Obama: Scrap The Constitution In Order To Spread The Wealth

Conservatives have been warning from the onset of the Obama campaign that he had radical ideas. While the media ignored disturbing aspects of Obama the man, they help to create a false imagine of a Centrist being attacked by the “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

In yet another example of the dinosaur demigods (the old media) not doing their job, the “recently discovered” audio tape of Barrack Obama discussing his interpretation of the Constitution to justify social engineering through wealth distribution is frieghtening:

It sounds harmless, taking “from the haves, and giving to the have notes.” But who will determine who the “haves” are, and who the “have not’s” are. Not the people, because Obama will use the Courts to “define” his vision of equality. Having lost in the arena of ideas, they want to “reshape America” through the courts:

"[W]e need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges." – Barrack Obama, July 2007

In this one statement Obama wants America to disregard the Constitution, and walk away from one of the Supreme Courts guiding principals “Equal Justice Under The Law.” Obama is suggesting that the Supreme Court Justices look at the color of a person’s skin, judge them by their social standing, dispense rulings based on a person’s age, or physical or mental handicap. When we ask the Justices to interject emotion into their decision making, then we expose the rule of law to the whim of emotion and not reason.

For over two-hundred years the United States Supreme Court has functioned with the belief that justice is the guardian of liberty. Lady Justice, who stands before the Supreme Court is blindfolded for a reason. Supreme Court Justices are suppose to look to the Constitution, not to their “hearts.”
The American Thinker: In Obama's Own Word
Federalist Society: Obama's 'Redistribution' Constitution

LA Times Suppresses Tape Of Obama Praising Terrorist Mouthpiece

Obama, Ayers, and PLO supporters toast Edward Said's successor, but the press doesn't think it's quite as newsworthy as Sarah Palin's wardrobe.


By Andrew C. McCarthy

Let's try a thought experiment. Say John McCain attended a party at which known racists and terror mongers were in attendance. Say testimonials were given, including a glowing one by McCain for the benefit of the guest of honor ... who happened to be a top apologist for terrorists. Say McCain not only gave a speech but stood by, in tacit approval and solidarity, while other racists and terror mongers gave speeches that reeked of hatred for an American ally and rationalizations of terror attacks.

Now let's say the Los Angeles Times obtained a videotape of the party.

Question: Is there any chance — any chance — the Times would not release the tape and publish front-page story after story about the gory details, with the usual accompanying chorus of sanctimony from the oped commentariat? Is there any chance, if the Times was the least bit reluctant about publishing (remember, we're pretending here), that the rest of the mainstream media (y'know, the guys who drove Trent Lott out of his leadership position over a birthday-party toast) would not be screaming for the release of the tape?

Do we really have to ask?

So now, let's leave thought experiments and return to reality: Why is the Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat?

At the time Khalidi, a PLO adviser turned University of Chicago professor, was headed east to Columbia. There he would take over the University's Middle East-studies program (which he has since maintained as a bubbling cauldron of anti-Semitism) and assume the professorship endowed in honor of Edward Sayyid, another notorious terror apologist.

The party featured encomiums by many of Khalidi's allies, colleagues, and friends, including Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, and Bill Ayers, the terrorist turned education professor. It was sponsored by the Arab American Action Network (AAAN), which had been founded by Khalidi and his wife, Mona, formerly a top English translator for Arafat's press agency.

Is there just a teeny-weenie chance that this was an evening of Israel-bashing Obama would find very difficult to explain? Could it be that the Times, a pillar of the Obamedia, is covering for its guy?

Gateway Pundit reports that the Times has the videotape but is suppressing it.

Back in April, the Times published a gentle story about the fete. Reporter Peter Wallsten avoided, for example, any mention of the inconvenient fact that the revelers included Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, Ayers's wife and fellow Weatherman terrorist. These self-professed revolutionary Leftists are friendly with both Obama and Khalidi — indeed, researcher Stanley Kurtz has noted that Ayers and Khalidi were "best friends." (And — small world! — it turns out that the Obamas are extremely close to the Khalidis, who have reportedly babysat the Obama children.)

Nor did the Times report the party was thrown by AAAN. Wallsten does tell us that the AAAN received grants from the Leftist Woods Fund when Obama was on its board — but, besides understating the amount (it was $75,000, not $40,000), the Times mentions neither that Ayers was also on the Woods board at the time nor that AAAN is rabidly anti-Israel. (Though the organization regards Israel as illegitimate and has sought to justify Palestinian terrorism, Wallsten describes the AAAN as "a social service group.")

Perhaps even more inconveniently, the Times also let slip that it had obtained a videotape of the party.

Wallsten's story is worth excerpting at length (italics are mine):

It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."...

[T]he warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Their belief is not drawn from Obama's speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.

At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."

One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."

Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than … his opponents for the White House....

At Khalidi's going-away party in 2003, the scholar lavished praise on Obama, telling the mostly Palestinian American crowd that the state senator deserved their help in winning a U.S. Senate seat. "You will not have a better senator under any circumstances," Khalidi said.

The event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The Times.


Though Khalidi has seen little of Sen. Obama in recent years, Michelle Obama attended a party several months ago celebrating the marriage of the Khalidis' daughter.

In interviews with The Times, Khalidi declined to discuss specifics of private talks over the years with Obama. He did not begrudge his friend for being out of touch, or for focusing more these days on his support for Israel — a stance that Khalidi calls a requirement to win a national election in the U.S., just as wooing Chicago's large Arab American community was important for winning local elections.

So why is the Times sitting on the videotape of the Khalidi festivities? Given Obama's (preposterous) claims that he didn't know Ayers that well and was unfamiliar with Ayers's views, why didn't the Times report that Ayers and Dohrn were at the bash? Was it not worth mentioning the remarkable coincidence that both Obama and Ayers — the "education reform" allies who barely know each other … except to the extent they together doled out tens of millions of dollars to Leftist agitators, attacked the criminal justice system, and raved about each others books — just happen to be intimate friends of the same anti-American Israel-basher? (Despite having watched the videotape, Wallsten told Gateway Pundit he "did not know" whether Ayers was there.)

