Obama Gets Coveted Ludacris Endorsement

The latest chapter in the Cult of Obama features rapper Ludacris who recently penned a song for The Messiah. While making a number of racist statements and generalizations, Ludacris (the name is more fitting than you think) calls Hillary Clinton a bitch and refers to paralysis in the same sentence with John McCain.

A class act, this one.

A sampling of Ludacris’s rhymes on behalf of Obama:

Hillary hated on you, so that bitch is irrelevant
[...]
you can’t stop what’s bout to happen, we bout to make history
the first black president is destined and it’s meant to be
the threats ain’t fazing us, the nooses or the jokes
so get off your ass, black people, it’s time to get out and vote!
paint the White House black and I’m sure that’s got ‘em terrified
McCain don’t belong in ANY chair unless he’s paralyzed
Yeah I said it cause Bush is mentally handicapped
Ball up all of his speeches and I throw em like candy wrap
cause what you talking I hear nothing even relevant
and you the worst of all 43 presidents
get out and vote or the end will be near
the world is ready for change because Obama is here!

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , Barack Obama / The Messiah, bitch, Crazy liberals, cult, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Fake Conservative, Ludacris, paralysis, rap

“What Liberal Media?” — Eric Alterman

The above quote is actually the title of a book by liberal journalist Eric Alterman. (No, I’m not linking the book.) I didn’t buy or read the book, but the title itself tells me all I need to know. (Our time on this earth is finite.) Apparently the mainstream news media is either not liberal at all to Alterman, or, if it is liberal, it isn’t THAT bad.

Whatever. Anyone who writes a book seriously doubting the blatant advocacy of the media must be in such severe denial about the proverbial elephant standing in the living room that it’s hard to take any such arguments or assertions seriously.

Fortunately, the public is not as blind. According to Rasmussen Reports, the public would likely disagree with the sentiment that the media is unbiased or objective, at least in regard to election coverage.

Voters Give Media Failing Grades in Objectivity for Election 2008

Just 17% of voters nationwide believe that most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of election campaigns. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that four times as many—68%–believe most reporters try to help the candidate that they want to win.

The perception that reporters are advocates rather than observers is held by 82% of Republicans, 56% of Democrats, and 69% of voters not affiliated with either major party. The skepticism about reporters cuts across income, racial, gender, and age barriers.

When 56% of Democrats see a problem with the media, that problem must be quite serious.

Ideologically, political liberals give the least pessimistic assessment of reporters, but even 50% of those on the political left see bias. Thirty-three percent (33%) of liberals believe most reporters try to be objective. Moderates, by a 65% to 17% margin, see reporters as advocates, not scribes. Among political conservatives, only 7% see reporters as objective while 83% believe they are biased.

Given these results, it’s not surprising that 76% of voters believe the media has too much power and influence over elections. Just 3% believe the Fourth Estate has too little influence while 16% say the balance is about right.

Eighty-seven percent (87%) of Republicans believe the media has too much influence along with 80% of unaffiliated voters and 65% of Democrats.

Voters have little doubt as to who is benefitting [sic] from the media coverage this year—Barack Obama. Fifty-four percent (54%) say Obama has gotten the best coverage so far. Twenty-two percent (22%) say McCain has received the most favorable coverage while 14% say that Hillary got the best treatment.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, What Liberal Media?

Hillary Clinton to End Campaign for President

ABC: Clinton Preparing to Drop Out of Presidential Race — Barack Obama Captures Nomination After Intense Democratic Fight By KATE SNOW, ELOISE HARPER and ED O’KEEFE

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Hillary Clinton

Liberal Media Has Collective Orgasm Over Obama’s Skin Color

Rather than use Senator Barack Obama’s nomination as an opportunity to discuss his record, the coverage of the event was nothing more than cheer leading. No substance, no information to be found on any network.

Note that the media did not respond when Clarence Thomas was nominated to the highest court in America; or when Colin Powell was appointed Secretary of State; or when Condi Rice was appointed Secretary of State; or when J.C. Watts was elected; or when Michael Steele ran for governor; or when Lynn Swann ran for governor.

Why? Those men and women were black but they were conservative.

ABC Goes Live in Prime Time to Carry Triumphant Obama Speech By Brent Baker

Meanwhile Hillary isn’t quite ready to leave:

AP: Clinton open to VP nod By JIM KUHNHENN and BETH FOUHY

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media? , Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media?

