Pat Buchanan brings up a very good question that I have not thought about before. The Liberal and Black expectations are that America must elect Barack Obama. So what will they do if they actually lose the election? After thinking about it I think I can already tell you.

This is not a request by the Far Left, the Blacks and the immoral special interest groups. It is a demand that we elect Barack Obama. Should Obama lose the election they will be claiming racism and election fraud and burning the cities and looting because they were disrespected and the national media will justify their actions.

Understand, that this is not a presidential election it is a coronation of the choosen King of the Liberals, Blacks and all the immoral special interest groups who wants Obama to take change out of your pocket and morality out of your mind in order to bring in a demented socialist utopia of delusion.

The Far Left elite are playing the racist card in order to put into power all their immoral programs through their chosen elitist half black man counting on the fact that race sensitive America would not dare reject a black man. If the nation does not elect Obama on a close election they will say the election was unfair so let the white controlled party and nation be dammed. If the nation does not elect him and the vote is not close they will say let this white racist nation be damned. If the nation elects him and he brings in the wealth transfer and Far Left socialist agenda that Obama stands for, the nation will be damned. So we are damned if we do and damned if we don’t elect Barack Obama.

So what will happen is that should Obama lose you will see Far Left instigation of massive civil disobedience making it necessary for McCain to either appease the Far Left and bring in the same agendas or McCain will move toward a police state, or both. The outcome might be determined by the depth of the civil disobedience.

Make no mistake, white America and all those who oppose Barack Obama’s moral positions are now being held hostage and should we choose not be black mailed the instigated civil unrest might become the biggest issues in this nation. So this election is not all about change or Iraq. There is a hidden agenda coming from the Far left controlled media, secular humanists, radical environmentalists, race baiting black leaders and all the immoral special interest groups that are forcing their agenda and perversions on this nation. They think they cannot lose no matter how this falls out and they are probably right since the moral majority is now a moral minority.

And if Obama loses?

Questions arise. With this immense moral and emotional investment in a Barack victory – by 94 to 1 in one poll black America is behind him — what happens if the nation decides he is too radical, too inexperienced, too callow, too risky to be president?

What happens if the American people reject their marching orders and say no to Barack and black America? What happens if all the hopes and dreams, hype and hoopla, end in disillusionment?

Would the defeat of Barack Obama be taken as an affront to black America? Could we be in for a time of deepening racial division rather than healing? Could we be in for a long, hot autumn like the long, hot summers some of us recall from 40 years ago?

One black preacher here suggested as much to me.

No candidate has ever been nominated by a major party with fewer credentials or a weaker claim to the presidency, or more doubts as to his core beliefs. If Obama wins, the country could be in real trouble. And if he loses, the country could be in real trouble.

What the media celebrate today, they may rue tomorrow.

Full Article

I think “Catholicism for Dummies” book is much needed and way overdue. Maybe they could dumb it down so even Pelosi, Kennedy, and Biden could understand it. That might require that each point of the faith be said in ten words or less. Then if they still do not believe it they can go to Hell.

Most Catholics today believe anything they want and they either do not know or do not care what the Catholic Church teaches (mostly the latter). Pope Pelosi tries to redefine Catholic doctrine by claiming to know more about Catholicism than the Pope and Bishops.

Someone ought to write a book about why Catholics still go to to Mass, communion and confession when they believe nothing at all about what their church teaches. It is not like they got further enlightened by other Christian faiths either. They know nothing of Christianity period. In fact, if the Catholic Church did the discipline that their own doctrine requires of them more than half of the Catholic Church would now be excommunicated. Now you know why they do almost nothing.

Pelosi denies that Catholicism condemns abortion (OneNewsNow.com)

WASHINGTON - In an appearance on the NBC program Meet the Press on Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a self-professed Catholic, denied that the Catholic Church condemns abortion.

Pelosi again side-stepped the question, suggesting that the Catholic Church’s current position is only a recent position and that “over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.”

The president of the Catholic League, Bill Donohue, responded to Pelosi’s statements on Meet the Press, observing that the Catholic Church’s position on abortion is clear beyond any doubt. “Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: ‘Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.’”

He continued, “It also says, ‘Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.’ Looks like Pelosi didn’t study the subject long enough. But not to worry: We are sending her a copy of Catholicism for Dummies today.”

Pelosi concluded her appearance by contradicting another doctrine of the Catholic Church by advocating contraception. Contraception is officially condemned by the Catholic Church as “intrinsically evil.”

Full article

Good start, but even if this goes to Jury trial he could be out of office before it is heard or we could end up with a Joe Biden slap in the face. There should be a way of forcing candidates to reveal their citizenship before then are nominated and elected. Somebody in the legal system needs to figure out how we do that.

OBAMA: National Security Risk | Northeast Intelligence Network

OBAMA: National Security Risk

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director

Lawsuit filed in Eastern District of Pennsylvania

23 August 2008: A lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania might be the catalyst that will compel democratic presidential candidate Barack Hussein OBAMA to produce legitimate birth records that would verify his citizenship and thus, his eligibility to be president.

As heard on The Roth Show last night, Pennsylvania attorney Phillip BERG filed for DECLARTORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against OBAMA and the DNC. Whatever one might think of the petitioner (plaintiff) in this case, these are legitimate questions that must be answered.

Full Article

A Democratic Party President, a Democratic House and a filibuster proof Democratic Senate would be the end of this nation as we know it. When are people going to realize that this secular humanist amoral Democratic party is not the Democratic party of our fathers? The national party is now controlled by radical left wing elitist power brokers. It is a fifth column of elite that wants to force the U.S. to conform to the socialist globalist rules of the UN and the EU.