Why won't the Times tell us what was said in the various Khalidi testimonials? On that score, Ayers and Dohrn have always had characteristically noxious views on the Israeli/Palestinian dispute. And, true to form, they have always been quite open about them. There is no reason to believe those views have ever changed. Here, for example, is what they had to say in Prairie Fire, the Weather Underground's 1974 Communist manifesto (emphasis in original):

Palestinian independence is opposed with reactionary schemes by Jordan, completely opposed with military terror by Israel, and manipulated by the U.S. The U.S.-sponsored notion of stability and status-quo in the Mideast is an attempt to preserve U.S. imperialist control of oil, using zionist power as the cat's paw. The Mideast has become a world focus of struggles over oil resources and control of strategic sea and air routes. Yet the Palestinian struggle is at the heart of other conflicts in the Mideast. Only the Palestinians can determine the solution which reflects the aspirations of the Palestinian people. No "settlements" in the Mideast which exclude the Palestinians will resolve the conflict. Palestinian liberation will not be suppressed.

The U.S. people have been seriously deceived about the Palestinians and Israel. This calls for a campaign to educate and focus attention on the true situation: teach-ins, debates, and open clear support for Palestinian liberation; reading about the Palestinian movement—The Disinherited by Fawaz Turki, Enemy of the Sun; opposing U.S. aid to Israel. Our silence or acceptance of pro-zionist policy is a form of complicity with U.S.-backed aggression and terror, and a betrayal of internationalism.

SELF-DETERMINATION FOR THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE!

U.S. OUT OF THE MIDEAST!

END AID TO ISRAEL!

Barack Obama wouldn't possibly let something like that pass without a spirited defense of the Israel he tells us he so staunchly supports … would he? I guess to answer that question, we'd have to know what was on the tape.

But who has time for such trifles? After all, isn't Diana Vreeland about to critique Sarah Palin's sartorial splendor?

Barrack Obama On Key Issues

Here is a visual representation of Obama’s own record (or lack thereof). These are not lies or distortion, but are the inactions that define Barrack Obama. Many of these issues fall way outside the realm of where most Americans stand, and not only go against our common decency, but commonsense. If you are planning to vote for Barrack, or are not sure whether to vote for Obama, you need to watch this video:

Where is the commonsense in any of these votes:

SB609 - Refusing to vote to restrict the establishing of adult orientated business within 1000 feet of schools, daycares, and public parks.
HB1812 – Voted no to requiring schools to install software to protect kids from sexually explicit materials that penetrate through the Internet.
SB880 – Allow someone to purchase 10 hypodermic needles without a prescription.
SB488 – The ONLY YES vote to give sexual offenders reduce sentences for good behavior.
SB1661- Voted No to the Infant Born Alive Protection. A bill that even NARAL didn’t contest.

Are we now suppose to believe that somehow Obama will lead differently once he is on the national stage?

Obamaism-The Blob That Ate America and Destroyed The World

Sure, Obama may be a socialist, but this is America…..how much can he get away with? There is this belief by many in this country that Obama's brand of socialism can be "controlled," used to serve the better good of all Americans. But socialism is like the beast in the movie "The Blob." It starts out small, but it grows larger and larger with each new person it consumes, becoming a single entity needing to consume all in order to survive. Socialism will grow beyond control if people just lay down in its path and allow themselves to be consumed.

Mark Steyn wrote an article in National Review that not only talks about an America that moves towards Socialism, but what will happen to the world:

Mark Steyn: The Results Of This Election – Point Of No Return

Mark Steyn: The point of no return

Excerpts from the article:

"Ask not what your country can do for you, demand it."

"In Europe, lavish social-democratic government has transformed citizens into eternal wards of the nanny state: the bureaucracy's assumption of every adult responsibility has severed Continentals from the most basic survival impulse, to the point where unaffordable entitlements on shriveled birth rates have put a question mark over some of the oldest nation states on earth. A vote for an Obama-Pelosi-Barney Frank-ACORN supermajority is a vote for a Europeanized domestic policy that is, as the eco-types like to say, "unsustainable"."

"More to the point, the only reason why Belgium has gotten away with being Belgium and Sweden Sweden and Germany Germany this long is because America's America. The soft comfortable cocoon in which western Europe has dozed this last half-century is girded by cold hard American power. What happens when the last serious western nation votes for the same soothing beguiling siren song as its enervated allies?"

A supermajority in the hands of a Congress with an approval rating of 18% is insane. We have seen how divisive Pelosi and Reid have been, imagine them unchecked:

What Will Happen During Obama's First 100 Days: Nothing We Want, or Need

Welcome To Obamaland

What will the first 100 Days of a "Supermajority" look like (from Townhall):

• Swift amnesty for 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens and a drive to make them citizens and register them, as in the Bill Clinton years. This will mean that Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona will soon move out of reach for GOP presidential candidates, as has California.
  
• Border security will go on the backburner, and America will have a virtual open border with a Mexico of 110 million.
  
• Taxes will be raised on the top 5 percent of wage-earners, who now carry 60 percent of the U.S. income tax burden, and tens of millions of checks will be sent out to the 40 percent of wage-earners who pay no federal income tax. Like the man said, redistribute the wealth, spread it around.
  
• Social Security taxes will be raised on the most successful among us, and capital gains taxes will be raised from 15 percent to 20 percent. The Bush tax cuts will be repealed, and death taxes reimposed.
  
• Two or three more liberal activists of the Ruth Bader Ginsberg-John Paul Stevens stripe will be named to the Supreme Court. U.S. district and appellate courts will be stacked with "progressives."
  
• Special protections for homosexuals will be written into all civil rights laws, and gays and lesbians in the military will be invited to come out of the closet. "Don't ask, don't tell" will be dead.
  
• The homosexual marriages that state judges have forced California, Massachusetts and Connecticut to recognize, an Obama Congress or Obama court will require all 50 states to recognize.
  
• A "Freedom of Choice Act" nullifying all state restrictions on abortions will be enacted. America will become the most pro-abortion nation on earth.
  
• Affirmative action -- hiring and promotions based on race, sex and sexual orientation until specified quotas are reached -- will be rigorously enforced throughout the U.S. government and private sector.
  