Useful Headline of the Day

Hartford Courant: Clinton Exit Possible

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Hillary Clinton

The Broken Recor(D)s

Scott Stantis

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama / The Messiah, cliches, euphemisms, Hillary Clinton

The Death of Time Magazine

No longer the sane, centrist news magazine, Time long ago cast aside any pretense of objectivity. Instead, it fully embraced it’s role as the Democrat National Committee’s personal bitch.

For some proof, a review of Time’s covers in 2007 and 2008 might show a pattern:

April 21, 2007

May 14th, 2007

Nov 19, 2007

Dec 10, 2007

Feb 18th, 2008

March 10, 2008

March 17, 2008

May 5, 2008

May 19, 2008

When it’s not being the subservient mouth piece of the DNC, Time makes sure to take shots at Republicans and the War on Terror:

Mar 26th, 2007

Jan 15th, 2007

March 19, 2007

May 21, 2007

Of course, Time is not alone in this, but it is revealing to note how brazenly open Time is in its shameless advocacy. It simply cares nothing about objectivity or any journalistic standards. The primary goal at Time is a (1) Democrat (2) in the White House. In order to achieve that goal, they will openly root for Hillary and Obama and cast doubt and disrespect (or simply ignore) any Republican. Is this is the “free press” that Americans deserve? How is this agenda-driven cheer leading any different than The Daily Worker or Pravda under the Soviet Union?

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media? , Barack Obama, Dick Cheney, Hillary Clinton, media bias, Mitt Romney, time, What Liberal Media?

Eliot Spitzer’s Whore Supports — drumroll — Hillary

I’m sure Senator Clinton is thrilled with this coveted endorsement.

Ashley Alexandra “Kristen” Dupre, whose political expertise can only lead to a, like, totally cool speech tour, just loves screwing those Democrats.

Pics of the degenerate are here. (I meant Dupre, not Hillary.)

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Ashley Alexandra Dupre, Democrat, Hillary Clinton, Kristen, whores

The Rehabilitation of Jeremiah Wright Begins

The Barack Obama/The Messiah campaign cannot erase Jeremiah Wright’s racist, ignorant statements. Nor can they erase Wright’s 20 year connection to The Messiah. So what CAN the campaign do?

Well, they can try to make Wright look like a good ‘ole, nice guy who doesn’t mean any harm. He’s not a crackpot racist who hates America and every white person in it! Oh nooo! Wright’s just a teddy bear behind a pulpit! Yes, it’s image rehabilitation time.

(Although it seems that Wright doesn’t want to cooperate in that endeavor!)

Meanwhile, in a great irony, Obama pretends that race doesn’t really matter. (It matters only so long as liberals control the debate.) Try to ignore the fact that Obama and other liberals obsess about race constantly.

And who is the big loser in all this? (Besides America, which has to chose from two socialists and one back stabbing, pseudo-conservative.) Hillary has NO intention of leaving this race, even if she’s (God forbid) totally incapacitated. But Obama still leads in delegates. So it will come down to the Democrat party having to chose between (1) angering Hillary supporters or (2) angering Obama supporters.

Damned if they do, and. . .

The beneficiary of this political bloodbath is Senator John “campaign finance” McCain, who gets to do nothing (except beat up on his own supporters for television ads he hasn’t bothered to see himself) but watch and laugh.

The North Carolina G.O.P. ad which irritates John “backstabber” McCain so much:

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , Barack Obama, Bill Moyers, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton, image rehabilitation, Jeremiah Wright, John McCain

Obama’s Biggest Enemies

Senator Barack Hussein Obama has had it easy for a long time. The media engineered Presidential candidate wasted no time complaining about the questions he received in the most recent ABC debate:

“Last night, I think we set a new record because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people. It took us 45 minutes!”

“Forty-five minutes before we heard about health care. Forty-five minutes before we heard about Iraq,” he continued. “Forty-five – 45 – minutes before we heard about jobs. Forty-five minutes before we heard about gas prices.”

Uh huh. I am certain Obama’s first thought during the debate was about Americans and their concerns. Most important to Obama was the fact that Obama was on the losing end of the questions posed to him.

The whining continued:

“They like stirring up controversy and they like playing gotcha games, getting us to attack each other. And I have to say Senator Clinton looked in her element,” Obama said. “She was taking every opportunity to get a dig in there. You know, that’s all right. That’s her right. That’s her right to kind of twist the knife a little bit.”

Very self-aware, this Obama guy.

Even if we concede for the sake of argument that the questions posed to Obama were somehow unjust or irrelevant, how does this man plan on leading the nation for the next 4 years as President? By complaining when things do not go his way? It is unlikely, but what will he do if he inherits a Republican Senate or House? Will he complain when Congress doesn’t push his socialist legislative proposals?