We would be a Left wing Fascist socialist nation in no time. Within a year or two they would have a liberal Supreme Court to uphold their unconstitutional laws and anything Obama, Harry and Nanny wanted they would get. The whole U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights would be redefined by godless socialists. By the end of term they will have changed media laws, they will have put into effect anti Christian hate speech laws and they will have made broad political changes that will insure that they stay in power. Somewhat like Putin and his Fascist people are now doing in Russia.

Even if they do not get their filibuster proof majority in the Senate it does not mean that we are out of the woods. If there is a Democratic President the scum suckers will try to change the Senate rules and stop filibusters all together and they will probably succeed. The only reason these bottom feeding scum suckers have not attempted to do that already is that they know that a Senate rules change now would not help them with a Republican President in office who would veto their bills.

So gee…nothing less then our Republic is on the line during the next election. So if you want to live under left wing Fascism you know how to vote. I find it simply unbelievable that so many people in this nation continue to vote for a national party that has not taken a correct moral stand on any significant issue in decades. Don’t you people even believe what your religion teaches? If not quit pretending! Admit you believe in nothing but how the government can give you a free handout.

Don’t count on being able to remove these bottom feeders in four years like some say will happen either. By then the rules of the political game will have changed and they will have muzzled free speech. We could even be under Marshall law. You will need a military coup to get the scum suckers out of office if that happens.

Don’t also count on the U.S becoming some Christian socialist paradise through the liberals passing huge give away programs and bailouts that this nation cannot afford. The failed economic polices of socialism will put us in the worse economic times in the history of this nation. We are in trouble already because of a democrat controlled House and Senate. Just one example is the cost of gas. Why do you think gas is four dollars a gallon? It is because liberals would not let people drill where there is significant oil or build refineries for twenty years.

Left wing naive wishful thinking will bring foreign policy miscalculation against Iran, Russia, and others that will probably put us in the third world war. So vote for a Democrat and also sign up for the draft.

You cannot say you were not warned when you still go ahead and vote for that Democrat.

(Of course I am mainly  talking about national candidates not all democrats running for local offices)

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Democrats Aim for a 60-Vote Senate

Here’s an intriguing thought: The John McCain-Barack Obama fight isn’t this season’s biggest political story. That honor should be reserved for the intense Democratic push to win a filibuster-proof Senate majority.

Democrats know this is a huge prize, and they are throwing at least as much money and sweat into that effort as they are into electing Mr. Obama. What isn’t clear is that voters are as aware of the stakes. An unstoppable Democratic Senate has the potential to alter the balance of power in Washington in ways not yet seen.

Mr. Reid won’t necessarily need 60 votes to hold Washington’s whip hand. With a contingent of blue-state Republicans (think Maine’s Olympia Snowe), Mr. Reid could peel off votes and have an “effective” filibuster with just 57 or 58 seats. That may not be enough to accomplish every last item on his wish list, but close.

That wish list? Take a look at what House Democrats (who aren’t burdened with a filibuster) unilaterally passed last year: The biggest tax increase in history; card check, which eliminates secret ballots in union organizing elections; an “energy” bill that lacks drilling; vastly expanded government health insurance; new powers to restrict pharmaceutical prices. Add to this a global warming program, new trade restrictions (certainly no new trade deals) and fewer private options in Medicare.

Full article

Frank Salvanto says we have a perfect storm coming from two enormous threats. The denial of the Islamic threat and the fifth column called the progressive Left. This storm will destroy this nation if the American people continue to ignore the threat. I would also add a third and fourth enormous threat. The economic storm brought on by debt and greed, and the perversion storm rapidly developing out of moral relativism. Wake up America! There is a perfect storm brewing and its not going to be a tempest in a tea cup.

The New Media Journal | Ignoring ‘The Perfect Storm’ at Our Own Peril by Frank Salvato

The mainstream media and the presumptive nominee from the Democrat Party have done a pretty good job of steering the electorate’s attention to issues of a domestic nature. It wasn’t hard to do. With gasoline prices hovering around four dollars a gallon, combined with the self-induced but limited financial crisis created by proprietary lenders and a healthcare system that’s being raped by grifting lawyers and robber-baron insurance companies, it is easy to understand why voters would fall prey to diversionary tactics of the political power seekers. But we do so at the expense of the well being of our nation. We do so ignoring “the perfect storm.”

politicians consistently put politics, power and financial special interests before the issues most important to the American people: A small, elite group of Progressives, beholden to the environmental lobby, uses their governmental powers to usurp the will of the people by refusing to allow drilling in places we know there are oil deposits; politicians on both sides of the aisle pander to an illegitimate voting demographic in the illegal alien population for fear that if they stand up for America’s sovereignty they may be voted out of office by those who shouldn’t be voting in the first place; politicians of both major political parties refuse to banish the earmark and reserve the right to raid the government treasury to provide bribes to their constituencies in an effort to garner re-election; the tax code continues to overburden the middle class and penalize the family while expanding entitlement increases the number of those feeding from the public trough and the mega-rich evolve into an elitist class; etc, etc, etc…

Our nation faces two enormous threats, one externally and one from within, and we do so without a proper understanding of why we should be fighting them both with every fiber of our collective being.

why would any elected official, true to good government, deny the enormity of the threat posed to the United States and the West by radical Islamist elements?

The second serious threat is less immediate and less violent, but caustic and lethal to the American philosophy and the continued existence of our country just the same. This threat comes from the American Fifth Column; the threat from within.

Emanating from the failed ideologies of Marxist-Leninst socialism and communism, the American Fifth Column dedicates itself to the transformation of the United States from a representative republic to a system of democratic socialism. This movement is personified by the progressive-left that has effectively hijacked the Democrat party.

