Friday, October 31, 2008

Why We Must Fight For McCain by Arnold Schwarzenegger

The whole video is interesing, but if you are in a rush, make sure you watch minute 5:20

Petition to the LA Times: Release the Obama/Khalidi Tape!

I encourage our readers to sign it. At the time of this writing: 5000 signatures and growing!

Victor Davis Hanson: 'The End of Journalism'

Victor Davis Hanson is a well regarded scholar in military history, fellow at the Hoover Institution and a registered Democrat. I always love his columns because they are cogent and persuasive. In every single piece that I have read from him, he usually goes in detail through his arguments, providing solid evidence backing his points. That's why I find his piece about media bias in this Presidential election particularly interesting. Call it a "scholarly researched" version of Michael Malone's illuminating piece. Please read it here,
"There have always been media biases and prejudices. Everyone knew that Walter Cronkite, from his gilded throne at CBS news, helped to alter the course of the Vietnam War, when, in the post-Tet depression, he prematurely declared the war unwinnible. Dan Rather’s career imploded when he knowingly promulgated a forged document that impugned the service record of George W. Bush. We’ve known for a long time — from various polling, and records of political donations of journalists themselves, as well as surveys of public perceptions — that the vast majority of journalists identify themselves as Democratic, and liberal in particular.Yet we have never quite seen anything like the current media infatuation with Barack Obama, and its collective desire not to raise key issues of concern to the American people. Here were four areas of national interest that were largely ignored.
Imagine the reaction of CNN or NBC had John McCain’s pastor and spiritual advisor of 20 years been revealed as a white supremacist who damned a multiracial United States, or had he been a close acquaintance until 2005 of an unrepentant terrorist bomber of abortion clinics, or had McCain himself sued to eliminate congressional opponents by challenging the validity of African-American voters who signed petitions, or had both his primary and general election senatorial rivals imploded once their sealed divorce records were mysteriously leaked."

Thursday, October 30, 2008

CNN's King: 'Whining' Media 'Out of Touch' on Election Coverage

Read the whole story here,

"You know media bias has reached epic proportions when journalists are criticizing their own colleagues for a lack of professionalism in covering Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama and Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin."

Are the MSM suddenly realizing that they have crossed a very dangerous line that might lead to their extinction given the new emerging media?

LA Times: Shame on You!

A Spaniard's Case For McCain and Against Obama

November 4th is approaching and those who are undecided are beginning to make up their minds. I want to present my reasons for supporting John McCain for President and why an Obama Presidency brings to my mind deeply uncomfortable thoughts.

In full disclosure, I must say to all of you that I am not a US citizen yet. My immigration status is known technically as US Lawful Permanent Resident, commonly known as "green card holder". My status in the US is, for most practical purposes, similar to that of a US citizen except that I cannot vote in those elections which require US citizenship, ie the vast majority of elections held in the US. What that means is that in everything else I have most of the same rights and obligations of a US citizen, including my eligibility for the US Army draft. I also plan to apply for US citizenship next year, so my interest in who will be the next US President goes beyond a mere curiosity from a foreigner who lives in the US.

Simply put, I cannot be truthful to my reasons for willing to become a US citizen without passionately supporting John McCain in what has been called the most important election since 1980. This has nothing to do with calling Obama unpatriotic, although the latter's own statements on his reasons for not wearing a US flag pin would raise alarms on any reasonable person, but with the vision of America that captured my imagination as a child and teenager. Is that vision, that I received through American movies and TV, that triggered my desire to work hard so I could come to the US to seek the American Dream.

So what vision am I talking about? I fell in love with the America that gives every individual an opportunity to raise by himself regardless of his economic or family background. An America where individual freedom is the creed upon which its patriotism is based. An America where individual enterprise created the technology breakthroughs that have changed the world in which we live. An America that rewards individual merit while she is generous with the less fortunate of society. An America whose powerful Army has been used mostly as a force for good, unlike the different European armies that have been used mostly to subjugate neighbors and the rest of the world. In summary, an America that promises to those who give the best they have in themselves that success will follow their hard work and dedication. The last eight years haven't been perfect and frankly, George W Bush, mainly through an incompetent administration, has made a lot of damage to that vision of America. Whatever mistakes Bush made however, do not justify giving the highest office in the land to an individual, Barack Obama, whose vision for America is nothing like what grabbed my imagination as a kid but that sounds a lot like the European nightmare that I lived before coming to the US.

So, what nightmare I am talking about? Well, a society where the economic and social status where you are born pretty much determine your future. A society that provides universal state funded education and health care but with the catch that the government, not the individual, decides which school you attend and which doctor you go to. A society where asking a powerful politician a simple question can put you and your family in trouble (does the Joe the Plumber story sound familiar?). A society where mediocrity is rewarded and excellence punished (convince yourself by looking at the list of the best world universities and count the number of European universities there). A society where the "old money" still controls businesses, where chronic high unemployment exists because some people find it a better deal to receive government checks than to help themselves by having a job. A society where if you take a look at the largest companies, by almost any measure, 30 years ago you'll discover little change with respect to the largest companies today (in the US companies such as Google didn't exist 30 years ago; others like Microsoft or Apple were garage startups back then). A society where the last time the Europeans had armies comparable to the present US army in size and influence, they brought us World War II (ethnic nationalism is so ingrained in each European country that the only way the different European countries have found to be good neighbors is to have armies so weakened that they don't pose any serious threat to each other). Do I really need to continue?

When I hear the Obama/Biden ticket talking about "spreading the wealth around", "giving government checks to people who don't pay income taxes", "government mandated health care insurance", "negotiating without preconditions with the crappiest dictators of the world", rhetoric that puts the government playing an intrusive role in people's lives, education, free enterprise, science and technology, deciding when an individual is too rich for his own good... I get reminded of what I left behind in Spain. When in addition I see the press lynching a private citizen who dared ask a question to Obama or Biden avoiding the journalists who ask him hard questions, I am fearful that an Obama regime would make incidents such as Valerie Plame's the norm, not the exception.

For all these reasons, I cannot but wholeheartedly support John McCain for President.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

LA Times covering up Obama

It's official. With so many false rumors around, I was hesitant to believe this one at first. Now, the LA Times has confirmed the existence of the tape and its opposition to release it,
"The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it," said the newspaper's editor, Russ Stanton. "The Times keeps its promises to sources."
The Obama/Khalidi story can be viewed here,
A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about
meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.
His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."

Clerk charged with unlawful search of Joe the Plumber

Read here,

"Toledo Police have confirmed that a TPD records clerk is accused of performing an illegal search of information related to 'Joe the Plumber.'"

Keep The Change

CBS Exposes The Obama Campaign's Financing

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered!

I found this chilling audio recording through Drudge and Littlegreenfootballs. In this audio, in his own voice, as Naked Empire put it (the audio poster in Youtube), he wants to Radically Reinterpret the Constitution to Redistribute Wealth. In the audio, the discussion is not about whether redistribution of wealth is right or wrong, it is about HOW to do it legitimately! Obama is discussing the best way to bring about a Redistribution of Wealth! Read more about Warren Court after you watch this video. It will open your eyes about Obama's real agenda - redistribution of wealth BY ALL MEANS!