Interesting to note that Obama’s complaining comes long after some of the bigger attacks were directed against him.

One LA Times columnist and University of California professor (and obvious racist) wondered whether Obama is black enough. (Picture a conservative getting away with that kind of rhetoric.)

The controversy over Obama’s middle name — Hussein — began thanks to Democrat and former Senator of Nebraska Bob Kerrey.

On the issue of Obama’s alleged drug use and alleged drug selling, that issue began thanks to Bill Shaheen, Hillary Clinton’s co-chair.

So what do all three of the above trouble-makers have in common?

They happen to be liberals.

And John McCain can continue to pretend that he’s above dirty politics because the Democrat Party is taking care of that for him quite well.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , ABC, Barack Obama, bi-racial, black, Bob Kerrey, Democrat, drug selling, drug use, drugs, hussein, John McCain/Sarah Palin, L.A. Times, liberals, media, race, Shaheen

More Double Standards from Liberals: Tough Questions Are Only for Republicans!

The story below is the predictable reaction from critics and liberals when the moderators of the recent Dem debate, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson, dared to ask some tough questions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Apparently tough questions are only for Republicans.

So what kinds of “tough” questions were asked?

[T]he first three issues raised concerned comments made by Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright; comments that Obama made about the draw of guns and religion to some rural Americans; and Clinton’s false claim that she had been under sniper fire in Bosnia while first lady.

Obama was asked about why he hasn’t worn an American flag pin on his lapel, and his relationship with a former member of the Weather Underground.

All of these issues were raised before Iraq and the economy came up.

All relevant, recent and newsworthy issues, no? Of course they are.

As for Jeremiah Wright and the Weathermen, is it not relevant to inquire about Obama’s associations? Is it not relevant to ask why a man who is running for President of the United States has difficulty publicly wearing the American flag on his suit jacket?

Is it not relevant for Mrs. Clinton to explain how she honestly believed she was being attacked by bullets when no such attack occurred? Isn’t her honesty, assuming that she has been able to retain such a trait, a relevant issue?

Oh not to Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News! Based on Bunch’s reaction, he sounded like he had to be taken to the nearest emergency room.

Will Bunch, a Philadelphia Daily News writer, posted an open letter to Gibson and Stephanopoulos on his blog. He wrote that he was so angry that “it’s hard to even type accurately because my hands are shaking.” He said the ABC newsmen spent too much time on trivial matters that didn’t concern most voters.

“By so badly botching arguably the most critical debate of such an important election, in a time of both war and economic misery, you disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself,” Bunch wrote.

Shales also criticized the early line of questioning, and said ABC’s coverage appeared slanted against Obama. He mocked Gibson’s closing thank you to the candidates for a fascinating debate.

“He’s entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer,” Shales wrote.

Normally liberals reserve such bile for Rush Limbaugh.

Someone tell me how Will Bunch’s juvenile whining is any different than a screaming three year old at a grocery store whose mother refused to buy him his 500th toy?

The Bunchster was not alone:

Greg Mitchell of the trade publication Editor and Publisher said it was “perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate this year.”

Yes, embarrassing it was. For Obama and Clinton.

The comments on ABC News’ Web site were angry, sometimes profane and occasionally funny. “Why not have Paris Hilton moderate next time?” one poster wrote. One man repeated the word “bad” 48 times. A sampling found opinion was running against the network about 8-to-1.

They must get their way at all times, these liberals. Truth, fact, logic and relevancy are, well, irrelevant. And if you dare deviate one iota from the Democrat Blueprint, then you must be shallow or stupid; you must be Paris Hilton. So convinced they are of themselves and their opinions, so lacking in maturity are they, the act of asking relevant and recent and newsworthy questions of two people who want to be President of the United State of America is nearly a crime against humanity.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media? , ABC, Barack Obama, Charles Gibson, Crazy liberals, debate, Democrat, George Stephanopoulos, Greg Mitchell, Hillary Clinton, liberal whining, Paris Hilton, Presidency, Will Bunch

Obama’s Connection to an Unrepentant Terrorist

Obama’s 20 year connection to Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger is already known. But does Obama’s radical connection run deeper than racist pastors?

Politico: Obama once visited ’60s radicals By BEN SMITH

While [William] Ayers and [Bernadine] Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.

Now, as Obama runs for president, what two guests recall as an unremarkable gathering on the road to a minor elected office stands as a symbol of how swiftly he has risen from a man in the Hyde Park left to one closing in fast on the Democratic nomination for president.

“I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.”

Obama and Palmer “were both there,” he said.

Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.

Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.

To give you an idea of how little Ayers has changed, he was interviewed by the New York Times years ago when he stated, “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” [Translation: I wish we killed more people and destroyed more property, but I don't have the courage to say so.]

That interview was published on Sept. 11, 2001.

Former radical activist Bernardine Dohrn and her companion William Ayers leave court in Chicago on Jan. 14, 1981. Dohrn received a $1,500 fine and three years probation for her role in the ‘Days of Rage’ disturbance in Chicago in 1969. Photo: AP

Why does all this matter? Even though Obama now condemns the criminal acts of Ayers, Dohrn, and others, it is highly unlikely that Obama did not know of their past when he first met them. It is even MORE unlikely once he served with Ayers in their Woods and Annenberg activities.

It matters because it either casts great doubt on Obama’s judgment, confirms his extreme desire for power, or both.

Regarding his judgment, consider: would you intentionally meet with anyone who set off bombs in public for any reason? Would you associate with such a person over many years time?

If Obama DID know of Ayers’s criminal activities, he must made a cost/benefit analysis. In Obama’s view, it must have been worth the political risk to associate with a terrorist couple if it could lead to election to higher office.

Whether he lacked judgment or sought power at any cost, it certainly casts doubt over what kind of President Barack Obama would be.

***

More at:

Washington Post: Obama’s ‘Weatherman’ Connection

***

Obama’s response to all this has been the illogical claim that he was merely 8 years old when Ayers set off bombs. While this is technically true, Obama has remained connected to Ayers as an adult.

Despite his involvement with a terrorist organization and bombings, the University of Illinois at Chicago found lunatic and unrepentant William Ayers to be worthy of joining their faculty. As for his lunatic and unrepentant wife, Bernie Dohrn, Northwestern University School of Law hired her.

Ayers and Dohrn should be in a prison cell for the rest of their lives, not in a classroom. Instead, they were accepted by prestigious academic programs not only as students but as professors.

If this doesn’t tell you all you need to know about the moral decay of the spineless souls who run academia in America…

Moreover, if you truly hated the nation in which you live, would you

a. live in that nation;

b. become educated in that nation;

c. be employed in that nation;

d. pay taxes to its government;

e. accept the protection of that nation’s constitution, military, police and fire departments?

I guess if you’re a comfortable parasite, maybe you would.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama, Bernardine Dohrn, Crazy liberals, Northwestern University, The Woods Fund, University of Illinois at Chicago, Weathermen, William Ayers

Obama Condescends on “Bitter” Small Town America

Keep talking, Barry. Keep talking.

Reuters: Under fire, Obama clarifies small-town remarks By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama tried to quell a political furor on Saturday over his comments about small-town Pennsylvanians, saying he used the wrong words to describe their mood.

Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and Republican candidate John McCain kept the heat on the Illinois senator for his comments that small-town residents were bitter over job losses and turned in frustration to religion, guns and anti-immigrant sentiments.

Clinton, campaigning in Indiana before the state’s May 6 contest, said the comments were elitist, divisive and out of touch and did not reflect the values of Americans she met.

“I don’t think it helps to divide our country into one America that is enlightened and one that is not,” Clinton, a New York senator, said in Indianapolis. “If you want to be the president of all Americans, you need to respect all Americans.”

Of course, you expected the vulture Clinton campaign to swoop in on this carcass, right? Ignore the fact that Hillary shares the same condescension on regular Americans as Obama/The Messiah.

Obama said he did not use the right language to describe the anger and frustration small-town residents feel about the struggling economy and the failure of government to help them.

“I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois, who are bitter,” Obama said in Muncie, Indiana.

“So I said well you know when you’re bitter you turn to what you can count on. So people they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community,” he said.

“Now, I didn’t say it as well as I should have.”

In an interview with the Winston-Salem Journal, Obama said, “If I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that.

“The underlying truth of what I said remains, which is simply that people who have seen their way of life upended because of economic distress are frustrated and rightfully so,” he was quoted as saying.

Obama touched off the controversy with his remarks at a closed San Francisco fundraiser earlier in the week. The remarks became public on Friday.

He said jobs had been disappearing in small towns in Pennsylvania and across the Midwest for 25 years with nothing to replace them.

“It’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” he said.

The exact quote:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

As time goes on, the facade of the Obamessiah keeps getting chipped away, little by little.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton , arrogant liberals, Barack Obama, economy, Hillary Clinton, small town America

The Religion of Peace Considers Non-Muslims “Dogs”

The arrogance and disrespect which Muslim doctrine preaches should outrage anyone.