Through unconstitutional entitlement programs and the legislation of inequitable tax burden on those who have successfully employed the capitalist system to their benefit, those leading the American Fifth Column strive to artificially create economic equality through the redistribution of wealth. Ironically, those who lead the American Fifth Column have established an elitist class for themselves, as most of them are millionaires (like Nancy Pelosi) and even billionaires (like Peter Lewis and George Soros). They do so to reduce the “influential footprint” of the United States on the world in a quest for a one-world order administered by the elite.

Interestingly, the progressive-leftists of the American Fifth Column are playing the roll – either unwittingly or recklessly – of the useful idiot to radical Islam’s quest for a global Caliphate.

So, the people of the United States face these two incredibly potent threats – each which could affect the end of the great American experiment – yet we are apathetic to the threat. Why? Because we face these challenges constitutionally illiterate.

Our educational system has been hijacked by progressive-left ideologues.

It is time that parents from all over the country – all over the world – embrace the idea that we have to take charge of educating our children.

Full Article

This article on the Democratic national coronation of their “O”mniscient One in Denver is just too good and too true not to post. Now will Obama’s false prophet “O”prah also be revealed?

The mile lie club

The scene on the final evening of the Democratic convention next week is bound to be a gripping one: Some 75,000 people will be in the stands awaiting healing and anointing in the packed but expansive confines of Denver’s Invesco Field.

The entire event has forced the Broncos to make contingency plans for an alternate place to play their home football games just in case the entire stadium is swept away during the pretribulation rapture on the night of 28 August in the year marked by the gathered faithful as 48 B.C. (Barack’s Coming, two score and 8 years ago)

As tens of thousands clamor for their savior – the Benny Hinn of wealth redistribution – the high-decibel chants of “Obama” will be broken only by the orgasmic screeches of writhing members of the mainstream media. The tingle up Chris Matthews’ leg will hurt so unbearably good that “Hardball” will, for one brief and shining moment, be the most apropos program title in the world.

Full article

In Canada people are being brought before hate speech tribunals for saying something that just hurts the feelings of some homosexual. It is well known how homosexual queens wear their feelings on their blouse sleeve and it costs people a lot of money to defend themselves from these pansy attacks. So just what is just about this justice system in Canada and why would you want to bring it here by voting for a demented pro hate speech big brother control freak Democrat?

Magazine cleared of ‘bigotry,’ now facing 2nd hearing

A Christian publication already cleared by the Canadian Human Rights Commission on claims its reporting on issues involving homosexuality stem from “bigotry, discrimination and hate” will have to defend itself – again – from the same charges.

De Valk, the editor, said earlier, “It is chilling to think that a publication can be hauled before a government tribunal simply for reporting to interested citizens developments in these [homosexual rights] areas of controversy.”

WND reported earlier on the Canadian procedures that give human rights commissions virtually unlimited power to “hear” allegations of “hate crimes” and issue orders in those cases.

Already, a Knights of Columbus council was fined more than $1,000 for refusing to allow its facility to be used for a lesbian “wedding,” and before that printer Scott Brockie was fined $5,000 for declining to print homosexual-themed stationery. In another case Hugh Owens was fined thousands of dollars for quoting Bible verses in a newspaper and London, Ontario, mayor Diane Haskett was fined $10,000 for refusing to proclaim a homosexual pride day.

Officials noted the United States is not immune to such cases, either, after a New Mexico photographer was fined $6,600 for refusing to meet the demands of a lesbian to take pictures at a “wedding.”

Canada Family Action Coalition has blamed the situation on “bastardized courts” because activists who claim “hurt feelings” are demanding and getting penalties imposed against those who oppose homosexuality.

Wells has alleged he was offended by the Catholic Insight. Its editor, de Valk, said the claims are unfounded and the publication simply follows the teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality.

Catholic Insight reported that Wells’ attack on the publication is not his first. In 2006 he tried to close down several websites including concernedchristians.ca because of their Christian content, and he targeted Ron Gray and the Christian Heritage party because the political entity posted articles “motivated by hate” of homosexuals.

Mychal Massie sums up in seven very short paragraphs why America is not the nation it was and is not the nation it could be and what he says is totally contrary to what Obama stands for.

America not good enough for Obama’s children

Asked in Elkhart, Ind., by a 7-year-old little girl, why he wanted to be president, Barack Obama answered: “Because I don’t believe that America is what it could be [or] what it once was – and I don’t want that for my little girls.”

Parsing his statement, “He doesn’t want our America for [his] little girls,” because he doesn’t “believe [it is] what it once was.” On that point, I agree with him, albeit for completely different reasons.

When a presidential candidate says, “[We] Americans can’t drive our SUVs and [cannot] eat as much as we want and [cannot] keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to be okay.” When he states emphatically that this will not be the case under his leadership – I submit that we can conclude what kind of country he believes America “could be.” The problem is, that’s not the kind of country our Founding Fathers envisioned nor is it the kind of nation a majority of Americans want to live in

Joseph Farah talks about number three on the Democratic nomination ticket. John Edwards was the “moral” candidate for president from the Democratic Party. During the campaign Edwards talked about being a devout Christian, a man full of deep compassion. Now Edwards gets exposed for what he is and he does a Bill Clinton impersonation on TV by spinning the affair as some short past moral weakness due to his sudden fame. However, everyone knows John Edwards is still lying through his teeth. John Edwards deserves the Demented Delusional or Dumb club of the week award.

Politicians at all levels lie to the public too often. If the press does not expose them there are no negative consequences to them. Has anyone ever considered a law that would make outright lying to the public a felony for those in public office and for those running for public office?

John Edwards brand of moral insanity

Is it any wonder he would sire another child or two to whom he has no moral obligations?

Is it any wonder he would leave his wife, suffering from Stage 4 breast cancer, and little children behind in North Carolina while sowing his wild oats in California?

No, it isn’t any wonder at all.

The only wonder is why he tries to hide it all.