I would recommend to watch the video, record it (use Camtasia software) and store it in your hard drive. I've heard about controversial Obama movies disappearing from Youtube before as in case you don't know, the CEO of Google (youtube parent company) supports The One.

Why Obama's socialism should not be necessary in America

My mother, bless her heart, said something very important the other day. She said that Europeans are much more socially conscious than Americans and that's why they have all those government programs (i.e., socialism or spreading the wealth). She was clearly trying to say that Americans are mean and selfish, and that's why they've traditionally leaned to keeping their wealth, rather than allowing government redistribution. She's completely wrong, of course, but wrong in a very interesting way.

What she neglected to consider with her pronouncement is that, traditionally, America and Europe had vastly different social and economic fluidity. While Europe has had an exceptionally rigid class system from which few escape, America has been since it's inception a place in which people can "make it." Every immigrant group (and such is the nature of America that all but the Indigenous Americans are immigrant groups), has managed to assimilate and rise economically.

Census records from the Lower East Side in New York, through which passed hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of immigrants from all over Europe, show that within two generations, all of the families that once lived there had moved into the working, middle or wealthy classes. Certainly, individuals may have suffered and failed but, en masse, the immigrants did well. They didn't need to become the recipients of perpetual government largesse.

In Europe, however, there were no systems by which the lower classes (and that also always meant the poorer classes) could escape their stratum. Whether by accent, education, poverty, or tradition, they stayed there. (And, interestingly, even the educational opportunities socialism provided didn't much change that. When I lived in England a couple of decades ago, after almost 40 years of free access to college education, most English people did not go on to college and people still gave away their class instantly just by opening their mouths.) Socialism, in other words, was just a totalitarian government substitute for the old noblesse oblige that saw the upper class (or, at least, the socially conscious ones) take care of the poorer orders, all the while ensuring that they stayed in their place.

The intense stratification of that system continues to exist with the new immigrants to Europe. Whether in Germany, Norway, Sweden, England, Italy or France, these new Muslim immigrants are instantly the recipients of government largesse that gives them housing and money -- and that essentially tells them to get into their immigrant ghettos, and stay there, preferably feeling grateful to and voting for the government that was so good to them. Its a shock to the ruling class, and one that they can't seem to understand, that these immigrants, rather than feeling grateful at being stuffed away into ghettos without any opportunities, loath the countries in which they live, and cheerfully envision their bloody overthrows.

My mother agreed with me on all of these points (how could she not?), but then produced her "a-ha!" to prove me wrong: "What about blacks in America (and, she could have added, Native Americans, too)?" To her, they proved I was entirely wrong in describing America's social and economic fluidity. To me, though, the were just the extra evidence I needed to prove that when, as they do you Europe, a government provides too much for people, it consigns them permanently to poverty and social exile.

As you know, African-Americans (and Native Americans) differed from all other immigrant groups in America because the American system essentially imposed against them, for centuries (and in brutal and horrible ways), a European style stratification that prevented any upward movement. This is true whether one is looking at slavery, relocation, genocidal wars or Jim Crow. I'll focus from here on out on what happened to blacks when Americans finally wised up to the error of their ways, but you can tell the same story about Native Americans.

Beginning in the 1940s (with the WWII economy) and continuing into the 1950s (with the Civil Rights movement), blacks started the same upward movement as other American groups. That is, once the nation began removing the artificial ceiling it had imposed on them, blacks too made social and economic strides. The strides were slow, because prejudice is slow to die, but they were real, and they created a rising black working and middle class composed of nuclear families. I have no doubt that, had the government continued to educate and police against discrimination, and otherwise left the market to do its work, African Americans would have joined other immigrant groups in realizing the American dream in a generation or two.

The death knell for this laborious, but real, social and economic ascent was the Great Society. The moment comprehensive welfare programs began (around the mid-1960s), government workers fanned out to black communities all over America and made huge efforts to tell blacks to stop working, because the government would pay for them. White guilt was at its apex, and government welfare was its expiation.

Being rational actors, blacks gave up bad, low-paying, often demeaning jobs for free money. And being rational actors, they gave up nuclear families and parental responsibility for even more free money. And so began the terrible slide of the African-American community. Even if you all don't remember that time, you do remember what finally arrested this slide and helped put African-Americans back on the same, slow upward trajectory that existed before the Great Society: The fact that Clinton, under duress from a real Republican Congress, ended “welfare as we know it.” Once again, African-Americans, being rational actors, were given the incentive to shelter in the strength of the nuclear family and plug into the American Dream.

Obama wants to undo the American Dream and turn us into a European economy, where all benefits flow from the government, rather than individual effort. You can call it "socialism," or "big government," or "spreading the wealth," or whatever else suits you, but the outcome will be the same: People will be locked into government induced poverty in perpetuity, the middle class will become slack, the economy will enter into stagflation, unemployment will rise, and service in every area of American life will fall as people lose their incentive (because they've lost the ability) to rise upwards and join in the American Dream.

Signs Pointing To A McCain Victory - NO KIDDING!

After I posted my latest article, Why Do Barack Obama Unfounded Rhetoric and Radical Associations Seem Insignificant, I decided to do more research on the net to find a glimpse of hope that the American People can still see through the Main Stream Media and US Academia Indoctrination, about what Obama really is. I'm just not ready yet to believe that the ideology of Freedom and Liberty can be easily replaced by the Socialism, From Each According to His Ability, To Each According to His Need, Ideology. So here you go: Signs Pointing To A McCain Victory! Go PUMA (Party Unity My A**)! You also have to read PUMA letter that's addressed to the Republican Party! If PUMA will fight to the end for the McCain/Palin ticket, we have to fight too! It's so comforting to know that we have a friend in PUMA!

Here's one of the comments on the article (1 out of 250-ish last time I check!):

Thank You for this uplifting article. I am a lifelong Democrat and an African American. I was a Hillary Supporter during the primary but I am now voting for John McCain. The same goes for my husband and his sister. I realize that I am one of the 4% of AA's not voting for Obama. In my book principals should trump race, gender and party. I cannot vote for Obama. While I would love to have an African American or female president someday, I am disappointed in the DNC's choice of Barack Obama who is an empty suit that talks a good game. Obama has accomplished nothing in Illinois. The city of Chicago has the highest sales tax in the nation at 10.25%. The city has had 462 murders this year and we still have 2months in the year left. If you look at his record you see nothing. During the debates, Obama had no experience to draw upon for examples. Sarah Palin did, Biden did, obviously McCain did. When I hear Obama talking I glaze over because it is such empty rhetoric. he criticizes the other guy and really says nothing about what he will do beyond his flash card answers.

I am also disturbed by the African American leaders who have been used and thrown under the bus by Obama such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.If Martin Luther King were alive he would have found a place under that bus as well. You can be sure of it. Donna Brazille is a race baiting buffoon and Colin Powell is a desperate man whose legacy is on the mend.

Interesting that Obama delivered his Denver DNC speech on MLK's "I Had a Dream" anniversary yet did not mention Dr. King once. Obama lacks humility and smacks of insolence--the kind that a true leader should not possess. Obama lacks judgment. The media constantly gives him a pass on purchasing his home from Rezko, his unscrupulous relationships and lack of experience. It amounts to affirmative action.Which I am not in favor of. Obama is the least qualified person to ever run for POTUS.

