thing is ridiculous! He’s another bungler who can’t think straight – like that addle-brained bungler we got in the White House now! Both of them air-heads, in love with themselves, propped up by God knows who! For what reasons! Money! Do they care what happens to this country? Hah! They don’t remember all the rich guys who jumped out the windows on Wall Street when the country went into the great depression.
Meanwhile, waiting in the wings, we got a woman at least as smart and strong as Eleanor Roosevelt, Golda Meir, in fact, and I’ll say it, she’s smarter and better able to lead the world than anybody living – maybe even than dead! You know what I’m gonna do? I’m gonna vote for all the damned Republicans –- you know why? Because I love the Democratic Party like it used to be, and I want to see it get cleaned up even if I don’t live long enough! The way it is now they’re a lot of spineless connivers! They stand for nothing! Nothing! Listen, I’ll tell you something else….”
Finally, I got a word in, “Have you heard about PUMA?”
"The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now.... [We
need to] wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians
have lived because of Zionism." Last year, the bulletin at Wright's church reprinted an article
by a Hamas official." (Hemingway)
"Given Obama's past and current relationships, the Jewish community is taking his rhetoric with
hefty portions of sodium chloride. One well-known Jewish Democratic strategist says that with
Obama running, McCain could equal or even surpass the 39 percent of the Jewish vote that Ronald
Reagan captured against Jimmy Carter in 1980. This could be a major factor in swing states with
significant Jewish populations, notably Florida and Pennsylvania. According to
Pennsylvania-primary exit polls, Jews went for Hillary, 62 to 38 percent." (Hemingway)
I'm not so optimistic that Jews for McCain will surpass the vote of Jews for Reagan. I have
talked to a lot of Jews and they don't seem to get it. Obama, a racially charged Black man
groomed for the presidency by people who hate "God-Damn" America and he is not good for Israel
nor the Jews. And Obama is not good for America.
Now, taking all of this into consideration (and this is just a small part of it) you could
assume that ALL Jews would be very reluctant if not outright antagonistic toward the idea of
supporting Obama. BUT all that aside, the facts indicate otherwise. 50% of Jewish Democrats
supported Obama vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton and now with Hillary out of the race, more than that
support Obama - even with a huge number of former Clinton supporters switching their support to
McCain.
How incredible is it that any American Jews could support Barack Obama over John McCain who has
been a staunch supporter of Israel for more than 22 years in the Senate? Very!
Jewish Democrats for John McCain
Barack Obama's background is certainly suspect. His well known association with terrorists and
with pro-Palestinians, with the Nation of Islam, with the Rev Wright, with Ayers and with Rezko
and his friends who were all major contributors to Obama's political campaigns. His association
with energy companies and and the influence which accompanies contributions from major
corporations are enough to for the rest of the Jews; Democrats now supporting McCain, to burn
their Democratic Party affiliation membership cards ....
When will association with and support for Obama become an embarrassment?
It will eventually.
I heard 2 rumours today about pumas at the receiving end of some vague threats. Who knows what they really were. The Pods are certainly capable of it. I know from the few Pods that come around here that the talking points are clearly uniform and "approved" by someone. They also probe for weakness, test things out, retreat and try again. They are like the veloceraptors trying to get into the kitchen in Jurassic Park.
What is fascinating to me is the possible motivation. I no longer think it is commitment to a candidate, per say. It is not an effort to convince us to support this man - it is an attempt to make us feel the way they feel about him. This is a need I believe they have. It is an ego protection mechanism. There is rarely talk about issues, or healthy or unhealthy arguments. The subtext is always "you just don't understand. I am trying to make you understand."
Not everyone is happy with Senator Barack Obama. Many of his once loyal followers have woken up from the trance they were in and have started exhibiting the first symptoms of normality. They are beginning to use rational thought and are actually questioning their Messiah. The wheels are starting to come off from the Hopey Changey wagon. And it couldn’t be a prettier sight.
Another example of the candidate voicing an ideal and not living up to it.
There are more males on his staff and they are paid on average $6,000 more than women. For men and women earning greater than $23,000, men earn on average more than $10,000.
“Matthew 25 Network PAC Hits Christian Radio with Pro-Obama Ad as Christian Conservative Leaders Decide to Support McCain” http://preview.tinyurl.com/47q9vl
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUe3-A4V6tM
______________________________
VIDEO SUBJECT:
"Hillary Clinton's Not for Sale-Help Retire Her Debt "
_______________________________
(NEW VIDEO-From one of the producers of YOUTUBE LEGEND,
"Mad As Hell- Media Bias and Sexism")
_______________________________
FROM COMMENTS AT YOUTUBE.
"I just love this video.
At the end I was up dancing and singing, too!!!
I will pass this to everyone I know!"
_______________________________
TO CONTRIBUTE: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/contribute/7VNC
_______________________________
FOR comments by creator of video... http://giveemhell.org
I Can't Imagine Any Jew Voting for You; I Can't Imagine Anyone Voting for You
You might become our next President, Leader and Commander-in-Chief, but we
the people know precious little about who you are, your ability to
withstand pressure, your philosophy, sympathies and preferences, your
experience and your judgment. During your recent campaigning we hear from
you many wonderful words like unification of America, no more blue or red
states, help to humanity, care for those that need care, and I applaud
those words. If your words are supported by your past actions, then you
might be the man for the job. If your words contradict or are unsupported
by what you did before the Presidential race, then you are not what you
say you are, right? In order to find that out I attempted to examine whom
you hang out with, what words you and your friends were saying in private
and in public and how all that can affect our lives...I cant imagine being
a Jew and voting Obama.
