Bloomberg reports on the travesty:

July 15 (Bloomberg) — House Democrats plan to fund the broadest U.S. health-care expansion in four decades by increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans, imposing a surtax of 5.4 percent on couples with more than $1 million in income.

The legislation unveiled yesterday would place additional taxes on households with more than $350,000 a year in income and calls for further increases if the measure doesn’t hit a target for cost savings. The provisions are intended to raise $544 billion over 10 years.

House leaders said the plan, which includes mandates to purchase coverage and a public health-insurance option, would cover 97 percent of Americans by 2019. President Barack Obama praised their work, saying it will “begin the process of fixing what’s broken” in the system.

Everyone needs to take notice of the little line in there about “further increases if the measure doesn’t hit a target for cost savings” since it means the taxes will move on down the line until they take the wealth they need to pay for health care.

This means that when taxing people who earn $350k and up isn’t enough, they’ll come for $250k, then $150k, then $100k and so forth on down the line. Pretty soon, you who are making $50k a year will be paying the health care bill for your neighbor making $40k a year.

Hot Air has more analysis on the “$1 trillion over 10 years” claim that the left is making:

Actually, it’s really a cool trillion over five years. Eyeball the graph Philip Klein posted this afternoon and admire the left’s sleight of hand. They’re using a 10-year timeline to create the illusion that the program costs $100 billion a year or so. In fact, it’ll be more than $200 billion once it gets going, which won’t happen until 2014, and that’s assuming that the cost projections aren’t wildly over-optimistic the way every other projection they’ve made this year has turned out to be. In fact, the trillion-dollar figure doesn’t even account for all expenses; as MKH notes, the CBO has yet to compute “administrative costs” of implementing the program or the effect it’ll have on other areas of federal spending. Still, give The One credit for consistency: Whether it’s borrowing from future generations to pay for the stimulus or hiding the costs of his health-care boondoggle by backloading them, he’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

Or, more precisely, the rich will pay. For now.

Here again, Politico mentions that the taxes and surcharges will climb when the socialized health care budget inevitably falls short:

To help pay for the estimated $1 trillion bill, lawmakers have decided to tax the wealthy. A married couple making more than $350,000 and less than $500,000 would be hit with a 1 percent tax, those making between $500,000 and $1 million would be assessed a 1.5 percent tax and those making more than $1 million would see a 5.4 percent surtax added to their tax bill. Some of the rates could climb if anticipated savings from elsewhere in the bill did not materialize.

The rates will climb as the program balloons out of control. Remember all those rosy estimates from the White House on the economy and how badly they fell short? Think of that but a million times worse on this health care legislation from congress.

Also, think about social security and medicare, two terribly run socialized government programs. Their costs are fart exceeding what they can handle and they have been running them for decades. Congress is atrocious at running social programs, they fail every time and you and I, the taxpayers, are left footing the bill for these incompetent morons on capital hill.

There is much controversy surrounding this bill and I believe the American people can mobilize against it. Many representatives and senators are weary from voter backlash, it’s time they hear from you tenfold everyday on this issue. Phone calls, faxes, emails – everything you can send at them, they need to hear just how opposed you are to tax increases and wealth redistribution for government-run health care.

Update

The GOP leadership has produced an easy-to-understand chart depicting exactly how this new efficient government-run health care plan will function:

(Click for larger version)

(Click for larger version)
Source: House GOP Leadership (PDF)

Seems simple enough, what could go wrong?

However, I think we all know that these photos probably wouldn’t have come to light if it wasn’t for the answer she gave at the Miss USA pageant when questioned by Perez Hilton. I took a lot of guts for her to answer with conviction, I was proud that this beautiful women stood by her faith and was willing to endure public scrutiny.

Here’s video of the press conference with Donald Trump and Carrie Prejean from earlier today:

That was an excellent statement she made and I’m glad she’s sticking to her guns.

I also have to wonder why President Obama hasn’t taken the same criticism for this statement:

Why is it that when Miss California says that she doesn’t believe in gay marriage, she’s massacred in the press? However, when President Obama states that he doesn’t believe in gay marriage, nobody even thinks twice about.

President Obama even said that he believes marriage should be defined as being between one man and one woman and he’s not getting trashed by gay celebrity bloggers.

Miss California stuck to her convictions and so did Barack Obama.

Can someone explain the double standard?

Ben Smith has the scoop:

“John McCain has failed miserably in his duty to secure this nation’s borders and protect the people of Arizona from the escalating violence and lawlessness,” Simcox said. “He has fought real efforts over the years at every turn, opting to hold our nation’s border security hostage to his amnesty schemes. Coupled with his votes for reckless bailout spending and big government solutions to our nation’s problems, John McCain is out of touch with everyday Arizonans. Enough is enough.”

Conservatives reluctantly supported McCain in the 2008 Presidential race mainly because the likes of Barack Obama riding up Pennsylvania Avenue on his unicorn spewing hope and change, frankly, scarred the taxes out of us. So it is to no shock that conservatives are fed up and only have finally stepped forward to strip John McCain of his Senate seat.

“Simcox, with a national base and a high profile on the right, is well positioned to give McCain a serious local headache. He’ll find some allies among the conservatives who recently took over the Arizona Republican Party from McCain’s allies, and he has a national fundraising base.”

Promotional campaign video from Simcox:

A link to Chris Simcox’s campaign page:

Simcox for Senate

It’s about time! Can you say term limits?

By now we’re all aware that Warren Buffett along with Jim Cramer and others have come out and opposed Obama’s economic policies, well sort of. The men I mentioned are still too scared to waive the red flag on Obama’s attack on Capitalism just yet. They curse his policies then at the end of their rants they remind their audience that they have love for Obama and, by the way, they voted for him. Why is it that these men and others are afraid to come out fully and fight the on Capitalism? Because they are afraid the Obama administration will take aim at them the same way they are targeting Rush Limbaugh. What would give supporters of Capitalism incentive to speak out and waive the red flag is if Obama’s approval ratings were to fall.

Rush Worm Finally turning
(Click play to listen)
Rush Limbaugh: Is the Worm Beginning to Turn? Buffett Throws Obama Under Bus

If Obama wasn’t perceived to be high in approval ratings, which he’s no better than average, moderate-leaning Democrats wouldn’t be so scared to speak against him. They fear his minions in the mainstream media and liberal groups who will target them for questioning the leader.

They need to stand up for principles they know are right. These people know, in their hearts, that Obama is wrong, and they need to stand for the country against Obama without reservation. The repercussions be damned, it’s time to stand up for capitalist principles against the Obama regime.

Rush How to Slow Down Obama
(Click play to listen)
Rush Limbaugh: How Can We Slow Down Obama?

Obama’s poll ratings will go down when the people who voted for him realize he’s fallible. They will realize that when you inform them. These are your friends, neighbors, family members and co-workers. These are people who do not read policy, nor will they inform themselves of history, yet they will simply think Obama is “change” and he must be right. It is your job to inform them of the dangers of Obama’s socialist plans. It is your job to inform them of the capitalist principles the country was founded on and explain why the country became great. People need to be told from you because they will not get it from the media and they certainly won’t ever hear Obama debate the merits of his policies with anyone.

Rush Audio
(Click the Play button to listen)

Or if you’d prefer to read instead of listen to all 15 minutes, be my guest. Originall linked from here:

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I got an e-mail. This is from Susan in Virginia Beach. “Dear Rush: You are my professor. I am indebted to you for the knowledge that you have given me. You’ve always told us that you would tell us when it was time to panic. I’m starting to wonder how we are going to get our country back from these revolutionaries. Is it time to panic?” No. ‘Cause panic doesn’t accomplish anything. But when we come back from the break, I’m going to tell you how to get the country back. I’m going to tell you how it will happen, and I’m going to suggest what we might do when we get it back, because we will, ’cause these people are going to overreach. They are not going to win every election from here on out unless they end elections, which I wouldn’t rule out they’re dreaming about doing.

So when we come back from the break I’ll tell you how we’re going to get our country back, and I’ll tell you what we’re going to do when we get our country back. I’ll give you a little hint. We’re going to treat them the same way they have been treating us for years. We are going to subject them to the same things they have subjected us to, and we are going to have a big and strong and powerful government to wield against them because they’re in the process of building it. And we’re going to win it back one day, and when we win this country back, and this government back, we are going to deploy government against them the way they have been deploying it against us, and let them find out what it’s like, and they’re not going to be able to stop it, because they will not have a power base anywhere that will let them stop it.

RUSH: Is it time to panic? No, my friends, it’s not time to panic, because nothing gets done in a panic. What we have to realize is this: the left, the Democrat Party, will not control the government forever. It just will not happen. They are going to overreach. They’re going to overreach pretty quickly. Polling data already shows that, in a generic race for Congress, it’s tied Republican and Democrat. Only when you put the names in… Nobody can believe this. Fifty-six percent of the American people now are in opposition to the stimulus in total or in part. By the way, about the negotiations: They’re trying to ram this through just like amnesty. They’re trying to ram this through, and they’re using the same tactics that they used with global warming. It’s a fear of crisis. We can’t wait; we gotta do it now. The conference negotiations are going on with not one Republican being permitted to participate.