I will be happy to vote for John McCain on November 4th. John is a true patriot and has a deep commitment to this country. When I see McCain his words are sincere and not preachy like Obama. Not condescending like Michelle Obama either. Who by the way will make a terrible first lady. She is a very angry,bitter woman and it shows. I will not let her work through her race issues by being our first lady. I don't need Barack to enlighten me. This so called Great Unifier has caused division among woman, blacks, the DNC and everything else that he touches. Go back to Chicago Senator Obama and finish,or I should say start the job that the people of Illinois elected you to do. 143 days was not enough.

I know how to bring change into my life without this just add water arugula smoothie drinking Messiah.

McCain/Palin 08

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Obama's Campaign Cancels Future Interviews With WFTV

I just read this at the Orlando Sentinel,

" Why did Barack Obama's campaign cancel an interview Jill Biden, wife of Sen. Joe Biden, was going to do with WFTV-Channel 9?
The Obama campaign earlier Friday suggested that future interviews with WFTV were unlikely before Election Day"

Please watch the interview and decide for yourself. Of course, it goes without saying that had Sarah Palin been the person interviewed by Barbara West, this would have made the national media.

Big Brother: Government computers used to find information on Joe the Plumber

I have stated several times that I am no friend of conspiracy theories. I found it laughable when Naomi Wolf said that the US was in the process of becoming a totalitarian regime because of the anti terror laws enacted after 9/11. That comparison was then insulting to those who really know what a true dictatorship is all about.
Surprisingly, the "US is becoming a dictatorship" in the MSM ended quietly after the November 2006 election that gave the Democrats the control of the US Congress. Which takes me to the the public lynching of Joe the Plumber by the MSM. We've seen public lynching of individuals involved in controversial political issues before. What made this case different until yesterday was that those individuals who were lynched by the MSM were, by their own choosing, public political figures in one way or another. In my 8 years in the US I don't remember the MSM lynching a private citizen "just for" asking a question to a politician.
Adding perilous insult to injury, yesterday we learned from an Ohio newspaper that, "State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber."
Note that from the article, it's a given that Joe's private info was accessed from government computers and shortly after he became famous because of his encounter with "The One". Those are facts nobody questions. What the Ohio authorities are investigating is whether that access was illegal. Ms Wolf, don't you think that this is a much more serious invasion of privacy by Big Brother than whatever fantasies you had in your mind before the 2006 election? (That was a rhetorical question). Another rhetorical question: where are the MSM when we need them; how is that this isn't highlighted by them as an issue of more relevance than Sarah Palin's wardrobe?

Friday, October 24, 2008

Michael S. Malone: Editing Their Way to Oblivion: Journalism Sacrificed For Power and Pensions

I first learned about Michael S. Malone last year when I was recommended his book about Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. I ended up buying the book, getting emotional while reading it and attending one of his talks about his portrayal of Bill and Dave at a Mountain View bookstore.
Since his name was new to me, I did a bit of research about him prior to attending the event; I learned that he was a household name in high tech journalism. A former HP employee like myself, although he had had the privilege to work with both Bill and Dave, he had been a journalist at the San Jose Mercury News before writing for the biggest household names in the news industry such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, ABC News. Further, from his presentation I came under the impression that he was a strong supporter of the media, especially the liberal media. I remember him defending the San Francisco Chronicle existence in the middle of the crisis that has affected newspapers main source of revenue, that is advertising, now that they have to compete with the new Internet media. That's why, I was completely shocked when I was reading this article of his today repudiating the way the media has handled this Presidential campaign.
I have been living in the United States for only eight years. Up until this past September and this, about to end, October I had an overall good impression of the US media. Not that I was convinced that all media were "fair and balanced" but at least I got the impression that when it came to reporting news, most respectable sources tried their best to present both sides of controversial topics. Not anymore. And it worries me a great deal. Nothing of what I saw in the Presidential campaign of 2004 comes close to the systematic lynching and humiliation that I have witnessed this time around regarding anybody who dares challenge, let alone criticize, "The One".
See, for those of us who come from places like Spain where all media have been behaving for years in the same way the MSM have been behaving during this Presidential campaign, it was refreshing to be able to tell the people who still live there that the New York Times mocked Spanish newspapers such as El Pais by calling them "pro-government newspaper". Is the US in the process of becoming a country like Spain?
How the hell did it came to this? While I was thinking these past days about the issue, I said to myself, well, maybe this is the way the US media were before 9/11 and I just didn't see it because of the special circumstances we lived after that horrible tragedy. That's why, reading Michael S Malone's article was so refreshing. After all, it seems that even he thinks that the media has gone too far this time. I'll reproduce some of the most interesting quotes but I really, really encourage everybody to read his article completely.

"The traditional media is playing a very, very dangerous game.
With its readers, with the Constitution, and with its own fate."

"But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer”, because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist."

"But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current Presidential campaign."

"But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass - no, make that shameless support - they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press. I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather - not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake - but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election."

"I’m not one of those people who think the media has been too hard on, say, Gov. Palin, by rushing reportorial SWAT teams to Alaska to rifle through her garbage."

"No, what I object to (and I think most other Americans do as well) is the lack of equivalent hardball coverage of the other side - or worse, actively serving as attack dogs for Senators Obama and Biden. If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as President of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography. That isn’t Sen. Obama’s fault: his job is to put his best face forward. No, it is the traditional media’s fault, for it alone (unlike the alternative media) has had the resources to cover this story properly, and has systematically refused to do so."

"Why, for example to quote McCain’s lawyer, haven’t we seen an interview with Sen. Obama’s grad school drug dealer - when we know all about Mrs. McCain’s addiction? Are Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko that hard to interview? All those phony voter registrations that hard to scrutinize? And why are Senator Biden’s endless gaffes almost always covered up, or rationalized, by the traditional media?"

It Doesn't Have to Happen!

Thursday, October 23, 2008

A Small Business Perspective on Obama's Tax Plan

An Army of Joe's

TIPP: Dead even race

This must be one of the most weird campaigns in history. Some polls show Obama with double digit gains (and not surprisingly those are the polls that are echoed by the media); yet, the daily tracking polls of several organizations show the race tightening, some within the margin of error (for instance Gallup's traditional model for likely voters shows Obama and McCain within the margin of error). The most surprising of all comes from TIPP. Its daily tracking poll, the poll that got it closest in 2004, shows a dead even race,

"McCain has cut into Obama's lead for a second day and is now just 1.1 points behind. The spread was 3.7 Wednesday and 6.0 Tuesday. The Republican is making headway with middle- and working- class voters, and has surged 10 points in two days among those earning between $30,000 and $75,000. He has also gone from an 11-point deficit to a 9-point lead among Catholics."

I am Voting Democrat: The Clueless College Student!

Hope this story makes you laugh as much as it did to me,

"Finally, I asked the troubling question about how Obama will ensure a tax break for 95% of people--despite the fact that about 40% don't pay income taxes. He struggled with that one for a while. Again, it seemed to be a foreign concept to him, like no one had ever raised the subject before.