• Universal health insurance will be enacted, covering legal and illegal immigrants, providing another powerful magnet for the world to come to America, if necessary by breaching her borders.
  
• A federal bailout of states and municipalities to keep state and local governments spending up could come in December or early next year.
  
• The first trillion-dollar deficit will be run in the first year of an Obama presidency. It will be the first of many.
  

 

Obama's First 100 Days

What Does The Left Mean By Change

If you say "things" are bad long enough, and you have the assistance of a willing media, than people start to believe the lies. The Left has, and always will, distort their own records. The Left (Democrats) have tried to rewrite history to take credit for things they never did, to deny responsibly for their failures, and to falsely blame Conservatives and the Republicans for societal ills created by Democratic policies:

Dennis Prager: Why The Left Wants Change

The manipulation of the truth is the key to Left's power, knowing the real history is Conservatism's strength.

Why Character Matters: Obama’s Lack Of Judgment Is Dangerous

The warning signs are right before our very eyes. Who we associate with is the sum total of our character, and how we act when we think no one is looking speaks to our "moral courage." We saw this previously with President Clinton. The old media produced snow job after snow job to "distance" Clinton from the "vast right wing conspiracy." As Clinton's Presidency unfolded we saw how his "character flaws" resonated throughout his term in office.

Many of the "scandals" we saw from Clinton are the same types we see from Obama. Potential voter fraud, questionable campaign funds, shady associations. Like with Clinton, the media has failed to "explore" the many distortions, dubious alliances, and frankly out rights lies that is Obama. It's the "little" lies that tell the most about a person, and Obama has numerous ones. If we decide to elect a "morally challenged" candidate to the highest office, is that a reflection of our ignorance or a testament to our own perceived ethical deficiencies?

Real Clear Politics: Why Character Matters

"Midway along the journey of our life, I woke to find myself in a dark wood, for I had wandered off from the straight path." Dante's – A Devine Comedy

The Truth About Sarah Palin

What is behind the criticism of Governor Palin? Is the media going "out of its way" to destroy Palin, while ignoring (or under reporting) Obama and Biden? And if so, why? Is America getting a full picture of the real Sarah Palin?

Recently, a piece by Bryon York (a fantastic journalist who appears in National Review) was misquoted by CNN's Drew Griffen. Griffen not only misquoted the story during an interview with Governor Palin (that was seen by millions of people), Griffen admitted during the interview that he had not researched the story before "confronting Palin." If that is what passes for "investigative journalism" at CNN, they should have their legal department draft a standard "oops, we screwed up letter" that can be sent out in the future. CNN/Griffen later "recanted" the story, but the damage was done.

So if CNN was wrong, what is the real story from Byron York? Bryon York did real journalism, and provided a clear picture of the true leader that is Governor Sarah Palin:

NRO - Bryon York: How Palin Governed

From Bryon's piece:

" a look at Palin's 20 months in power, along with interviews with people who worked with her, shows her to be a serious executive, a governor who picked important things to do and got them done — and who didn't just stumble into an 80 percent job-approval rating."

"She had four principles she wanted to bring to the process," says Joe Balash, who served as Palin's special assistant for energy issues. "One, to have competition. Two, to have clear and objective measures of progress, because with a massive project like that it's going to be years before any dirt turns. Three, there had to be a commitment to expansion [the pipeline would have to be big enough to handle more gas in the future]. And four, it had to be done without surrendering the state's sovereignty."

"the Anchorage Daily News reported that the pipeline deal "sealed the popular Republican governor's second major victory in two years against not only her opponents in the Legislature but also major oil companies Palin sometimes has poked publicly." Her approval rating soared."

"she became convinced that fellow commissioner Randy Ruedrich, the head of the Alaska Republican party, was conducting party business on the commission's time. Palin filed an ethics complaint against Ruedrich, leading to a long and contentious investigation. In 2004, Ruedrich admitted guilt and agreed to pay a $12,000 fine, which was the largest such punishment ever in Alaska."

"Still, it's fair to say that overall, Palin's time in office, from her swearing-in until the moment John McCain picked her to be his running mate, has been a success. And from her handling of the issues she has tackled, it's possible to see a pattern in the way she approaches governing.

First, she hires well. "There was a pretty good team of people assembled right away to come in and start with her big-picture principles and develop a process and legislation to carry that out," says Joe Balash. "I would say that her management style is to give her staff, her cabinet, a pretty long leash, but with very high expectations — and she's not afraid to tell you that you didn't get it right."

Second, she is involved with details on some big things, but not on everything. "When it comes to issues that she cares about, that she knows the public cares about, she's got all kinds of time and prioritizes things in a big way," says one insider who has worked with her and asked not to be named. "For the mundane tasks of government . . . say, regulations for the Kenai River, she instead looks for recommendations from her cabinet and the regulatory agencies, but she's not going to get in and argue specific details."

Third, she is dead set on fulfilling campaign promises. "There was this absolute expectation that if it was an issue that had been talked about during the campaign and there was a particular commitment that she had made, then we had to live up to it, no matter how difficult," says Balash, "because her big thing was restoring the confidence of the public in state government."

The unfair reporting and mischaracterization of Governor Sarah Palin will go down as one of the darkest stains in American political history. The character assassination and deceitful attempts to diminish Governor Palin's many accomplishments is insulting and pathetic. Worst is how many Americans stood by and did nothing.

And what of these attacks on Palin based on her distorted "lack of experience" or the naive belief she was only selected because she was a female. The New York Times said it best:

"Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President? Surely Ronald Reagan does not subscribe to that maxim. Or where is it written that mere representatives aren't qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens? Representative Morris Udall, who lost New Hampshire to Jimmy Carter by a hair in 1976, must surely disagree. So must a longtime Michigan Congressman named Gerald Ford. Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial? That didn't stop Richard Nixon from picking Spiro Agnew, a suburban politician who became Governor of Maryland. Remember the main foreign affairs credential of Georgia's Governor Carter: He was a member of the Trilateral Commission. Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy. One might even say demography is destiny: this candidate was chosen because he could deliver Texas, that one because he personified rectitude, that one because he appealed to the other wing of the party. On occasion, Americans find it necessary to rationalize this rough-and-ready process. What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen. This rationale may even be right, but then let it also be fair. Why shouldn't a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow? We may even be gradually elevating our standards for choosing Vice Presidential candidates. But that should be done fairly, also. Meanwhile, the indispensable credential for a Woman Who is the same as for a Man Who - one who helps the ticket."

