August 2008 Archives


The Obama-supporting mainstream media is having a field day trashing Governor Palin on her inexperience. A McCain-Palin supporter has put together a comparison chart that must be seen. Click here.


John Fund of the Wall Street Journal also is demanding that the Obama campaign come clean. There is ugliness, deceit, evasiveness and secrecy in the Obama campaign. They are hiding information about Obama's past. In some cases the media is not doing its investigative job, but often it is the campaign that is refusing to cooperate.

Obama remains a mystery because he has been hiding details of his past life. Fund details some of the matters on which Obama is stonewalling.

"They're terrified of people poking around Obama's life," one reporter told Gabriel Sherman at the New Republic. "The whole Obama narrative is built around the narrative that Obama and [campaign strategist] David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it's not entirely true." The stakes are high. If the full story of Mr. Obama's relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright had been revealed before the Iowa caucus, he wouldn't have won.

David Axelrod is Chicago Mayor Daley's right hand man in running the Democratic patronage and payoff machine, which is Obama's principal patron. Over the years the machine has become expert in stalling, twisting and hiding facts and obfuscating what's really going on. Obama is a beneficiary of that expertise.

Fund also describes the ugly steps the Obama campaign are taking to stifle all criticism of Obama.

Team Obama has launched an offensive against WGN, the Chicago Tribune's radio station, for interviewing Stanley Kurtz. Mr. Kurtz is a conservative writer who this week forced the University of Illinois to finally open its records on Sen. Obama's association with William Ayers, the unrepentant 1970s Weather Underground terrorist.

An Obama campaign email to supporters called Mr. Kurtz a "slimy character assassin" whose "divisive, destructive ranting" should be confronted. WGN producer Zack Christenson says the outpouring of negative calls and emails is "unprecedented." He also notes that it is curious -- because "we wanted the Obama campaign's take" on Mr. Kurtz's findings, but the campaign declined to put anyone on air.

Stanley Kurtz is a highly respected senior fellow at Washington's Ethics and Public Policy Center, hardly a "slimy character assassin."

For a rundown of the obstacles and barriers put in his way as he sought information about Obama's relationship with terrorist bomber William Ayers, see Kurtz's article "Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown?"


| 1 Comment

It looks as if at least 90% of Republicans and conservatives are thrilled by Sarah Palin's selection and her fantastic debut on national television. Suddenly, there is energy in Republican ranks that had been lacking. Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard has high confidence in Palin's ability to connect with voters. Kristol thinks Palin is a "natural." She can handle herself and there should be no attempt to put her into a cookie cutter mold.

Palin could become the Democrats' worst nightmare. She is fearless. In becoming Alaska's governor she defeated the incumbent Republican governor in the primary (accusing him of insider politics) and trounced a popular former Democratic governor in the final. Midway through her first term her approval rating in male-dominated Alaska is in the 80s.

McCain Palin TWS.jpg
Let Palin Be Palin --- Why the left is scared to death of McCain's running mate.

by William Kristol
09/08/2008 The Weekly Standard

A spectre is haunting the liberal elites of New York and Washington--the spectre of a young, attractive, unapologetic conservatism, rising out of the American countryside, free of the taint (fair or unfair) of the Bush administration and the recent Republican Congress, able to invigorate a McCain administration and to govern beyond it.

That spectre has a name--Sarah Palin, the 44-year-old governor of Alaska chosen by John McCain on Friday to be his running mate. There she is: a working woman who's a proud wife and mother; a traditionalist in important matters who's broken through all kinds of barriers; a reformer who's a Republican; a challenger of a corrupt good-old-boy establishment who's a conservative; a successful woman whose life is unapologetically grounded in religious belief; a lady who's a leader.

So what we will see in the next days and weeks--what we have already seen in the hours after her nomination--is an effort by all the powers of the old liberalism, both in the Democratic party and the mainstream media, to exorcise this spectre. They will ridicule her and patronize her. They will distort her words and caricature her biography. They will appeal, sometimes explicitly, to anti-small town and anti-religious prejudice. All of this will be in the cause of trying to prevent the American people from arriving at their own judgment of Sarah Palin.

That's why Palin's spectacular performance in her introduction in Dayton was so important. Her remarks were cogent and compelling. Her presentation of herself was shrewd and savvy. I heard from many who watched Palin--many of them not predisposed to support her--about how moved they were by her remarks, her composure, and her story. She will have a chance to shine again Wednesday night at the Republican convention.

More ...

The reaction of Republicans and conservatives to the selection of Sarah Palin has been overwhelmingly positive. Predictably, starting with the Obama campaign itself, Democrats have sneered at Palin as a small town mayor and governor of a state with a population (600,000) smaller than many mid-size cities in the U.S. Yet she has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined.

A few thoughtful conservatives such as Charles Krauthammer think that the Palin selection was a mistake because it takes the issue of Obama inexperience and "readiness to lead" off the table.

Most disagree. Obama is still totally inexperienced in foreign policy and national defense, as he demonstrates on an almost daily basis. McCain's advantage is still universally acknowledged. McCain has been a fighter against corruption and pork; Obama is still someone who played ball with "the good old boys" and practiced pork politics.

The choice of Palin opens up some new territory for examination. The mainstream media will now go over Palin's history with a fine tooth comb because she's an "unknown." But the media have failed or refused to do that kind of examination of Obama's history. After months and months of soaring rhetoric about "hope" and "change" Obama is still a mystery to many because the media hasn't done its job.

Some examples of media neglect:

Palin is a fighter against corruption and waste in government. What has Obama done in his years in the Illinois senate and in Washington? He has indulged in pork barrel politics and played ball with Chicago's patronage-ridden Democratic machine, which is running his campaign. But you wouldn't know that if you just read the newspapers and watch television.

For many months bloggers have been asking the Obama campaign to open up the birth records in Hawaii. The campaign has refused and has only offered a copy of a supposed birth certificate to a left wing website that at least three forensic experts claim is a forgery. Not a word of this controversy has been seen in the national media. Since the matter can be cleared up easily by authorizing access to the original official records, why hasn't the Obama campaign done that?

Long-time Obama friend and fundraiser Tony Rezko, who helped Obama financially in his purchase of his Chicago mansion, has been convicted of 16 counts of political corruption. The media has brushed off the association. Why was Rezko, of Middle East origins who obtained large loans from an Iraqi convicted of grand theft from the Iraqi government, so eager to help Obama?

What has shaped Obama's economic views? Before college his mentor (as identified in Obama's first book) in Hawaii was or had been a member of the Communist Party of the U.S. who railed against the American economic system and white capitalist oppression. Obama's book also disclosed he sought out socialists and black power advocates while in college and progressively distanced himself from his mother's race (which is white). The media shrugs, even though Obama continued his association with haters of America and advocates of black power against white oppression by joining forces with "God Damn America" Reverend Jeremiah Wright for 20 years. He helped organize Nation of Islam's Million Man March and found inspiration in the words of black power zealot Louis Farrakhan. Why did he go to Chicago to learn the Alinsky method of community organizing for socialism, which stresses hiding the real purpose of changing the American economic system by uttering vague appeals to "hope" and "change"? Is none of this relevant?

Recently, sources outside the mainstream media have brought to light Obama's fight against the Illinois Born Alive Act and the fact he lied about why he opposed saving the lives of babies who survived failed abortions. Also, Obama's close association with unrepentant terrorist bomber William Ayers has been ignored by the media and only came to public light through a privately financed TV ad, which the Obama campaign is trying to force off the air.

So, as the digging into the life story of Palin begins, voters should demand that the same diligence be given to Obama's history, from birth to today. Obama's inexperience is known, but his character and the shaping of his worldview are not. Why are so many haters of America his friends? So far, the media has taken Obama's words as the last word. There is too much at stake in this election for the media not to live up to its obligations to the American public.