He stumbled through a series of answers. Obama would "give" the unemployed jobs so that they could pay taxes and get a tax break. When I reminded him that would only account for 6%, he--in a tribute to the American education system--said that Obama was really talking about the 55% difference between 95 and 40. I reminded him that Obama had specified 95%, not 55%. He replied that "Obama didn't really mean that." I asked if he, the caller, was really supporting a candidate who lied about something so important?
He told me to wait while he talked to his supervisor. I could overhear bits of a conversation in which he referred to me, rather politely, as "a difficult one." (At least he didn't call me THAT one.)
When he returned to the phone, he informed me that Obama would reach the 95% figure by initiating taxes on the 40% who don't pay income taxes now, so that he could later give them their promised tax break."

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

It's Official: Coverage of McCain Twice as Negative as Obama

We already knew this, but having it confirmed by the The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism is akin to having it proved. Shame on you, MSM (or should I say Obama's propaganda arm?),

" John McCain received nearly twice as much negative press coverage as did Barack Obama. According to the report, 57% of the stories about John McCain during the period between September 8 and October 16 were "clearly negative in tone," compared to 29% for Obama. Conversely, stories that were "clearly positive in tone" favored Obama over McCain by a factor of more than two to one, 36% for Obama to just 14% for McCain."

Obama's Judgement about Iraq

Obama and Ayers in Their Own Words

New McCain Ad: Sweat Equity (aka the other Joe the Plumbers)

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

CNN interview with Sarah Palin

This is the Sarah Palin we love! Just see the anchor concede at the end that the media is giving a pass to Joe Biden with his comments that Obama, if elected, will be tested by America's enemies!

Jonah Goldberg: The media vs. Joe the Plumber

Follow up on the Tito Munoz story,

"In short, Obama's explanation to Joe the Plumber that we need to "spread the wealth around" is a sincere and significant expression of his worldview, with roots stretching back to his church and his days as a community organizer. Millions of Americans don't share this vision. They don't see the economy as a pie, whereby your slice can only get bigger if someone else's gets smaller. They don't begrudge the wealthy their wealth; they only ask to be given the same opportunities. They look at countries such as France and, rather than envy their socialized medicine and short workweeks, they fear their joblessness and tax policies that punish entrepreneurialism. People like Tito Munoz look at America and see an open path to their own American dream. It would be nice if the media at least tried to understand this point. Instead, they attacked and belittled a citizen who asked a candidate a question. They think he's stupid or a liar for not understanding that a promised check from a President Obama is more valuable than some pipe dream about future success."

Military Men and Women Prefer John McCain Overwhelmingly; Democrats on Iraq

That's right folks,

"Sen. John McCain enjoys overwhelming support from the military’s professional core, a Military Times survey of nearly 4,300 readers, indicates, though career-oriented black service members strongly favored the Democratic Party candidate.
McCain, R-Ariz., handily defeated Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., 68 percent to 23 percent in a voluntary survey of 4,293 active-duty, National Guard and reserve subscribers and former subscribers to Army Times, Navy Times, Marine Corps Times and Air Force Times.
The results of the Military Times 2008 Election Poll are not representative of the opinions of the military as a whole. The group surveyed is older, more senior in rank and less ethnically diverse than the overall armed services. But as a snapshot of careerists, the results suggest Democrats have gained little ground in their attempts to significantly chip away at a traditionally Republican voting bloc in campaign messages and legislative initiatives, such as the recent expansion of GI Bill benefits, experts said."

Also, I want to remind our viewers the opinion of our dear democrats on the Iraq war, back when their opinion actually mattered,

Why Do Barack Obama Unfounded Rhetoric and Radical Associations Seem Insignificant?

The fact that Obama is ahead in multiple polls really disturbed me. How can someone who has not been truthful about his background and his records be so liked by the American people? How can the people of this FREE country like to hear what this guy has to say? How can the people of this FREE country get eaten up by his empty rhetoric? How can his 'SOCIALIST' like policies resonate so much with the people of this FREE country?
So, I decide to throw out there, some reasons that I can think of. Some other, I found from the internet. Here you go:
1) Americans hate Bush so much that anything that's tied to him is hated too. For the records, I love Bush tax cut policy, but I dislike his uncontrolled spending! And I think that's one of the reasons why our country is in huge debt right now!
2) Americans predominantly watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, ABC, PBS, Comedy Central (yes...I'm not kidding you, I heard my friend telling this to my other friend!) and only listen to NPR for their news source. They should watch C-SPAN once in a while!
3) American are not well informed about Barack Obama's proposed policies vs his records
4) Americans chose to ignore
Barack Obama's records of tax & spending and radical associations AND the true nature of his proposed policies (which is Socialist-like) subconsciously
Americans chose to ignore Barack Obama's records of tax & spending and radical associations AND the true nature of his proposed policies (which is Socialist-like) willingly

Out of all reasons, I found #5 to be the most disturbing. Why? Because if a presidential candidate's records can not be used as non-biased true predictors or indicators of how he or she would lead this country, than what can? Campaign ads, campaign slogans, rhetoric, fluffs?!?
If this is the answer, I would submit to you that we are finished! Let's just start reciting our "Viva Obama" chant!

I found more consolations in reason #1 - #4. Well, they're actually kinda tied together. The hatred for Bush, Americans are not well informed, and
Americans chose to ignore Barack Obama's records of tax & spending and radical associations AND the true nature of his proposed policies (which is Socialist-like) are the results of Americans predominantly watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, ABC, PBS, Comedy Central and only listen to NPR for their news source. Let's see the example below, about Sarah Palin vs Joe Biden debate coverage, the top one is the debate coverage by MSNBC and the bottom one is a coverage by Fox News. Basically they were discussing about all the alleged lies from both sides. Watch and learn!

MSNBC Coverage

Fox News Coverage

Okay, if you know nothing about what each candidate stands for, which coverage makes you feel like this: "this candidate is really a big LIAR and I can't believe he/she is arrogant enough to think that the media is not going to find out"? Exactly. If didn't know any better, I would say Palin is a big LIAR, she's so arrogant to think that the media is not going to find out! Okay...some of us knows who's for who :) Rove's for McCain/Palin, and Olbermann's for Obama. With the advent of Internet, it is really easy to find out whose "lies" are real LIES vs "lies" that are made up for political purpose. For example, one website that I like to go to, to see if any of these candidates' rhetoric are just that, rhetoric, or there's really some truth to them, is How did I found this site? I just googled "McCain voting records" or "Obama voting records". And's all right there, in front of the whole world to see. Going back to the lies discussion. I went to the website to check whose lies are real lies and guess what...I don't mean to sound bias here...of course it's Rove's list of lies that are the real LIES...of Biden's!
Again, just go to this website,, to check out all the candidates' voting records!