First, I decided to look who is endorsing you (according to the
information that can be found on Internet), who likes where you stand on
issues. I found among others a scaring host of anti-Semitic and
anti-Israeli people and organizations:
- Louis Farrakhan (Nation of Islam Leader, racist, anti-Semite)
- Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (Islamic Terror Organization)
- Raila Odinga (Fundamental Islamic Candidate, Kenya, some say he is your
cousin)
- Daniel Ortega (Marxist Sandinista Leader, Nicaragua)
- Raul Castro (Hard-line Communist Leader, Cuba)
- Socialist Party USA (Marxist Political Party)
- The New Black Panther Party (Black Militant Organization)
- Hamas Terrorist Organization (Islamic Terrorist Organization).
I cant imagine being an Israeli supporter and
voting Obama either. I cant imagine voting Obama period.
Barack Obama has put out a new ad touting his legislative achievements. A good thing it is one of those 30 second ads. Otherwise he would have to fill it with lies like he did his first.
Strangely, Obama has decided to come clean (almost) on this ad. He removed the reference to passing a law to extend health care to wounded veterans. You know, that inartful statement LIE that he told on his first ad because Obama didn’t even vote for the legislation. Whoops!
Ironically the title of this new ad is Dignity. I suppose that Obama finally coming clean after blatantly lying in his first general election ad is considered being dignified by the Obama folk. I think it would have been more appropriately titled: Fessing Up.
As of Bring "Em On Day 2003, 186 Americans had lost their lives in Iraq. More than 4000 American military personnel, and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, have died since that date. Nearly 30,000 Americans have been wounded.
You want more of this kind of stupid school yard bravado, then by all means, vote for John McSame
In a pathetic attempt to "Swiftboat" John McCain (exactly the way Bush did to John Kerry four years ago) Barack Obama and his surrogate thugs, Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) and "informal advisor" Rand Beers, stoop to brand new lows this election year.
Apparently, it is Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton, who is willing to do or say anything to get elected.
Other than George W. Bush’s downright un-American assault on McCain’s war record in 2000, no one has had the audacity, before or since, to try to smear one of this country’s greatest war heros…
"I despise above all two kinds of people: Jews and journalists. Unfortunately,
I am both."
- Ferdinand Lassalle
Someone wrote to me and said,
"Isn't it pushing the envelope to call other Jews antiSemites?" And I asked him
why can't a Jew also be self-destructive and insane just like anybody else?
Yes, "insane" - because it is insane to question the existence of the State of
Israel if you are a Jew --- although it is perfectly acceptable to be critical
of Israeli policy -- and therein lies a problem because those I debate often
times do not distinguish between Israeli policy and Israel's existence. They
are just as critical of Israel being there and that is AntiSemitic just as much
if a Jew says it, just as it is if a non-Jew says it.
There is that constant refrain from Israel's critics that Israelis are
colonizers and they are on "stolen land." It is ironic that they can
distinguish between Israel being on so-called stolen land and their parents or
the parents of their parents coming to America and being on stolen, confiscated
property because everyone at one time or another was on someone elses land and
it was common in the history of this country - for land to be acquired by force
of conquest. Every piece of sand on the American continent was acquired by
force or it was purchased from a foreign power that acquired it by force.
All is not well in the house of the Democratic Party and as much as the party leaders would like to overlook the schisms boiling below the surface, here is a warning: DEM DI DUMB DUMB – DON’T!
There are some pretty ticked off Democrats out there, all those women and others who voted for Hillary Clinton who are just not buying the party line, “Get over it!”...it, of course, being the selection of Barack Obama as the Party’s presidential nominee.
The party meme is that these folks will come home to the party come the fall, but don’t be so sure.
But be sure of this: Barack Obama cannot win the presidency without these voters, no way, no how, no matter what kind of “new” coalition the Dem Party’s presumptive nominee tries to build.
Groups such as PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) and The Just Say No Deal Coalition, and websites such as Larry Johnson’s NoQuarterusa.net, aren’t bending under the weight of the Democratic Party’s pressure to come home. And, despite Hillary Clinton’s personal appeals, “I strongly urge you not to vote for John McCain,” in her unity appearance in Unity New Hampshire last week, these voters aren’t buying into the party line. “We are a coalition of millions with one thing in common: Nobama,” says the headline at the website of JustSayNoDeal.com.
Posts on the Puma Party Blog Network have these headings, “Real Dems, Real Change,” “From Hillary to McCain,” “Stink on It,” “Refuse the Public Humiliation.”
These disaffected voters are seething with rage over the Party’s presumed “fixing” of the selection of Barack Obama as the Party’s nominee, furious over the silence of the Party over the misogynistic attacks on Clinton during the primaries, outraged over what they see as an unfair primary voting process, and simply not buying into the Change idea of the Obama candidacy.
Obama’s lack of experience, a basic distrust of the candidate, particularly now that since his clinching the Party’s nomination he has flipped-flopped on a host of issues including those having to do with Israel, NAFTA, campaign finance, FISA, and is even signaling a change in position on his signature Iraq War issue, seems to have cemented the hard feelings of these voters that Hillary Clinton isn’t the Democratic Party’s nominee.
Brewing as well is a troubling discontent amongst Obama’s own base. Some supporters worked furiously over the weekend to organize a campaign to protest and pressure Obama over his FISA backtrack. The progressive blogosphere, which was so influential in the legitimizing of Obama’s candidacy, are having second thoughts.
Opposition to the opposition is building, but not getting heard as are PUMA members and Just Say No Deal members on cable news stations like MSNBC, CNN and Fox News. YestoDemocracy.org bills itself as the Anti-Puma website. “This website was created in an effort to STOP PUMA, before they get any bigger. The anti-Democratic rogue coalition of closeted Republicans posing as Democrats, leading a flock of angry women supporters under their wing must NOT continue to brand our party as ‘divided,’” the website says.