Did you know that? Not one Republican from the House, not one Republican Senator is involved in the conference between the House and the Senate to come up with a bill that both support. Not one Republican in this new era of responsibility, not one Republican in this new era of bipartisanship. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have shut the Republicans out. This is from Mike Pence, congressman from Indiana. So, let ‘em go ahead with these tactics. We can’t stop them anyway. We lost the election. But they’re going to lose down the road. They will not control government forever, and when our turn comes, we are going to turn the power of government against the left. We are going to investigate them. We are going to hold public hearings. We are going to humiliate them. We’re going to nationalize their unions. We’re going to fund our groups for a change.
If they can give ACORN $4.1 billion then we can start paying our groups with federal money. We’re going to do exactly to them what they have done to us. We’re going to build and use the Big Government that they have built and turn it right against them. We are gonna turn the power of government against the left, and against Democrats in ways they cannot imagine. They will not know what hit them. They are using the law. They are using government to advance a cause that is un-American. We are going to use the power that the left is centralizing in the federal government to punish them, to break ‘em up, and to make them pay for this. It’s time for tit-for-tat. Nice guy playing by the rules when they don’t, is over. It’s time they got a taste of their own medicine, and it’s going to happen, folks, because they’re not going to hold power forever.

The left — you people, you Democrats — you are creating a monster that you will not be able to control forever. You will ultimately regret what you are doing just like the media will ultimately regret its sacrifice of reason, its abandonment of its primary purpose. The day is coming when the media will actually investigate a Democrat and find some problems and nobody’s going to believe them because they’ve lost all credibility. Nobody believes what the mainstream media says now anyway. Except the uneducated, the illiterate, and the uninformed — which, sadly, is a fairly large number. Well, we’ll deal with that. We are taking names. We are taking names now. We are monitoring who on the left is going to deserve payback, and it’s going to be hell. This much I promise you. This is just getting out of hand.

We’re gonna come after the left’s favorite corporations. We’re going to come after your favorite political constituents. We’re going to come after your favorite media outlets. You want to try the Fairness Doctrine? Fine. We’ll impose it on network television. We’ll impose it on newspapers. You want to try censorship? Fine! We will censor you when we get the control of the government back. We will reapportion districts using the Census to help conservatives. We’re going to turn the power of government against the Democrats and the left and weaken and you break you into little pieces. Because, my friends, the day has passed when we can become passive and be passive about what they are doing. We will use the political and the legal system as they have and are, and we will use it to promote our party and to diminish theirs. We will use the power of government and legal system to promote our movement and our agenda, just as they are.

If they are going to bastardize the American system, if they are going to make this government large and powerful and intrusive, someday they’re going to lose it. But they’re going to lose it after having amassed all this power. We will control it, and we’re going to turn it right back against them. We will build a massive army of patriots to counter ACORN. We will defund ACORN. We’ll defund the labor unions, and we will fund our own people to go out and zap ACORN. And we will do everything we can to enhance anti-union employment. We will make sure that when companies lose money, that the people that get canned are union people. We’re going to use the power of government just like the left is using the power of government. We’re going to use the Justice Department.
We’re going to go after big unions with the Justice Department. We’re going to find all of the criminal activity. We are going to find all the lack of ethics. We are going to find every bit of corruption we can, and we’re gonna sic the attorney general and the justice department and the US attorneys on you people just as you have been doing to the people of the right and the Republican Party for 50 years. And then we’re going to find George Soros and other concentrations of left-wing power and wealth. And we’re going to focus our attention on him, so that the American people will finally learn just who the hell paid for the bastardization of the United States, just who the hell paid for the destruction of the American way of life.

We have learned from you leftists. We have sat by, we have watched, and we’ve been too passive. We have sat on the sidelines as impotent observers, and we have trusted in the goodness and the decency of the American people. But you have even perverted them. It was a disgrace what was on display in Fort Myers, Florida, yesterday. It was an absolute saddening, shocking, depressing disgrace. And you have created that segment of America that has no faith in and of itself, no faith in this country, and thinks the only reason to talk to a president is to ask him for a kitchen, to ask him for a car. By the way, asking a president for a new car who hasn’t even given his brother who lives in a hut a welcome home mat! I don’t think he’s given his brother a pot, much less a pan.

His brother lives in a nine-square-foot hut in Nairobi. You’re asking the president of the United States…? God bless these people. What has this government done to them? What has the media in this country done to these people, depriving them of the very essence of humanity? No sense of self, no pride. This is what Democrats and the left do to people. They rob people of their humanity, of their goodness and their decency. They rob them of confidence. We are going to restore this. We are going to use the power of the government to tell people how good they can be, how important they are, and how much happier they will be if they’re not looking to our president for the next kitchen or the car or a job. We’re going to become activists. We’ll take back our government.

It’s going to be a bigger, more powerful, stronger government — and we’re going to turn it against the left in ways they could have never imagined. So, Sue in Virginia Beach, we can’t do any of this if we panic. I know some of you are saying, “Rush, it all sounds great, but who’s going to do this?” Well, folks, I admit that you look out on the horizon right now and you don’t see a single person in the political class willing to do this. But before these people on the left get through, there is going to be so much anger and outrage among the people who made this country work, who are now being targeted as the enemies. You who have jobs, you who have played by the rules, you who are not asking anybody for your next kitchen, you’re the enemy — and it isn’t going to be long before the people of this country get fed up enough that they’re going to want to turn the tables on the people who are trying to destroy America as we have always known it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Carol has been waiting awhile. I appreciate that, Carol. It’s nice to have you here on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thank you for having me on. I appreciate it.

RUSH: You bet.

CALLER: Rush, I wanted to tell you, this morning when you started off, you were just inspiring. I was getting so inspired. You were talking about how, when the Republicans come back, you know, they’re going to take this strong government that the Democrats have built and they’re going to turn it on them. And I was thinking, yeah, yeah, yeah. And then I was thinking — you know, it came to me — “Wait a minute,” you know? “What Republicans is he talking about?” The Republicans that I remember were always so careful to make sure they included the Democrats in everything they did. What makes you think they won’t do that again?

RUSH: Well, it’s a crapshoot. I agree. You have a very important observation. This is something, however, that I think we’re going to try to inspire. I think, you know, if the Democrats go as far as I think they’re going to go, it is going to cause anger and outrage like you can’t believe. But the point of that whole monologue was these people are using the power and the finances of the federal government to defeat political opposition, to build up this grand old socialist system that destroys capitalism in the process, or tries to. To me, I’m just getting fed up. You know, we play by the rules all the time, and we aim for the hearts and minds of the American people, the American voter — and these people are trying to dumb everybody down.

They want to talk about investigating George W. Bush for war crimes. Well, by God, I want to investigate Barney Frank! I want to investigate Chris Dodd! I want to investigate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and all these things. I want the truth to get out, I want to use federal money to fund our groups and our organizations. I want to investigate George Soros and find out just exactly what his role has been in precipitating this economic decline we’re in for the political purposes of defeating Republicans and electing Democrats. I think that between now and then, hopefully there’s a battle that is raging within the conservative movement over what conservatism is and who is going to lead it, and the same thing is happening in the Republican Party. I’m hoping all this happens to coalesce. There will be efforts made to bring all this to bear. I know it sounds like it’s a long shot, but this is what we hope to inspire, because it’s payback time. It’s not enough just to beat these people in elections. It’s time to give them a dose (or multiple doses) of their own medicine, and it’s something I want to work toward and see to it that it happens. It’s not time to panic yet.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let me answer Carol from Spring, Texas, and her question again. She said, “You know, I loved that monologue you did, but then I thought, where are the Republicans that are going to engage in this kind of payback?” Carol, the simple answer is by the time we get to that point, those are the only kind of Republicans that have a chance of getting elected. That is how bad it is going to get. The only Republicans that are going to have a chance of getting elected or reelected are those that are outraged over what has been done to their country, and not only want to fix it, but they want to name names, they want people to know exactly who it was that destroyed the capitalist system for their own personal political gain.

END TRANSCRIPT

Amen.

It’s become very clear this year that every major media outlet is in the tank for Obama to the point where they can no longer breathe. We hear everyday how McCain supporters are “discouraged” while Obama supporters are “energized” about their candidate. This is all part of the media’s campaign to discourage McCain supporters and passively suppress the vote.

I’m here to tell you that it doesn’t matter, the only thing that matters is every single McCain supporter going to the polls and casting a vote. The media will try to dispirit and debase you during the next 48 hours, don’t let that happen!

Here’s a rundown of the media lies and distortions and way the Obama campaign directly and indirectly manipulates the media and the polls. Just the other day I stumbled across my new favorite website called HillBuzz, McCain supporters need to check it out and be renewed by the former Hillary Clinton supporters now supporting McCain because they don’t believe in Obama’s socialism.

1. Exaggerations of the “youth/minority vote”

The youth voter nonsense is way overblown, just as it was in 2004. Remember? John Kerry was going to win with all the amazing youth voters. Too bad none of them showed up to the polls. Why will Obama be any different? The truth, he wont!