But that is not really a wonder, is it?

Because John Edwards is a politician. He knows that to get what he really wants, namely power, he has to pretend to be something he is not. What he is not is a devoted husband, a caring and faithful father, a man of integrity.

No wonder John Edwards doesn’t have a problem with same-sex marriage – marriage doesn’t mean that much to John Edwards.

No wonder John Edwards wouldn’t mind if some perverted schoolteacher lectured his 7-year-old about homosexuality – his own kids don’t mean that much to John Edwards.

No wonder John Edwards believes it’s government’s job to meet the needs of children, the elderly, the jobless and less fortunate – because John Edwards has no concept of real compassion, not even for his own family.

Most people in California obviously want this or they would not be electing into office liberal “progressive” representatives that keep passing amoral laws like this. This bill passed by 2/3rds majority in both houses. Anyone who thinks the “progressive” governor Schwarzenegger will not sign this bill is delusional and Californians put him in office. So what can you do if you disagree with celebrating homosexuality in your schools? You can let your kids be brainwashed, put them in private schools, home school them, convert many in California to true Christianity or move to a state where the people are not so “progressively” perverted. I have come to the conclusion that those who think they can stop amoral agendas in California without converting a substantial number of voters to true Christianity are now simply delusional. After all Californian’s are electing the liberal “progressive” politicians that are legislating the homosexual agenda

Legislators tell school kids to celebrate homosexuality

Only a year after banning all negative messages about homosexuality in
public schools throughout the state, the California Legislature now is
ordering school children to celebrate “gay” lifestyle choices.

“If signed into law, AB 2567 will mean an official day commemorating
homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality in California government
schools,” said Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children
and Families.

Thomasson said the passage by lawmakers of AB 2567 will require all California
public schools to “conduct suitable commemorative exercises” in honor
of the anti-religious, sexual-anarchy agenda of Harvey Milk, the late
San Francisco supervisor who was a homosexual activist.

The California Assembly approved the plan 43-26 and the Senate 22-13, with
both votes along party lines of Democrats supporting the homosexual
agenda.

The plan comes on the heels of last year’s school sexual indoctrination
laws, Thomasson said. “When fully implemented, SB 777 and AB 394 will
teach children in California government schools to support
homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality via instructional
materials, programs and activities, and school ’safety’ guidelines,” he
said. “In addition, the California State School Board this year
implemented SB 71 requiring public schools that provide sex education
to promote unmarried sexual activity with no restraints other than
mutual consent.”

The CCF announcement noted some of Milk’s statements included a blanket
condemnation of religion, which he described as “true perversion;” a
mandate to “declare yourself gay or lesbian,” and promotion of same-sex
marriages, which were created by the California Supreme Court in May
but are being challenged in the November election.

“This bad bill will teach impressionable schoolchildren the anti-religious,
homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda of Harvey Milk,” said Thomasson.
“For the love of God, parents and their children, we implore Gov.
Schwarzenegger to veto AB 2567.”

Even though voters turned down these socialist “reforms” socialists like Hugo Chavez cannot take no for an answer. They know what is best for everyone including what is best to keep themselves in power. I notice that Hugo Chavez is going to create a civilian militia so he can control any dissension. Obama also talked about creating a civilian force that would be as powerful as our military. Do you see the parallel here between Chavez and Obama?

Obama is also a socialist who has views much like those of Hugo Chavez. Just watch Venezuela if you want to know what will happen in the U.S. under the Obama administration. It all starts with a national civilian police force and the state taking control of private business and establishing price controls. Then before you know it you are living in a state much like the old USSR or Cuba.

My Way News - Venezuelans protest Chavez’s new socialist push

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - Riot police used tear gas Wednesday to block hundreds of Venezuelans protesting the latest moves by President Hugo Chavez to concentrate his power. The demonstrators said a blacklist of opposition candidates and a series of socialist decrees are destroying what’s left of their democracy.

Though the protest of about 1,000 people chanting “freedom!” was small compared to past marches, there is a growing public outcry over the sidelining of key government opponents ahead of state and local elections in November.

Chavez opponents also are outraged by 26 laws the president just decreed, some of them mirroring the socialist measures voters rejected in a December referendum.

Chavez issued the decrees just before the expiration of special legislative powers that allowed him to make laws without National Assembly approval for the past 18 month

One decree establishes a civilian militia that critics warn could emulate the citizen groups that control many aspects of community life in Cuba. Another gives Chavez the ability to designate regional authorities who critics say could undermine the power of locally elected officials.

Other decrees empower Chavez to expropriate goods from private businesses and increase state control over food, punishing business owners who fail to comply with price controls with fines, closure and even 10-year prison terms.

So here you have it. Polosi and Obama plan to legalize homosexual marriage nationwide by repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. Do not be deceived, the only thing you can do to stop it is to not vote for a Democrat for president and do not vote for a Democrat for the House or Senate. Do not count on a constitutional amendment to change this. It would take years to pass and at the rate this country is going downhill and being brainwashed they will have the votes to stop any constitutional amendment long before it gets ratified by the required number of states.

Pelosi on same-sex ‘marriage’ (OneNewsNow.com)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she would support efforts by would-be president Barack Obama to legalize homosexual so-called “marriages” nationwide.

Pelosi made the admission when questioned by a reporter for CNSNews.com, the Cybercast News Service.

REPORTER: Senator Obama has called for the full repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). And I’m wondering, if Senator Obama is elected president, if you’ll support him in repealing that in the next congress?

PELOSI: Yes.

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, is stunned by the admission.

Here are two pretty good articles on Obama. I think they peg him about right. He is a arrogant black liberation Marxist. If American is fooled by this half black arrogance they will see him rule over the demise of America.