That was the New York Times position in 1984 regarding the pick of Geraldine Ferraro. Funny, I did not see the same support for Palin, or forceful condemnation against the false piety by those currently trashing Palin. Daniel Henninger said it best in is October 23, 2008 piece - “The stoning of Sarah Palin has exposed enough cultural fissures in American politics to occupy strategists full-time until 2012. We now see there is a left-to-right elite centered in New York, Washington, Hollywood and Silicon Valley who hand down judgments of the nation's mortals from their perch atop the Bell Curve.”

How Sarah Palin has been treated should be a wakeup call to everyone, but especially women. You are free to consider yourself a unique individual, deserving of equality and fair play, and worthy of being judged on the merits of your accomplishments, SO LONG as you fall inline with those on the Left (Democrats, NOW, NARAL, etc), and walk lock step with their ideals. Outside of that, you will be belittled, your family insulted, your accomplishments downplayed, and your success attributed to matters beyond your control.

Electoral College: Move Oregon and New Hampshire

Is The Media In Obama’s Camp: Not At All

Of course I was joking with my blog title. A recent PEW Institute survey indicates that 80% of Americans believe that the Left leaning media clearly wants Obama to win. But the media has also ignored the erratic behavior coming from Obama's running mate, Joe Biden:

Human Events: Camp Followers

The article did not emphasis enough the absolute loathing (unfairly, and frankly, sickening) directed at Governor Palin. Governor Palin is a threat to Liberalism and cronyism, that is why she is being attacked, and it is a sad state affairs when Americans stand by idly and let the media, the elitists, and Liberals destroy a person more qualified than either Biden or Obama to lead this country.

Obamanomics: Killing Me Softy With His Song

"I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat . . . I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money."

-- Barney Frank, October 20, 2008

With less than two weeks before we choose the next leader of the Free World, many in the old media (dinosaur demigods) are ignoring the debacle that would be the Obama Presidency, both on foreign policy and economics, but especially the economy:

WSJ: Obama's Tax Plan Will "Sock It" To Small Business

WSJ: An Obamanomics Preview - Tax and spend, but not in that order.

WSJ: Obama Channeling The Ghost Of FDR

Key Excerpts:

"Mr. Obama's tax increase would hit the bottom line of small businesses in three direct ways. First, because 85% of small business owners are taxed at the personal income tax rate, any moderately successful business with an income above as little as $165,000 a year could face a higher tax liability. That's the income level at which the 33% income tax bracket now phases in for individuals, and Mr. Obama would raise that tax rate for those businesses to 36%."

"Mr. Obama responds that more than nine of 10 small businesses would not pay these higher taxes. Last Thursday he scoffed in response to the debate over Joe the Plumber, saying that not too many plumbers "make more than $250,000 a year." He's right that most of the 35 million small businesses in America have a net income of less than $250,000, hire only a few workers, and stay in business for less than four years.

However, the point is that it is the most successful small- and medium-sized businesses that create most of the new jobs in our dynamic society. And they are precisely the businesses that will be slammed by Mr. Obama's tax increase. Joe the Plumber would get hit if he expanded his business and hired 10 to 15 other plumbers. An analysis by the Senate Finance Committee found that of the filers in the highest two tax brackets, three out of four are small business owners. A typical firm with a net income of $500,000 would see its tax burden rise to $166,000 a year under the Obama plan from $146,000 today."

"According to a Gallup survey conducted for the National Federation of Independent Business last December and January, only 10% of all businesses that hire between one and nine employees would pay the Obama tax. But 19.5% of employers with 10 to 19 employees would be socked by the tax. And 50% of businesses with 20 to 249 workers would pay the tax. The Obama plan is an incentive to hire fewer workers."

"Federal budget deficits are not something we obsess about, but eventually this new spending has to be paid for, and Barney Frank's comments only underscore that big tax increases are coming. The prospect of these tax increases is now hanging over the economy like a pall, as investors and businesses wonder where and how heavily an Obama Administration and Congress would strike. The pall is likely to continue well into 2009, as millions of Americans delay their investment decisions until they know how much their after-tax returns are likely to fall.

"Barack Obama is one of the most liberal members of the Senate. His reaction to the financial crisis is to blame deregulation. He even leverages fear of deregulation onto other issues. For example, Sen. John McCain wants to allow consumers to buy health insurance across state lines. Mr. Obama likens this to the financial deregulation that he alleges got us into the current mess."

"But a President Obama would also enjoy large Democratic majorities in Congress. His party might even win a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, giving him more power than any president has had in decades to push a liberal agenda. And given the opportunity, Mr. Obama will likely radically increase government interference in the economy."

The most damaging statement to Obama's economic plan comes from one of his own advisors:

"Loyal Democrats have howled over the claim that small businesses will get soaked by the Obama tax plan, so we thought we would seek an authority they might trust on the issue: Democratic Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. Here is what Mr. Baucus wrote in a joint press release with Iowa Republican Charles Grassley on August 20, 2001, when they supported the income tax rate cuts that Mr. Obama wants to repeal:

". . . when the new tax relief law is fully phased in, entrepreneurs and small businesses -- owners of sole proprietorships, partnerships, S corporations, and farms -- will receive 80 percent of the tax relief associated with reducing the top income tax rates of 36 percent to 33 percent and 39.6 percent to 35 percent."

"Experts agree that lower taxes increase a business' cash flow, which helps with liquidity constraints during an economic slowdown and could increase the demand for investment and labor."

The point has been made loud and clear, now is not the time (as if there should ever be a time) for Obamanomics. Now is the time for lower taxes, fiscal restraint and reducing the budget. We cannot spend our way out of this crisis, and what Obama is proposing is economic suicide.

Are The Polls Accurate: Its Doubtful

If you are like me, you have noticed that the polls seem to be all over the place. 10 points, 1 point, margin of error…yada, yada, yada. But in a year in which we witnessed what may be the final death blow to journalistic integrity, it is beyond naive to think that we could trust the polls:

WSJ: Are the Polls Accurate?