There is another reason why Palin is a big plus for McCain. She is an expert on energy, a champion of drilling now, including in ANWR (which is in Alaska). For many Americans gasoline prices are at the top of their list of concerns. Palin has been and is a strong voice for America to use its own resources to end dependence on hostile and unstable oil producers. Even if oil prices come down somewhat, America has finally learned its lesson: Let's rely on ourselves as much as we can.

There's much more to like about the selection of Palin, but these two reasons alone justify the choice. Let's finally learn the full Obama story as we learn the full Palin story.

And drill now.


Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for 070405sowellthomas.jpgHoover Institution Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell reflects on Obama's idea of "change" and the real change that McCain-Palin represent.

We don't need Barack Obama to create "change." Things change in politics, in the economy, and elsewhere in American society, without waiting for a political messiah to lead us into the promised land.

Who would have thought that Obama's big speech at the Democratic convention would disappoint expectations, while McCain's speech electrified his audience when he announced his choice of Governor Sarah Palin for his running mate?

Some people were surprised that his choice was a woman. What is more surprising is that she is an articulate Republican. How many of those have you seen?

Despite the incessantly repeated mantra of "change," Barack Obama's politics is as old as the New Deal and he is behind the curve when it comes to today's economy.

Not only is Obama peddling failed economic policies and stirring up class warfare, his national security policies would put the nation at great risk.

Senator Obama's rhetoric today is the anti-business and class warfare rhetoric that worked so brilliantly in a political sense for FDR in the 1930s. But Obama is following an opposite course from FDR when it comes to recognizing threats to American national security.

Senator Obama has repeatedly tried to deal with national security threats with rhetoric. He tried to dismiss the threat of a nuclear Iran with because Iran is "a small nation"-- even though it is larger than Japan, which launched a devastating attack against the United States at Pearl Harbor.

FDR had the good sense to begin urging greater military preparedness in 1940, more than a year before the United States was attacked. He said, "If you wait until you see the whites of their eyes, you will never know what hit you."

Cutting the military budget and taking foreign policy problems to the United Nations are Obama's version of "change."

That is change that we dare not believe in. It is the audacity of hype.


While the Democrats and their boosters in the mainstream media keep wishing to see the U.S. in recession, inconvenient facts point in the other direction. Second-quarter GDP growth of 3.3% shows a strong recovery gathering force following the collapse of the housing bubble, the ensuing credit lockup and escalation of world oil prices due to a shortage of supply. Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke and Secretary of the Treasury Paulson, both selected by President Bush, have performed brilliantly to keep the nation from sinking into Japan-style deflation, which is enormously difficult to defeat -- as Japan's decade plus struggle shows.


There is still a lot of work to be done for GDP growth to reach potential, but the trendline seems to indicate that the disaster that could have been has been averted by prompt, skillful and innovative action.


Sarah Palin was introduced to the nation -- and the world -- in Dayton, Ohio today.

How was her introductory speech received?

One viewer emailed to National Review Online:

"I have never seen Governor Palin speak before in my life, although I have heard of her. Let me say that this hard core conservative has shed some happy tears during her speech. This is the day that the conservative movement took back control of the GOP and the day that McCain won the election. She IS from a small town, and it shows. We are blessed to have her on the ticket. The other side is looking a very old, tired, and a little cheap."

Having watched her introduction, there is no disagreement here. She adds an exciting dimension to the race and exudes warmth and human appeal. Yet she is tough, articulate and has a record of fighting waste in government, corruption and the "good old boys." She goes across party lines and cooperates with Democrats and independents, some of whom she has appointed to important offices in her administration.

Obama fails on bipartisanship. McCain and Palin excel.


Sarah Palin had her enthusiastic supporters before today.


The Club for Growth backs federal candidates dedicated to eliminating wasteful spending. It keeps an eye on what's happening in the state capitols on pork. The Club for Growth comments:

Club for Growth PAC on Possible Palin Pick

August 29, 2008

Washington – With all the talk about Sarah Palin being picked for vice-president, the Club for Growth PAC described the Alaska Governor as a genuine reformer who has taken on wasteful spending in her own state.

“At a time when many Republicans are still clinging to pork-barrel politics, Governor Palin has quickly become a leader on this issue,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “She is a principled reformer who understands how badly wasteful spending has marred the Republican brand.”

Governor Palin has proven herself to be a reformer unafraid to take on the establishment, which she did early on when she took on the incumbent Republican governor of Alaska in 2006. Only nine months in office, Governor Palin instructed the state to abandon the notorious pork project secured by Alaska’s politicians, the $223 million “Bridge to Nowhere.” While many Republicans in Congress are afraid to antagonize Washington’s biggest porkers, Sarah Palin stood strong for fiscal responsibility. Palin is also a persistent advocate of drilling in ANWR and expanding America’s domestic oil supply in general.


A brilliant pick by McCain.


Fox and Friends just reported that Palin's family is aloft flying to rendezvous with John McCain today.

Palin is extremely popular in Alaska, is strong on energy -- drill now! -- and is the mother of five. In her early life she was a basketball star and along the line was voted "Miss Congeniality." Her personal energy and drive are legendary. She is an outspoken advocate of pro-life policies.


Obama's actions to stifle criticism and debate about him is gettng to be really disturbing. Just a few days ago he asked the U.S. Attorney General to sue the principal funder of a TV ad detailing the long association of Obama with unrepentant terrorist bomber William Ayers.

Now his campaign tried to keep a researcher off a radio talk show in Chicago.

Charles Krauthammer expresses his continuing amazement that America knows so little about Obama and yet he now stands as the official Democratic nominee for president of the United States.

As Juan Williams of NPR and Fox News points out (and national polls repeatedly confirm), Obama is where he is because, not in spite of, his race. Many whites and non-black minorities in this country WANT to vote for a qualified black to be president, while more than 90% of blacks do, too. But how do we know he's qualified? Before bestowing the mantle of Martin Luther King, Jr. on him, Williams says we at least should know where he stands on issues affecting race, but we do not.

Not only has Obama carefully not disclosed his positions on key issues, instead offering "hope" for "change," there is an even more basic lack that Krauthammer points out: If we cannot measure Obama by his very thin resumé of accomplishments, then who are the persons of stature who can vouch for his character? Certainly not long-time associates American-haters Reverend Jeremiah Wright or unrepentant terrorist bomber William Ayers.

Eerily missing at the Democratic convention this year were people of stature who were seriously involved at some point in Obama’s life standing up to say: I know Barack Obama. I’ve been with Barack Obama. We’ve toiled/endured together. You can trust him. I do.

Is this absence of witnesses the reason for the sense of anxiety that pervaded the Democratic convention?

Barack Obama is an immensely talented man whose talents have been largely devoted to crafting, and chronicling, his own life. Not things. Not ideas. Not institutions. But himself.

Nothing wrong or even terribly odd about that — except that he is laying claim to the job of crafting the coming history of the United States. A leap of such audacity is odd. The air of unease at the Democratic convention this week was not just a result of the Clinton psychodrama. The deeper anxiety was that the party was nominating a man of many gifts but precious few accomplishments — bearing even fewer witnesses.

The question hangs in the air: "Who is this stranger?"

The oddity of this convention is that its central figure is the ultimate self-made man, a dazzling mysterious Gatsby. The palpable apprehension is that the anointed is a stranger — a deeply engaging, elegant, brilliant stranger with whom the Democrats had a torrid affair. Having slowly woken up, they see the ring and wonder who exactly they married last night.

It's long past time to find out who Barack Obama really is.


Power Line picked up a Reuters report that "Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple." . . . . The Political Inquirer can see it now.


Obama in so many ways says I'm better than you. Trashing those white rural rubes who "cling" to their God. "We are the ones we've been waiting for," which of course means "I am The One you have been waiting for." To supporters at a rally he even said a shaft of light would come down from above and inspire them to vote for Obama.