HillBuzz explains the phenomenon and how the media is distorting it:

First of all, black voters have always voted Democratic in massive numbers. We don’t think blacks have ever voted for Republicans in any substantial way in any race we can think of. Blacks vote as a race-bloc, and they always vote for the Democrat. Maybe Obama will get blacks who have never voted before to vote for him, or blacks who don’t bother to vote on Election Day to show up and vote, but we doubt that it will be very many people. Black voters were highly motivated to vote in 2004 because they felt George W. Bush stole the 2000 election, and they saw that as a civil rights issue that increased black turnout to one of the highest levels we have ever seen. Remember, Jesse Jackson almost won Election 2000 for Gore but was stopped by the Gore campaign, in the form of Donna Brazile. Watch the HBO movie Recount. Jackson felt the Florida Recount was a civil rights/voter disenfranchisement issue at its heart, and wanted to press that to the public. He revved the black community up and flew down to Tallahassee, but Gore and Brazile made him get back on a plane to Chicago. That was a critically stupid move…and you know how the recount ended.

There’s no McCain hate working against the Republicans this year, and there was no Kerry love in 2004.

So, mathematically this works out as:

Obama-love + McCain-hate = Bush-hate + Kerry-love = impact of black voters

We, thus, believe Obama will not have much more support from blacks than Kerry did, since Democrats win almost all black voters anyway. This year will be no different.

Newsflash, African-Americans always vote 90% and/or higher for Democratic candidates. More might turn out this year, however, it will probably be negligible to the results.

HillBuzz also explains the youth vote and how they never seem to materialize:

We’re astonished no one has ever thought of this before to explain why young people don’t turn up to vote in the numbers the media predicts: it’s because of Halloween. Not JUST because of Halloween, but Halloween has a lot to do with it, especially this year, when Halloween falls in perfect synch to form three days of wild, costumed debauchery. Monday is hangover day, which means nothing got done Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and now Monday, so Tuesday pressure builds to catchup on class or work or whatever.

Ironically, the Obamedia’s constant drumbeat that Obama’s so far ahead will, ironically, keep a lot of these people from actually voting — since they think he will win in a landslide without them, and one vote doesn’t matter. “Oh, we meant to vote, but we got, like, busy. And stuff.”

We hear this every 4 years. Why should this year be any different?

So, in essence, if just comes down to Republicans getting out to vote and ignoring the above head games the Obamedia is already cooking up for you.

There’s no difference. Obama is the “cool” candidate to support. Support includes telling other liberal friends in college that you “support” Obama since he’s for CHANGE. That doesn’t mean these fools actually make their way to a voting booth.

2. Calls or questions about why McCain hasn’t “quit yet” or won’t “quit”

Well, call me crazy, but maybe McCain hasn’t quit the race because he’s got a better than 50% chance of winning the election.

HillBuzz explains this use of the media by the Obama campaign as well:

This one is a favorite of the trolls who lurk on pro-McCain sites. We get them here, despite all the spraying and fumigating we do, but notice how we ignore these trolls. We’ve identified two paid Obama staffers who have been assigned to HillBuzz. We picked them up around the same time people from Ace and LGF started picking up some of our stuff — so our guess is they were assigned to us by whoever was monitoring those sites. They’re different trolls than the ones assigned to us during the primaries (we only had one back then, so evidently we’ve gotten more on the radar now). One of them starts posting “her” concern troll remarks here at 8am. The other one starts “his” remarks around 5pm or so. It appears there are two shifts for the trolls — and from what we can see, they share the same computer and IP address. And it’s an address right here in Chicago. Imagine that. We wonder if we’ve ever run into these people at Houlihan’s on Michigan Avenue after one of their shifts, as that’s where a lot of Obama staffers like to go for a drink, and where we often hang out to see what we can overhear while pretending to read a book over a little dinner. Since we’re going to be in Ohio the rest of the time before the election, we’re okay with letting you in on that little bit, as we won’t be able to eavesdrop on you anymore. But the information these Obama staffers inadvertantly provided was really helpful on a lot of things. A great way to see how the race was going was to listen for how “audacious” these people felt that day. That’s their internal lingo: “Are you feelin’ it? Are you feelin’ audacious today?”. “Nope, not feelin’ the audacity today, ’cause we know those PA polls are bogus and BO’s not gonna take the state”. Word to the wise: these staffers were never as “audacious” as the media and skewed polls have insisted they should be.

It’s so funny, but when you work on these campaigns every day and give up all of your free time and all other activities for this, you just know when the media’s lying and reading from an Axelrod script. The coerographed calls for Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race before New Hampshire, before Super Tuesday, before Ohio and Texas, before Pennsylvania, before West Virgina, before Kentucky, before Indiana, and before South Dakota were completely ridiculous to us — and yet, Eeyores always listened, and lost enthusiasm and drive because ‘the TV said Hillary needs to just quit”. We know this kept some Eeyores from going out to vote, because they thought, “Why bother? The TV told me she’s gonna lose!”. Well, the TV lies. And the toaster says you’re fat. Unfortunately, the toaster’s telling the truth. The microwave tells you to set fires – and that just means you’re nuts, because why would it do that?

Read that all through again and soak it in. The media is so in the tank for Obama that they take the Obama talking points and use them to dispirit McCain supporters, as they did Clinton supporters during the primary. Hillary Clinton received a larger popular vote than Obama, yet she was supposed to drop out? You’d think she lost everything the way the Obama campaign was acting.

Think about some of the “generic” posts here at YouDecide2008.com, do any of them sound familiar like they’re Obama campaign scripts? I’ve seen plenty in the past several months meant to dispirit McCain supporters on the site. The Obama campaign works by distracting, dispiriting, and demoralizing the competition. Not our regular liberal commenters, just the ones who drop in and leave mild messages about being pro-Obama and anti-McCain, they’re meant to sound like an average voter having an epiphany about now supporting Obama.

3. Exaggerations of Obama winning states he’s expected to win

This should be obvious but HillBuzz explains it as well:

Obama believes there are 57 states (maybe 58 or 59, depending on how he’s counting that day), the Obamedia will report huge wins for Dear Leader in the states of Confusion, Denial, and Undress, with Atlantis, Oz, Hopetopia, and Leningrad all going to Obama early on November 4th — because everyone loves Obama so much, that places that don’t even exist have voted for him (with 100% of the vote of the dead, cartoon characters, and historical figures going to Dear Leader in unprecedented numbers). The best example of the Obamedia making up lies like this was on Super Tuesday, when every Eeyore we knew ran through the streets crying and pants-wetting, gnashing their teeth and yanking their hair as the sky fell around them — BECAUSE OBAMA IS WINNING CALIFORNIA! MASSACHUSETTS! ARKANSAS! TENNESSEE! NEW JERSEY! NEW YORK! WAAAAAAAAH! DOOOOOOOMED!

Honestly, we are never kidding when we say what a true living Hell Eeyores have made our lives since January. We never joke when we tell you how much damage these people have done. Just using HillBuzz as an example, there are at least 3 essays each day we would love to have time to write, on topics we feel are important, or on intel we get from sources in the Democratic party (or eavesdropped off Obama staffers or at Obama events), but we don’t have time to get to them because we are on the phone with Eeyores, or answering Eeyores frantic emails with questions we’ve answered 1,000 times before, or talking Eeyores off their ledges after they’ve been listening to MSNBC again. Eeyores are time burglars.

Everyone knows Obama is winning Massachusetts, New York and other liberal states, who cares? The media will use these states to wrongly make it sound like Obama will win red states as well, which he wont. It’s all a big fabrication, a load of lies meant to make Obama seem bigger than he is.

HillBuzz is also home to a couple of Obama campaign defectors. At least 2 women post to the site, or provide information, who currently work in the Obama campaign but are so disgusted by the way Hillary Clinton was treated, and then Sarah Palin, they have defected and are now blowing the whistle on how the Obama campaign operates.

This post from Thursday, October 30th, 2008, is titled Confession of an Obama Blogger – by Sarah P. Sarah P is the alias she uses. Here are some choice excerpts which should make even the staunchest Obama supporters get a lump in their stomach:

I work for a campaign and can’t wait for this week to be over.

I was doing it for a job. I was not a fan of any candidate but over time grew to love HRC.

The internal campaign idea is to twist, distort, humiliate and finally dispirit you.

We pay people and organize people to go to all the online sites and “play the part of a clinton or mccain supporter who just switched our support for obama”

We do this to stifle your motivation and to destroy your confidence.

We did this the whole primary and it worked.

Sprinkle in mass vote confusion and it becomes bewildering. Most people lose patience and just give up on their support of a candidate and decide to just block out tv, news, websites, etc.

This surprisingly has had a huge suppressing movement and vote turnout issues.

Next, we infiltrate all the blogs and all the youtube videos and overwhelm the voting, the comments, etc. All to continue this appearance of overwhelming world support.

People makes posts to the effect that the world has “gone mad”

Thats the intention. To make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.

That has been seen, even on this site. The Obama campaign needs a smokescreen to mask their inadequacies and lack of support. She continues:

We have also had quite a hand in skewing many many polls, some we couldn’t control as much as we would have liked. But many we have spoiled over. Just enough to make real clear politics look scarey to a mccain supporter. Its worked, alough the goal was to appear 13-15 points ahead.

see, the results have been working. People tend to support a winner, go with the flow, become “sheeple”

The polls are roughly 3-5 points in favor of Barack. Thats due to our inflation of the polls and pulling in the sheeple.