NIS News (Netherlands): Children Told they are Dogs during Mosque Visit

A primary school in Amsterdam wished to provide its pupils with an understanding for other cultures. But during a visit to a mosque, the children were told they were dogs.

With a view to developing understanding and respect for other cultures among children, primary school De Horizon regularly organises outings to various religious organisations. The chairman of the El Mouchidine mosque told the children from group 7 (aged 10) and their chaperones however that non-Muslims are dogs.

In a letter to the children’s parents, the school expresses its regret at the incident: “We are shocked that during the guided tour, the mosque’s chairman told the children and chaperoning parents that non believers were dogs. We consider this statement as unacceptable since we allow our children to partake in this project to develop respect for freedom of religious choice”.

In the meantime, the school’s management has addressed the mosque on the undesirable behaviour of the chairman. Both parties will say nothing further on the matter. “We will resolve the matter amongst ourselves and I have no inclination whatsoever to discuss the matter with the media”, as newspaper De Telegraaf quoted the school’s spokesperson Mariet ten Berge. “We have been to the mosque before and it always went well”.

Angry parents had sent the letter on to De Telegraaf but were reportedly rapped on the knuckles by the school’s management. “The school wishes to play this down. That is precisely the problem”, as one mother commented.

Note that the school does the apologizing but the mosque does not.

Referring to non-Muslims as “dogs” isn’t all that unusual for Muslims. Non-Muslims are deemed “unclean” (“najis”) and placed in the same list with some revolting stuff:

“84. The following ten things are essentially najis: 1. Urine 2. Faeces 3. Semen 4. Dead body 5. Blood 6. Dog 7. Pig 8. Kafir 9. Alcoholic liquors 10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [i.e., unclean things].

108. The entire body of a Kafir, including his hair and nails, and all liquid substances of his body, are najis.

109. If the parents, paternal grandmother and paternal grandfather of a minor child are all kafir, that child is najis, except when he is intelligent enough, and professes Islam. When, even one person from his parents or grandparents is a Muslim, the child is Pak (The details will be explained in rule 217).

110. A person about whom it is not known whether he is a Muslim or not, and if no signs exist to establish him as a Muslim, he will be considered Pak. But he will not have the privileges of a Muslim, like, he cannot marry a Muslim woman, nor can he be buried in a Muslim cemetery.”

More here and here.

Imagine an evangelical Christian referring to anyone as “unclean.” Imagine Joel Osteen claiming that Muslims are on the same level as feces or dead bodies. Do you think the media would maintain the dhimmified silence it currently keeps? Tolerance and multiculturalism go in one direction only, kafir!

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, The Religion of Peace Files , children, dhimmis, dogs, Islam, Kafir, Muslims, najis, Netherlands, The Religion of Peace

The Enumerated Powers Act, McCain, Obama, and Clinton

Each of our nominees for President prefer not to support a bill which “would require that all bills introduced in the U.S. Congress include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which the law is being enacted.”

Political Loathsomeness By Walter E. Williams

“[W]hy would Sens. Obama, Clinton and McCain have a distaste for, and fail to support, a measure binding them to what the Constitution actually permits?”

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, Rep. John Shadegg, The Enumerated Powers Act

More Multicult Madness: Turban>Safety

Vancouver Sun: Sikhs file rights complaint — Turbaned forestry workers say their employer’s hard-hat rule prevents them from working by Kim Bolan

Filed under: Abortion/Baby Killing, Everything Else, Hillary Clinton , B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Kalwant Singh Sahota, madness, Mander Singh Sohal, multiculturalism, sawmill, Vancouver

Media Pushes “Recession” Despite Facts

In their April 4th article, David Leonhardt and Marjorie Connelly of the New York Treason wrote:

Although the public mood has been darkening since the early days of the war in Iraq, it has taken a new turn for the worse in the last few months, as the economy has seemed to slip into recession. There is now nearly a national consensus that the country faces significant problems.

How’s that to cheer you up?

The country has not slipped into a recession, contrary to the desires of the media. A recession can be defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth, but we have not experienced even one single quarter of negative growth. At most, one can accurately say that the economy has slowed down significantly during the end of last year. Note, however, that during last year’s third quarter, we experienced a strong annual GDP growth rate of 4.9 percent!

But this error is mild in comparison to the shameless attempt by the media over the last year to perpetrate the myth that the U.S. economy is now in the Great Depression; it isn’t. The only reasons one can explain this sudden surge of negativity is either (1) too much good news is coming out of Iraq (which as a matter of official policy must always be ignored), and (2) the media is utilizing a similar tactic employed in 1992 when it successfully help to unseat President Bush Sr. with (false) claims that the economy was doing worse than it really was.