Babbling Biden: Say It Ain’t So Joe!

As the media continues its assault on Governor Palin (with feminist either remaining silent or actively participating) in an effort to diminish her accomplishments, people are starting to question the integrity of the “attackers.”

But it is also not the integrity of the attacks that is being called into question, but the lack of scrutiny directed at the living, breathing gaffe machine known as Joe Biden:

Michelle Malkin: The Increasingly Erratic Super Gaffetastic Joe Biden
NY POST: Bidens Bungles A Blatant Bias
Delaware Online: Hey Joe, Katie's Diner Closed 20 Years Ago
City Data Forum: Biden Is A Liar

The media lets Biden slink away while Obama makes a statement that Joe was just "florishing." Closed diners, factious conversations with imaginary gas pump attendants, spelling a “three letter” word with 4 letters, confusing Constitutional Articles and Presidential history……..sure, you just go on believing there is no media bias!!!???!!!

It Is “The People” That Rule America

William Kristol, wrote an excellent OP-ED piece, which unfortunately appeared in the Gray Lady, which spells out how the intellect of the "common man," is much more often than not, right:

NY Times - Kristol: Here The People Rule

"In the 1930s, the American people didn't fall — unlike so many of their supposed intellectual betters — for either fascism or Communism. Since World War II, the American people have resisted the temptations of isolationism and protectionism, and have turned their backs on a history of bigotry."

Let's tally the score regarding whether the people or the "elites" have been more right:

Who was right about the true nature of the Soviet Union before its collapse? The People or The Elites. 1 Point Awarded to The People.

Who has been right a majority of the time that a distended government has been bad for the economic prosperity and the overall general welfare of this country? The People or The Elites. 1 Point Awarded to The People.

Who has been right on immigration? The people who believe in a balanced immigration policy or the elites who want to open up the floodgates of uncontrolled immigration? The People or The Elites. 1 Point Awarded to The People.

The list could go on, but the point that needs to be made is that the people want to take a pragmatic approach to solving issues as they arise, whether it is spending, addressing climate change, and taxes. But Elites want to "just jump in," and believe that the quick reaction, which usually equates to throwing a ton of money at every issue, is the best reaction.

In the end, we the voters must decide whose judgment can be trusted to lead this country…the everyday man or the elites, and which candidate represents those views best.

Barney Frank Is A Financial Idiot

" Suffering Succotash..."

First it was Joe Biden telling a tale of apocalyptic doom if Obama is elected; now we have Barney Frank encouraging Obama to spend more, tax more, and don’t worry about the deficit:

‘….at this point there needs to be an immediate increase in spending…..…this is the time that deficit fear has to take a second seat.” There is one sane thing in Frank’s statement:

“….. my encouraging will probably have more impact on Senator Obama than Senator McCain.”

God help this country if the likes of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are allowed to regain power and go unchecked.

Obama’s Tax “Refund” Is Gibberish

Obama's tax plan is nothing more than a scheme to "rob Peter to pay Paul." The numbers do not add up. Obama keeps stating that 95% of Americans would receive a tax refund, but note he is not say 95% of "those that pay taxes" would be receiving a rebate. But as we have learned, 40% of the 95% do not pay taxes at all. How can that be?

So where is the refund coming from? The refund is coming from the payroll tax, or money that would normal is going into the Social Security coffers:

WSJ: Obama Talks Nonsense on Tax Cuts

Social Security is already in jeopardy, and as the Wall Street Journal article indicates, Obama's plan would only serve to place Social Security in further risk.

Obama and McCain: How The Media Ignored The Truth

What does integrity mean to you? Do you believe honesty is subjective, something that bends in many directions depending on a person's point of view? Or is honesty absolute, which becomes corrupted by ones own selfishness? Is the omission of facts the same as lying? Is ignoring accuracy to ensure your viewpoint triumphs nothing more than an act of deceit? The sad reality is that depending on the "content of your character," the answers may vary, and that is disturbing.

Journalist Orson Scott Card, a Democrat, is concerned for his colleagues in the Fourth Estate. He is troubled that they may be ignoring the many truths about John McCain, Barrack Obama, Democrats, and Republicans, and that the media may be willing accomplices in a fraud being perpetrated against the American people:

Orson Scott Card: Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

What about the American people who choose to ignore what is happening before their very eyes? What role did they have in the death of the truth? And if what appears in print must always be looked upon as suspect, then can we finally admitted, that except for a few outlets, that objective journalism is dead?

To think that many on the Left feared censorship from their own government, only to now realize that the attack on truth would come from within. Who would have thought that the demise of journalistic integrity would be self-inflicted?

America The Weak: The Big O Is Not Ready To Lead

Ralph Peters provided an insight into the fate of the World under the Obama administration:

NY Post: America The Weak

Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Georgia, Cuba (with new oil wealth), Venezuela, and the list goes on. It is also not encouraging that Biden claims that he "has forgotten more about foreign policy" than his colleagues remember. Considering Biden has been wrong on almost every international crisis this country has faced dating back to 1973, do we really need two arrogant Liberals in the White House at the same time?

Mr. Peters wrote this article prior to Mighty Joe's (Biden) speech in Seattle on October 19, where he clearly reaffirmed Mr. Peters (as well as others) assessment of the troubles we would face if Obama were elected.

That ominous 3:00 a.m. call is looking more concerning if in fact Obama is on the other end.

A Call To Liberals: Support Our Troops, Vote McCain

The very people the next President will lead as Commander-In-Chief have spoken, and they overwhelmingly support Senator John McCain:

Military Times: Military Stands With McCain

Much was made a few months back by the Liberals, that based on political contributions, Obama was favored by those in the military. What the Liberals failed to mention about "this survey" was:

• The sample data was small
  
• The survey only addressed contributions of $200.00 or more, which almost immediately eliminates those in the enlisted ranks.
  
• Most of those that were supporting Obama were serving in the US Air Force. Not to disparage those that serve in any military branch, but the Air Force tends to be the more Liberal of any of the Branches.
  