Our donors, are the same people who finance the MSM. Their interests are tied, Barack then tends to come across as teflon. Nothing sticks. And trust, there were meetings with Fox news. The goal was to blunt them as much as possible. Watch Bill Oreilly he has become much more diplomatic and “fair and balanced” and soft. Its because he wants to retain the #1 spot on cable news and to do that he has to have access to the Obama campaign and we worked hard at stringing him a long and keeping him soft for an interview swap. It worked and now he is anticipating more access. So he is playing it still soft.

This is why nothing sticks.

The operation is massive, the goal is to paint a picture that is that of a winner, regardless of the results.

There is no true inauguration draft or true grant park construction going on. There will be a party, but we are boasting beyond the truth to make it seem like the election is wrapped up.

Our goal is to continue to make you lose your moral. We worked hard at persuasion and paying off and timing and playing the right political numbers to get key republican endorsements to make it seem even more like it was over and the world was coming to an end for you all.

There is a huge staff of people working around the clock, watching every site, blogs, etc. We flood these sites. We have had a goal to overwhelm.

The truth is here. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.

If you had suspicions that a good chunk of Obama’s support is largely artificial, this simply confirms those suspicions. The media is a willing accomplice in this sense, they are all too eager to elect Obama that they don’t mind being used to create the smokescreen.

She continues, discussing Sarah Palin and how the Obama campaign has gone after here:

Sarah Palin is a huge threat, and our campaign has feared her like you can’t imagine. If it seems unfair how she has been treated, well its because she has had a team working round the clock to make her look like a fool.

No surprise there since Sarah Palin has been destroying the Obama campaign, just destroying them.

She concludes:

I will be quitting my post on nov 5th and my vote will be for John Mccain. Fortunately, my position has been a marketing position and I don’t feel I had any part of anything I would feel guilty for. But I look forward to getting out of this as the negativity and environment upsets me.

I wish you all well, and goodluck.

PS my name is not really sarah. but I am a female and I understand your plight.

I know what you Obama supporters are thinking, that it’s a hoax right? Wrong. Think that if you have to, but the lid is being blown off the Obama campaign’s weak support.

Aside from the HillBuzz blog, to which this next item might be related, there have been similar posts elsewhere from former Hillary Clinton staffers, turned Obama staffers, now turned Obama defectors because of the disgust they have for the way his campaign has been run and the sexism they saw against Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.

Here is an anonymous Obama staffer, which may be the same person listed above as Sarah P. She posted anonymously to RedState.com, it’s titled What you were never intended to know in this election.

Read this and be excited as a McCain supporter:

The Bradley Effect. Don’t believe these polls for a second. I just went over our numbers and found that we have next to no chance in the following states: Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, New Hampshire and Nevada. Ohio leans heavily to McCain, but is too close to call it for him. Virginia, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa are the true “toss up states”. The only two of these the campaign feels “confident” in are Iowa and New Mexico. The reason for such polling discrepancy is the Bradley Effect, and this is a subject of much discussion in the campaign. In general, we tend to take a -10 point percentage in allowing for this, and are not comfortable until the polls give us a spread well over this mark. This is why we are still campaigning in Virginia and Pennsylvania! This is why Ohio is such a desperate hope for us! What truly bothers this campaign is the fact that some pollsters get up to an 80% “refuse to respond” result. You can’t possibly include these into the polls. The truth is, people are afraid to let people know who they are voting for. The vast majority of these respondents are McCain supporters. Obama is the “hip” choice, and we all know it.

The polls are all off, as discussed above. This gives McCain a door to the presidency, if McCain supporters show up to vote!

The anonymous Obama staffer continues, discussing former Hillary voters:

Hillary voters. Internal polling suggests that at best, we are taking 70-75% of these voters. Other estimates are as low as 60% in some areas – particularly Ohio and western PA. My biggest problem with this campaign’s strategy was the decision NOT to offer Hillary the VP slot. She was ready and able to take this on, and would have campaigned enthusiastically for it. This selection would have also brought virtually all of her supporters into the fold, and the Obama campaign knew it. Though I have no way of knowing this for certain, and I do admit that I am relying on internal gossip, Senator Obama actually went against the advice of his top advisors. They wanted him to choose her, but the only significant opposition to this within the campaign came from Barack and Michelle Obama. In short, he let personal feelings take precedence over what was the most logical thing to do. Biden, by the way, has been a disaster inside the campaign. Everyone cringes whenever he gives an interview, and he creates so many headaches as the campaign has to stay on their toes in order to disseminate information and spin whatever it was he was trying to say.

This means that conservative estimates of around 20 to 25% of former Clinton supporters are now backing McCain. Not good for Obama. What’s more, Biden has been a disaster. When he makes news, it’s because he said something idiotic. When he doesn’t make news, like right now, it’s because he’s been hidden away so he doesn’t blow the entire campaign.

The anonymous Obama staffer continues, wrapping this up for us:

As part of my research duties, I scour right wing blogs and websites to get somewhat of a “feel” as to what is being talked about on the other side. Much of it is nonsense, but there are some exceptions which give the campaign jitters. A spirited campaign has been made to infiltrate many pro-Hillary sites and discredit them. A more disorganized, but genuine effort has also been made to sow doubts among the unapologetically right wing sites such as redstate.com. Don’t you guys get it? This has been the Obama campaign’s sole strategy from the very beginning! The only way he wins is over a dispirited, disorganized, and demobilized opposition. This is how it has been for all of his campaigns. What surprises me is that everyone has fallen for it.

You may point to the polls as proof of the inevitability of all of this. If so, you have fallen for the oldest trick in the book. How did we skew these polls, you might ask? It all starts with the media “buzz” which has been generated over the campaign. Many stories are generated on the powerful Obama ground game, and how many new voters were registered. None of this happens by coincidence. It is all part of the poll-skewing process. This makes pollsters change their mixes to reflect these new voters and tilt the mix more towards Democratic voters. What is not mentioned or reported on is not the “under-reported cell phone users or young voters” we hear so much about. What is underreported is you.

I changed my somewhat positive opinion of this campaign during the unfair and sexist campaign against Sarah Palin. I will never agree with her on the issues and will probably never vote for her, but I am embarrassed of what has happened. I can’t ignore our own hand in all of this. What I do know is that I will not be voting for Obama this time around. Treat that as you will.

The Obama campaign has fed the rumors of record numbers of new voters in order to skew poll results by ancouraing pollsters to factor more Democrats and more Independents. There is evidence of this in nearly every poll. The breakdown in 2004 from actual voting was around 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and the rest Independents or unaffiliated. Why is 2008 going to be much different?

Instead we see polls where Democrats recent sometimes nearly 50% of the polling sample, which is utterly absurd. The electorate has changed in 4 years, but not by that much.

One more thing. Remember the Obama campaign’s 30 minute television ad last thursday? No? That’s exactly it, the whole thing bombed.

HillBuzz points this out as well:

So, Obama spent millions of dollars last night on a TV Variety Special no one is talking about today. We don’t know what he did on his TV show, because we don’t like listening to him. Unlike his followers, we’ve been to church and knows what a good preacher sounds like — and kids, we’ve got to tell you, if you go weak in the knees listening to Obama, you would have spontaneously combusted hearing Billy Graham back in the day. Even here in Chicago, just about any church had a more effective preacher than Obama – like Trinity United itself, where Obama learned his oration style and melodic rises and falls of cadence. You do know he used to listen to tape of Jeremiah Wright while at Harvard, because he was sharp enough to realize the fastest ticket to the top required mesmerizing black audiences in Chicago. And thus, a star was born…

But one who’s mega-millions TV special fell FLAT!

The mainstream media is so in the tank for Obama, it’s actually hilariously funny to us — because you know something was a disaster for Obama when the media just pretends it never happened.

Obama’s support is nowhere near landslide levels. If you’re an Obama supporter, keep kidding yourself, I dare you. McCain is probably closer to winning than Obama at this point, especially since he is now trending up while Obama has remained flat, almost stagnant and is now starting to slip. His 30 minute ad did nothing, other than remind people who they won’t be voting for.

With so much information about how the Obama campaign is built on a house of cards, what does this mean for McCain supporters.

One word: VOTE!

Go vote on Tuesday for McCain, stand in line as long as it takes, fight back against this smokescreen campaign put out by Obama and the media. Obama is nowhere near as far ahead as the media makes him out to be. If anything, this race is tied right now and the Obama campaign knows it.

If Iowa is such a lock in the polls along with Nevada, then why is the Obama campaign spending time there when they need Virginia, Florida, and other major swing states? Simple answer is because Nevada and Iowa are not solid locks, and the Obama campaign internally knows it. Iowa will probably go Obama’s way, though McCain doesn’t need it. Still, Obama is spending time campaigning there personally anyway.

Heads high McCain supporters, vote with confidence and we will overcome this conglomerate of the Obama campaign and the liberal media.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentary writer for YouDecide2008.com

Original story:

Some interesting information has surfaced today which cements what many of us already suspected about Barack Obama. For starters, Obama hasn’t always been a loyal member of the Democratic Party, and new information out now shows quite the contrary.