It would be refreshing if journalists simply reported facts and reality and kept their personal preferences and fantasies to themselves.

Filed under: Everything Else, Hillary Clinton , economy, lies, New York Times, recession

Hillary Can’t Get Her Lies Straight

NY POST: HILLARY IS ONE BIG ‘MIS’TAKE By CHARLES HURT and DAPHNE RETTER Post Correspondents

First she “misspoke,” now she misheard.

Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday seemed to deny that she told New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson that Barack Obama could not win the presidency.

But her campaign later said she misheard a reporter’s question.

Asked at a press conference whether she made the comment to Richardson, Clinton said, “That’s a no.”

She added, “We have been going back and forth in this campaign of who said what to whom and let me say this, that I don’t talk about private conversations but I have consistently made the case that I can win.”

Campaign spokeswoman Mo Elleithee later said Clinton thought she was being asked whether she’d disclose what she actually said to Richardson, who has endorsed Obama.

“Senator Clinton was simply reiterating what she had just said — she doesn’t talk about private conversations,” Elleithee said.

Clinton has come under fire in recent weeks about inconsistent statements.

She admitted late last month, that she “misspoke” when she claimed she had dodged bullets while arriving in Bosnia as first lady.

She poked fun at the controversy last night in an appearance on “The Tonight Show” telling host Jay Leno, “I was so worried I wasn’t going to make it. I was pinned down by sniper fire.”

The latest misstep came as supporters of Obama called her claims that he can’t win the desperate act of a losing candidate.

“I’m sure she is frustrated,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who supports Obama.

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Hillary Clinton, Jay Leno, liars, lies, misheard, misspoke, sniper fire

Hillary’s Former Boss: “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”

NorthstarWriters: Watergate-Era Judiciary Chief of Staff: Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies, Unethical Behavior

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Constitution, Democrats, ethics, Hillary Clinton, Jerry Zeifman, Richard Nixon, Rodham

McCain Has 10 Point Lead on Hillary

A 3/30/08 Rasmussen Reports poll shows that John McCain — remember him? — leads Hillary by 10, but McCain vs. Obama is alot tighter: McCain leads by a small 3%.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, Rasmussen Reports

It’s Only Fair When Democrats Do It? Rush Limbaugh Attacked for “Operation Chaos”

Columbus Dispatch: Limbaugh safe from voter-fraud charges — Radio host encouraged fans to vote Democrat By Mark Niquette

Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh has been telling his audience for days now that he could be indicted for encouraging Ohio Republicans to take a Democratic ballot in the March 4 primary in what he calls “Operation Chaos.”

Could that actually happen?

Not likely, Ohio officials say.

“We have no intention of prosecuting Rush Limbaugh because lying through your teeth and being stupid isn’t a crime,” said Leo Jennings, a spokesman for Democratic Attorney General Marc Dann.

For someone who labels people “stupid,” Jennings doesn’t like to pluralize basic English verbs.

(It’s not “isn’t a crime.” Jennings means “aren’t crimes.”)

Mr. Jennings, you can disagree with Limbaugh all you want, but Limbaugh hasn’t lied and he isn’t stupid. As for your manners and decorum, on the other hand…

When asked whether she has concerns about what Limbaugh did, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, replied, “I think it’s very bad form, but I think most voters are intelligent enough to make their own decisions.”

“Very bad form”? Democrats and the left-wing media, which focused primarily on John McCain, have selected the Republican nominee. A more conservative pick would have been any of the following:

• Duncan Hunter
• Tom Tancredo
• Fred Thompson
• Mitt Romney

They all dropped out of the Presidential race.

But when Limbaugh encourages his listeners to force the Democrat nominee, well, then it is “very bad form”!

Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” in Ohio, Pennsylvania and other states holding presidential primaries is designed to help presumptive Republican nominee John McCain win the Nov. 4 election.

The idea is to encourage Republicans in those states to vote for Hillary Clinton as a way to prolong the Democratic fight for the nomination with Barack Obama, possibly making it more difficult for Democrats to unite in the fall.

Some critics have complained that Limbaugh is improperly encouraging voters to break the law.

In Ohio, party-switchers are supposed to sign a form attesting, under penalty of election falsification — a felony — that they support the principles of the party whose ballot they are obtaining.

“Support the principles of the party…” ?

I guess the Soviet Union isn’t dead after all.

But Jennings said it would be difficult to prosecute anyone because they also have constitutionally protected freedom of speech and it’s hard to prove voter intent.