Outspoken Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and Hillary Clinton supporter who has embraced Barack Obama as the Party’s nominee has leant his name to HOUND (Hillary-Obama-United-Not-Divided). “We have formed HOUND in response to the creation of PUMA (party unity, my ass — or its cleaned up moniker, People United Means Action). Hound was not formed to be Anti-PUMA according to Rendell who says “We agree with many of your grievances.” He calls the Democratic Party’s nominating process “unfair and undemocratic” and calls for the elimination of the caucus system in his posting. The Pennsylvania Dems website hosts a HOUND petition under the heading: “Hillary Obama United Not Divided.”
Rendell’s response to PUMA tells me that the Democratic Party may actually be concerned about these angry Hillary voters despite the party line that they will eventually come home and vote for Obama.
Good, because to ignore the problem would be DEM DI DUMB DUMB for the Party.
Don't believe the corporate media spin about "Democratic division"... Join our new group at the Democratic Party's PartyBuilder site! We stand with Hillary Clinton, and we support her fight for our progressive values. That's why we stand with her now in support of our nominee, Barack Obama! :-)
This was originally comment, but by the time I finished saying everything I felt needed saying (and by the time I'd reiterated it incessantly to make sure I was understood, as I neurotically tend to do), I realized I'd written a diary.
I'm not sure if this is the right audience for my musings, but I like dialogue and I like TM.
Wes Clark did something unusual today. When given a chance to make nice and move on beyond the controversy he created Sunday he instead tried something else entirely. He stepped in the dog doo. Or as I prefer to call it, the dog don’t. Because we really shouldn’t be encouraging such things. Appearing on Good Morning America Wes sought to clarify his remarks. But try as he might all he did was did himself a little deeper into the muck.
Yesterday, Gary Bauer wrote a piece for Politico in which he warns the vast left-wing homosexual conspiracy not to underestimate the power of homophobia in mobilizing sheep voters to the polls. In his article, he repeats the argument that anti-gay marriage amendments helped rally evangelical conservatives to polls to vote for homophobia and fear (George Bush). The argument that fear of gay nuptials pushed President Bush over the top is not without its detractors:
SNIP
Earth to Gary Bauer. We're not afraid anymore. No more politics of fear. In 2002, the politics of fear gave Republicans control of the Senate. In 2004, the politics of fear gave George Bush a second term. In 2006, voters repudiated the politics of fear and gave Democrats control of the Senate. In 2008, voters will again repudiate the politics of fear and keep John McCain in the Senate, where he belongs.
Cass Sunstein, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School and former law clerk to Thurgood Marshall, is well acquainted with our "presumptious nominee." In an article written for HuffPo, Prof Sunstein praises Obama's Republican fans in Chicago, and suggests a future Obama administration could lead to an administration of "yes men." Scary stuff, especially when you consider this was written by one of Obama's law school cronies.
He's sounding the alarm that there's a "real risk" if Obama is our nominee. Superdelegates, are you listening?
Why should non-human animals have less sanctity than human animals? Most humans think that all members of our own species are special. [We are just another animal species] Christians think human animals have souls, whatever that is, and non-human animals do not. Our ethical thinking in the West is bounded by arbitrary differences and a disregard humans have for the feelings of non-human animals. We think we should be free to own non-human animals as we once owned slaves and we think we should be able to eat their flesh. If it is cheaper to confine them in cages, that is what we do, regardless of their feelings. We think that members of our own species have human rights but deny those rights to non-human species. We consider all human lives precious. But humans are less caring than they appear to be because they ignore the feelings and rights of other sentient animals.
We assume non-human animals have no rights; no dignity; that they are simply there for us to use. My contention is there is no dignity for human animals until humans recognize the dignity of all animals.
Animals should be entitled to an equal consideration of interests. That is the principle upon which we should govern our inter-relationships predicated on individual wants, desires and needs. The fact that non-human species are a different species is immaterial and similar interests should be given similar weight. There has already been enough pain and suffering for human animals to contribute more distress and discomfort. It seems to me that ethics is something we can do something about and should.
Despite all the talk of unity things aren’t all that unified across the country. A new phenomenon is occurring. Politicians that backed Hillary Clinton are now facing challenges by those who want to punish the people that supported her. Even John Lewis who changed his endorsement to Obama under duress is not immune.
As a former Gallup study director, I view the polling of Zogby and Gallup in non-technical terms…and recount some of my own experiences witnessing manipulation of data…
I’m a little confused. And it’s starting to bother me. Just when I think I am beginning to understand who Obama is the guy just up and changes. As easy as putting on a new pair of socks. So I’ve been wondering if it is possible that Obama stands for anything at all. Or if he wasn’t kidding about all that change stuff. Maybe that is why the rest of us need hope so bad. Because we sure as hell can’t count on him to show any backbone. But worms are like that.
Last week Barack Obama made 180 degree turns on three previous positions he had taken in order to seduce liberal Democrats. In an article entitled "For Obama, winning is everything", Michael Tomasky writes of these changes, claiming that:
"It's acceptable - and necessary - for Barack Obama to compromise his liberal principles in order to get elected."
Would McCain stock the Supreme Court with foes of Roe v. Wade? The 1973 decision guarantees a right to abortion.
The answer is unclear but probably "no." While McCain has positioned himself as "pro-life" during this campaign, his statements over the years show considerable latitude on the issue.
In a 1999 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, McCain said, "I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America" to undergo "illegal and dangerous operations."