I'm sure you have also heard about Obama's radical associations which bunch of people and organizations that are:

1) Anti America (Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright)

Do you honestly and intellectually believe that Obama who has been going to Rev. Wright's church for 20 years, doesn't know that his pastor hates America? How about the fact that Obama's 2nd book is titled and based on Wright's sermon "The Audacity of Hope"?
If you watch the video below, Wright gave several sermons at different times and of course the consistent theme is Let's Hate America people, America's no good, America's the source of all evil, well you get the point. My point is, it is so apparent that Wright's shown and heard to have been consistently hating America, and therefore, it is almost impossible for Obama (and dishonest, I might add) to say that he never saw that side of rev. Wright. He said, what's he's seen is the Rev. Wright who preached love, giving, caring for other people, and all the sermon topics that normal Pastors actually gives! Uhumm..and I am Shirley Temple! By the way, in addition to using Wright's sermon as the theme of his 2nd book, Rev. Wright also married Barack and Michelle, and baptized their 2 daughters. Now, if you don't trust that your Reverent, would you ask him to marry you and baptize your children? By the way, this article is really telling about "Who is Barack Obama".
And what about "Hate Speech" towards white people? Boy, this guy, Wright, sure knows how to give it! For some people that think that racism can only go one way, the video below clearly demonstrates that racism can go the other way! I'm not white and yet I am disgusted to see such conspiracy theory about white people being thrown around like that! It's clear that Wright is a race monger that should be distanced away at any cost - even if was going to run for only a PTA leader, I would distance myself away! And Obama is running for a president!
It is not clear to me why and how any sane person would want to associate himself with this guy. Period. Unless...they share the same view!

2) Socialist, Communist, Anti America, and Unrepentant Terrorist (Bill Ayers, all the above; New Party, Obama's socialist association)

I know that McCain has been trying to raise this association in his effort to portray Obama's lack of judgment. My question is, why just Ayers? Why not Wright as well? Anyways, it's beyond me.
And unfortunately, McCain's effort seemed to have failed as a lot of Americans do not resonate with his ad despite the fact that Ayers is a socialist, communist, anti America and an unrepentant terrorist. Why? I really don't's so beyond me, that I decided to do my own research and found this article:
Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines. Here's the excerpt:
The leftist intelligentsia that dominates higher education, and which writes the civics texts used in high schools -- I've read and studied these texts -- and which trains the teachers who teach in high schools, is not in the slightest bit notably anti-communist. These liberals do not teach the lessons of communism.

What's more, aside from failing to instruct their students in the crass facts about communism's unprecedented destruction -- its purges, mass famines, show trials, killing fields, concentration camps -- these educators are negligent in failing to teach the essential, non-emotional, but crucial Econ 101 basics that contrast capitalism and communism and, thus, that get at the heart of how and why command economies simply do not work. Each semester in my Comparative Politics course at Grove City College, it takes no more than 50 minutes to matter-of-factly lay out the rudimentary differences. Whereas capitalist systems are based on the market forces of supply and demand, which dictate prices and production levels and targets, communist systems are based on central planning, by which a government bureau attempts to manage such things. Capitalism is based on private ownership; communism on public ownership. Capitalism thrives on small government and taxes; communism on large government and taxes, typically progressive income-tax rates and estate taxes -- both advocated explicitly by Marx -- and much more.

This stuff isn't rocket science. It is easy to teach, if the professor desires. The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)

Most Americans generally know that the USSR was a bad place and that it was good that the Berlin Wall fell; they lived through that. But they know little beyond that, especially young Americans in college today, born around the time the wall fell -- Obama's biggest supporters. Nowhere in America is Barack Obama worshipped as he is on college campuses, by students and professors alike.

What does it all mean for November 2008? It means that millions of modern Americans, when they hear that Barack Obama has deep roots with communist radicals like Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis, don't care; they don't get it. Moreover, the leftist establishment -- from academia to media to Hollywood -- will not help them get it. To the contrary, the left responds to these accusations by not only downplaying or dismissing them but by ridiculing or even vilifying them, given the left's reflexive anti-anti-communism. The left will create bad guys out of the anti-communists who are legitimately blowing the whistle on the real bad guys.
Based on the article, Americans seemed to be (alarmingly) open to accept someone, Barack Obama, who clearly had (or has?) some associations with people or organization who have socialist, communist agenda. And the cause of this is lack of education on this topic, socialism and communism, academically. What can possibly cause this? I think this is the answer. With close to 4000 professors from various famous universities and colleges show their dear support for Bill Ayers, how can the American people and youth even remotely think that socialism and communism are bad for this country? Unfortunately, it looks like the Gallup poll by education tracking supports my suspicion about the "normalization" of socialism (perhaps not to the extent of communism) in the US academia. Take notice of the percentage of the college level and post graduate level voters who support Obama vs McCain. When I learned about this whole petition and connect it with the Gallup poll results, it seriously made me sick to my stomach, to think of the possibility that my child, when she grew up, will have a good chance of being educated by some of these professors who signed the petition! It saddens me to see that this great country that was founded based on Freedom and Liberty is now being permeated, slowly but sure, by supporters of the socialist ideology. I mean, if they don't support the ideology, why in the world would they support Ayers?

Going back to Obama, there was a new revelation that Obama was a member of the New Party which was formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA.

Okay, let me just put it this way...who are we kidding here...just like what Joe Biden says: Honey, if it looks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, IT'S A DUCK!...I would say, Dear American people, if he thinks like a socialist, if he talks like a socialist, if he governs like a socialist, then..HE IS A SOCIALIST! Seriously, I should just write Palin's campaign speech...I'm sure she would appreciate this!

On serious note, if you are interested in finding out why socialism and communism are bad, please check this website out. Basically, the notion that everything can be taken care of by the benevolent government is a very dreamy and euphoric idea, an idea that can only be exercised by surrendering your basic rights, freedom and liberty, to the government. And what the government gives, it can take away. Watch the video below, it might just open your mind.

I also found this great article detailing how Hitler Won Over The German People. It's so great that it disturbs me even more about this US election because it has a lot of similarities with the German election when the Germans ended up electing Hitler. Here's the excerpt:

It was a manufactured consensus, a propaganda construct, with repression of political opponents, "racial enemies" and other outsiders to the proclaimed "national community" as the other side of the coin. The "superman" image of Hitler amounted to the central component of the fabrication. Already before the "takeover of power" it had been the creation of the most modern, hugely successful, political "marketing" strategy of its time, masterminded by Goebbels. And once the monopoly of state control of propaganda fell into Nazi hands in 1933, there was no obstacle in the mass media to the rapid spread of Hitler's "charismatic" appeal.

Sounds familiar?? And to think that these Leftists always try to associate Bush with Hitler!
And if you think Hitler is not a good example of a socialist, this article may change your mind!

3) Racist (Ayers, Pfegler)
Watch Rev. Wright video above.

4) Corrupt (Rezko)

5) Anti-semite (Rashid Khalidi who worked with PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) in the past)

It is also worth noting that it has been confirmed that there is a video of Obama toasting the radical Khalidi at a Jew-bashing dinner event to honor Khalidi in 2003. The LA Times has this video but won't release it!

6) Committing Vote Registration (ACORN)

This article (with a picture in it) is pretty much self explanatory.

Even with the numerous amount of evidence about Obama's radical associations, I won't be surprised if some of you will say what's the big deal, it's just guilty by association. No. Guilty by association is one thing. Guilty by participation is another thing. If you take a more detailed look into each of the asociation, Obama was not necessarily a passive associate, i.e. he did not just sit by the sidelines and watch his beloved friends doing all these henious acts. He participated in acts that certainly are in support of their agenda. For example, Ayers. They both sat in the Woods foundation where Ayers, as the chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, appointed Obama to administer $50 million to advance the project agenda of "education reform" not by improving math and science, but by politizing the student body and "radicalizing them". And guess what group that Obama's administered the fund to: ACORN. What a nice coincidence huh?