“You can’t just make the assumption that someone is lying,” Jennings said.

Rendering the entire concept of “supporting party principles” to be not only Soviet but utterly useless.

Neither Limbaugh nor a spokesman could be reached, but Limbaugh has a transcript posted on his Web site addressing listeners concerned about being charged with voter fraud.

“I wouldn’t worry about it,” Limbaugh said. “Look at this as a badge of honor, ladies and gentlemen. If anybody gets indicted, if anybody has to go jail, it will be me — and I’ll do my program from jail for the short amount of time I will be there before I am excused and the charges dismissed.

“I had the temerity, ladies and gentlemen, to tinker with a tradition, a liberal Democrat tradition: voter manipulation.”

It would be bad enough if that voter manipulation just involved the selection of Democrats and their nominees, but it has also been true in the case of John McCain.

If it’s too early for voter manipulation, the media dutifully plays its role to either force Republican candidates out of races or led them down the path of defeat. Virginia Senator and Republican, George Allen, lost the most recent election because of his use of a little-known slur. The media covered it for weeks. One would have thought Allen had committed adultery, tampered with witnesses and perjured himself. Meanwhile, the media didn’t give nearly the same coverage when it reported that his opponent, Jim Webb, had merely published pornographic novels including one depicting fellatio between a father and his young son.

The Times in England wrote:

In one excerpt, taken from one of six novels that Mr Webb wrote between 1978 and 2001, a naked stripper slices a banana with her genitalia. In another, Mr Webb says of a fictional nurse at Bethesda Naval Hospital that she would be less of a “damn witch” if she had sex.

Stupid use of a racial slur by Republican = very very bad!

Publication of porn novels (involving a boy, incest, and talented strippers) by Democrat = meh!

Part of the reason why Barack Obama won the election for his Illinois Senate seat is because the Illinois media’s hatchet job against his Republican opponent, Jack Ryan. The media cared nothing about privacy when they demanded the release of Ryan’s divorce records. Ryan understandably tried to obtain some media sympathy by explaining that release of those records would be harmful to his child. The media, however, much like sharks aware of blood, were hungry and demanded a Republican carcass. So why was the media so interested? It just happened that those divorce records revealed that Ryan took his wife to sex clubs. (Yes, this was certainly lousy, horn-ball behavior, but if Ryan was a Democrat, the story would have died before it was born.)

Republicans then recruited Alan Keyes, who lost by a fat margin to Obama.

Of course, when liberals and Democrats pull election stunts, it’s fine. When Rush does it, then it’s a problem?

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin , Attorney General Marc Dann, conservatives, Democrats, John McCain/Sarah Palin, Leo Jennings, liberals, Ohio, Operation Chaos, Republicans, Rush Limbaugh, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, Soviet Union, voter fraud

Change He Can Believe In: Obama Made Nearly $1 Million in 2006

CNN: Obama releases tax returns, challenges Clinton to follow suit

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, tax returns

John McCain — Remember Him? — Takes Lead

Reuters: Obama’s lead over Clinton narrows: Reuters poll By Steve Holland

Democrat Barack Obama’s big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain, according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

A more logical headline would be “McCain Leads Obama, Clinton,” but Reuters doesn’t want to risk the chance that you’ll actually think that a Republican nominee even exists.  If you’re a highly biased and politicized news organization (although I repeat myself) it’s much better to focus on the two Democrat candidates.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media? , Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, Reuters, What Liberal Media?

Deep Thoughts By Feminists

Marianna Williamson, author of many insubstantial new age books, shocks us with some common sense: she’s not voting with her vagina.

Liberals consider this “deep thinking.”

It would also take a hell of lot of muscle control to vote using vaginal muscles. That’s one powerful puss.

Anyway, considering that feminists live their whole lives by their vagina, it’s nice to see them take an occasional break.

(By the way, when did Marianne Williamson become a “feminist” icon?)

Feminist Icon Chooses Obama: I Won’t Vote With My Vagina

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Hillary Clinton , authors, Barack Obama, Crazy liberals, feminsts, Marianne Williamson, new age, vagina

When Race and Gender are Two-Edged Swords

NRO: Monsters and Racists and Sexists, Oh My! — Free speech, it seems, is no longer so free in the political arena. By Kathleen Parker

Race and gender, once the courted darlings of the Democrats, are becoming party poopers.

[...]

[Samantha] Power was sacrificed on the altar of a nice politics that exists only in the rhetoric of the presidential candidates. As for [Geraldine] Ferraro, her statement wasn’t racist so much as it was racial. It is, in fact, unlikely that anyone else with Obama’s experience — just two years in the U.S. Senate before he began running for president — would get this close to the White House.