George W. Bush turned that statement against him in the 2000 race for the GOP nomination. The National Right to Life Committee ran ads denouncing McCain -- one reason he lost the important South Carolina primary to Bush.
Addressing conservative South Carolinians last year, McCain said that Roe should be overturned. Primary politics or a change of mind? The former is my guess -- and also that in his current pursuit of Hillary Democrats we may see a softening of that position.
Whatever McCain really thinks, the chances that he would submerge his presidency in the maelstrom of abortion politics seem slim. Partisan battles over court nominees aren't his thing, either.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/09/clinton.supporters/
“A newly released CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll found that if Obama does not select Clinton as his running mate, 22 percent of her supporters would stay home this fall — and another 17 percent would vote for McCain.”
So that’s 39% not voting for Obama — about 7 million voters.
======================
Here is Craig Della Penna crunching those numbers (at his blog, http://theheraclitanfire.blogspot.com/)
“A newly released CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll found that if Obama does not select Clinton as his running mate, 22 percent of her supporters would stay home this fall (almost 4 million voters) — and another 17 percent (a little over 3 million) would vote for McCain.” –CNN (parentheses are mine). So, if we use 2004 as the baseline - GWB won with 62 million voters vs Kerry’s 59 million. then take away 4 million Democratic votes, that leaves BHO with 55 million. Now take away another 3 million from that (Clinton supporters who will not stay home but will vote for McCain) and add 3 million to the Republican side. You end up with 65 million for McCain to 52 million for BHO. There is a word for this: landslide.
"From an Israeli vantage point then, it was shocking to see that immediately
after Bush stepped down from the rostrum, Obama and his Democratic supporters
began pillorying him for his remarks. Most distressing is what Obama's reaction
said about the Democratic presidential hopeful." (ibid)
"OBAMA'S RESPONSE to Bush's speech was an effective acknowledgment that
appeasing Iran and other terror sponsors is a defining feature of his campaign
and of his political persona. As far as he is concerned, an attack against
appeasement is an attack against Obama." (ibid)
What Obama found offensive did elicit a strong reaction in Israel. But it was
the opposite response; it was one of relief. George Bush has not been as
strongly opposed to terrorism and terrorist states as most Israelis would like
so when he pledges no to appeasement and "not to allow Iran to acquire the
means to conduct a new Holocaust," that is a welcome relief to most Israelis.
Too bad Obama could not see the intent of those words. It demonstrates again
that Barack Obama is too naive and incompetent to be president. Israel's
security is not up for negotiation.
Obama doesn't have much of a record, but what it does show is Obama has a
record of being anti-gun. His "bitter" and "cleave to religion" comments
targeted workers and gun owners but that doesn't stop him from courting
firearm-rights supporters.
As reported in Politico, Obama highlights his background in constitutional law
while downplaying his anti-gun voting record. And that subterfuge didn't stop
him from getting endorsements from pro-gun Democratic superdelegates.
Call it hypocrisy or call it old fashioned politics. Obama is clearly a
politician, who will say anything to win, while doing the opposite if it helps
him win. In Obama's world real facts don't matter. They never mattered. He is
friends with everyone; terrorist and crime fighter - worker and the boss. The
end always justifies the means. But will this trickery work in the general
election?
When it suits him he is a gun-tottin, NAFTA hating (secretly loving NAFTA and
CAFTA), a "red-neck" which comes in two colors, both white or black (that is,
whatever works) and he is even more Jewish than the Jews when speaking to
AIPAC. Obama flip-flops around all the issues, FLIP or FLOP on real issues and
will say anything when the timing is right, to get nominated.
The only real alternative is "straight talking" McCain after over a year of
putting up with Obama's gymnastic flip flops with the truth. He can shift
change so well he would be a shoo-in in a political Olympics if they had an
event for the most convincing liars.
It is "as-if" the powerful don't care anymore who knows what they intend
to do to keep inequality the status quo and injustice the standard. And it
is also astonishingly obvious that so many people are either oblivious and
duped into going along with their own oppression and the ruling classes'
disregard for international law, or they are simply willing to become
followers and at times even willing to disregard the flagrant misconduct
of their leaders, like those "good Germans" who went along with the
lawlessness of the Third Reich.
He is not Barack Obama. He is The Obama.
I believe that if it were proposed to make Obama the King of America, more
than a third of the country would vote for it, along with more than
two-thirds of the news media. Perhaps not. But I am absolutely convinced
that the media, and many on the left, simply believe that they -- or their
candidate, at least -- well, OK, themselves too -- are simply better, and
therefore the same rules don't apply.
This is a lawless world which didn't begin with George Bush, but not in my
memory and my lifetime has there been so much of it. Who says it can't
happen here? It can and does. The travesty of injustice is the obvious
abuse and disregard for the truth.
Sidenote: [It is pathetic and dishonest for Wesley Clark, who has NEVER been in public office to question McCain's credentials as a leader and legislator. I admired Clark before and still do, but his judgement is wrong and misguided and perhaps it is a good thing he never got the nomination himself. McCain has been on both sides of many issues and a long time dedicated servant of the nation but as for his competence to be the commander in chief, there is none better or more qualified...
Hank Roth,
I'm a veteran of TWO wars
and former post commander of the Jewish War Veterans - As a veteran I have full confidence in John McCain to keep America safe - as safe as is possible. Obama couldn't even keep the Black poor folks in his district from freezing because pure and simply he can't lead and he is not interested in the well being of his constituents. Reject Obama. Vote McCain! - http://inyourface.info/bio/ http://pnews.org/
Obama isn't for equal pay for women. He pays his staffers that are women much less then his male staffers. On the ohter hand McCain does pay his staffers, male or female very equal pay! Tell me how anyone can say Obama is for equal pay! McCain doesn't have to declare it he shows it in his actions in his campaign staff! Obama once again lies!