In 1996, during his Illinois state senate run, Barack Obama was a member of a radical socialist organization called the Chicago New Party, a group of hardcore left-wing socialists bent on infiltrating the Democratic Party with their ultra-socialist candidates.

One of their newest, most promising candidates in 1996 was none other than the now well-known Barack Obama, currently running for President of the United States of America.

These claims aren’t baseless or even a stretch, rather there are many direct links between Obama and these radical factions which I will explore below. First though, a little background on the Chicago New Party and the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America.

The WikiPedia, for what it’s worth, explains the New Party in this manner:

Left-wing critics of the New Party, such as supporters of the Green Party, argued that the New Party was merely a pressure group on the fringes of the Democratic Party, rather than a genuinely new political party. New Party leaders argued that classic third-party strategies were doomed to failure, but that the Democratic Party was too entrenched and undemocratic to be a useful institution for “small-d democrats” either, even if they could succeed in taking it over, and so a new kind of organization was needed.

While the New Party itself was not a legitimate party, what is scarier is that New Party proponents and supporters wanted to infiltrate the Democratic Party to move it towards socialism since they believed it was too entrenched in corporate interests.

What we’re seeing today with Barack Obama running for President as a Democrat is the culmination of the New Party’s ultimate plan, to install radical left-wing socialists into prominent offices under the guise of the Democratic Party. Barack Obama is the textbook plan the Chicago New Party radicals have been waiting for.

Take this directly from the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America website which congratulates Barack Obama on his primary victory while running for the Illinois State Senate in 1996:

Secondly, the NP’s ‘96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration.

Check the link above for verification, the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America party spoke very highly of their new golden boy. They even quote Obama as asking for other New Party members (NPers as stated in the blurb) to join his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. Sounds familiar, ACORN anyone? Barack Obama ran for the Illinois state senate, registered as a Democrat of course, but he was running as a closet socialist New Party member with the intent on moving the Democratic Party to the left from within, not running as a third-party candidate. This is irrefutable.

More evidence –

The New Zeal blog did all Americans a service by digging up the Chicago New Party’s old newsletters from 1996. Here is where the plot thickens even more. Here is the front page of their 1996 newsletter scanned:

Here is a close-up on this front page:

Here’s the ultra-close-up of that front page, discussing members of the Chicago New Party, such as Barack Obama, and their victories in their respective primaries:

Let me re-quote it just for impact:

New Party members won three other primaries this spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County judiciary).

The New Party was championing Barack Obama as their new golden boy running for the Illinois State Senate, they even gloated about him in their newsletter as a New Party member winning a primary.

Further evidence, if you had any remaining doubt, here is a scan of the New Party’s 1996 newsletter from page 2 scanned:

See that gentleman on the right? That’s Barack Obama on the right side posing with his other New Party friends and relishing their victories on their road to turn the Democratic Party toward radical socialism.

The Chicago Democratic Socialists of America make no bones about their intentions, they openly discuss their desire to install socialist politicians within the Democratic Party with the hopes of turning America away from capitalism.

Here’s a direct quote from the front page of the DSA:

Our mission is to establish democratic socialism as a political force in the United States and around the world by training and mobilizing socialist activists to participate in a vibrant and diverse socialist organization at both the local and the national level. DSA both educates the public about democratic socialist values and policies and builds progressive coalitions to win victories that move the U.S. and the world toward social democracy.

Barack Obama’s old political friends in Chicago, the same people who endorsed him and launched his career, yearn to instill socialist ideals in politics and bring the Democratic Party to the left, where they believe it belongs.

The other group closely associated with the Chicago New Party was ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Of course, as we know, Barack Obama worked for ACORN, volunteering his time to train ACORN staffers on how to register voters. ACORN is now under investigation in 13 states for voter fraud after Barack Obama’s campaign paid them $800,000 to register voters during the primary season.

Need more proof of Barack Obama’s hidden socialist intentions? Listen to the audio in this video, recorded in 1995, in which Obama trashes the United States as a racist nation where whites constantly subjugate blacks:

Note how the video cuts back and forth from 1995 to present day statements so you can see his socialist views on wealth redistribution have not changed during the past 12 years. In 1995, Obama said reparations should take the form of taxing wealthy “white” professionals and redistribute it to “inner city” schools. Earlier this year at a debate during the Democratic Primary, Obama made the same argument that he believes reparations should take the form of investing in education.

OBAMA: And I really want to emphasize the word responsibility. I think that, uh, whether you are a white executive living out in the suburbs who doesn’t want to pay taxes to inner city children, uh, to — for them to go to school.

Because I think of the problems that African-Americans face in this country, we tend to have a sanitized view in the African-American community about what is going on in Africa. And the truth of the matter is is that many of the problems that Africa faces, whether it’s poverty, uh, or political suppression, uh, or ethnic conflict, uh, is just as prominent there and can’t all be blamed on, uh, the effects of colonialism. What it can be blamed on is some of the common factors that affect Bosnia or, uh, Los Angeles or, uh, all kinds of places on this earth, and that is the tendency for one group to try to suppress another group in the interests of power or greed or, uh, resources or what have you.

The media, for all their time and money, have done every single American a disservice during this election season. We have here Barack Obama, a radical socialist who, in his own words, discusses his belief that increasing taxes on the wealthy is the way he will force America to pay reparations to African-Americans.

Furthermore, Barack Obama went out of his way to be a member of the Chicago New Party, a group of like-minded socialists who could launch his political career.

A short list summarizing Barack Obama’s affiliations and membership in the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) party:

1. Barack Obama attended and participated in meetings of the Chicago New Party and the Chicago DSA, the local affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America.
2. Barack Obama sought the endorsement of the Chicago DSA which by the party’s Political Committee as well as Mr. Obama’s signature on contract promising “a visible and active relationship with the NP.”
3. Barack Obama actively used the endorsement from the Chicago DSA.
4. Barack Obama won his DSA-endorsed and -backed campaign to secure his seat in the Illinois State Senate.
5. Barack Obama continued his involvement with the Chicago DSA — including directly asking the group to join “his task forces on voter education and voter registeration” — and received their endorsements in subsequent campaigns.

The bottom line here is something that many Barack Obama supporters will not want to read or even believe could be possible. Barack Obama is a closet radical socialist who ran, in 1996, as Democratic with a membership in the Chicago New Party.

The goal: For the radical socialist Chicago New Party to install socialist politicians into prominent positions under the mask of the Democratic Party.

The man: Barack Obama was an active member in the Chicago New Party, as evidenced above by the party newsletters calling him a member and congratulating on his win.

The conclusion: The radical socialist Chicago New Party is now getting it’s wishes since Barack Obama is masquerading under the Democratic Party while running for President.

I just did, in about 30 minutes, what the entire mainstream media complex hasn’t done for two years.

My fellow Americans, there is still time to save American’s capitalist freedom for future generations by voting against Barack Obama on November 4th. Do you want to wake up on November 5th and find out you just voted for a radical socialist who’s been masquerading as a common Democrat?

If you vote for Barack Obama, you will be responsible for fulfilling the plans of the Chicago New Party by sending a radical, anti-capitalist, pro-socialist politician to the White House. I implore you to vote for McCain this year and save your vote for 2012 to vote for a real Democrat, not Barack Obama the Chicago New Party socialist.

Just remember, Barack Obama is one man, however, he will have to appoint over 1,100 people to various government positions the day he walks into the White House, who do you think he’ll be appointing? My guess is a group of anti-American socialists so radical you won’t even be able to recognize the government in a couple years. How do I know this? Just look at all the radical socialists he owes favors to for starting his political career in Chicago.

Barack Obama is a proponent of socialist policies such as the redistribution of wealth. That is, taking money from people who are successful and giving it to people who don’t pay taxes. If you are even remotely successful in life, Barack Obama wants to pick your pocket and redistribute to someone who makes less money, that is the ultimate Chicago New Party goal. What’s more, as seen in the above video, Barack Obama wants to implement these socialist policies with a racial tinge of reparations.

I for one will not be a part of the dismantling of America’s free market capitalism, I hope you won’t be either.

Story Update:

Due to the popularity and importance of this article, I have continued digging and found even more alarming information concerning Barack Obama’s direct connection to, and endorsement of, the radical socialist ideas professed by the Chicago New Party and the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America.

Here is video of Barack Obama standing with, and endorsing rabid Chicago New Party member Danny K. Davis. Obama makes it a point to say that he’s supporting Davis because, quote, “he shares our values”. This appearance by Barack Obama was during his run for the United States Senate in 2004:

Obama’s version of giving everyone a “piece” of the American dream is to take someone’s existing “piece” and redistribute to someone else who he believes more fairly deserves it.

The page on the Chicago New Party website which discusses Davis has been removed, however, luckily the cached copy is available in the Internet Archive, seen here:

On March 19, Danny Davis won the Democratic Primary for Congress in Chicago’s 7th Congressional District (West Side), and won the general election in November, 1996. Why is this particularly interesting to the New Party? Because Davis became the first New Party member elected to the U.S. Congress.

“I’m proud to be the first New Party member in the House of Representatives. Now we need to build a nationwide progressive-populist political organization which can aggressively fight back against those who are driving American politics in an anti-democratic direction.”