There are lots of reasons for Obama’s success that have nothing to do with race. But there’s also this: You can’t separate race from who Obama is. He is the biracial man. Although he self-identifies as African-American, it is precisely his dual race — and his own personal work toward identity integration and transcendence — that allows him to speak effectively of racial reconciliation and national unity in ways that a white male, or another black male for that matter, could not.

So, yes, Ferraro was partly right. If Obama were white, he probably wouldn’t be where he is.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama / The Messiah, Democrats, free speech, gender, Geraldine Ferraro, Hillary Clinton, Kathleen Parker, National Review, race

Hillary Apologizes for Geraldine Ferraro

In a move that is very typical for the Clintons, the public mea maxima culpa, Hillary apologized for former Vice Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro’s assertions that Senator Obama is approaching the presidency because he’s (part) black.

Ferraro, understandably, refused to apologize. (Good for her.)

But no matter, because Hillary will do the apologizing whether Ferraro likes it or not.

CNN: Clinton apologizes to black voters

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Everything Else, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama / The Messiah, Crazy liberals, Geraldine Ferraro, Hillary Clinton, race

What Liberal Media?

MRC: ABC’s Diane Sawyer Touts Clinton and Obama ‘Dream’ Ticket

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media? , ABC, Barack Obama / The Messiah, Diane Sawyer, Hillary Clinton, What Liberal Media?

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton , Barack Obama / The Messiah, Chuck Asay, Fox News, Hillary Clinton

What Liberal Media?

The mainstream media doesn’t even pretend or try to be objective any more. It simply doesn’t matter to them. Much more important is trying to score petty points with an American public that increasingly doesn’t trust a word from these arrogant talking heads.

Like (P)MSNBC’s Dan Abrams whose contempt could be heard from a mile away.

Newsbusters: MSNBC’s Dan Abrams: Rush Limbaugh Is ‘Un-American’ by Tim Graham

On Wednesday’s episode of Live With Dan Abrams on MSNBC, Abrams lit into Rush Limbaugh as “un-American” for encouraging Republican voters to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton on Tuesday. In his “Beat the Press” segment, Abrams attacked Limbaugh mocking him for a segment on Monday night’s Abrams show on Limbaugh’s “Far Right Dirty Tricks.”

ABRAMS:

He was upset that I said he was perverting the process by encouraging Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in open primaries in an effort to quote, “bloody up” Obama….When you encourage someone to vote for a candidate that they don’t want as president, I believe it is actually un-American, and they are willing to increase the chances of what they consider to be a bad candidate winning in the hope they may slightly increase their candidate’s chances? It is shameful.

From Rush’s website, here’s how Limbaugh addressed Abrams:

ABRAMS: Rush Limbaugh and others on the far right, now trying to pervert tomorrow’s results, calling on Republicans in Ohio and Texas to vote in the Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton — not because they like Clinton, but because they want to keep the Democrats in disarray.

RUSH: Perverting the Democrat process? What did you guys do to our process? All you Democrats and independents crossing over, not only in 2000, but here in 2008, nominating and voting for Senator McCain. What, you guys are going to vote for McCain in November? You think we don’t understand what you were doing here? You’re trying to choose our nominee, why can’t we try to choose yours?

Rush asks “why,” but Rush already knows the answer. Contrary to their trite sloganeering about “diversity of” this and that, liberals like Abrams hate competition. Why? Because (they think) they already have all the answers. Abrams and the rest of the media gangsters-with microphones already know what’s best for America. They already know what beliefs are legit and which are verboten. So when someone like Rush, a man with influence, tries to, you know, actually influence people’s votes and ideas, well, how dare he! Rush has no right to spread his opinions and ideas like, for example, Dan Abrams does!

A good journalist would have merely reported what Rush did and leave the viewer to draw his or her own conclusions, but it’s clear that Dan Abrams is not a good journalist.

Filed under: Barack Obama / The Messiah, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, What Liberal Media? , Barack Obama / The Messiah, Dan Abrams, Hillary Clinton, John McCain/Sarah Palin, MSNBC, Rush Limbaugh, What Liberal Media?

Hillary Conveniently Finds Christianity

Because nothing is an accident with the Clintons, you can be sure that the interview below with reporter Michael Luo of the New York Times was, ahem, well calculated.

CDN: Hillary: “I Have Felt the Presence of the Holy Spirit” by David Brody

Filed under: Hillary Clinton , Bible, Christianity, Hillary Clinton