McCain's ad "The One" captures that elite arrogance well.


Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were terrorists who bombed federal buildings in the late '60s and early '70s and as recently as 2001 said they wished they had done more. Ayers even said the thought of America made him want to puke. In 2001 Ayers was featured on the cover of a Chicago magazine standing on the American flag.

The terrorist couple (now married) hosted a coming-out party for Obama as he geared up to run for the Ilinois senate in 1995. Obama and Ayers served together on the board of a charity which made grants to questionable groups in the Chicago area. Obama and Ayers appeared together as the star presenters on a Chicago panel organized by Michelle Obama.

Recently there was a gathering of one-time terrorists where Ayers and Dohrn were caught on tape making it clear they were not sorry at all for the bombings they had done, but thought bombing federal buildings (such as the Capitol and the Pentagon) were good deeds.

This association of Obama with terrorists has been ignored or downplayed by the media in their quest to make Obama president. So an independent group not connected with the McCain campaign put this TV ad together to let people know about some of Obama's friends so they can assess his judgment and his indulgence towards those who hate America. It isn't just "God Damn America" Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger and Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan.

Obama has gone ballistic about this ad and has had his campaign demand that the U.S. Attorney General sue the people funding the ad so it will be taken off the air. The campaign hasn't identified what is false in it. Free speech seems to be for Obama only.


The United States needs a superbly qualified, tested leader in these dangerous times. That's John McCain.



Hugh Hewitt, a popular radio host on the West Coast and in the Midwest, is appalled by how Obama knocks America. Just in the past day or so, Obama waxed eloquent (Doesn’t he always wax eloquent?) about how great the infrastructure in China is and how much better it is than in the United States. Tell that to the majority of Chinese living beyond the Beijing region where the Olympics were held. And recall the denigration of America before 200,000 in Berlin. Hewitt observed:

It is an unusual strategy to seek the presidency by arguing that American conduct abroad is the equivalent of Russia's, that China's engineering and architectural achievements are superior to ours, and that it could be understood how a business might think it would be better off relocating to the PRC.

Obama is definitely not running on American exceptionalism, but we knew that when he told the seven-year old that "America is no longer what it could be, what it once was."

And now Obama has chosen good old Joe Biden for his VP. John Hinderaker, one of the lawyer bloggers on the very popular Power Line blog said it well:

THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BIDEN Some time in the next 48 hours, Barack Obama will announce his running mate. The current favorite seems to be Joe Biden. I hope it's true: if Obama chooses Biden, it will be more evidence that he, and the Democrats generally, are living in a bubble. Personally, I kind of like Biden. He can be disarming at times, and occasionally borders on the moderate. But how can he possibly help Obama? Throughout his long career, Biden has been anything but a powerhouse. His several Presidential runs have gone nowhere. On the national scene he is, frankly, a bit of a joke. What is he going to do, help Obama carry Delaware? You can see the logic behind choosing Biden. Obama is young, so he wants an old Veep. Obama knows little about American history, diplomacy, foreign affairs or military matters, and Biden is the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Superficially, it seems to make sense. The problem is that, whereas Obama is a young lightweight, Biden is an old lightweight--Obama with a hair transplant. While Obama has only been a lightweight for 47 years, Biden has been one for 65. Is this a big plus? I doubt it. If you put Biden on a stage next to Tim Pawlenty and ask voters which one is the serious candidate, two-thirds will say Pawlenty. [Same for Romney.] So: Slow Joe Biden for Vice-President? Absolutely! It's one more sign that Obama, the supposed harbinger of change, is running an unimaginative, paint-by-numbers campaign.

Hinderaker practices law in Minnesota, so knows its governor Tim Pawlenty very well. Pawlenty is shaping up as McCain’s VP choice. It really comes down to two excekkebt choices Romney and Pawlenty, but, sadly, polling shows that anti-Mormon prejudice would hurt a McCain-Romney ticket, which for America would be a very strong team. Nonetheless, Pawlenty is bright, savvy and articulate and a popular Republican in Democratic Minnesota. Pawlenty has been featured prominently on television lately to build up his exposure and has handled himself well. So the Republican team will be a strong one with Pawlenty in the second slot.

Surprises can happen, but Pawlenty appears to have the inside track.


Robert Spencer is the modern-day equivalent of Paul Revere, seeking to awaken the American people to a threat that is closing in on us and which we must fight to the death.

In 1775 the American people awakened and a great nation, the greatest on earth, was born.

In 2008, whatever new awakening may have taken place in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, seems to have run its course. Americans by and large have gone back to sleep. We have forgotten, if we ever grasped it in the first place, what the aims were of those true believers of Islam who brought mass murder to America.

We aren't fighting a Global War on Terror. We are the target of a Global War of World Conquest being waged by the true believers of Islam, who are carrying out Mohammad's command to make the world subject to Islamic power.


Obama has earned his way into our Hall of Shame.

Before a gathering of San Francisco sophisticates he demeaned rural rubes who "cling" to their God and their guns.

He falsely accused John McCain of racism in his campaign rallies more than once till he was called on it. He tried to play the race card in his favor, but it backfired.

He canceled a scheduled visit to American military personnel in a hospital in Germany because he couldn't bring his campaign aide along, there couldn't be any media accompanying him or he'd rather go to the gym or all of the above.

Not only is he an extremist on partilal-birth-abortion, he even lied about his key role in blocking a bill that would have saved the lives of babies born alive after failed abortions.


Why does John McCain describe radical Islam as the "transcendent challenge" of our times?

Unless there is a revolution of the natives, European civilization in Europe will disappear before the end of this century. Already 20 to 50 million Muslims are in Europe, most of whom have refused to assimilate. They cluster in their own neighborhoods living as they would in Pakistan or Sudan, maintaining their alien Islamic culture and intimidating the natives to change their practices and ways. Continuing immigration and high birth rates -- while the natives are failing to even reproduce their numbers -- are leading to increasing Muslim dominance. Amsterdam and Rotterdam, for example, are close to being majority Muslim cities now.

What will a Muslim-dominated Europe be like?

Under Islamic law, if one refuses to become Muslim, one is subject to death unless he or she agrees to a humiliating, underclass status (dhimmitude) and pays special (historically onerous) taxes not levied on Muslims. During the so-called Golden Age of Islam Islamic centers such as Baghdad and Damascus flourished with the riches of those taxes and the hired talents of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians and other non-Muslims. As the generations went on, non-Muslims tired of their underclass status and converted to Islam and became as warlike and and uninterested in real work as their fellow Muslims. So Muslim society collapsed and has been revived only because of the discovery and development in Muslim lands -- by westerners -- of oil and gas vital to the West.

Europe is succumbing to a demographic and ideological takeover, the kind of jihad that is already being waged against the United States.

Muslims are smart enough to realize they have the best chance now in 1400 years to take over the world: They have the oil, they have the money, they have the true believers (growing greater in numbers every day as Saudi madrassas recruit the young to what Mohammad commanded was every Muslim’s duty – jihad until Islam rules the world). What Iran’s leaders say about killing Americans (Great Satan) and Israeli (Little Satan) is no aberration, no departure from Koranic teaching at all. They and the House of Saud may be contending for leadership of the Islamic masses or ummah, but they are united in their goal of achieving power over the world.

With their supreme sense of superiority, an imperial ideology, more than a billion adherents (whom they are willing to sacrifice in the millions) and, soon, nuclear weapons facing off against an anxious-to-please, politically correct, pacifist, let-us-reason-together West, who will have to lead the fight against them if not the United States?

Unflortunately, for America's and the world's sake, Obama doesn't see the challenge at all. As he said in Berlin, all walls between Muslims and the rest of the world should come down and peace will prevail. History tells a different story.