We must ask ourselves about Obama and his radical associations:
1) Does he actually share the ideology of these radicals that he associated with?
2) Did he just use these radicals to get ahead in his political career and dump them when it's politically inconvenient? Just like when he disowned Rev. Wright when pressed thousand times by the media (i.e. Fox News!)
3) Was he just a clueless and naive young man from Chicago who had a lot of HOPES to CHANGE the world that have blinded him from seeing what these radicals are all about
4) Was he just possessed by the alien that wants to take over the earth? **wink**wink**

Answering YES to any one of the questions above, on top of his lack of experience and supporting records for his campaign rhetoric SHOULD be enough reason to not vote for him and disqualify him to be the President of the United States of America.

Lastly, I truly believe that the Main Stream Media and the penetration of US universities by the leftist (and radical) ideology are the predominant culprits of why Barack Obama unfounded rhetoric and radical Associations seem insignificant. Perhaps...just perhaps...people will start paying attention when things that we take for granted, slowly but surely, perish under Obama's presidency:
a) Walmart, Target
b) Quality Education
c) Quality Healthcare
d) Conservative Talk Radio (see Fairness Doctrine)
e) Competitive Pay for Workers
g) Innovativeness
h) Driving your gas guzzlin' SUVs
i) Freedom NOT to support and fund an ideology that you don't believe in (see Freedom of Choice Act, Obama is a proud supporter of this)
Here's an excerpt of Freedom of Choice Act:
By enacting FOCA, we will establish a federal law guaranteeing reproductive freedom for future generations of American women. This guarantee will protect women’s rights even if President Bush and an anti‐choice Congress are successful in reversing Roe v. Wade or enacting even more restrictions on our right to choose.
With a single stroke of the pen, the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) would wipe away virtually every state law on abortion nationwide, allowing abortion-on-demand in all nine months of pregnancy for any reason and without any restrictions. And guess what...since it will become a federal law, it is unavoidable that our taxpayers money will be use for this disgraceful act.

Monday, October 20, 2008

I'm Voting Democrat

Job Creators Prefer McCain Four to One Over Obama

The economy seems to be the most important issue leading to November 4th. For all the media fanfare created around Google's CEO endorsement of Obama, it turns out that job creators overwhelmingly support John McCain for President,

For some months during this Presidential election year, Chief Executive has conducted specialized polling of CEOs’ attitudes on issues affecting national policy and the economy. In CE’s most recent poll in September, 751 respondents, more than double the usual number of business leaders, made their voices heard on their Presidential choice. By a four-to-one margin CEOs support Senator John McCain over his rival, Senator Barack Obama. More to the point, a thundering 74 percent majority say they fear the consequences of an Obama presidency, compared to only 19 percent who fear a McCain presidency.

By the nature of the survey, we don't know who is siding with McCain and who is siding with Obama. Yet, if Silicon Valley is any indication, among the CEOs of the top 10 companies in the Valley in terms of revenue, known CEO supporters of John McCain include Cisco's John Chambers, HP's Mark Hurd and Intel's Paul Otellini. Excluding HP's purchase of EDS, the combined revenue of those three companies was more than 180 billion dollars in 2007. Those three companies alone make more than one third of the SV150's 450 billion of dollars in sales in 2007. So! We know how "objective" the mainstream media is reporting these issues :D.

Will 2012 be like 1980?

No Comment

Biden: 'Obama will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in office'

The full article is here, at ABC News' blog. UPDATE: hear Biden in his own words. I just want to remind our readers of Obama's plans for a weakened US military and his manifestly inconsistent pronouncements on foreign policy during his presidential campaign.

Q: Joe The Plumber in Spanish? A: Tito Munoz

Interesting article from the National Review,


After McCain left, as the crowd filed out, Munoz made his way to an area near some loudspeakers. He attracted a few reporters when he started talking loudly, in heavily-accented English, about media mistreatment of Wurzelbacher. (It was clear that Spanish was Munoz’s native language, and he later told me he was born in Colombia.) When I first made my way over to him, Munoz thought I was there to give him the third degree.“Are you going to check my license, too?” he asked me. “Are you going to check my immigration status? I’m ready, I have everything here. Whatever you want, I have it. I have my greencard, I have my passport — “

“Yeah, I have my papers right here,” he said. “I’m an American citizen. Right here, right here.” With that, he produced a U.S. passport, turned it to the page with his picture on it, and thrust it about an inch from my nose.
“Right here,” he said. “In your face.” Munoz said he owned a small construction business. “I have a license, if you guys want to check,” he said.Someone asked why Munoz had come to the rally. “I support McCain, but I’ve come to face you guys because I’m disgusted with you guys,” he said. “Why the hell are you going after Joe the Plumber? Joe the Plumber has an idea. He has a future. He wants to be something else. Why is that wrong? Everything is possible in America. I made it. Joe the Plumber could make it even better than me. . . . I was born in Colombia, but I was made in the U.S.A.” The scene turned into a mini-fracas when David Corn, of Mother Jones, defended press coverage. Munoz was having none of it. Why, he asked, would the press whack Joe the Plumber when it didn’t want to report on Obama’s relationship with William Ayers, the former Weather Underground bomber? “How come that’s not in the news all the time?” Munoz said. “How come Joe the Plumber is every second? I’m talking about NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN.”

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Back on Track

So I have to apologize for being delinquent on my last two posts. I was out of town and also sick which explains my absence. However, during this time I have been keeping close tabs on all the recent developments and I have to jump back in to get down and dirty again. Many of my McCain supporting friends have been in a funk lately citing negative polls and a barrage of doomsayers who claim McCain is all but finished. To those friends, I say nothing can be further from the truth. Here are some good points to meditate on and share with potential friends of yours who may be on the fence.

Ayers is a legitimate target. I know this is so yesterday's news but Bill Ayers is a legitimate concern. Much has been said in the media that McCain and Palin (the desparate and evil people they are) have resorted to low down smear tactics on Obama because they continue to remind us of the true nature of Obama's good friends. In this case, the media is flat out wrong. To question Obama's association with Ayers, Bill Wright and other radicals from Obama's past is proper diligence. If someone was applying to be a scout leader, but they were close friends with a known unrepentant pedophile, it is only just and valid to take that association into consideration especially as a negative. In fact you would be negligent in not disclosing this type of negative association. Again, this is not being dirty it's being diligent. If you have ever had to apply for top level government security clearance, you know that all of your associations going back to high school are fair game. Barack Obama is applying to be the leader of this country. If he closely associates with and is influenced by people who are unapologetic about their desire to destroy this country then the Anti-Americanism of those radicals deserves to count against him. This is especially applicable to Obama since he has no record of ever standing up for his country. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but a good way to put it into perspective for others is this: If John McCain had been a close friend of someone like a KKK member who was unapologetic for attacks that killed an ethnic minority John's campaign would be done. We would be the Bloggers for Mitt Romney.