Barack Obama has vowed to make pay equity for women a top priority if elected president. An analysis of his Senate staff shows that men outnumber and are paid more than women.
Contrast that to John McCain's Senate office, where women, for the most part, out-rank and are paid more than men.
Obama spoke in Albuquerque, N.M. last week about his commitment to the issue and his support of a Senate bill to make it easier to sue an employer for pay discrimination.
The so far left that they forgot what is right wing of the Democratic party has taken a new tact. They have decided that they don’t really have a problem with swiftboating after all. Just as long as the shoe is on the other foot. Starting this week they are coming out in droves to paint John McCain, a decorated war hero, as a traitor and a war criminal. And gosh wouldn’t you know it, some people even posted their drivel on Barack Obama’s website.
In my last post, "Confessions of a White Man", I decided to use the words of Barack and Michelle Obama to apply to a white person. I believe their words and opinions to be racist, yet I knew no one would be upset until I changed "black" to "white". The following is a comment posted on that page — and then a response…
"You stated, “Today, while the establishment is busy protecting black Americans from discrimination, they have turned a blind eye toward white people, women, and Christians.”
Please, spare us the victimhood. Until white people in this country are slaves for 200 years, forced to endure jim crow, seperate but unequal, terrorized for another 100 years, and attacked by the state for protesting equal rights in a country where “all men are created equal” (civil rights movement) there really is nothing to talk about here.
And so much for honoring MLK’s dream of racial utopia–you forgot about the Asians, Latinos, Muslims etc., that also make up this great country. But I guess they don’t count in your myopic black/white vision that is America.
You also stated, “Progress has been made regarding attitudes toward black people, but an over-correction is being committed.”
As an African-American I’m DYING to know how the US “over-corrected” the institutionalized marginalization and designation of blacks as second class citizens which persisted for over 200 years. Oh that’s right 30 years of Affirmative Action policies (many of which have since been dismantled and that benefitted white WOMEN) should have more than made up for those injustices.
As an African-American I should be grateful (and I’m stealing this from the PUMA playbook) and “fall in line”. I’m not suggesting we haven’t come a long way–we have, but man you reek of prejudice! And no it’s not cause you’re not voting for Obama!
Thanks for the confession, but no your racially misguided views don’t represent the “typical white person[s]” I know."
Barack Obama has not always been a Christian, if he is even one now - for which I have my doubts. He is deceitful. He has lied about his many associations with known criminals, with pro-Palestinian Arabs, with terrorists (like Ayers). The Islamists have been saying they will destroy America from within - for as long as Hitler said in Mein kampf he would murder the Jews. We all know how that turned out. Obama does not need to deny he is a Muslim. The mass media consistently denies it for him as they wet their pants in excitement over finally assuaging their white guilt. White liberals and 90% of African-Americans will not be enough to elect him unless the money and the TV and radio pundits do it for him. If this is the plan, here we go. We're almost there. All that remains is to change our name to AMERABIA.
Terrorism is a virulent Islamic fanatical hatred of non-Muslims. Americans also have an obsession for oil, which we need to keep us in the manner to which we have become accustomed and the Jews, as usual, somehow got stuck right in the middle of it - when it would have been far better if they settled in Miami Beach instead of Jerusalem. Obama owes favors to his Islamic pro-Palestinian, Muslim friends if he becomes president, and George W. Bush is waiting for rapture so there is nothing happening here that is not according to _the_ plan.
These problems are not going away. It is for sure that Israel lives in a bad neighborhood. It is also a certainty that Israel won't be able to stop other countries in the region from obtaining nuclear power and with it the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons. Haraatz recently reported that Turkey and Saudi Arabia are building nuclear reactors and Jordan has announced its intent to do the same. How will Israel prevent the region from obtaining nuclear technology. The short answer is, it won't.
We in America must become energy independent. We have to cut our reliance on the Middle East and we must stand ready, willing and able to come to the aid of our only friend and ally, which is Israel. Obviously Israelis also realize they really can't depend on anyone else as much as they can themselves to defend Israel. The U.S. public is fickle. Today's friend may be tomorrow's scapegoat. Israel needs friends she can depend on. Don't deny her that.
The war is far from over. The war on Islamic fanaticism is only just beginning. We should never lose sight of that fact. As stated in Defense Update: "The primary objective of any such action should be to halt or substantially delay Iran's completion of its nuclear project for several years, hoping that a more moderate regime will emerge, willing to regain its place in the free world." (ibid) "It seems inevitable, that the Tehran Ayathollah's must be stopped, one way or another, before the world enters into total disarray and uncontrollable chaos, threatened by a nuclear tipped Islamic fundamentalist rogue nation. Time is critical, but Israel must not be left alone to face the consequences looming on the threshold of the free world." (ibid)
Who would you rather be president if we are attacked again? Obama or McCain? Continue reading at:
This weekends PR stunt or "unity" fest underscores a problem for the presumptive Democratic nominee. The problem can be summed up in one word:...http://tinyurl.com/64894t
CHICAGO - The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can't afford to live anywhere else.
But it's not safe to live here.
About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale - a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.
Grove Parc has become a symbol for some in Chicago of the broader failures of giving public subsidies to private companies to build and manage affordable housing - an approach strongly backed by Obama as the best replacement for public housing.
As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.
But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable...
That’s just the way that it is.
They love each other, they hate each other. Sometimes they enjoy each other. Other times just the thought of a family uniting in a room for the holidays is enough to cause familial angst.