Turkey has slowly and steadily been dismantling the secular state created by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s. Ataturk recognized the insidious nature of Islam and barred that ideology from public life. As a result, Turkey began developing a functioning economy, established close ties with the United States and became a member of NATO, the only Muslim-majority nation to do so.

It also sought to join the European Union, which has caused great unease among the European peoples because that would add anywhere from 70 to 90 million Muslims to the 20 to 50 Muslims already in Europe, most of whom are not assimilating but seem bent on making Europe Islamic.

The election of the Islamist AK Party in 2002 under Prime Minister Recep Erdogan began the transformation towards a de facto Islamic state. It has accelerated since his party’s reelection. Caroline Glick, the world’s leading analyst of the Middle East, details the challenge this presents to the U.S., which challenge the U.S. is currently flunking.

What is Erdogan’s party doing? A sampling:

SINCE TAKING office in 2002, the AKP under Erdogan has taken control over Turkey's bureaucracy. It has weakened women's rights. It has launched brutal campaigns against its foes in the media, taking over opposition television stations and arresting and intimidating anti-Islamic editors and reporters. It has taken over the Turkish secret police and regular police forces. It has stacked the Turkish courts with its loyalists. It has enabled the opening of radical Islamic madrassas. It has penetrated the military and demoralized and intimidated the senior officer corps. It has ignored court judgments against it.

Since 2002 Turkey has changed from a staunch American ally to become the most anti-American society in the world, inflamed by the strident fundamentalist Islamic agenda fostered and encouraged by the AKP. It is becoming a threat to the West.

Turkey's Abandonment of the West

Aug. 11, 2008

Russia's invasion of Georgia should serve as proof that there are some regimes that simply cannot be considered strategic allies of the West. And as the US and NATO try to assess the wreckage of their attempt to forge a post-Soviet alliance with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, another erstwhile ally is showing that it too, cannot be trusted.

On Wednesday, Iran's genocidal, nuclear weapons-seeking leader, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, will arrive in Istanbul for a "working visit" with Turkish leaders. This visit represents a diplomatic triumph for Teheran. Since assuming office three years ago, Ahmadinejad has feverishly pursued diplomatic ties with Western-allied states in an effort to weaken the West's will to take action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Turkey is the first NATO member to welcome him to its territory.


Democratic speaker of the House Pelosi ran home to San Francisco rather than allow a vote to allow new drilling in America to bring down the price of gas at the pump.

She then went on a national book tour touting herself as an example of leadership for "America's daughters."

Michael Barone elevated Pelosi into the number one position of shame in this session of Congress by using procedural tricks to get around the requirements of the fast track trade law to bring signed trade treaty deals to the floor for a vote. And who did she do it to? America's foremost ally in the America's -- Colombia.

President Uribe of Columbia recently mounted a fantastically successful operation to free hostages (including three Americans) held in some cases for years by FARC terrorists Uribe is winning fight alongside the United States against communist-leaning Venezuela and drugs.

Yet Pelosi thumbed her nose at America's best ally. It's fitting that respected political analyst Michael Barone said her action was the most shameful of this Congress.

So Pelosi goes into our Hall of Shame, deservedly so.



Sometime ago the Canadian-born writer Mark Steyn, who now lives in New Hampshire, wrote this paragraph which encapsulates the entire problem with how blind Americans are to what is in reality an existential threat:

I found myself behind a car in Vermont, in the US, the other day; it had a one-word bumper sticker with the injunction "COEXIST". It's one of those sentiments beloved of Western progressives, one designed principally to flatter their sense of moral superiority. The C was the Islamic crescent, the O was the hippie peace sign, the X was the Star of David and the T was the Christian cross. Very nice, hard to argue with.

But the reality is, it's the first of those symbols that has a problem with coexistence. Take the crescent out of the equation and you wouldn't need a bumper sticker at all. Indeed, coexistence is what the Islamists are at war with; or, if you prefer, pluralism, the idea that different groups can rub along together within the same general neighbourhood.

There are many trouble spots across the world but, as a general rule, even if one gives no more than a cursory glance at the foreign pages, it's easy to guess at least one of the sides: Muslims v Jews in Palestine, Muslims v Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims v Christians in Nigeria, Muslims v Buddhists in southern Thailand, Muslims v (your team here). Whatever one's views of the merits on a case by case basis, the ubiquitousness of one team is a fact.

This is why John McCain says radical Islam is the "transcendent challenge" of our times.


What do you think of a congressman who in a hearing expresses delight that al-Qaeda now knows what a U.S. government official who is working to defeat al-Qaeda looks like?

That congressman unfortunately represents the Tenth Congressional District of Massachusetts, which includes Cape Cod and Chatham.

William Delhahunt, not content with being so cozy with Venenzuela's de facto dictator Hugo Chavez that he calls him his "excellent friend," is into outing patriotic Americans fighting Islamic terrorism.

So Delahunt is the first to enter our Hall of Shame. A well-earned honor.

Oh, you missed the congressional hearing? Do note the delight in the congressman's expression as he "outed" the American official fighting terrorism.

This article from May has even more relevance today.

May 24, 2008, 0:00 a.m.

Wright Connection
A haunting presence for Obama.

By Michael Barone

As Barack Obama makes his slow but steady way toward the Democratic nomination, the assumption in the admiring precincts of the press corps is that voters have dismissed as irrelevant his longtime association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. But that may prove as mistaken as the assumption, back in 1988, that voters would not be impressed by Michael Dukakis’s 11-year support of a law granting weekend furloughs to convicts sentenced to life without parole, an issue brought up in the primaries by Al Gore but largely ignored in press coverage at the time.

Evidence for this comes in the exit polls from the West Virginia and Kentucky primaries on May 13 and 20. In both, about half the voters — and these are voters in the Democratic primary — said that they believe Obama shares Wright’s views either somewhat or a lot. And slightly under 50 percent of these voters said that Obama is honest and trustworthy.

To be sure, these were primaries in which Obama was beaten, and beaten badly, by Hillary Clinton — 67 percent to 26 percent in West Virginia, 66 percent to 30 percent in Kentucky. So they would be inclined, one might believe, to think ill of Obama. Yet it is not universally the case that voters who choose one candidate in a hotly contested election doubt whether the other candidate is honest. You can oppose someone who you believe to be trustworthy. Only 38 percent of Americans voted for Barry Goldwater in 1964 and George McGovern in 1972. But probably a higher percentage believed that they were basically honest.

Which leads me to ask why these voters declined to say Obama is honest. When have they seen him lie or being caught in a lie? The response to the question on Wright may provide the answer. They know that he attended Wright’s church for 20 years. They know that he said, both on March 18 when he refused to renounce Wright and on April 29 when he did renounce him, that he was not aware of his pastor and spiritual mentor’s incendiary comments. Yet half of these voters also think that, despite those statements, Obama agrees with what Wright has been saying.

It’s a little dangerous in interpreting polls to assume that voters’ thinking proceeds along logical lines. People who aren’t professionally involved in politics, whose knowledge comes from bits and snippets of news, can hold beliefs that are contradictory or in tension with each other. They don’t feel obliged to resolve contradictions. But even granting that, it seems to me that about half of West Virginia and Kentucky Democratic primary voters were saying that Obama lied about not knowing what Wright has been preaching and that he agrees with him a lot more than he has let on.

Now West Virginia and Kentucky are not typical primary states. They, together with Arkansas, where Hillary Clinton was First Lady for 12 years, were Obama’s weakest states in this year’s primaries. And some percentage of registered Democrats in these states have been voting Republican in recent presidential elections. Nevertheless, the negative verdict these voters render on Obama’s honesty and his relationship with Wright is likely to be typical of some significant quantum of potential Democratic voters this year. And not just in states like West Virginia and Kentucky, which he will certainly lose, but in marginal states which he must carry in order to be elected.