This survey is without a doubt one of the more important ones conducted during this election. The very people fighting for this country, who could ultimately be asked to serve in a combat zone (or maybe already are) want John McCain as the next Commander-In-Chief by a margin of 68% to 22%.

Now is the time to test the resolve of the Liberals, many of who have opposed the mission of our military. For all those Liberals with the bumper sticker "Support Our Troops" on their Prius's or Volvo's , now is the time to put up or shut up. Our Troops have spoken, they want McCain. If you truly want to "Support Our Troops" do what they have asked and help elected McCain!

Why We Should Vote For McCain

Two Top Ten Lists: Obama Versus McCain

By
Tom Scheffelin
(American Thinker)

I have not seen a simple list of reasons to vote for or against either Presidential candidate. To fill this need, I offer my two top ten lists below. I solicit your comments, edits, and improvements. Feel free to share this with neighbors, friends, and coworkers.

Top Ten Reasons to Vote for McCain:

1) Senator McCain has an enduring Faith, a High Moral Character, a Good Work Ethic, and Compassion.
2) Senator McCain's economic policies will create prosperity.
3) Senator McCain loves his country - a patriot's patriot.
4) Senator McCain will be a great commander-in-chief
5) Senator McCain has excellent Personal Judgment.
6) Senator McCain believes in the sanctity of life.
7) Senator McCain gets things done in Congress.
8) Senator McCain is one of the Senate's Most Savvy Technologists.
9) Senator McCain never consorted with terrorists, bombers, criminals, anti-Americans, bigots, or racists.
10) President McCain's Vice President will be Sarah Palin: a woman, a mother, a PTA mom, a mayor, a governor, an achiever, and someone who believes that all children are deserving of life and opportunity regardless of the circumstances of their birth.

Top Ten Reasons to Reject Obama

1) As a matter of public record, Obama voted to kill innocent "inconvenient" living babies.
2) Obama's "Share the Wealth" policies will punish the owners of small businesses, the backbone of our economy.
3) Based on Obama's campaign remarks, one has to wonder if Obama hates the United States.
4) Other than buzzwords, memorized talking points, and unsupported statistics, without a prewritten speech on a teleprompter Obama is lacking in clear and coherent thoughts. But he is a great speaker. So was Hitler.
5) Obama failed in his only leadership role.
6) When politically convenient, Obama abandoned his church and minister of 20 years, referred to his grandmother as a racist, and has not helped his desperately poor half-brother in need.
7) Obama lied -- repeatedly -- 50 times and counting.
8) Obama and the Obama campaign have impugned, mocked, and ridiculed proven leaders and citizens, disrespecting all of us.
9) Obama consorted with terrorists, criminals, anti-Americans, bigots, and racists.
10) Obama's vice presidential pick, a known plagiarist, a liar, and someone who has nothing in common with the citizens he seeks to govern, displays Obama's lack of Personal Judgment.

Senator McCain has Faith, a High Moral Character, a Good Work Ethic, and Compassion - qualities the leader of our nation must have. Senator McCain developed an enduring Faith during his years as a POW in Vietnam. His campaign, like his personal conduct, exemplifies a High Moral Character, and does not stoop to slander. McCain has a Good Work Ethic, learned from his father, grandfather, and the United States Naval Academy. I know from personal experience the United States military academies demand the ultimate four years of academic, mental, and physical challenges of any curriculum in any university in the world. Graduating from an academy puts all such graduates head and shoulders above any other graduate from any other university or college in any degree. However, in addition to the rigorous curriculum the academies instill graduates with a lifelong moral and honor code.

Senator McCain's economic policies will create prosperity, not misery. Senator McCain opposes "spreading the wealth" around; that is, to steal from achievers, those who start and grow companies, create jobs, and pay the taxes that support schools, fire departments, police departments, and all of the local, state, and federal programs that benefit everybody.

Senator McCain loves his country -- a patriot's patriot. I recommend one read "Faith of my Fathers" to better understand why John McCain is a great American.

Senator McCain will be a great commander-in-chief. Senator McCain was responsible for the successful Iraq surge, even when that decision, and the Iraq war, was unpopular. Great Presidents do what is best for the country, not what keeps their poll numbers high.

Senator McCain has demonstrated excellent Personal Judgment -- one of a President's most important qualities when appointing thousands of department and agency leaders, judges, ambassadors, generals, and admirals. Senator McCain was the commander-in-charge of the United States Navy's largest fighter wing, responsible for the wing's Operations, Maintenance, Hiring, Discipline, Morale, and Health of the military and civilian staff under his command -- applicable experience to prepare one for the Presidency.

Senator McCain believes in the sanctity of life -- Senator McCain defended our country, defended our citizens, and will defend our babies. Senator McCain believes women are blessed with a baby.

Senator McCain gets things done in Congress. Senator McCain does what he believes what is best for the country, not what is best for his reelection or his political party.

Senator McCain is one of the Senate's Most Savvy Technologists, despite the Obama campaign's condescending and hurtful ad impugning McCain's inability to e-mail. Did the Obama campaign know or care that Senator McCain has difficulty typing due to the horrible and permanent injuries inflicted by the Vietnamese during his years as a Prisoner-of-War? I believe it is beneath Senator McCain's dignity to refute the hurtful ad - so I will say it for him. In the same manner, if my paralyzed mother were running for President against Obama, Obama's campaign would mock my mother for not being able to bowl.

Senator McCain never consorted with terrorists, bombers, criminals, anti-Americans, bigots, or racists.

President McCain's Vice President will be Sarah Palin: a woman, a mother, a PTA mom, a mayor, a governor, and someone who believes that all children are deserving of life and opportunity. Her life story, and her response to the Obama campaign's slander and the drive-by media's condescension, is proof that she is executive timber.

As a matter of public record, Obama voted to kill innocent living babies that were "inconvenient", and has publicly stated that women could be "punished with a baby". Yesterday I met a mother with a 10 day old infant. Seeing a newborn up close, our common humanity instinctively knows this child is completely innocent, trusting, and in need of love and protection. Yet, when I think of post-abortion but living babies Obama would sentence to die in hospital janitorial closets, alone on a cold steel table, in the dark, sometimes taking hours to die - the only word that comes to mind is Inhuman Monster.