How did America come to the place where they might even elect to President someone that was a drug abuser, a man with no national experience, a man that has known association with criminals and terrorists, a man that joined with a black theology religious cult for twenty years, a man who grew up among Islam and was highly influenced by Marxism who will not even show normal American patriotism in public. a man who confesses Christianity but denies it by every amoral stand he takes, a self professed pluralistic univeralist who believes that all religious lead to the same god, a man that will pass hate speech laws that will muzzle Christian free speech, a man we know will appoint people to the Supreme Court that will redefine our Constitution and Our Bill of Rights to mean what they want it to mean, and so forth?

Is is just because he can say “yes we can“? Well up to recently on oil he has said no we cannot and has shown himself to be an Olympic flip flopper on many issues. Or perhaps it is because he can say “change“? So is this the loose change that you want in the White House? If anyone remembers Jimmy Carter’s presidency, Obama’s will even make him look Presidential. Think of Obama, Reed, Pelosi, and a liberal Supreme Court running this country and you might think the U.S. became the first state of Cuba.

Obama thinks he’s better than you

The more I observe the great illusionist Barack Obama, the more I am convinced that if he is able to dupe enough voters into putting him in charge it will be the most entertaining presidency in the history of the office. Is there really any sane person who believes this guy would make a good president?

Forget for a moment the people with whom he associates. Look past the bomber, mad preacher, angry wife and crooked slumlord. They are merely distractions. Forget the lack of experience or substantive legislation during his short stint in the Senate. Just focus on his current actions.

When he takes the stage, there is an air of arrogance I have never sensed from anyone else in a similar situation. There is a tone of pompousness and entitlement. One gets the sense that Obama feels he is doing his attendees a favor for allowing them in his presence. His body language screams, “I am better than you.” His confidence is not quiet. His soaring rhetoric is accompanied by the dropping of the final syllable or vowel. His almost preacher-like twang is devoid of even the slightest shred of modesty.

Properly inflating our tires and keeping our cars tuned are not the answer to the energy crunch. Sending a $1,000 check to every American and sending the bill to Exxon is not an energy policy. Printing money to bail out banks and stop foreclosures is not the answer to bad decisions.

Government is not the answer to our problems; government is the problem. The sooner an honest politician declares so and puts forth legislation to shrink government, the better off we will all be.

Obama’s hissing

One of many sayings I remember from my grandmother is, “If the hiss doesn’t tell you it’s a snake, then the fact that it slithers on its belly in the dirt should.” And to that point, if the company Barack Obama has kept (read the dirt he has aligned himself with) doesn’t tell you he is a Marxist reparationist, then the words from his mouth, i.e., his hiss, certainly should.

Obama repeatedly told the NAACP, “I’ve been working my entire adult life to help build an America where ‘economic justice’ is being served. And as president, we’ll ensure that ‘economic justice’ is served. That’s what this election is about.” (”Barack Obama’s Stealth Socialism,” Investor’s Business Daily, July 28, 2008.)

“Economic justice” is just an oblique euphemism for wealth redistribution, i.e., Marxism – “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” IBD theorizes Obama’s intent is a massive transfer of wealth from those who have money to those whom he defines as poor. Worse, he views it as a global obligation.

Mrs Speaker I thought saving the planet is Al Gore’s job. Your job is be Speaker of the House. We are now reaping the consequences of your inability to even do a fair job at being the Speaker. Let the person with the qualifications save the planet. There is only one person that can save the planet and no, its not Al Gore either. Have they taught you nothing in that church you claim to attend?

Instead of saving the planet how about doing something to lower the oil prices before we have a complete economic collapse. No, the answer is not to open the strategic oil reserves and make ourselves vulnerable to Iran. The answer is to open up all the areas that you and your democratic congress have put off limits for drilling.

Pelosi: ‘I’m trying to save the planet’ - David Rogers - Politico.com

With fewer than 20 legislative days before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1, the entire appropriations process has largely ground to a halt because of the ham-handed fighting that followed Republican attempts to lift the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration. And after promising fairness and open debate, Pelosi has resorted to hard-nosed parliamentary devices that effectively bar any chance for Republicans to offer policy alternatives.

“I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet,” she says impatiently when questioned. “I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy.”

“I respect the office that I hold,” she says. “And when you win the election, you win the majority, and what is the power of the speaker? To set the agenda, the power of recognition, and I am not giving the gavel away to anyone.”

Let’s face it, Washington: This speaker is different. She’s the first woman ever to hold the post and a very tough one at that, with a penchant for the mystical.

How about if you cannot find the state your voting in on a map of the United States you cannot vote. You don’t even have to read to do that but it would probably eliminate almost half of all Americans. You better not use a globe or a third of them could not even find the United States.

Should All Americans be allowed to vote? - HUMAN EVENTS

Should we allow just anyone with a registration card to vote? In my view, we should not. There will be those who will abhor the notion that only “smart” people should be allowed to vote and how and where, they will argue, can you draw the line? Good questions, certainly, but we had better try real hard to embrace the argument and find some answers.

The vetting process can be debated and the final definitions of the “authorities” over voter legitimacy can be formulated at length to make a new system as fair as can be. But it does need to be done, and the sooner the better, because allowing really stupid people to vote for really stupid reasons or no reason at all is in itself a very bad idea.

Now notice in the commentary lines for this article who will address the concepts embraced in this article and who will instead simply attack me for having a father they didn’t like, or call me a “neo-con” (whatever that really is), or decry my Harvard education or some other utterly absurd personal attack and/or off the issue remark. Certainly that is their right
as a responding reader, and in such a small matter as this article it doesn’t much matter, but in an American presidential election, with so much at stake for the mass of humanity, does it make sense to have a voter base made up of people who in some cases haven’t the slightest idea at all what they are voting for?