America is a family. Fifty states united under the American flag, north, south, east, west, people’s whose ancestors came from all over the globe. Asians, whites, dark skin, light skin, black hair, red hair; American’s are a kaleidoscope of color, ethnicity, personality, wants, desires, needs.
It is the amalgamation of the individuality that has made the great experiment that is America the success that it is and the envy of cultures worldwide.
The world has played witness to brother fighting brother, father battling son, right trumping wrong in our struggle to achieve a country where freedom rings.
And through it all, no matter how angry, how hurt, despite our individual sacrifices, Americans have always come home to country
This nation has endured and we remain a united family.
But now, a malady affects our nation, a subtle sickness that threatens the very core of who we are.
American’s have become addicted to America bashing and the way that we feed that addiction is through the drug of demeaning our presidents.
Now, I’m not talking about having issues with our Presidents and their agendas. It is the right of every American to either approve or disapprove of a president’s positions. If you don’t like the Iraq War, then by all means protest.
But call a President of the United States stupid? An idiot? Incompetent?
Strong families may argue around the holiday table, or siblings may stop talking to one another for months, even years. But the strength of a family demands that when the going gets tough, the family stands together and portrays to the world both honor and respect toward one another.
This picture of a family from the outside in reinforces the families’ system.
Americans seem to have forgotten this. The Office of the Presidency is under assault, first by the mainstream media that finds sport in denigrating our presidents, not only their policies. And by America’s citizens who have taken to deriding our leaders.
America doesn’t need 527’s to bash our presidents, or our leaders who are auditioning for the office. Americans seem to have turned into its own militia of seeking out what’s wrong with our leaders rather than in what’s right.
Americans have turned into Archie Bunkers and lost their Edith within.
Americans have become bigots, haters of their own presidents.
This bigotry seems to have started with the unfortunate downfall of President Richard Nixon, an onerous character if ever there was one, and a president who was forced to resign from office in shame. But he was the exception to the rule.
Since Nixon’s downfall, facilitated by Woodward and Bernstein, two young, tenacious reporters of the Washington Post, every investigative journalist out there has been looking for that gotcha that will bring down the American president and win them a Pulitzer Prize.
By the same token, American citizens have joined in the fray. They see all politicians as suspicious, self-serving, megalomaniacs. And while some might be, not all are.
There is, of course, nothing wrong with guarded distrust. But anything more is pathological. Still, if you want to win friends and influence people, pick on the president.
No one knows this better than Barack Obama, who cleverly brought down his opponent in the Democratic contest, Hillary Clinton, not by deriding Mrs. Clinton, a woman, and therefore a commodity that was difficult to attack without looking like an abuser, but by going after her husband, the 41st President of the United States, both as a man and as a president.
Obama crossed that boundary of respect for the highest office in the land, and the mainstream press crossed the boundary right a long with him.
It was a disgrace to watch.
Obama and his surrogates and the press accused a former President of the United States of being a racist and got away with it. And as if that were not enough, attacked the success of his presidency, arguably the most successful presidency of the post World War II era.
Admittedly, the situation was unusual. A former President’s wife was seeking the office of the Presidency, and that was new. But the attacks on President Clinton were on President Clinton…not on his standing as the husband of the candidate.
When George W. Bush ran for the office, his opponents kept young Bushs’ father former President George H. Bush, out of the fray in respect for the office.
Not so Barack Obama.
Ironically now that Barack Obama is the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee, he knows that in order for himself to become the President of the United States, he needs to build party unity and bring the former President back into the fold. Now Obama is singing the praises of the former President.
As to Bill Clinton, although it took him three weeks, the former President through his spokesperson issued what can only be called a tepid endorsement for his wife’s vanquisher.
Clinton’s lack of enthusiasm for Barack Obama’s candidacy is understandable given that Obama defeated his wife, given that Obama nearly destroyed the legacy of President Clinton, but moreover, that Barack Obama broke what should be a cardinal rule of American politics, don’t personally attack a president, current or former.
Sadly, some men, the odious former President Richard Nixon being one, have little respect for the office, but honor its power.
It appears that Barack Obama is much like Richard Nixon, a man who chose to put self-interest above the job he was elected to do: head the family we call The United States of America.
Obama is nothing more than a meathead, which I can say because Obama is not the President yet!
TM NOTE: In the past days I have not received one single email pointing to any complaint of a comment, nor from "wisdomseeker". As I've done numerous times, I have requested people report abusive comments. "Mr. Unlimited" has been reported before, put into moderation, but offered another opportunity to post. People have to email me or the webmaster to report offensive comments. When that happens we do what we can to address issues. There is viciousness on BOTH SIDES right now, as people work out the primary season heat, but again, both sides are guilty of horrendous over the top attacks. It would help if everyone calmed down, but I can't orchestrate it. As for language, words are not owned. As for the charges that some of these posters are "employees" of this site, it is laughable. First, we don't have the budget. Second, I wouldn't bother with such tactics. Anyone thinking I would probably shouldn't be reading or posting on this site. They don't have a clue as to my mission and passion. As for the disrespect of saying so, it says more about the over imaginative mind making the accusations than anything else.
Terrible viciousness is being allowed at this site. A commenter who signs himself “Mr. Unlimited,” long an annoyance to many who post here because of his unintelligent comments on posts and his attacks on the posters, has turned downright foul and brutal. His rhetorical method, strictly junior college, never varies: line-by-line, word-by-word, he repeats the poster’s remarks; then, he tries to destroy the poster's argument, but never succeeds because his points are remarkably ill-informed and illogical; he then concludes by insulting the person who posted. Lately, however, his slurs have become increasingly personal and increasingly nasty. This week, obviously using his thesaurus to find a synonym for liar, he called me disingenuous, and added that I was delusional. (Now from whose recent comment on a post did he get that word, Ms. Marsh? Best to take care when you sow into the wind.)