Obama's "Share the Wealth" policies will punish our nation's producers, reward the takers, cause further job loss, decrease our citizen's self-sufficiency, and increase our citizen's dependency, creating long-lasting economic misery. The Better Business Bureau in every city should have a "Stop Obama At All Costs" emergency meeting tomorrow morning. Thank God his true motives were revealed by Joe the Plumber.

Based on Obama's campaign remarks, one has to wonder if Obama, and his unsavory associates, hates the United States. Who among the readers of this article have ever heard a minister or priest utter the words "God XXXX America"?

Other than buzzwords, memorized talking points, and unsupported statistics, without a prewritten speech on a teleprompter, Obama is lacking in clear and coherent thoughts.

Obama failed in his only leadership role, as the Chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge -- unless one considers funding Acorn, the illegal voter registration organization, to be a success. The students of the Chicago public schools, the intended recipients of the millions of dollars of OPM (Other People's Money), benefited not at all.

Obama has a fair-weather faith, a questionable work ethic, and a propensity to mock those who disagree with him. When politically convenient, Obama abandoned his church and minister of 20 years without a second glance, referred to his grandmother as a racist, and has not helped his desperately poor half-brother in need. Despite an advance of thousands of dollars for his book, Obama didn't produce the book. Obama, the Obama campaign, and the drive-by media have impugned, mocked, and ridiculed Governor Palin, a true citizen statesman. Obama, the Obama campaign, and the drive-by media have impugned, mocked, ridiculed, and mischaracterized citizens such as Joe the Plumber, disrespecting all of us. Prepare yourselves for vicious public personal slander should anyone have the audacity to challenge governmental decisions in such an administration.

Obama lied. Repeatedly. 50 times and counting. Despite his claim to the contrary, he began his political career with a known unrepentant Terrorist, who only seven years ago was quoted "I don't regret settings bombs. I feel we didn't do enough." Obama knew who Bill Ayers was then, and he knows now.

Far from running an honorable campaign, an auditor for the Federal Election Commission recommended the Obama campaign be investigated for more than $200 million in potentially illegal political donations, including millions of dollars of illegal, foreign donations.

Obama consorted with terrorists, bombers, criminals, anti-Americans, bigots, and racists. Under normal circumstances, Obama would not qualify for a secret clearance, much less a Top Secret clearance. Yet we are to trust him with our nation's highest office?

Obama's vice presidential pick, Senator Biden, a known plagiarist, a liar, and someone who has nothing in common with the citizens he seeks to govern, displays Obama's lack of Personal Judgment.

Thankfully -- for now-- we have alternative media outlets to broadcast the truth.

My choice for President is clear: McCain. I utterly reject Obama. Now you know why.

Joe Biden: If Obama Is Elected, Expect A World Crisis

It is amazing to me that so much attention has been paid to Governor Palin and almost none to "Mighty" Joe Biden. Whether it is forgetting which Article of the Constitution defines the role of the Vice-President (or for that matter what the role of the Vice-President is), claiming FDR used television to calm people down during the Stock Market Crash of 1929, or confusing who are enemies in the world, Joe always seems to manage to top himself.

During a campaign stop in the State of Washington on October 19, 2008, Biden warned all in attendance that the United States of America would face an international crisis immediately if we elected Obama, in large part because of Obama inexperience:

"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking."

"Gird your loins," Biden told the crowd."

"Lions," who talks like that anymore? Barack Obama is no John Kennedy, and even if he was, this is not the time for the President of the United States to deal with a test from our enemies. Joe Biden is finally making the argument many of us have been making about Obama…..he is not ready to eat at the grownup table.

In fact, the reality of JFK cannot stand up to the myth of JFK. Kennedy met with Khrushchev unconditionally, which Khrushchev perceived as weakness. The Berlin Wall was built under Kennedy’s watch, and he did nothing but declare himself to be a pastry. The Cuban Missile Crisis happened under Kennedy’s watch, due in large part because Khrushchev deemed Kennedy as weak and inexperienced. The fable that Kennedy “stood up” to the Russian is just that, a fantasy. America learned years later that Kennedy conceded our missile defense bases in Turkey in exchange for Khrushchev withdrawing his missiles from Cuba. The Kennedy spin machine made sure that American’s concessions were hidden from the rest of the world.

Obama has been wrong about the surge. Obama first reaction regarding Russia’s invasion of George was wrong. Obama was wrong to state that he would sit down unconditional with thugs and dictators, and he was wrong when he described Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Venezuela as just “small” countries that are “not dangerous.” Obama first reaction, like that of his running mate, regarding World affairs has been constantly wrong. Combine that with what Biden said, and we should be very afraid!

Biden is also reinforcing what he stated during the debates regarding Obama's lack of readiness to lead. In the midst of a worldwide financial crisis, and with enemies waiting to strike, we should heed Biden's words, and elect someone the world will not put to a test…..John McCain.

Commentary Magazine: Biden Tells Voters To Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

NRO: Our Enemies Will Test Obama In The First 6 Months, So Stay With Us

ABC News: Biden Tells Supports To Get Ready For The Worse

Powell Endorses Obama: Liberals Spontaneously Explode

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced his endorsement of Barrack Obama, which resulted in the spontaneously explosion of millions of those on the far Left.

General Powell is not a Conservative, and he hinted of his support for Obama throughout this election (Huffington Post: Novak-Powell Will Endorse Obama, New York Times: Powell Praises Obama ). I respect General Powell, but I known that he is wrong on this one. But what is more interesting is what the response by those on the Left will be. For years, Powell was reviled by those on the Left, often called a stooge, a liar, Uncle Tom, and worst of all, a traitor:

Daily Kos

Papillion’s Art Palace

Village Voice: The Uncle Tom Dilemma

Michelle Malkin: Exposing the Uncle Tom Outreach Initiative

The Hollywood Liberal

When Obama announced Colin Powell support at a rally on October 19, 2008, the audience applauded. I couldn’t help but wonder how many in the crowd were the same ones who maligned Secretary Powell when he worked for President Bush? Is the Left willing to “forgive” Powell now that he has endorsed their candidate, or admit that they were wrong? And what would those of the Left be saying about Powell had he surprised everyone and endorsed McCain?