So just what are these “shared values” which are common between Danny Davis, Barack Obama, and other Chicago New Party members? I’ll let the New Party website explain them.

The most alarming, blatantly socialist aspect of the Chicago New Party’s platform is their “Starting Gate” welfare reform program. Welfare reform? We’ve heard that before, but this is “reform” like you’ve never even imagined. Here is the description from the New Party website which is now archived:

American commitments to equal opportunity should be upheld with the resources to make them real. We favor universal access to quality health care, education, and housing for all children – a program of “starting gate” equality that will tend to equalize chances before people enter the labor force. For adults, we believe most social benefits should be universal – like Social Security is now – but taxed progressively based on private income. The result would be fairer and more fiscally stable.

So what does Barack Obama and his Chicago New Party socialist friends mean? It’s very clear, they want to redistribute wealth from successful Americans in order to provide “free,” universal everything programs to many Americans who don’t even pay taxes.

This line here should make your skin crawl: “but taxed progressively based on private income”

As such, the Chicago New Party believes in extreme progressive taxation, taxing successful Americans the most in order to pay for universal health insurance, universal housing, and expanding universal retirement similar to the way Social Security, the failing system, now functions.

Barack Obama’s version of welfare reform is not trying to minimize welfare, it’s expanding it to include every possible service the government can provide, paid for by successful Americans by increasing their taxes through an extreme progressive tax.

If this doesn’t give you concern, perhaps this next bit of information will.

As of now in 2008, the Chicago New Party is largely inactive. Of course, these people didn’t all go away, they simply formed a new party under a new name which didn’t have the stigma attached to it that the Chicago New Party once had.

If you visit the current Chicago New Party website, there isn’t much to find except a link to the Working Families Party website. What is the “Working Families Party” you ask?

The Wikipedia, again for what it’s worth, describes the Working Families Party in this regard:

New York’s Working Families Party was first organized in 1998 by a coalition of labor unions, ACORN and other community organizations, members of the now-inactive national New Party, and a variety of public interest groups. The party blends a culture of political organizing with unionism, 1960s idealism, and tactical pragmatism. The party’s main issue concerns are jobs, health care, education and energy/environment, and it has won notable policy gains at the city, county and state level by piggybacking on Democratic or Republican candidates.

The Working Families Party was organized by groups such as ACORN and former members of the now inactive New Party, two groups with which Barack Obama has had much involvement in the past. What’s more, the blurb discusses similar tactics used by the Chicago New Party of attaching themselves to the Democratic or Republican ticket in order to actually win elections as closet radical socialists.

Sound familiar? It should since the Chicago New Party’s goal was also to piggyback it’s way into prominent political offices by running as Democrats. This is the same way Barack Obama operated in Illinois while running for a state senate seat as a secret member of the Chicago New Party, running as a Democrat.

It comes, as no surprise then, that the Working Families Party has endorsed Barack Obama:

Barack Obama’s campaign has inspired millions of Americans to fight for the issues the WFP has long championed, whether it’s an economy that works for everyone, healthcare for all, protecting social security, or the right to join a union.

This November, Obama will appear on the Working Families Party ballot line – “Row E” – across New York. Votes for Obama on the WFP line count just the same, but they also let you vote your values and send a powerful message: New Yorkers demand real progressive change.

Reading that correctly? The Working Families Party has endorsed Barack Obama because they know he can, quote, bring “real progressive change”. The Working Familiies Party, made up of ACORN and the New Party, is endorsing Barack Obama because they know he is a radical socialist who used to work for ACORN and went out of his way to become a member of radical Chicago New Party when was running to be a state senator in Illinois.

So with all that, which is a lot to digest, where does it leave us?

The answer: Right back to where Barack Obama started, as a wealth redistribution proponent in the Chicago New Party:

As you can tell by now, when Barack Obama says “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody,” he truly means it in his own socialist mindset. His true feelings have emerged several times over the course of the campaign though no encounter has been as damning as his encounter with “Joe the Plumber,” to whom he shared his Chicago New Party socialist mindset.

Once again, I implore you as a fellow American who cares deeply for my country. Do not vote for Barack Obama, the radical socialist who has piggybacked his way onto the Democratic ticket.

If you vote for Barack Obama, you’re not voting for Barack Obama the “Democrat,” you’re voting for Barack Obama of the Chicago New Party, part of the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America, endorsed by the currently active and ultra-socialist Working Families Party.

If there is ever a time to put partisanship aside and do what is best for the country, now is that time. Vote against Barack Obama’s radical socialist agenda, which we have just documented and chronicled.

Finally, share this article with friends, family, and anyone thinking of voting for Barack Obama.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentary writer for YouDecide2008.com

If there was ever a better illustration of how intolerant the so-called “tolerant” left is in America, it’s been seen in the vicious, evil attacks directed toward Gov. Sarah Palin since she became John McCain’s vice presidential nominee.

Many liberals in this country like to pretend they are open-minded and love free speech, that lie couldn’t be further from the truth. They believe in tolerance to the point where they wish death on Republicans and espouse violence toward anyone who dare question The One and his socialist ways.

Just for some examples of this liberal “tolerance” in action, I didn’t have to go far before scores of stories popped up to illustrate just how tolerant liberals really are.

Just to contrast this, there was a big media todo about a supporter at a McCain rally supposedly yelling “Kill him,” when speaking of Barack Obama. This turned out to be a complete fabrication as the Secret Service investigated it as a death threat and found no merit to the claim made by one reporter, read about there here.

Now, onto the liberal tolerance.

1. “Let’s stone her, old school”

Just over a week ago, Gov. Sarah Palin was invited to a Philadelphia Flyers game to drop the ceremonious “first puck” of the game. She was received with mixed cheers and boos, however, outside on the street, it was another story. According to Philly.com, one Palin-hater was heard saying the following:

Outside on Broad Street, waiting for Palin to leave, one man was heard saying: “Let’s stone her, old school.”

So is “stone her” better than “kill him,” which never even happened? I’d say not yet the media isn’t interested in reporting hateful death threats made against conservatives from Barack Obama supporters.

2. “Abort Sarah Palin”

You don’t have to look much further than internet t-shirt shops to find the love and respect given to Sarah Palin by the left. Did I say love and respect, I’m sorry I meant hatred and disrespect.

Just a few examples of t-shirts being designed and sold from supporters of Barack Obama:

Oops, sorry, tossed in one illustrating the tolerant love and affection these same folks have for President Bush.

Oops, and another, I better stop now or this could go all day.

Here’s the wrap-up from Fox News discussing an anti-Palin t-shirt worn to a Barack Obama rally which was so vulgar, they can’t even show it on TV:

But wait, I though Barack Obama supporters were all tolerant, peace-loving people. Then why, may I ask, do they support stoning Sarah Palin, killing President Bush, and constantly trashing those with whom they disagree? It must be their love and tolerance.

3. Silencing free speech

In recent days and weeks, it has become the norm for supporters of Barack Obama to begin stifling free speech which doesn’t support The One and his policies.

One example from the state of Florida where a man’s car was vandalized and defaced because of it had a McCain/Palin sticker on it:

CLEARWATER (Bay News 9) — A Clearwater man’s vehicle that displayed a bumper sticker supporting John McCain has been defaced in what appears to be a hate crime, authorities say.

According to authorities, 41-year-old Frank Armstrong’s 2006 Lexus LS 430 was parked on the 1400 block of Gulf Boulevard when someone or a group of people scratched the letters “KKK” into the paint and burned a U.S. Flag on the vehicle.

Authorities say those involved also used cigarettes to burn several areas of the car and apparently urinated on the car.

Armstrong’s vehicle displayed a bumper sticker supporting the McCain campaign and another that was anti-Barack Obama leading investigators to believe the crime was racially or politically motivated.

No witnesses or surveillance video have been found.

The other “anti-Obama” sticker on his car was a sticker which said “NObama,” hardly offensive to the point where it warranted vandalism. This man put a McCain/Palin sticker on his car and supporters of Barack Obama etched “KKK” into his car because they didn’t like his free speech. Tolerance in action, my friends. Apparently tolerance means you find a car with a sticker you don’t like, then urinate on it.

Here’s a video of some guy who finally got ticked off enough at his McCain/Palin sign being stolen from his front yard, so he video taped it:

There are so many other examples of Barack Obama supporters illustrating their belief in free speech by stealing private property that I don’t have time to list them. Again, tolerance and what a beautiful thing it is.

Here’s another example, just for fun:

Now I know you could point to an Obama sign being stolen by a McCain supporter, but why justify bad behavior with other bad behavior? I will condemn any sign being stolen, be it a McCain or Obama, because I actually do believe in free speech, not like these Barack Obama supporters showing their respect for private property by walking onto someone’s lawn and stealing from them. See how gutsy they are doing it when it’s dark?

Here’s another story which explains how tolerant and love-filled Barack Obama supporters are:

Albemarle County Police are trying to figure out who is responsible for setting fire to a couple campaign signs.
The incident happened early Saturday morning in Earlysville. A McCain-Palin sign and a Virgil Goode sign were set on fire.