But today he crossed the line that separates insulting from indecent. In fact, his response to the post “Confessions of a White Man posted by PoliticalPyro06.28.2008 -11:14 pm” was malicious trash, nothing less than disgraceful and possibly libelous. Mr. Unlimited wrote, “Are you retarded? No, really, I want to know. Are you? If you are, I forgive you in advance for that pile of shit that you call a blog.” Calling someone “retarded” because he differs with you, demanding that the poster respond to your insult, talking about forgiving the man (as if the forgiveness of some nobody like Mr. Unlimited is of any significance whatsoever), and calling the man’s post a “pile of shit” tells nothing at all about the poster or his concerns, but reveals exactly what Mr. Unlimited is: mean-spirited, sadistic, immature, racist, and terribly, terribly stupid.
And now I’ll tell you something else that I think, Ms. Marsh. I believe that there is no Mr. Unlimited. Various bits of evidence, too long to detail in this post, conjoin to suggest that he is fictitious, a character created by an employee of this site. Further, I think it likely that “RMC,” a once-frequent but long-absent commenter, who today signed in to PoliticalPyro’s post to run damage conrol, is also an employee here, perhaps “Rose,” and that she trained Mr. Unlovable in the rhetorical method they share. Or, perhaps they were both trained by a third person. As to Taylor Marsh’s place in this scheme, I can make no conjectures, though I do not believe, even given your recent recourse to invective against your posters, that you had any part in this depraved, immoral attack on PoliticalPyro.
If I am wrong about RMC, apologies, and kudos for her reprimand of Mr.Unlimited. If I am wrong about Mr. Unlimited’s identity, I can only conclude that he is a highly unstable individual in urgent need of psychiatric care. However, we who post at this site are not his personal social workers. We are here to make a better world. Therefore, for the common good and for the sake of your good name, Ms. Marsh, it behooves you to ban all further posts and comments on posts by Mr. Unlimited.
My experiences during this election year have made me far more aware of my ‘whiteness’ than ever before. I have found in America today, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of the black leaders and citizens try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor in this country; as if I really don’t belong.
Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with blacks in America, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be white first and an American second.
As a former Clinton supporter, the path that Howard Dean tells me to choose by supporting Obama rather than McCain, would likely lead to further integration and/or assimilation into a black cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant.
Why does a Daily Kos Diary writer, Democratic Party activist, and Obama supporter have two fake Hawaii Certifications of Live Birth posted to his Photobucket.com image album? Perhaps Jay Mckinnon, who appears on numerous progressive blogs under the screen name opendna and describes himself as a former federal officer and trained document expert for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can explain the forged documents. One of the forgeries is appropriately labeled “Haye I.B. Aphorgerie” under CHILD’S NAME and the other is blank except for the same time (7:24PM) and Island of Birth (Oahu) as found on Obama’s suspect Certification of Live Birth. These forged documents were discovered in his photobucket.com album shortly after Daily Kos posted the alleged Obama Certification. Particularly interesting is the fact that neither of these fake documents displays the reversed time stamp found on the proffered Obama alleged Certification. The mostly blank certificate is thus perfect for the creation of a forgery. What follows below raises the question: is there a link between these forged documents and Barack Obama’s Certification of Live Birth posted at Daily Kos and on the Obama Campaign Website?
"Compassion is the basis of all morality"
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860
A lack of concern about the "loss of life" says much about us as a civilization. It has a lot to say about us as animals who hear about the slaughter, but don't see it and therefore feel detached from it. If many Americans don't seem to care about it, it is because the dying and suffering is happening to someone else. But the public consciousness is being raised by public recognition that Americans and Iraqis are dying and some think that perhaps with a new president that can all be changed. But, it is unlikely that it will because terrorism is a world-wide phenomenon which poses a very real threat to our lives here in America, Europe and the Middle East. It won't go away by ignoring it. It won't go away with an Israeli-Palestinian solution to their conflict. It won't go away until this tactic of suicide bombing and roadside bombs and flying airplanes into building is defeated because our resolve to defeat them is greater than their irrational belief in jihadism and dying for Allah.
Even if Saddam had no direct association with Wahabee el-Qaeda type terrorists (and it is not my contention that he didn't), he did much to further terrorist activity. Saddam Hussein’supported terrorism by paying "bonuses" of up to $25,000 for killing Jews. And it is also estimated that he murdered and buried at least 400,000 Iraqis in mass graves. Saddam Hussein was a terrorist tyrannical dictator.
Everyone Lies
Barack Obama lies. John McCain lies. Hillary Clinton lied. Politicians lie. George Bush also lies. George Bush now says he takes responsibility for the failed intelligence. Whoa there Mr. Bush. While his handlers think it is better now to cop to a plea of responsiblity for the "bad" intel - he actually had the right intel. Hussein was supporting terrorism.
"...[F]ew Iraq myths are as persistent as the notion that the Bush Administration invented a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Yet a new Pentagon report suggests that Iraq's links to world-wide terror networks, including al Qaeda, were far more extensive than previously understood." ("Saddam's Terror Links - March 24, 2008 - WSJ)
There was nothing wrong with the intelligence. The intel was clear about the threat from al-Qaeda. George Bush's mistake was he waited too long. We know he always intended to attack Iraq and he blamed it on WMD and then something else and then something else again.
(HLF and MR have joined forces with others to develop the DENVER GROUP...and they could use your help...If you share their concerns...)