Pride goes before a fall but when Obama falls will he take the nation with him? If he is elected to office that is about guaranteed. The country is going to get what it asked for and deserves. If the majority of people of the U.S. pick Obama to lead this nation what does that really say about them?

American Thinker: The Operative Term is ‘Hubris’

He has a seat on his campaign aircraft marked “president”. He has taken a shot at creating his own presidential seal, complete with Latin motto. He has laid claim to personal control over the world’s oceans and seas. He has repeatedly attempted to dictate how and on what level he, his ideas, and his activities may be discussed. He has encouraged a portrayal of himself as a messianic figure, including a portrait of himself as Christ, complete with halo. He is even now completing a triumphant grand tour of the old world, during which he attempted to shanghai an ancient monument for personal use without consulting the host government.

The operative term here is “hubris”. A word of Attic Greek origin, hubris was a major concept animating classical Greek thought. Hubris is overweening pride, an arrogance so profound and so visible as to affront the gods themselves. Hubris was a quality often identified with Greek tragic heroes. The hero allowed simple human pride in his accomplishments and station to burgeon to offensive proportions, at which point the wheels of fate began rolling. The ending was never good — the valiant Ajax stabs himself to death at a lonely spot, the kingly Oedipus is transformed into a howling, self-blinded wreck.

Barack Obama embodies hubris in chemically pure form. Not that he’s a tragic hero, or a hero of any sort, to anyone apart from his deluded legions of college freshmen. Beyond cleaning Hillary’s clock, he has no accomplishments to speak of, and as for his station… A glance at Trent Lott, Robert Byrd, and Ted Kennedy clearly reveals that “U.S. senator” is not a position of particular pride.

But even if he hasn’t founded cities, destroyed monsters, or led men into battle, Obama does share one quality with the heroes of the ancient world: an absolute conviction that he is superior to the ordinary run of humanity. Like them, Obama believes himself a man of destiny, and like them, Obama will go over the edge.

The only question is whether he gets to take the country with him.

People like Nancy Pelosi, T. Boone Pickens and Al gore are telling lies that could have a catastrophic negative impact on this nations for decades. At some point the people of the United States are going to have to say we have had enough of people with special interests buying time to give out irresponsible disinformation or the conservatives are going to have to do something about the imbalanced message themselves.

There is something wrong when billionaires like Pickens with a ten billion dollar venture in windmills can buy time on all major national medias to misinformed the public on a national security issue in order to sell the windmill industry that he leads.

There is something wrong when Al Gore’s group can spend 300 million to give global warming disinformation on media to sell a carbon cap and trade industry that he leads.

There is something wrong when the Speaker of the House will not even let the oil drilling issue come up for vote when 3/4 of the people of the U.S. want off shore drilling.

There is something wrong when all these people can get invited over and over again to appear on public media shows to give their nutty unrealistic views on energy but little or nothing is said by people who know the truth. There is a term for this, it is called brainwashing the American public.

A biased mass media run by the elite has changed America from a Republic to an Oligarchy. It used to be that representatives voted what the local people wanted but with mass media those that control the media first brainwash the public to believe a lie and then when they have enough convinced that lies are truth they pass loony laws that negatively impact Americans.

As I speak their is a bill sponsored by Obama going through Congress that will simply give away almost one percent of America’s Gross national product each year to the UN to give to other nations. Do you even know that this wealth transfer will soon be law? Why would they tell you? Government and media is not serving Americans anymore it is serving world governance through world elitists. As long as this continues we do not have a Republic we have a Oligarchy.

We need more than election reform, we also need brainwashing reform and we need to get rid of the undue influence of elitists that are brainwashing everyone. These power brokers are trying to manage everyone as they see fit but in reality they are about to screw up the whole world.

Major media is so influential and so controlled by just a few people that it needs to be made to report all the facts. It must not be allowed to just push the agendas of special interest groups.

I also would like to know why the Right is not making an equal effort in the major medias to inform the people of the truth as the Left is in giving disinformation? Is it only Homosexuals, environmentalists and big government socialists who have money to buy media in this country? Why is the conservative Right not buying just as much time to debunk the lies coming from the Left? We are not going to restore a government elected by people who have the facts if we allow the Left to have all the control over information to the people.

So I ask you conservative people who have the money, why are you not using your money to make a difference? Why is the conservative Right not also controlling major national medias? Is everyone on the Right broke? If conservative talk can draw the audience in talk radio why are conservatives not establishing their own TV programs to get out the truth?

If you are going to just give the Left the only voice that matters why would you expect anything other than more amoral laws and socialism in America?

Nancy Pelosi is playing God

There is a big disconnect between the rush to convert automobiles to batteries and the reality that the electricity to recharge those batteries would require a massive new generating capacity. The same flawed excuse of “protecting the environment” has also blocked the expansion of electricity generating capacity. If the self-appointed gods of environmental protection won’t allow the expansion of electricity generation, how are the batteries of all these new electric vehicles going to be recharged every night?

Another major disconnect between the rush to replace oil with renewable sources such as wind and solar is the negative environmental impact of these renewable technologies. For example, to replace a single 50-megawatt coal-fired generating plant, which may occupy as much as 20 acres of land, approximately 3,000 acres of land would have to be occupied by wind turbines. To produce 50-megawatts of electricity from solar panels would cover even more land. How can these protectors of the environment justify blanketing the land with whirling bird-killers and solar panels that block the sun from all forms of life beneath them?

Some environmental purists genuinely want America and the world to return to the Stone Age. Nancy Pelosi is no environmental purist. She is a political creature, which is a person so intoxicated by power that the instinct to retain and expand it overwhelms common sense, logic, ethics, morality, or anything else that might get in the way.