How do you spell hypocrite? L-I-B-E-R-A-L

The Liberal Media’s Number One Enemy: Joe the Plumber

As I mentioned in a previous story, it would only be a matter of time before Joe Wurzelbacher (aka: Joe the Plumber) felt the sting of Obama’s minions:

Michelle Malkin: Operation destroy Joe-the-plumber

How dare Mr. Wurzelbacher question the Messiah!

Shouts of “Kill Him” At A McCain Rally False

Some in the media, especially the dynamic duo over at MSNBC (Olbermann and Maddow), made it a point to over report on “alleged” hostile statements made at McCain and Palin rallies, in particular the claim that someone yelled “kill him”.

Never mind the fact that far worse is really happening at Obama – Biden rallies, but now we find that the “kill him” outburst did not happen:

Times Leader: Secret Service Says kill him allegation unfounded

I wanted to post the retraction or follow-up report by MSNBC, but I could not find either on their website. I guess they have too many other important things to do……..like “expose” that vile character Joe the Plumber.

The Liberal Super Majority

This race is far closer than the old media is reporting. Most creditable polling agencies has this race close to the margin of error. With a little more than two-weeks before the election, there is no clear victor.

But what would the world look like if the Democrats were to take the White House, Senate, and House? What would be in store for the United States if Pelosi, Reid, and Obama were allowed to rule “unchecked?” This new ruling class would be virtually unstoppable:

WSJ: Liberal Super Majority

CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN?

Before You Vote For Obama, You Need To Read This

Obama's economic plan will be a disaster for America!

America did not get to be the most prosperous country in the world because of government ownership (the current banking coup) and control (an unfair tax burden and unnecessary regulations). Our prosperity was due to the fact that America was (and I hope still is) a capitalist society that supported the entrepreneurial spirit. There are millions of Americans who have become willing participants in the death of capitalism……which would mean the passing of the America advantage.

Some of us are scared, some of us our dumbfounded, and all of us are angry. All of these emotions are valid, but we must not let these emotions drive us in the wrong direction. New taxes (regardless of a person's income), increased spending, and more government control are not the answer to getting us out of this mess.

Obama is purposing higher taxes, massive spending, and more government regulation, in short….economic ruin. These ideas are not new to American shores. They are failed socialist principles that will prove catastrophic if enacted. One only needs to do a little research to discover that socialism of any sort has brought on economic paralysis wherever it has been tried.

So lets look at what Obama is proposing.

Obama's Tax Plan:

Obama's tax plan can be summed up in one phrase….class-warfare. The belief that just because some people are financially successful merits punishing them with higher taxes is the antithesis of everything America stands for. Currently the top 1% of Americans pay 30% of the taxes, the top 5% pay 50% of the taxes, and the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes in America. Obama is going to raise taxes on everyone, it is in his liberal DNA, but he is going to start by taxing the very factors that drive the economic engine of America:

Tax Type	Currently	Obama's Plan
Income tax rate	35%	39.6%
Income Payroll	37.4%	52.2%
Capital Gains	15 %	28%
Dividends	15 %	39.6%
Estate tax	0%	55%

When you take money that will be used to create jobs (Joe Biden's favorite 3 letter word), and throw it away, the economy slows down. Obama will punish the very people and industries that are needed to get America out of this economic slump:

NRO: Obama's Tax-Plan Disaster

How is it fair to raise taxes on the capital gains, there by bringing in less taxes? The facts are simple. Whenever you increase the capital gains tax (or any tax for that matter), the government collects less in taxes. Additionally, when you give people a "tax break" who do not pay taxes (as Obama plan clearly states) you need to call it what it is….WELFARE. How will either of these factors help? Answer, they won't.

GRADE = F

Obama's Shopping Spree:

Barrack Obama has proposed 1 trillion dollars (1,000,000,000,000) in new spending. If you started counted right now, it would take you 31688 years, 32 days, 1 hour, 46 minutes, 40 seconds. It will take Barrack Obama just a few seconds to add this new spending to our debt. Combine this with his "tax plan," which will reduce the amount of money coming in, and America will drown in our own national debt:

Washington Times: How Obama Will "Spread The Wealth"

USA News: Obama's Math Does Not Add Up

Fox Forum: Obama Fiscal Follies

GRADE = F

Regulatory Reform:

Liberals never met a tax they didn't like, and have never found an industry they couldn't regulate into failure.

The Democrats have made it a point that the lack of regulation of industries such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is what got us into this mess. Alright I'll bite:

Question - Name three regulatory failures of President Bush that led to the financial crisis we are witnessing today? Two? One?

Answer - There are none. We have been living with the regulatory oversight supported by the Democrats, and signed by then President Clinton.

Question - Name one regulatory recommendation introduced by the Democrats in either the House or the Senate that would have helped to prevent this current fiscal crisis?

Answer - There were none. The fact that the top three recipients of Freddie Mac and Fannie were all Democrats might have something to do with the absence of action from the Left.

Question - Name one regulatory recommendation introduced by the Republicans in either the House or the Senate that would have helped to prevent this current fiscal crisis?

Answer – S.190, which was introduced in 2005 by Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), and was defeated by….wait for it……the Democrats! Not ONE Democrat signed on to support this Senate Bill. Experts agree, had S.190 passed we would not be dealing with this current financial crisis.

Question – What regulatory policies did Obama every initiate that would have prevented this financial meltdown?

Answer – None…..oh wait, he "wrote a letter" to the Treasury Secretary, months after he announced he was running for President. There's leadership for you. For the amount of time it took him to write this letter he could have either written a Senate Bill with some bite, or support a Senate Bill that would have provided balanced oversight. If only someone had introduced a Senate Bill that Obama could have support…..say like S.190! Not only did Obama not support S.190 (there's bi-partisanship for you), he took no action:

WSJ: Obama Voted 'Present' on Mortgage Reform

WSJ: Another 'Deregulation' Myth

GRADE = F

Whether you are blue or red is not what is at stake. It comes down to Conservative principals or Liberal ideals. It comes down to what will work best, fiscal restraint or free-spending standards. The clear answer is fiscal restraint, which points to only one candidate….John McCain.