"The Denver Group has been formed to insure that the Democratic National Committee respect and carry out the democratic process at the convention in Denver this August by meeting certain specific goals. We will be advocating, and if neccessary pressuring, through purchased mass media as well other accepted avenues, the Democratic National Committee to see to it that these goals and the interests of tens of millions of Democratic voters are met.
Our goals are:
An open convention.
Senator Clinton's name on the ballot
Speeches allowed by supporters of Senator Clinton on
behalf of her candidacy.
I live on the other side of the planet, so my thoughts are coming a little later than everyone else’s. I watched the Youtube clip of the Clinton-Obama unity rally. Well, let me correct that. I watched the first 19 minutes.
My first thought was that they were both good actors or that the affection they shared was genuine. It was great seeing Hillary on stage and I loved it when she admonished the crowd for passing on the opportunity compliment her youth. I also enjoyed listening to her bash John McCain.
Some things I didn’t like included the crowd scream “Obama” during her speech and hearing her repeat Obama’s campaign slogans—“yes we can” and “change you can believe in.”
I liked that Senator Obama began by thanking Senator Clinton, but that was as much as I listened to. I haven’t been able to watch him give any kind of speech since his race speech in March. After he began speaking, I closed the tab and moved on to something else.
This event could not have been easy for Senator Clinton. As a Clintonista who remains loyal to Hillary, watching her give this speech was difficult. I know that rallying around the nominee is the right thing to do. I know it. It’s not easy, but it is the right decision. That’s what I keep telling myself. My head and the woman I admire so much are telling me to support the nominee and that's what I'm doing.
However, as "cute" as this event was, I didn’t get a warm and fuzzy feeling at the end (of course, I didn’t watch Obama’s speech, but that probably would have made me feel worse). For me, the event was a step backwards. The sight of Hillary on that stage saying “change we can believe in” made me sick. If she is going to go around the country campaigning for him, if she is going to send emails to her supporters asking us to support him, if she is going to ask her donors to donate to his campaign, if she is going to reach out and work for him, there needs to be reciprocation.
Barack Obama is the nominee. Under the rules of our party, he won fair and square and I accept his nomination as legitimate. However, it bears noting that he barely won. 49% of the Democratic primary voters voted against him. The day after the infamous Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) meeting, Hillary won Puerto Rico. The day he clinched the nomination, she won South Dakota. She is not an also-ran like Chris Dodd, who didn’t make it out of Iowa, or Bill Richardson, who dropped out after New Hampshire.
Unity is not going to be the Clintonistas burning their Hillary signs and opening up their wallets for Senator Obama. If Senator Obama wants to unite this party for the fall election and for governing the country as president, he needs to acknowledge that Hillary is a force in the party. He needs to include her and her supporters rather than demand submission. That means hiring her staff. That means asking his donors—all of his donors—to give money to her campaign. (Why should we open his wallet for him if his people won’t do it for her? Being the nominee is enough to get my vote, but not my money.) That means giving her a prominent role at the convention. That means no more bullshit reminders that she's not in charge (ie: the RBC meeting where he stole four of her Michigan delegates). Only if such concrete steps are taken will many of us feel invested in the nominee of the party.
There are some who think it’s not that important. Some people think that enough of us will "get over it" and vote for Obama that it isn't necessary to reach out to the Clintonistas. Some think we need to just shut up and go away. They love to quote polling data and projections from Electoral-vote.com.
But I would remind everyone that Bush had low approval ratings four years ago at this time. He was presiding over an unpopular war and he was on the verge of becoming the first president since Herbert Hoover to shed jobs on his watch. In 2004, even after the lessons of 2000, "anybody but Bush" was not enough to put Kerry over the top.
In 2008, we have an infinitely more talented nominee (no offense to Sen. Kerry), but we also face a GOP nominee who is more respected that George Bush. We have a huge financial advantage, but we face opponents that have tricks up their sleeves and decades of experience smearing Democrats.
I am very confident that Senator Obama is going to mop the floor with McCain this fall, but a united Democratic Party makes that task much easier. We don't need to have our butts kissed and nobody is expecting apologies for the rough campaign. What many of us expect is that we will be included rather than coerced.
In 2000, John McCain went to South Carolina to campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in the midst of a debate over whether the confederate flag should fly over the state capital building. In the run-up to the primary, McCain and the other GOP candidates, when asked about their views, said that it was a local matter and that they should not weigh in. Democrats Al Gore and Bill Bradley came out against the flag.
After John McCain lost the South Carolina primary 52-43, he came out against the flag and confessed that he had secretly opposed the flag, but declined to speak out because he didn’t want to lose the primary:
"I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary. So I chose to compromise my principles. I broke my promise to always tell the truth," said the Arizona senator.
The “maverick” pandered to prejudiced voters in order to win an election. Is history repeating itself?
Sorry to all our readers here who've missed us over the last 24 hours. Blogger accidentally shut us down... But now, we're back! Please drop by and say hi. ;-)
Will The Media Be Fair To Just Say No Deals Voice This Weekend
Coming up tomorrow is our 2nd installment from “Obama Accepts Millions In “Subprime” Tied Contributions.
Last week while watching Lou Dobbs, the only program on CNN that can genuinely claim journalistic integrity and fair reporting, Mr. Dobbs eluded to his disgust with the lack of fair reporting during this campaign cycle. He pointed out the undeniable fact that much of the main stream media has been “in the tank” for the Obama campaign. Further denouncing certain Media outlets (you know the ones) that have chosen to refer to the Obama campaign as a “movement” while referring to Hillary Clinton and John McCain’s runs as simply “political campaigns”.
Organizations such as the LA Times and Newsweek have demonstrated a particular lack of fair reporting during this campaign cycle. Last weekend, the LA Times published a story claiming...