“This is a disturbing turn of events and I’m dismayed at the intolerance and attempted intimidation,” said Chairman of the Albemarle County Republican Committee, Christian Schoenewald.

Both signs were 4′ X 8′ that had been posted on someone’s private property.

“I’m concerned that this new behavior shows an escalation in the desire to intimidate Republican voters. Theft and defacing of signs is one thing. Burning signs elevates the situation to a whole new level,” said Schoenewald.

Last month, similar Republican campaign signs were stolen from that same area.

Barack Obama supporters literally torching McCain/Palin signs because they are such champions of free speech, that they have to stifle the speech of others. Embrace the tolerance, my friends, it’s a wonderful thing when Barack Obama supporters go around setting McCain/Palin signs on fire.

Think it’s just confined to McCain/Palin? Think again. Take this story from Minnesota where Democrats have vandalized the home of Republican Senator Norm Coleman, currently running for reelection:

ST. PAUL (WCCO) ? Vandals defaced the garage at Sen. Norm Coleman’s home, his campaign and police said Wednesday. Five other Minnesota politicians were similarly targeted with vandalism, according to authorities.

Coleman and his wife, Laurie, live in the Crocus Hill neighborhood of St. Paul. Graffiti left on the outside of their garage reads: “U R A criminal resign or else”; “Scum,” which is written three times; and “Psalm 2.”

Coleman is a former mayor of St. Paul, and has lived in the home on a residential street near the Victoria’s Crossing shopping area for almost 20 years.

Police spokesman Peter Panos said the graffiti was reported Wednesday morning. Police were canvassing the neighborhood for clues, and Panos said he expected increased patrols around the Coleman home.

“We’re considering it a threat to the senator,” Panos said, adding that three other Republican members of Congress — Reps. John Kline, Michele Bachmann and Jim Ramstad — were targeted with similar vandalism that police think might be related.

Hope, change, and calling people with whom you disagree “scum”.

Then take these photos of a business-owner in Minnesota who had a McCain/Palin bumper sticker on his van, this is how it ended up after Barack Obama supporters got a hold of it and left their calling card, in the form of Obama/Biden signs and spray paint on his personal property:

His wife’s Volvo was also targeted in the same driveway by thoughtful and caring Barack Obama supporters:

I feel the love, don’t you?

4. Hollywood Hatred

Aside from your average hateful Barack Obama supporter expressing their thought that Sarah Palin should have been aborted, you have the Hollywood fools acting as if their opinions matter.

Stay classy, Hollywood.

Right, because Matt Damon has faced down so many foreign leaders. Perhaps he is mistaking “The Bourne Identity” with his real life which consists of repeating the lines people feed him.

Of course, at the end there you get a good view of what those anti-Palin t-shirts said which were worn to a Barack Obama rally by tolerant Barack Obama supporters. They’re so loving and tolerant of Republicans that they believe “Sarah Palin is a cu**,” and wanted everyone else to know at the Barack Obama rally they attended. Can you imagine if Republicans wore clothing with a similar phrase on it? It would be front page New York Times for a week.

5. YouTube self-made “F*** Palin” videos

Just search YouTube for anything derogatory surrounding Sarah Palin and you will find dozens, probably hundreds of Barack Obama supporters swearing and ranting about how they believe Sarah Palin is “retarded” or needs to “suck it” from them. That’s putting it mild since many of them are obscene and sexual in nature. It’s really disgusting to watch these Barack Obama supporters descend into these filthy depths.

Here is an example, a very mild one at that, of what I’m speaking about:

****CONTENT WARNING: EXTREME EXPLICIT LANGUAGE!****

His intelligent ranting has won me over, I’m now voting for Obama, NOT!

Here’s your loving, Barack Obama supporter saying “Sarah Palin needs to get smacked in the fu***** face” with something. See the tolerance? He showed his tolerance when he said “Palin is retarded,” it went by quick at the end in case you missed his love, hope, and change.

Finally, just as an illustration of the tolerance espoused by Barack Obama supporters, here’s a video made by a group of McCain supporters who dared march in Manhattan. Witness the love and tolerance displayed by countless Barack Obama supporters as they flip them the finger, scream obscenities, equate them to Nazis, and tell them to leave because their free speech isn’t welcome there:

So tolerant, so love-filled. Barack Obama supporters are so tolerant, so open-minded that they won’t even allow opposing views to be expressed without shouting them down and calling them Nazis.

Stay classy, Barack Obama supporters while you say Sarah Palin should be “stoned” and/or “aborted”.

It is really sad that in our country a major party like the Democrats and Barack Obama supporters would not want everyone of all groups, including conservatives, to enjoy what they have to offer. Why would Barack Obama supporters embrace hate-filled rhetoric against everyone who opposes their views, instead of making a stand against it? The answer, of course, is because in the eyes of Barack Obama supporters, free speech is only acceptable when it is praising Obama, not McCain.

So, the next time you hear that it is McCain supporters espousing hatred because they dare question The One’s policies, remember, liberal Barack Obama supporters are full of hope, change, and most of all, love. They express these emotions by wishing death on anyone and everyone who opposes them.

Hope and change my friends, and Sarah Palin should be aborted according to Barack Obama supporters in their own words, proudly displayed to the world.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentary writer for YouDecide2008.com

I know when the election has gotten to me is when I start dreaming about our presidential candidates. I recently had a dream which I’ll try to describe in some detail. I was walking with a group of people while watching another group of people walking in the opposite direction. I noticed they were deformed, with bloodied faces as they marched along down this path. I watched as people I knew marched by in the same state, as if they has been turned into zombies and could no longer thing for themselves or rationalize anything. They just followed blindly, never questioning. Come to find out, at the end of this road was Barack Obama, bringing the zombies in as his voters.

I didn’t think much of the dream until I began piecing more together and realizing that many Obama supporters are, indeed, zombies who are not thinking for themselves, nor are they questioning The One and his policies, they’re just following him.

After months of watching this election unfold, I have come to a realization. There is a good portion of voters in this country that think Barack Hussein Obama will be a terrible president, however, they’re going to insanely march into the polling booth and pull the lever for him anyway. Why? Their reasons vary from no longer wanting to pay for health insurance to simply refusing to vote for a Republican again.

They are not examining the issues, they are not deciding which candidate best represents them, they are in a zombie-like trance which is pushing them to vote for Obama, even though they know he will be the most disastrous administration in American history. They’re aware of his domestic terrorist associations with William Ayers, and they’re fine with it because they have lost their minds and are not thinking clearly.

This piece from the Ben Smith’s blog at Politico about a moderate voter focus group:

Reagan Dems and Independents. Call them blue-collar plus. Slightly more Target than Walmart.

Yes, the spot worked. Yes, they believed the charges against Obama. Yes, they actually think he’s too liberal, consorts with bad people and WON’T BE A GOOD PRESIDENT…but they STILL don’t give a f***. They said right out, “He won’t do anything better than McCain” but they’re STILL voting for Obama.

The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups:

54 year-old white male, voted Kerry ‘04, Bush ‘00, Dole ‘96, hunter, NASCAR fan…hard for Obama said: “I’m gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He’s gonna be a bad president. But I won’t ever vote for another god-damn Republican. I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President.”

The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. “Well, I don’t know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I’m sick of paying for health insurance at work and that’s why I’m supporting Barack.”

I felt like I was taking crazy pills. I sat on the other side of the glass and realized…this really is the Apocalypse. The Seventh Seal is broken and its time for eight years of pure, delicious crazy….

Did you read the compelling reasons there? Did you read voters who were voting for Obama based on his stellar economic plan or his unfettered support for infanticide? No, they’re voting for him because they are not engaging their brains in this election, they’re walking in to vote for a terrorist-carousing, socialism-espousing, abortion-supporting radical leftist who will proceed to run this country further into the ground than we could have possibly fathomed.

Oh, I’m sure you liberal readers will reply with foolish, empty statements like “Barry Hussein Obama couldn’t be worse than George Bush, the worst President ever!!”

Let me tell you, George W. Bush doesn’t hate this country or scare me the way Barack Obama does. Bush has his failures, like the $700 billion bailout bill, running our deficit into oblivion, and failing to finish the Iraq War using our military to it’s fullest.

That all being said, I wouldn’t have this inherent, gut-wrenching fear if Hillary Clinton was the Democratic nominee. Hillary is a corrupt, crooked liberal politician, but at least I know she loves America. I cannot say the same for Barack Obama who moved to Chicago to embrace the radical, anti-American lifestyle.

The next criticism I’ll get is liberal fools asking me why Barack Hussein Obama would run for President in a country he despises? I’ll tell you why, to destroy it from the inside with his ultra-socialist policies of tearing down capitalism, piece by piece. I know that’s fine with many of you since you are incapable of handling your own lives and need the government to change your diapers. Thanks, but no thanks, not everyone needs Barack Obama’s help to get out of bed in the morning, some of as are self-sufficient even if you Obama zombies are not.

Here’s something for your Obamabot Zombies to consider, your “man” supports judges directly legislating from the bench, and I can prove it. Now, for some of you liberals, you’ll be fine with this since when you can’t win in the ballot box, you force your way using the judicial system. Judges are supposed to interpret law, not write them, any first year law student knows that, let alone Barack Obama as a lawyer. Obama gives the legal profession a bad name, it’s truly sad.