It's The Economy Stupid...but who is stupid?. We all know that the biggest issue is the economy. Stocks are plummeting, 401Ks are in the crapper and long time trusted institutions are going to that big financial bank up in the sky. According to the pollsters Obama's recent lead in the polls is due to the perception that he is better at handling this economic fear and malaise that has gripped our nation. But what has he done that indicates he is a financial savant? Quite simply the answer is nothing. In fact, everything that he has done has been the opposite. His economic plan has well known holes in it with handouts masquerading as tax cuts and his energy policy if enacted will be costly if not flat out impossible. Obama has never demonstrated any overwhelming command of economic issues. Nor has he provided any leadership in the Senate on any economic issues unless you count his insane Global Tax Proposal which aims to take a ridiculous amount of money and give it to the UN, no strings attached. The UN. The Hugo Cavez Loving, Arafat pandering and Ahmedinejad admiring UN.

Obama is a condescending snob. And it shows. Now I'm not too fond of arugula (although I will never set foot into a Whole Foods again since they sold me cement for toothpaste) but Obama has revealed time and time again he is nothing but an Ivy League elitist. The famous "Guns and Bibles" comment is particularly revealing and still sits in the mind of many voters. Like many elitists, he thinks that people in flyover America don't agree with him because they're too ignorant or scared. I'm not the most religious person in the world and I don't own a gun but it's lame politicians who make me bitter. Obama tells you how to maintain your car, how to talk to your children, what you should eat and how much money you should make. But take heart America. This campaign has shown that the more confident Obama gets, the more he feels he can get away with telling us what he truly thinks of the common person...and it aint nice. Obama's snobbery and elitism will rear its head again before this election is through.

Don't worry about Colin Powell And don't bash him either. Powell is a good citizen who has served his country well. He will always have my respect and admiration. He's no dummy either. He sees an opportunity to score big and has a really good out in case things backfire. This campaign has had defections on both sides and a significant amount of betrayals. Just ask Hillary. While I defend the man, I think that Colin Powell's reasons for choosing Obama are asinine. Oddly, Powell cited McCain's negative campaigning as a reason for his support of Obama. But how can someone who has served in the Bush administration and been witness to the most vile and hateful bile ever directed towards a political figure take offense at anything McCain's campaign has done? Furthermore, he cited Sarah Palin's perceived lack of experience as a negative but he calls Barack's non-experience "fresh". What a blatant double standard. Nevertheless I still respect the man. In many ways I feel sorry for him. He has now put himself in the same camp as those who ridiculed him for years such as Al Sharpton who called him a "House Negro" and Jeremiah Wright who lumped Colin along with Clarence and Condamnesia as the worst type of sellout.

So in these last few weeks before the election I encourage everyone to get the word out on these points. Engage your friends who might still be undecided. Get your McCain stickers on your cars and your laptops. I've got one on my guitar amp. I'm also encouraging friends to contribute to McCain's campaign and do some volunteering. The race is far from over and a lot can change in the next two weeks.

Newt Gingrich: Tax Rates and Job Creation

William Kristol: 'Here the People Rule'

I liked this Op-Ed:

"as Gerald Ford said after assuming the presidency on Aug. 9, 1974, ”Here the people rule.” One of those people is Joe Wurzelbacher, a k a Joe the Plumber. He’s the latest ordinary American to do a star turn in our vulgar democratic circus. He seems like a sensible man to me. And to Peggy Noonan, who wrote that Joe “in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made.” At least McCain and Palin have had the good sense to embrace him. I join them in taking my stand with Joe the Plumber — in defiance of Horace the Poet. "

Disappointed with Colin Powell

I watched the Meet The Press Interview completely and I saw that he himself was somehow hurting, even going as far as saying "it isn't easy for me to disappoint Senator McCain in the way that I have this morning". You disappointed many of us Mr Powell. Only you know why you decided to go the liberal media way, those same media that not very long ago were willing to cut your head for making the case for the Iraq war in the UN.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Convincing people with ideas

I carpooled to a soccer game today. The driver, who is someone I don't know very well, is a very charming man who is quite obviously a potential Obama voter. He wasn't quite sure about me and, since he was a very civil individual, he never came out and either insulted McCain or lauded Obama. He did say, though, that he thought it was the government's responsibility to provide medical care. He also characterized Vietnam as a complete disaster. That gave me an interesting opportunity to explain to him a few historic facts he didn't know -- because very few people know them.

I started out by reminding him of something that most people forget: the Vietnam War was a Democratic War. Kennedy started it and Johnson expanded it. (Nixon, the Republican, ended it.) I didn't say this in the spirit of accusation, because I wasn't being partisan. I said it to give historical context to a larger discussion about freedom versus statism.

I noted that, in the 1930s -- and, again, most people have forgotten this -- the major battle in Europe was between two Leftist ideologies: Communism and Fascism. When he looked a little blank, I pointed out that the Nazis were a socialist party, a fact he readily conceded. I also reminded him that, in the 1930s, given that Stalin was killing millions of his countrymen, and that Hitler hadn't yet started his killing spree, Fascism actually looked like the better deal. World War II demonstrated that both ideologies -- both of which vested all power in the State -- were equally murderous.

Men of the Kennedy/Johnson generation, I said, saw their role in WWII as freeing Europe from the Nazi version of socialism. When that job ended, they saw themselves in a continuing war to bring an end to the Communist version of socialism. Again, they were reacting to overwhelming statism.

Thus, to them, it was all a single battle with America upholding the banner, not of freedom, but of individualism. They knew that America couldn't necessarily make people free or bring them a democratic form of government, but that it could try to protect people from an all-powerful state. That's always been an integral part of American identity. He agreed with everything I said.

I then moved to the issue of socialized medicine, which I pointed out, again, gives the state all the power. The state, I said, has no conscience, and it will start doling out medical care based on its determining of which classes of individual are valuable, and which are less valuable, to the state. My friend didn't know, for example, that Baroness Warnock of Britain, who is considered one of Britain's leading moralists, announced that demented old people have a "duty to die" because they are a burden on the state.

A few more examples like that, and we agreed that the problem wasn't too little government when it comes to medicine, but too much. Health insurer companies operating in California are constrained by something like 1,600 state and federal regulations. I suggested that, rather than give the government more control over the medical bureaucracy, we take most of it away. He conceded that this was probably a good idea.

Lastly, I reminded him what happens when government steps in as the pater familias. He didn't know that, up until Johnson's Great Society, African-Americans were ever so slowly "making it." As a result of the Civil Rights movement, opportunities were opening for Northern Blacks, and they -- meaning the men -- were beginning to make more money. The African-American family was nuclear and starting to thrive.

This upward economic trend collapsed in the mid-1960s, and its collapse coincided absolutely to the minute with government social workers fanning out to black communities and telling them that the government would henceforth provide. Since it seemed stupid to work when you could get paid not to work, black men stopped working. They also stopped caring about their families, or even getting married, since unmarried mothers did even better under welfare than intact families. In a few short years, not only did African-Americans as a group collapse economically, their family structure collapsed too. Men were redundant. The state would provide. Again, my friend nodded his head in agreement.