I find confirmation from this in a recent focus group conducted for the Annenberg Public Policy Center by pollster Peter Hart (for whom I worked for seven years) of non-primary voters in Charlottesville, Va. As Hart and Alex Horowitz note in their analysis of reactions to Obama, “When asked to recount any two memories of the total presidential campaign so far, seven of the 12 participants cite Rev. Wright by name. So far, clips of Rev. Wright clearly are the one ‘key defining moment’ of this campaign.”

Most reporters are liberals, whose circles of friends and acquaintances have included people with views not dissimilar to those of Wright or William Ayers, the unrepentant Weather Underground bomber with whom Obama served on a nonprofit board and at whose house his state Senate candidacy was launched. Such reporters don’t find these views utterly repugnant or particularly noteworthy. But most American voters do. And they wonder whether a candidate who associates with such people agrees with them — or disbelieve him when he says he doesn’t.

Though most in the press won’t admit it, that’s a problem — for the Obama candidacy and for the whole Democratic party once it nominates him.


Democrat Speaker of the House Pelosi seems to be reacting to the pressure by McCain and Congressional Democrats to drill now with the same slippery ploy that Obama used.

She is now open to consideration of offshore drilling as part of a larger energy package.

How cute. The 2007 energy bill took two years to put together and it was inadequate. Like Obama, she is trying to put off an up and down vote on drilling to provide relief to average Americans at the gas pump till after the election, indeed, until next year.

A simple up or down vote can eliminate the moratoriums on offshore, Rocky Mountains and ANWR drilling. Already, just the possibility of such a vote is contributing to oil prices coming down.

A great majority of Americans now say they want drilling now. McCain and the Congressional Republicans should keep the pressure up. Get an up and down vote on drilling now. If that doesn't work, don't let Pelosi-Obama-Reid try to sneak a renewal of the moratoriums through in an omnibus budget bill; any such bill should be voted down. Pelosi-Obama-Reid will be responsible for shutting down the government to avoid a vote Americans want.

There's been a lot said about Obama's “Catholic problem.” In polls and in the primaries he has done poorly with the Catholic vote, but also with evangelicals and other people of faith. His belittling of rural folks who cling to their God and their guns certainly didn't help.

But many feel that it's Obama extremism on abortion that really turns the religious and many who aren't so religious off. He isn't "just" pro-choice. There is no one in the U.S. Senate (perhaps in American public life) who is more pro-abortion than Obama. He has opposed all efforts to end partial birth abortions. He fiercely criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the federal ban on partial-birth abortions passed by Congress and signed by the President. 70% of all Americans oppose partial-birth abortions, so as Linda Chavez notes, “Obama’s views put him in a distinct minority.” He has promised that, if elected President, his first act will be to seek to pass a law that will end all restrictions on abortion, including partial-birth-abortions.

If anything, Obama's problem with those who view partial-birth abortion with horror just got worse. Obama, while a state senator in Illinois, singlehandedly blocked a bill which provided that, should a baby be born alive as the result of a failed abortion, all possible steps must be taken to keep the baby alive. This week it was disclosed he has been lying about what he did.

When he was running for the U.S. Senate in 2004 Obama was criticized by his opponent for supporting infanticide. Obama at that time said he had opposed the bill to preserve the lives of babies who survive abortions because it lacked language that was in the federal bill stating the bill did not affect the status of a fetus. Now Illinois state records show that what Obama said was not true.


Russian troops have invaded Georgia far beyond the two provinces where Russian agents have been infiltrating for years seeking to cause unrest. Civilian deaths are mounting, some say in the thousands. Displaced persons are said to be in the tens of thousands.

The U.S. and the EU have demanded Russia withdraw its troops, but that is not happening. Western governments are considering what actions to take, but no plan as yet has emerged.

Senator McCain has called for an emergency meeting of NATO and a reconsideration of its decision last spring not to invite Georgia to become a member of NATO.

"NATO's North Atlantic Council should convene in emergency session to demand a ceasefire and begin discussions on both the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to South Ossetia and the implications for NATO's future relationship with Russia, a Partnership for Peace nation. NATO's decision to withhold a Membership Action Plan for Georgia might have been viewed as a green light by Russia for its attacks on Georgia, and I urge the NATO allies to revisit the decision.

Russian aggression in Georgia is no doubt also intended to intimidate Ukraine, which like Georgia applied for membership in NATO. With its new wealth from energy sales, Russia appears to be attempting to re-establish a Soviet-like sphere of compliant satellites.

Tuesday morning's Daily Mail of London has a lengthy report on the Russian invasion with a number of on-the-scene photographs of civilian casualties.


Our best friend in the Caucuses the nation of Georgia is being attacked by Russia and hundreds of civilians have already been killed by Russian tanks and planes. Russians appear to be making bombing runs against a vital oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean that bypasses Russia by going through Georgia.

The Russian aggression has been condemned by the United States government, NATO, the European Union and very forcefully by John McCain. When the attacks broke out, the Obama position was that both sides were to blame and called upon the United Nations to mediate. With Russia on the Security Council, that's close to being a sick joke.

John Hinderaker, one of the lawyer bloggers of the excellent blog Power Line, expressed his disgust:

It is often said that Obama is not ready to be President, but I don't think this is exactly right. It seems pretty obvious that Obama, given his temperament, his self-regard, his blithe ignorance of history and of the material conditions of life on this planet, will never be ready to be President. He is not unready: he is unsuited for, and inadequate to, the office.


Back on July 13th we published a chart showing that the oil deposits in Rocky Mountains shale would vault the U.S. into a commanding lead in the world as a producer of oil, far ahead of Saudi Arabia. Today Power Line reported that oil shale development is about to get underway -- in Jordan! Jordanian sources say Jordan can become oil-independent, become an oil exporter and satisfy its own needs for 700 years.

But Pelosi-Obama-Reid are preventing the U.S. from achieving energy independence with their ban on exploration and development offshore and in the Rocky Mountains.

Their stubborn disregard for national security and the distress high energy prices are causing average Americans is shocking, Their proposal -- to slap a profits tax on oil companies -- will punish the companies we need to produce oil and not deliver one new barrel of oil to the United States. Their environmental arguments are hogwash, since producing oil in the United States is done with more technoligical expertise and environmental sensitivity than anywhere else on the planet. Is is better for the U.S. to rely on oil production in Nigeria where oil platforms and pipelines are attacked almost daily with resulting oil spoilation of coastal waters?


Bruce Bawer is an American homosexual who move to Europe in hopes of finding a more compatible culture. He first settled in the Netherlands and then moved to Norway. To his shock and dismay, Europe was not what he imagined: the presence of Muslims had made the continent not only more hostile to gays such as himself, Muslims were more hostile to the native-born, who increasingly live in fear of aggressive, violent Muslim youth. His 2006 first hand account of his experience became a best-seller and is well worth reading: While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within.

Bawer chooses a single example (and alludes to another) to demonstrate how Norwegian Muslims play their game and how craven the natives are, pretending that their Muslims are integrating so well.

What both of these stories underscore is that on every front, and with every weapon they can find — lawsuits, veiled threats, guilt-tripping, and puff pieces masquerading as journalism — Islamists are poking and prodding at the edifice of European democracy in a tireless effort to weaken the system and bend it ever more surely toward sharia. They’ve realized that the work of jihad — of restoring the caliphate, of making Europe a part of the umma — doesn’t require suicide bombs and airplane missiles; for the prevalence in the West of useful idiots who’ve been brainwashed by multiculturalism makes such weapons superfluous.