By her refusal even to allow debate on proposals to expand oil development – where oil is known to exist – she stands like a barricade between thirsty consumers and a new mountain stream. She apparently sees herself as a self-appointed savior; she is, in truth, acting as judge and jury, condemning a nation desperate for more energy to spiraling energy costs for possibly another generation.

This is not a new posture for Democrat leadership. Democrats in the House, the Senate and the White House have blocked expansion of oil supplies for more than a decade. Had Bill Clinton not vetoed the bill that would have opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge more than a decade ago, gas prices would not be as high as they are today. Millions of jobs would have been created, and every American could have saved the money needlessly paid to foreign sources for oil, simply because one man played God and defied the express will of the people.

Nancy Pelosi is now playing God, standing where Bill Clinton stood more than a decade ago, defying the expressed will of the people by blocking access to the known oil reserves that are so desperately needed by the entire nation.

I did not say Obama is not black but this black fellow the Coach talked to did. Maybe blacks ought to seriously think about what he said. Many people in the world have brown skin tone but would you call them Black?

Dave Daubenmire — Conveniently Black

“I ain’t gonna say he is a Muslim like some others, but he sure isn’t a real Christian. I am a Christian and that is why I sat down to talk to you. Somebody has to tell the truth, Coach, somebody with some courage. Obama is a big-government socialist dressed up in a Willy Wonka suit. He will destroy what is left of America.”

“I love this country. I fought in Iraq for her….saw lots of men die. And I’ll tell you this; they didn’t die so that a woman could kill her baby or so that a man could marry a man. And I quaran-dam-tee you they didn’t fight and die to see this country handed over to the communists.”

“Barack Obama is not black, Coach. He is a white big-government liberal with a chocolate veneer. If he gets elected we’ll all be slaves. Please tell folks, Coach. Somebody has to do something. I know you are not afraid to speak the truth. Lots of folks are counting on you.”

He got up, shook my hand and walked out to his brown truck.

“Hmm.” Kevin grunted at me. “I hope you’re not thinking of taking that one on?”

“Not me,” I winked. “I could never get away with saying those things.”

Well Chuck Norris, I usually agree with you and I see the problem but your solution is not at all logical and it would not bring good government. We already have two separate branches in the legislator branch of government to deal with the representation problem. What you are proposing would effectively do away with the role of the House of Representatives. The Senate has two representatives from each state because that government body is meant to give equal representation to each state in the Union. However the House of Representatives is supposed to represent the population of the nation. The point of this is not to have a bunch of low population states dictating law to high population states at the national level. If you reduced the House to one member from each state as you suggest you would just have a second Senate. So the states would be doubly represented but the people of this nation would not have equal representation at the nation level.

If we were to do what you suggest we might as well become 50 independent nations or go under a unified treaty like what the EU is proposing and let unelected bureaucrats be appointed by the Senate to dictate federal governance over all the states (of course if we did that we would soon be under tyranny)

The problem is not the number of representatives in the House of Representatives the 9 percent approval rate reflects that these people are not representing the people or more likely that the nation is so divided that they can accomplish nothing.

We need to start electing representatives to the House that represent the common people. That means the make up of the House should not all be professional politicians and lawyers. That would take care of part of the problem but like I said, much of the reason the House and Senate can do nothing is because the people in this nation are deeply divided. That problem cannot be resolved in a Republican without a majority vision or compromise.

One thing we can do is to have major election reform. Incumbents have a huge fund raising advantage and media coverage advantage. Money should not be a factor in national elections but it is now the major factor. If it were not, the make up of the House would change overnight.

Mad as h— and not going to take it anymore!

I don’t only think there are too many cooks in Congress’ kitchen nowadays, but the numbers are stacked in discriminatory ways. For example, if California represents a larger liberal voice with its 53 representatives, what chance or how fair is it for smaller more conservative states who have between one and five representatives and votes in the House? The U.S. doesn’t need a new reapportionment act to raise the number of representatives, but a return to the Constitution to reduce the number of representatives in pursuit of creating more equitable regions or districts. Personally, I believe, just as we have one governor per state, we should consider reducing Congress to one representative and two senators per state (the minimal by constitutional requirements). If one representative works for Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming, why can’t it work for all the rest of the states? Here’s a movie we all can star in: “Honey, I shrunk the Congress!”

Nothing like Liberal unity to bring everyone together. They even recognize the fascist ways of their own party.

Backlash: 2 million angry Democrats reject Obama?

More than two million angry Democrats are rejecting Sen. Barack Obama as the likely Democratic nominee for the presidency this year, according to a new protest organization.

“I hate to use this word but it’s fascist, and that’s the approach they’re taking to silence any Hillary Clinton supporters,” Will Bower, co-founder of PUMA/Just Say No Deal, an exploding coalition of voters who say they have raised $10 million in just days to pay down Clinton’s campaign debt.

“Barack Obama wants to give his acceptance speech in a stadium because he intends to minimize any pro-Hillary supporter dissent. It’s not because he wants to include more people. He knows that if they pull any shenanigans at convention, the Hillary delegates will walk out, and they don’t want that to be seen or heard. They’re bringing as many Obama supporters as they can to fill that stadium. It’s fascism,” he said.

Now more than two million, based on donation and other records, are determined to protest the nominating process and push for an open convention in Denver this August.

“The seeds of discontent for the birth of the PUMA/Just Say No Deal movement were planted during Barack’s poor performances at the debates, the media assault on Clinton after Iowa, Obama’s arrogance on the campaign trail, and the DNC’s selective application of its own rules,” Bower explained.

Bower said Hillary supporters were so incensed with the DNC’s action they wrote about it at their blogsites. The issue went viral, spreading rapidly across the Internet. One irate blogger came up with the acronym PUMA after blogging “Party Unity, My A**.” The abbreviation eventually evolved into the puma cat logo used at multiple sites.