The ride ended at that point but, as he was dropping me off, my friend told me (and I think he was speaking from his heart), that it was an incredibly interesting ride. And I bet it was, because I gave him real food for thought in the form of facts and ideas that fall outside of the orthodoxy that characterizes our ultra-liberal community.

Cross-posted at Bookworm Room and Right Wing News.

David M Kennedy, Obama donor, New Deal Critic

David M Kennedy is a Stanford Professor of History who won the Pulitzer Prize in 2000 for his book Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945. In it, he argues that "the most responsible students of the events of 1929 have been unable to demonstrate an appreciable cause-and-effect linkage between the Crash and the Depression" and his subsequent argument that, although it made order out of chaos, the New Deal did not reverse the Depression--that, he says, was the war's doing".

Mr Kennedy is also a maxed-out Obama donor. Why I bring this up? Because this week, many people suggested that if the Democrats regain control of the White House and the US Congress, they are thinking about bringing a sort of New Deal 2.0 to the United States. I wonder why Mr Kennedy has remained shut about this (correct me if I am wrong), when, as recently as last May 3rd he said in a lecture that is available in iTunesU :"1940 was the 11th year of the Great Depression"; referring to a government survey he said "45% of all white families, and 95% of all African American families in 1940 lived below the poverty line"; "the average unemployment rate for the entire decade of the 1930s was 17%"; "one Herbert Hoover administration; two Roosevelt administrations had not solved the crisis of the Depression"; referring to the US "this was a truly impoverished country".

He goes on arguing that the US economy prospered together with the US involvement in World War II. I grant him that in May 3rd 2008 few anticipated the magnitude of the financial crisis. But now, when Obama and the Democrats are proposing New Deal type of solutions, I find it astonishing that he hasn't stepped up criticizing Obama's "spreading wealth around" economic plan.

Europeans' passion for totalitarianism: Jörg Haider

So much for "European enlightenment". I just read in the news that the funeral of Jörg Haider drew 25000 people:

"Thousands of Austrians packed the southern city of Klagenfurt on Saturday to mourn Joerg Haider, a politician who was denounced as a Nazi sympathizer in the 1990s but had remained hugely popular as a provincial governor"

Nazi = National Socialism. That's right. I am not saying that all European socialists are Nazis; all I am saying is that Europeans' passion for socialism has less to do with love for "spreading the wealth around" than "spreading the wealth around among us". And who is "us"? Well, go and check how difficult is to get each of the different European citizenships, compare that with the process of becoming a US citizen and you'll understand better. For instance, until 2000, Germany had a very strict Jus sanguinis citizenship law! After the law changed, it's easier for children of non Germans born in Germany to get the German citizenship, but it's still not a straight forward right as in the US.

Friday, October 17, 2008

Peter Robinson: What Would Milton Friedman Say?

Nice article at Forbes by Hoover Fellow Peter Robinson:
"Whom would Milton have blamed?
For the bubble itself? Probably nobody. From the tulip mania in Holland more than three-and-a-half centuries ago to the dot-com bubble here in the U.S. less than a decade ago, wildly irrational behavior sometimes develops in markets. "Friedman never argued that markets are perfect," says Jay, "only that over the long run they're a lot more efficient than any other method of allocating resources." Sometimes, Milton recognized, bubbles just happen.
Whatever the origin of the bubble, however, Milton would have blamed Congress for making it much, much worse. Congress, after all, created Fannie Mae (nyse: FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac (nyse: FRE - news - people ), institutions that spent tens of billions of dollars on subprime instruments. "Congress told Fannie and Freddie to subsidize bad loans for the purposes of social engineering," says Jay. "It was terrible, just terrible.""

Karl Rove's Identity Stolen by on Behalf of Barack Obama!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Karl Rove <>
Date: Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:39 PM
Subject: Hey ???: Don't help Obama!
To: ?????????

Dear ???,

Time to relax!

Obama is way ahead in the polls. It's time for you to take victory for granted, and to stop paying attention.

And take it from me, Karl Rove: there's definitely no need to spend one more minute making calls to recruit Obama volunteers.

You're probably thinking, "But Karl, why would you—the mastermind behind the stealth get-out-the-vote program that powered George Bush's victories—be advising us not to make phone calls for Obama?"

That's a good question. (And by the way, I prefer "Evil Genius" to "Mastermind.") It's true that voter outreach can tip an election. But hey, Obama's ahead in the polls, and they never lie.

So relax! Do some yoga. Check out the new season of Project Runway. Sip white wine lattes, or whatever it is that you people like to drink.

Barack does not need folks in ?????? calling MoveOn members in battleground states to get them out for Obama. So there's finally time to tie-dye the seat covers for your Volvo. In fact, you probably shouldn't even bother to vote.

Please forward this to all of your Democrat friends. Don't send it to Republicans, though.
Thanks in advance for not doing all that you normally do,

–"Karl Rove"

P.S. Again—no volunteering! Don't click this link to make a few minutes of calls right now, from home, and give a big boost the Obama campaign!

P.P.S. Okay, okay. This is Adam Ruben writing now, from Our lawyers made us promise to tell you that Karl Rove didn't actually write this message—but we're pretty sure this is what he'd write if he had.

Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 4.2 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.

More Political Satire; Really Funny

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Charles Krauthammer: Who's Playing the Race Card?

The insidious, and false, racism charges brought against the GOP by some at the MSM are an offense against the party that fought a war to end slavery. President Eisenhower didn't hesitate to face a Democratic Governor in Alabama to make sure African Americans had access to equal education opportunities. In some discussion that I had in a forum at the Mercury News, a recalcitrant Obamaniac conceded that the Democratic Party pre-JFK was fundamentally a racist party. While I commend the extraordinary work that JFK and LBJ did to enact what became the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which finally ended legal support for any kind of racial segregation in the US, it is completely unfair to charge the GOP with racism. The uncompromising commitment of the Republican Party with individual freedom includes, by definition, the repudiation of racism. This commitment has guided the GOP since its creation. Frankly, such unapologetic defense of individual freedom is one of the reasons I am a proud Republican.
Republicans don't need to redeem a history of support to racist ideals. That's why when Republicans nominate somebody who is qualified for a top political position, such as Colin Powell or Condi Rice, we don't care whether those individuals are African Americans. The Democrats never understood what individual freedom really means, that's why they keep inventing ways to redeem their racist sins. They first brought affirmative action, then they brought PC, which the late Charlton Heston brilliantly described as "tyranny with manners" and now they want to put an unqualified person in the top political office of the United States as if that could erase the shameful racist past of the Democratic Party. Enough is enough. Please keep reading,
Let me get this straight. A couple of agitated yahoos in a rally of thousands yell something offensive and incendiary, and John McCain and Sarah Palin are not just guilty by association -- with total strangers, mind you -- but worse: guilty according to The New York Times of "race-baiting and xenophobia."
But should you bring up Barack Obama's real associations -- 20 years with Jeremiah Wright, working on two foundations and distributing money with William Ayers, citing the raving Michael Pfleger as one who helps him keep his moral compass (Chicago Sun-Times, April 2004) and the long-standing relationship with the left-wing vote-fraud specialist ACORN -- you have crossed the line into illegitimate guilt by association. Moreover, it is tinged with racism.