John McCain has repeatedly warned that radical Islam is the "transcendent challenge" of our times. No doubt most people think he's talking about Iraq and Afghanistan. He's not. He is referring to a global war by true believers of Islam, funded in the trillions by oil sales to the West, to make Islam supreme in the world. As Bawer notes, conquest doesn't always require suicide bombs when multicultural brainwashed idiots can't see what's happening before their very eyes.

The basic question under discussion in Norway is whether gays should be executed. A Norwegian Muslim says he's waiting word from the Fatwa Council of Europe, but is sure the Council will say European law must control (for now). So how are the bureaucrats and media treating this equivocation?

Read the story and you'll know exactly what is already happening in the United States as well -- an unrelenting effort to make this nation part of the universal Islamic ummah which is being deliberately ignored by media and government alike, because the implications are too hard to deal with.

European Muslims Debate: Should Gays Be Executed?

August 7, 2008 - by Bruce Bawer

One of the pillars of the future totalitarian state in 1984 is the practice of doublethink, which Orwell defined as “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. … To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary.”

As it happens, this is a precise description of exactly what’s been going on in many parts of Europe in recent years, as multicultural ideology has been confronted by realities about Islam that, in a doublethink-free world, would send that ideology crashing to the ground in flames.


The following letter from a Cuban who escaped Communist Cuba after Castro appeared in Letters to the Editor in the Richmond Times Dispatch, Richmond, VA on July 7, 2008. As it circulated by email ,it was immediately attacked by the Obama netroots, claiming it was a fake right wing smear.

Well, no. Click the title of the Letter to the Editor to go to the newspaper. And do read the letter.

Beware Charismatic Men Who Preach 'Change'
Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Each year I get to celebrate Independence Day twice. On June 30 I celebrate my independence day and on July 4 I celebrateAmerica's. This year is special, because it marks the 40th anniversary of my independence.

On June 30, 1968, I escaped Communist Cuba and a few months later I was in the United Sates to stay. That I happened to arrive in Richmond on Thanksgiving Day is just part of the story, but I digress.

I've thought a lot about th e anniversary this year. The election-year rhetoric has made me think a lot about Cuba and what transpired there. In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.

When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said "Praise the Lord." And when the young leader said, "I will be for change and I'll bring you change," everyone yelled, "Viva Fidel!"

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner's guns went silent the people's guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans. And now I'm back to the beginning of my story.

Luckily, we Americans would never fall for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America? How will you pay for all this "change" and where will the money come from?

Would we?

Manuel Alvarez Jr.
Sandy Hook

While Pelosi-Obama-Reid continue to keep their heads buried in desert sand, Brazil is showing there is lots of oil in the continental shelf.

Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer recently marveled at the stupidity of Democrats in not doing what every sensible American wants done: Drill our way out of high prices and dependence on the Middle East and Venezauela.

American oil reserves have been in decline because Democrats in Congress have banned new exploration and development for decades.

Brazil’s oil reserves are soaring because Brazil is developing its own resources. Even its European partners are benefitting.

As new discoveries are made, the estimate of new reserves for Brazil are going up. Speculation now centers around 50 billion barrels of new oil in Brazil’s offshore region. That’s five times Brazil’s reserves as of last year (11 billion) and 2½ times all of the reserves of the U.S (21 billion).

Yet the estimates for banned areas offshore the U.S., in ANWR and in Rocky Mountain shale exceed one trillion barrels of oil or oil equivalents. The results of this failure to drill are high prices for gas, home heating oil and jet fuel and crude oil itself and unhealthy dependence on hostile and unstable oil producers.

The number one exporter of oil to the U.S. is Canada. Canada, like Brazil, has been aggressively exploring and developing its own natural resources. Canada has been building its reserves even as production in mature oil fields is flattening or declining. That’s fortunate for the U.S., since Canadian oil exports to the U.S. have been growing to help support economic growth.

Here’s the most recent news out of Brazil:

Galp Advances After Making New Oil Find in Brazil
By Joao Lima
Aug. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Galp Energia SGPS SA, Portugal's biggest oil company, rose in Lisbon trading after finding light crude oil in a deepwater well in Brazil's Santos Basin, the location of the biggest discovery in the Americas since 1976. …
Tupi is the largest oil discovery in the Americas since Mexico's Cantarell field was found in 1976, and compares with the 12 billion barrels held at Kazakhstan's Kashagan field, the largest oil find in the last three decades.
Petroleo Brasileiro SA, Brazil's state-controlled oil company, is the operator and owns 65 percent of the BM-S-11 block where both the Iara and Tupi wells were drilled. BG owns 25 percent and Galp owns 10 percent.
Estimated Reserves
``Given the discovery, recoverable reserves on block BM-S- 11 could increase to 10 billion barrels from currently 5 billion to 8 billion barrels,'' Kapadia said.
Iara is in Brazil's ``pre-salt'' offshore region, a new oil province that may contain about 50 billion barrels of oil according to Peter Wells, a director at U.K. research company Neftex Petroleum Consultants Ltd. The Iara well, which has yet to be declared commercially viable, is still being drilled in the hope of finding more oil at greater depths.
Some oil industry analysts, including David Thomas from Citigroup Global Markets Inc., have said that Tupi, Tupi Sul and Iara may be linked as part of a larger offshore deposit.
Petrobras in January said that a gas and oil discovery known as Jupiter, in the Santos Basin's BM-S-24 block, could be as big as Tupi. Petrobras owns 80 percent of Jupiter and operates the well. Galp has 20 percent of Jupiter. …


Former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, who has herself admittedly become enthralled by the messianic orations of Obama, says that feelngs are shifting and concerns are rising:

Mr. Obama's problem on foreign affairs is his own youth and inexperience. In a time of high stakes, do we want Mr. Untried and Untested?


Charles Krauthammer once again nails the truth to the wall.

Democrats and the American people have been ill-served on energy by the blind, tone-deaf Democratic leadership. Congressional Democrats fled for home, looking like cowards as well as stupid and out of touch.

So Pelosi now is passing the word that her people can vote for drilling.

The problem for the Democrats is that the argument for "do everything" is not rocket science. It is common sense. Which is why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, surveying the political rubble resulting from her insistence on not even permitting drilling to come to a floor vote, has quietly told her members that they can save their skins and vote for drilling when the pre-election Congress convenes next month. Pelosi says she wants to save the planet. Apparently saving her speakership comes first.

The Republicans who ditched their vacations to stay on the House floor demanding a vote on drilling have won. Despite Pelosi cutting off television, microphones and lights, the message got out to the American people. ThIs Democratic leadership of Pelosi-Obama-Reid, as President Clinton would have said, does not “feel your pain.”

Now they are feeling their own.

Read the brilliant Krauthammer piece.

As we count the reasons why, consider this one.

Ah, free speech, that Western concept.

What do you do when publishers assert their devotion to free speech, but then say they are afraid someone is going to get killed if they publish your work?

Not in America, you say? Well, think again.

Publishers who regular print books that demean Jesus and trash Christianity (think The Da Vinci Code) think differently when the book is about Islam.

An American writer Sherry Jones labored in research for years to produce her novel about one the most interesting of Muhammad's 12 wives. ((When Muhammad came across what would have been wife number five, after Allah had said up to four wives per man was ok with him, Allah appeared to Muhammad and said the Prophet, as his special messenger on earth, could have as many wives as he wanted.)

Aisha was married to Muhammad at six and had her first sexual relations with him when she was nine. She was a favorite of Muhammad and, from reports, was quite intelligent and truthful. In the morning after the night when Muhammad said Allah had lifted him out of his bed for a whirlwind tour of Jerusalem, Hell and Heaven, Aisha said she was at his elbow all night and he hadn't gone anywhere. (This magical ride is the main reason for Jerusalem being considered islam's third most holy site.)

The American writer's novel was scheduled to be released August 12th (next week).