It took only days for PUMA and dozens of other grassroots organizations and political activists to discover one another and convene a conference call. They agreed to band together and call the movement Just Say No Deal.

Well I am glad that someone is noticing the insanity of it all. If politicians actually try to cut CO2 by 50 percent there will be a world revolution. It is easy to make promises about forty years down the line because none of these people will be alive. Why would you believe a politician about what their country will do in forty years when their politicians do not even meet commitments of today. Seems everything the G 8 does is just for show including the photos. The Brits will be the first to revolt because thanks to government stupidity they will run short of electricity in just a few years unless they go into national decline which is more than likely.

Our leaders are in carbon-cloud cuckoo land - Telegraph

For a perfect example of what is meant by “gesture politics” - an empty pledge given solely for effect, which the politician has no hope of honouring - one could not do better than this week’s commitment by the G8 leaders on how they want us to fight climate change.

Sitting on their cloud-wreathed Japanese mountain top, they solemnly agreed that, to halt global warming, their countries would aim by 2050 to halve their emissions of carbon dioxide.

If the G8’s leaders genuinely wanted to cut carbon emissions by 50 per cent over the next 40 years, this would mean taking steps they haven’t even begun to contemplate. It would require such a drastic cut in our energy use and standard of living that their peoples would have risen up in mass revolt long before the target was reached.

Forget the nonsense about a 50 per cent cut in carbon emissions by 2050. Our Government has already committed Britain to go even further, by imposing a statutory cut of 60 per cent through its Climate Change Bill.

But long before that, unless those who rule us come down out of cloud cuckoo land very fast, our lights will go out, our computers will shut down, our economy will judder to a halt and we shall face a national catastrophe. We may well be meeting that 60 per cent target sooner than we think - but not for reasons that reflect well on our politicians, of any party.

Dr. Cuddy gives us a good overview how the power elite (PE) have been picking the U.S. choice for president for the last hundred years. The same thing is going on in most of the developed world. It will be no different this time. What is different is that their global world governance agenda is now getting close and they are using climate change fears as a tool to rapidly accelerate that agenda.

Dr. Dennis Cuddy — Think you have a choice?

Regarding the 2008 presidential election, I have in recent articles already explained how Senators John McCain and Barack Obama are both acceptable to the PE and are surrounded by CFR advisors. The point is that in election after election, the people think they have a choice but they really don’t.

This controversy about Obama’s birth is all pretty dumb and it is a red herring. The constitution of the U.S. says the President has to be a natural-born U.S. citizen. If I went to Canada just to get back in this country I would have to produce a valid birth certificate. The government should have done a background check on everyone in the Senate for their security clearance and if he was not born in the U.S. that would be known and he would not be in the race. If it turns out that they did not do their job we have a much bigger problems than Obama’s place of birth we need a dysfunctional unsecured government. I suggest you waste your time on the real issues. If you want to be taken as a serious news source post credible articles.

Obama birth certificate: Real or phony baloney?

Questions over a birth certificate for Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama – the document that could prove his constitutional qualifications to run for the presidency – have been revived by a report from Israel Insider.

Do not be deceived here is the heart of Obama’s Faith-Based Initiatives. It allows no expression of faith at all and will control those in it. Obama wants to use Federal tax payer money to help secularize and control faith-based groups. These proposals actually show that Obama is a radical socialist who wants government control over religion contrary to the U.S. Constitution that says, “congress should pass no law that prohibits its free exercise“.

This is also a deception to deceive naive people on the religious right. Be aware that Obama is not for faith in God changing society he really is proposing government controlled religion that is practicing socialism. This is not faith-based Initiatives.

Faithless, Faith-Based Initiatives « FOX Forum « FOXNews.com

a spokesman for the Obama campaign underlined the unique qualities of Obama’s plan as it compares to the policies of the current White House Office for Faith Based Community Initiatives, which McCain supports.

1) In an Obama administration, the federal government would supervise the hiring process of faith-based groups to make sure they do not give preference to employees who share the faith of the organization.

2) In an Obama administration, the federal government would only give money to “secular programs” of faith-based groups.

In his own words, Senator Obama explains and justifies his reforms in this way:

“Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don’t believe this partnership will endanger that idea - so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them - or against the people you hire - on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs.”

As a former professor of constitutional law, Senator Obama surely knows the Constitution says only two things about the federal government’s relation to religion: 1) it should not establish one religion over another 2) congress should pass no law that prohibits its free exercise.

But in the ubiquitous spirit of that phantom Constitutional wall of separation of church and state, Senator Obama promises his administration will discriminate against all faiths, as a way to respect the faith of all. In fact, his plan would whitewash faith-based groups of faith. Imagine what would happen to an after-school program run by an Orthodox Jewish temple that cannot give preference to hiring Orthodox Jewish teachers. The program would cease to exist. Or imagine an Evangelical ministry that helps prisoners reintegrate into society forced to “secularize” its programs in order to receive financial aid.

I think the statistics on Obama in this article will give you an idea of just how radical Obama is and how far his views differ from the vast majority of American people. With that in mind why is Obama leading in the polls? Blind stupidity? Brainwashing? What?

American Thinker: Obama: Radical in Liberal Clothing

Yet even with his recent attempts at moderation he retains positions on several significant issues indistinguishable from those of Dennis Kucinich. Most of those positions are opposed not only by overwhelming majorities of all Americans, but in several cases, majorities of Democrats as well.

Whenever a proposition polls in the 60% range, it’s considered to be in landslide territory. That doesn’t necessarily mean that someone supporting the minority viewpoint is a nut or an extremist, but at some point it may fairly be said that a person on the short end of several of these propositions is out of the mainstream. Here are just some of the issues in which Obama’s on the fringe of American opinion:*