Then last May Random House choked and said it wouldn't be publishing the novel out of fear of deadly retribution. Defenders of Islam said there would be killings if anything was published that they considered insulting to the memory of Muhammad -- even though what was imagined was well within the bounds of what was known about Muhammad's lustful life.

To this day "The Jewel of Medina" is without a publisher. For more details about Islam's disdain for freedom of speech, click here.

This kind of pressure and threats is achieving great success in shutting down criticism of Islam in Europe -- and in the United States. Even the truth, not just opinion, can be stifled if the threat of violence is considered real. A scholarly review "Free Speech in an age of jihad" can be obtained here.

A seven-year old girl asks Obama why he's running for president of the United States. Obama's inspiriational reply?



Now here's a frightening thought from Obama: [My] wife is "the most quintessentially American woman I know."

He may be telling the truth.

Michelle Obama, no doubt aided by affirmative action and financial aid, made her way through Princeton and Harvard Law School, landed at a big Chicago law firm and then quickly left for easier work at a major Chicago hospital which tripled her salary to over $300,000 when her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Her Princeton thesis pretty much pledged herself for life to black power against white oppression, which viewpoint certainly explalns her assertion in February that "for the first time in her life" she was proud of America.


In addition to Barack Obama's fixation on himself, he has another, perhaps even more disturbing fixation -- how bad America is.

His "Blame America" theme was on world exhibition when he spoke before tens of thousands of Berliners and orated about the "imperfect" nation he was seeking to lead.

In a thoughtful article "Barack's "Tragic" Emphasis", Ben Johnson asks,

Can Barack Obama go the rest of the campaign without demeaning the country he seeks to lead?

Johnson is bothered by Obama's "seemingly omnipresent emphasis on the ills and maladies of the nation whose presidency he seeks." For example, just this week, at a gathering of minority journalists, Barack Obama said, “I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged.”

Obama's choice of mentors and friends is troubling -- America haters such as Reverend Jeremiah Wright (for 20 years "God Damn America" was his theme) and Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who as recently as 2001regretted he hadn't bombed more.

His wife seems to reflect his -- and Jeremiah Wright's --negative attitude towards America. She repeatedly gave speeches about America being "just downright mean" and disclosed -- only after her husband had won a few primaries -- she was "for the first time in my adult life" proud to be American. She complained how America was always raising the bar: "it's always just quite out of reach."

Other signs, too, indicate something less than enthusiam for his country. Obama wouldn't wear a flag lapel pin, wouldn't cover his heart with his hand during the playing of the national anthem and he belittled small town America's religiousness.

Why isn't the media examining "just how obsessed is Obama with the ills and evils of his country’s past?" He may want to think of himself as a citizen of the world, as he said in Berlin, but he's running to be president of the United States.

Could this scene have anything to do with it?

When Obama walked on stage at the McCormick Center, many journalists in the audience leapt to their feet and applauded enthusiastically after being told not to do so. During a two-minute break halfway through the event, which was broadcast live on CNN, journalists ran to the stage to snap photos of Obama.

As Tammy Bruce commented, “Yeah, no bias there.”

The media refuse to see, but all Americans with a heart for their country’s well-being in a time of war should discern the significance of this bias – of the media for Obama, and of Obama against his country.

McCain wants to drill. Obama wants sun and wind, though they won't ever do much for destroyers, fighter aircraft and plastics. And did I mention cosmetics?

Can there be a plan that joins both aims? McCain, that old guy with brains and experience, welcomes debate. So it's a good thing that Paris Hilton has stepped up to address the issue.

It's too bad that Obama has lost his nerve about meeting John McCan in a series of town meeting type debates. He said he would, now says he won't.

If Paris Hilton is willing to debate the issues, why won't Barack Obama?

Paris Hilton proposes a compromise. They may not know it in celebrity land, but she is endorsing McCain's comprehensive energy policy. Way to go, Paris.

Paris' is better looking than many alternatives.


British-born Tony Blankley was until recently editorial page editor of the Washington Times, but now is a syndicated columnist. His book on the threat of radical Islam to the West was well-received. In his lifetime, he has seen a great deal, but he is "stunned" by Obama.

[T]he more I watch this man the more stunned I am at His overconfidence and towering pride. I have known a number of great and powerful men (and read biographies of many more), and they surely don't lack confidence or ego. But who among the great would have answered the question posed to the junior senator from Illinois a few weeks ago as He did? Asked whether He had any doubts, He said "never." .....
Here is a man who talked almost contemptuously of Gen. Petraeus. Explaining His differences with the general, He said that His "job is to think about the national security interest as a whole; (the generals') job is just to get their job done (in Iraq)." Of course, right at the moment, the junior senator from Illinois doesn't yet have "His" job, while Gen. Petraeus, as confirmed Centcom commander, has direct responsibility for both Afghanistan and Iraq and everything in between and around them. But in the mind of Sen. I Am, He already is, while He thinks the man who is perhaps our greatest general in two generations is just another flunky carrying out routine orders. It is repulsive to see such a mentality in a man who would be president.
All of us have our shortcomings, of course. But there is none so dangerous both to a man and to those for whom he has responsibility than the sin of pride. In the sixth century, Pope Gregory the Great recognized that pride breeds all the other sins and is therefore the most serious offense. St. Thomas Aquinas reaffirmed that pride is rebellion against the very authority of God.....
For a man, his personality is his destiny. If he becomes president, his flaws become the nation's dangers. The voters must judge carefully both the personalities and the ideas of those who would be president.

Read it all.


Brazil is already independent of foreign oil, yet it is aggressively exploring for oil in its continental shelf. In the past year it has made several new discoveries that will add significantly to its reserves and provide the fuel and petroleum products needed for its growing economy as well as to replace mature oil fields that at some point will go into decline.

And where does the Brazilian energy company Petrobras turn for the most technologically advanced oil rigs for deep water drilling? The U.S. One month ago U.S. company Transocean signed a $4 billion contract with Petrobras.

While U.S. oil fields are mature and our oil reserves are not holding their own, Brazil's and Canada's reserves are growing. The difference is both countries are exploring and developing their own resources, But the U.S. Congress has been banning such exploration and development for decades, thus making the U.S. more and more dependent on others for oil, including countries with unstable or hostile regimes and less-tthan-exemplary environmental practices.

The Republicans in the House of Representativesw who have taken the floor during recess demanding the House come back in session to pass a drilling bill are doing the right thing for America and our citizens. The Democratic leadership is failing abysmally in its duty. If $4 gasoline isn't a wake-up call for Pelosi-Obama-Reid, maybe the votes of an angry public in November will be.

Meanwhile, Brazil moves ahead.

Brazil: Petrobras To Start Pre-Salt Well Production

August 6, 2008
Brazilian state oil company Petroleo Brasileiro SA plans to begin production from an oil well in the pre-salt area in the Campos Basin on Aug. 12, Bloomberg reported Aug. 6, citing O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper. The well, in the Jubarte field, is expected to produce 10,000 to 15,000 barrels of oil per day. The Cachalote field, which is next to the Jubarte, will start production in October. Production in the pre-salt area in Jubarte will serve as a test for the development of large oil fields, such as Tupi, in the Santos Basin.

Source: Strategic Forecasting, Inc.

One would think that after even supporters started speaking about Obama's "presumptuousness" and "arrogance," some humility might be forced on the candidate by his campaign staff. The same might be said about his patriotism and his enthusiam about America. Criticism about not wearing a flag lapel pin eventually had him putting one on -- sometimes.

But now he has re-outfitted his campaign plane for the general election. The American flag on the tail is gone; in its place is Obama's symbol of himself.


As for humility, Obama had his own special chair labeled this way:



A new ATV/Zogby poll taken July 31-August 1 shows that Obama's lead has evaporated. The race is now neck and neck, down from a 46-36 Obama lead.

Key findings:

-Among voters aged 18-29, Obama lost 16 percent and McCain gained 20. Obama still leads, 49-38;

-Among women, McCain gained 10 percentage points. Obama now leads 43-38;

-Among independents, Obama lost an 11 point lead. They're now tied;

-Among Democrats, Obama's support dropped from 83 percent to 74 percent;

-Among Catholics, Obama lost the 11 point lead he had in July and now trails McCain by 15.

Zogby said Obama also lost ground among minorities.

The most astonishing turnaround is in the Catholic vote. Obama's support fell 26% and he now trails McCain by 15%.

The more voters get to know Obama, the better McCain looks.


Do we need oil? Despite what Obama says, of course. (Obama wants to end the use of oil "in our time.")

This chart shows that 70% of our oil is used for transportation. That's not only motor vehicles, but airplanes and ships. That includes our defense capability -- destroyers, cruisers, aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, landiing craft and tanks.

At the present times 96% of transportation propulsion comes from petroleum; 2% from biofuels and 2% from natural gas.

Most of the rest of oil goes into petrochemicals for use in everything from plastics to detergents.

1Excludes 0.6 quadrillion Btu of ethanol, which is included in "Renewable Energy.”
2Excludes supplemental gaseous fuels.
3Includes 0.1 quadrillion Btu of coal coke net imports.
4Conventional hydroelectric power, geothermal, solar/PV, wind, and biomass.
5Includes industrial combined-heat-and-power (CHP) and industrial electricity-only plants.
6Includes commercial combined-heat-and-power (CHP) and commercial electricity-only plants.
7Electricity-only and combined-heat-and-power (CHP) plants whose primary business is to sell electricity, or electricity and heat, to the public.

Note: Sum of components may not equal 100 percent due to independent rounding.
Source: Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2007, Tables 1.3 and 2.1b-2.1f, and 10.3.


Democrats are working hard to win this November's presidential election, as the old adage says, "by hook or crook." History provides us with key evidence about how the "crook" side of things work in voter registration, so is there any doubt that registration fraud is happening now and will be happening in the run-up to election day?

Democrat candidate Obama is intimately aware of how the system works. During his years as a community organizer and lawyer in Chicago, Obama worked closely with and later represented as a lawyer ACORN, a group dedicated to registering Democratic voters, using whatever it takes, including fraud or, indeed, especially fraud.

John Fund of the Wall Street Journal did some investigating and came up with an extraordinary number of fraud cases involving Acorn around the country, including this one from the state of Washington:

But the most interesting news came out of Seattle, where on Thursday local prosecutors indicted seven workers for Acorn, a union-backed activist group that last year registered more than 540,000 low-income and minority voters nationwide and deployed more than 4,000 get-out-the-vote workers. The Acorn defendants stand accused of submitting phony forms in what Secretary of State Sam Reed says is the "worst case of voter-registration fraud in the history" of the state.

The list of "voters" registered in Washington state included former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, New York Times columnists Frank Rich and Tom Friedman, actress Katie Holmes and nonexistent people with nonsensical names such as Stormi Bays and Fruto Boy. The addresses used for the fake names were local homeless shelters. Given that the state doesn't require the showing of any identification before voting, it is entirely possible people could have illegally voted using those names.

Local officials refused to accept the registrations because they had been delivered after last year's Oct. 7 registration deadline. Initially, Acorn officials demanded the registrations be accepted and threatened to sue King County (Seattle) officials if they were tossed out. But just after four Acorn registration workers were indicted in Kansas City, Mo., on similar charges of fraud, the group reversed its position and said the registrations should be rejected. But by then, local election workers had had a reason to carefully scrutinize the forms and uncovered the fraud. Of the 1,805 names submitted by Acorn, only nine have been confirmed as valid, and another 34 are still being investigated. The rest--over 97%--were fake. (emphasis added)

The Wall Street Journal notes some questions are being asked about why a Belgian beer company was able to buy Anheuser-Busch and not the other way around.

Taxes were a big part of the reason. The Bud boys were paying almost twice as much in taxes as the Begian company InBev. U.S. corporate taxes are now among the highest in the world. John McCain wants to cut the corporate tax rate to 25%, which is about the world average (Ireland's is 12.5%, for example.) Obama has only been talking about raising taxes. John McCain understands the economy, Obama doesn't. Another reason to vote for John McCain.

Democrat Speaker of the House Pelosi closed down the House Friday and left town in a hurry, making sure there would be no vote authorizing drilling in the outer continental shelves. She claimed she was “saving the planet.” (See Charles Krauthammer’s destruction of that ludicrously false argument.)

However, Republicans stayed on the House floor to argue for drilling. Pelosi heard about it and ordered that the lights and microphones be shut off and C-Span to stop broadcasting. Everyone was to be evicted from the House chamber. Talk about heavy-handed totalitarian rule acting against the interest of the American people.

The Republicans dug in, as these four reports from National Review writers show. As Mark Hemingway notes, “It really looks like Congressional Republicans are getting some of their mojo back.”



John Trevor Albuquerque Journal

True to form, Barack Obama, finally reading the polls and feeling the heat created by John McCain and congressional Republicans, has now switched from adamant opposition to seeming support for offshore drilling. But wait: Offshore drilling will only be included in a comprehensive energy package if that's what it takes to put a bill together. Too clever by half.

His statement is absurd on its face. Obama knows very well the more items that go into "an energy bill" the longer it will take to achieve a compromise, assuming one can be reached. The wholly inadequate energy bill of 2007 took years to put together. So while he grandly says he's for offshore drilling, he's actually playing for delay so that the clock will run out in this legislative year with no new drilling authorized.

Do you think the media will tell the truth about BO's phony conversion to support for offshore drilling? No way.

Informal soundings indicate there is a majority in both houses of Congress for ending the moratorium on offshore drilling. Therefore, a straightforward bill to authorize offshore drilling would pass. But the Democratic leadership has blocked every Republican effort to bring a drilling vote to the floor and shut down Congress for the August vacation without doing a thing to help bring gas prices down and lessen dependence on overseas oil. You can bet that Pelosi-Obama-Reid are working together to do what their environmental extremists want them to do.

There is a second chance for Americans suffering from high prices of oil, gasoline and home heating oil to win this year. The moratorium actually expires by its own terms on September 30th; it has to be renewed for one or more years by a new vote. That vote will be buried in a huge appropriations bill to run the government, so the Democratic leadership is betting Republicans (and sensible Democrats) won't dare vote "no" and the president won't dare to veto the bill, because the government might shut down, with enormous adverse consequences and finger pointing. Who would be to blame for that? It's really the Democrats trying to pull a fast one and avoid a yes/no vote on drilling. But you know how the media will play it.

Contact your Democratic representatives in Congress and demand they vote now for drilling offshore, in ANWR and in the Rocky Mountains shale. Virtually all Republicans are onboard already.


Obama believes in Obama. Do you?


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes lifting the moratorium on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and on the Outer Continental Shelf. She won't even allow it to come to a vote. With $4 gas having massively shifted public opinion in favor of domestic production, she wants to protect her Democratic members from having to cast an anti-drilling election-year vote. Moreover, given the public mood, she might even lose. This cannot be permitted. Why? Because as she explained to Politico: "I'm trying to save the planet; I'm trying to save the planet."

A lovely sentiment. But has Pelosi actually thought through the moratorium's actual effects on the planet?

So begins Charles Krauthammer's devastating analysis of the Pelosi argument. He builds his case on her environmental terms.

Why has Pelosi only thought about the American part of the planet where the best and safest technology is available operating under one of the best enviromental regulatory regimes?

The world consumes 86 million barrels a day; the United States, roughly 20 million. We need the stuff to run our cars and planes and economy. Where does it come from?

Powered by Movable Type 4.23-en

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from August 2008 listed from newest to oldest.

July 2008 is the previous archive.

September 2008 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.