Here is Barack Obama’s answer from Wednesday’s final presidential debate concerning Supreme Court nominees:

Obama: Well, I think it’s true that we shouldn’t apply a strict litmus test and the most important thing in any judge is their capacity to provide fairness and justice to the American people.

And it is true that this is going to be, I think, one of the most consequential decisions of the next president. It is very likely that one of us will be making at least one and probably more than one appointments and Roe versus Wade probably hangs in the balance.

Now I would not provide a litmus test. But I am somebody who believes that Roe versus Wade was rightly decided. I think that abortion is a very difficult issue and it is a moral issue and one that I think good people on both sides can disagree on.

But what ultimately I believe is that women in consultation with their families, their doctors, their religious advisers, are in the best position to make this decision. And I think that the Constitution has a right to privacy in it that shouldn’t be subject to state referendum, any more than our First Amendment rights are subject to state referendum, any more than many of the other rights that we have should be subject to popular vote.

So this is going to be an important issue. I will look for those judges who have an outstanding judicial record, who have the intellect, and who hopefully have a sense of what real-world folks are going through.

Did you read that? Obama wants a justice who “have an outstanding judicial record, who have the intellect, and who hopefully have a sense of what real-world folks are going through.” I missed the part about how the justice should interpret and uphold the constitution, not “have a sense of what real-world folks are going through.” That is an uninformed, incorrect answer from a man who should know better. Then again, as part of his radicalization in Chicago, Obama probably learned that the judiciary system is the way through which his radical, socialist policies can be impugned on the citizens.

The Supreme Court was not designed to function the way Barack Obama thinks it should function. Supreme Court justices are not there to decide on what “real-world folks are going through,” they’re there to determine if a constitutional right has been broken. Barack Obama is relying on you to be misinformed on this subject and give him a pass on his shortcomings, don’t let him!

There you go, the legal scholar who doesn’t even know what the true job of the judiciary branch is supposed to be. Yet, he taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. If I was a student, I’d be asking for a refund.

Luckily we haven’t voted yet so there is still a chance to save the country from the turn down this road. Please, for the sake of America, educated yourself and don’t follow the Obamabot Zombies down the path to destruction. Vote with a love for your country, not a love of Obama’s radical socialist policies. Open your eyes and your mind, do not be sucked into his speeches for they are but empty words, a curtain hiding his radical socialist agenda for this nation.

Think about this one folks, if Barack Obama was being considered for cabinet position, he wouldn’t be granted a security clearance because of his past domestic terrorist associations. If that doesn’t scare you, then have fun in your Obamatopia while the country goes down the crapshoot. As for me, I’ll be forming a compound made up of the sane people who did not vote for Obama. We’ll be somewhere bitterly clinging to our guns and religion, as Obama cannot take them away.

Don’t be an Obamabot Zombie, think for yourself and your vote against Obama might just save us all.

Sorry for the length, I’ve gotta vent somewhere.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentary writer for YouDecide2008.com

The first, most pervasive lie I’ve seen floating around, and recently seen repeated, has to do with the charge that, as mayor, Sarah Palin created a policy stating that rape victims had to pay for their forensic testing. The second myth has to do with Sarah Palin and Todd Palin’s association with the Alaska Independence Party, which some wrongly claim is a treasonous party which supports secession, it does not.

Myth #1: Todd and Sarah Palin were members of the Alaskan Independence Party (AIP) which is treasonous and advocates secession. The myth also says that Sarah Palin was, and still is secretly a member of the AIP and believes in Alaska’s secession from the union.

Truth: The AIP does NOT support or advocate Alaska’s secession and is just another third-party run on the state level. Todd Palin was a member for 7 years though Sarah Palin was never a member and has been a registered Republican since 1982. She did address their convention a few times as mayor of Wasilla and while running for governor.

Plus, as the kicker, the AIP has endorsed Chuck Baldwin for President, the Constitution Party candidate, not John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Here’s the explanation and why the lie originated:

First, where did this claim that the AIP is a secessionist party originate from? Here’s the answer. The AIP founder, Joe Vogler, was disgusted by the United States government acquiring Alaska and making it a state of the union in 1958. Vogler held strong disgust toward the United States government and was most distraught because the citizens of Alaska were not given a true opportunity to choose whether they wanted to become part of the United States of America, or remain a territory, or not join at all. Vogler made many statements condemning the United States, many of which I find deplorable, however, the AIP does not hold Vogler’s personal views as part of it’s platform, which is explained below.

FactCheck.org made mention of the AIP and described it in this manner:

She (Sarah Palin) was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

Note that FactCheck.org did not describe the AIP as “treasonous” or a “secessionist” party, they simply described it as a party which wants Alaskans to have a a true vote on whether they were to become part of the United States, the same right Puerto Rico has today. FactCheck.org simply states that the AIP supports the right to a vote, not that the AIP advocates secession or supports secession as a result of the vote. The AIP has abandoned pushing for the vote as part of their platform since they now focus on putting the state of Alaska first, along with individual and property rights.

The AIP’s website even addresses the criticism and explains where the secessionist claim arose from:

“Although it is widely thought to be a secessionist movement, the Party makes great effort to emphasize that its primary goal is merely a vote on secession, something that Party advocates say Alaskans were denied during the founding of the state. A plebiscite was, in fact, held in Alaska at the state’s inception in 1958, but AIP members argue that voting was corrupt and that residents were not given the proper choice between statehood, commonwealth status, or complete separation — something they say has been granted to other U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico.”

The AIP does not support secession, they simply wanted the state to have an option before becoming part of the United States.

I don’t blame Joe Vogler, the AIP founder, for his disgust on feeling like the federal government took control of Alaska without giving Alaskans a choice. I disagree with his statements condemning America and would never defend him personally or what he’s said, however, the AIP does not hold a secessionist platform, as is wrongly claimed by the myths and lies circulating the internet.

Much to the contrary of Joe Vogler’s beliefs, the AIP founder, the party now honors the United States constitution and adheres to it’s laws, they just support the rights of Alaska as a state being put first for individual Alaskans.

The AIP website lists their current platform which does not even discuss the right to vote on secession as a part of what they advocate for. The AIP has become a conservative-leaning state-level party with the interests of Alaska’s rights as a state before the federal government’s.

Here’s the Alaskan Independence Party platform, all 20 parts of it with my personal explanation, from their website:

Platform
We pledge to exert our best efforts to accomplish the following:

1. To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.

First and foremost, they comply with the constitution of the United States of America, which means they do not support secession, they believe in the United States of America and honor it’s laws, despite their founders’ past sentiments.

2. To support and defend States’ Rights, Individual Rights, Property Rights, and the Equal Footing Doctrine as guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States of America and the state of Alaska.

They believe in states’ rights, individual rights, and property rights, these are fundamental rights to all people and all states. They support our rights as individuals as guaranteed under the US constitution.

3. To advocate the convening of a State Constitutional Convention at the constitutionally designated 10 year interval.

They want the state of Alaska to have a state constitutional convention every 10 years, something every state should do. Maybe voters would learn more about how they’re governed.

4. To reinforce the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator to Alaska law, by eliminating the use of the word “privilege” in the Alaska statutes.

They believe in God as a creator and would like it acknowledged in their state constitution.

5. To amend the Constitution of the State of Alaska so as to re-establish the rights of all Alaskan residents to entry upon all public lands within the state, and to acquire private property interest there in, under fair and reasonable conditions. Such property interest shall include surface and sub-surface patent.

They want the public to be able to use state-owned public land. They believe in individual rights to access the land with “fair and reasonable” restrictions. Again, more states should take that attitude.

6. To foster a constitutional amendment abolishing and prohibiting all property taxes.

They want to do away with property taxes entirely, a perfectly legitimate political position. Most Americans would agree property taxes should at least lowered, if not eliminated.

7. To seek the complete repatriation of the public lands, held by the federal government, to the state and people of Alaska in conformance with Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, of the federal constitution.

The want the US government to give federal land back to the state of Alaska because they believe in states’ rights and that Alaska should be in charge of public land, not Washington.

8. To prohibit all bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings purporting to have the effect of law, except that which shall be approved by the elected legislature.

They want to stop judges from legislating from the bench as they believe the judiciary should interpret law, not author it.

9. To preserve and protect the Alaska Permanent Fund, Permanent fund earnings, earnings reserve fund and individual Permanent Fund Dividends.

They want to keep public money in Alaska, though I’m not familiar with the “Alaska Permanent Fund,” but I’m sure it’s a states’ right and individual rights issue.

10. To provide for the direct popular election of the attorney general, all judges, and magistrates.

They want the attorney general and judges elected by, and accountable to, the people. I completely agree! I hate unelected, unaccountable politicians.

11. To provide for the development of unrestricted, statewide, surface transportation and utility corridors as needed by the public or any individual.

They want development of transportation and utility corridors for public use.

12. To affirm and assert every possible right-of-way established under R.S. 2477 of July 26, 1866, before its repeal by the Federal Land Management Policy Act of October 21, 1976.

They want the state of Alaska to control state and public land, not the federal government, I don’t blame them. States should control their own land, not foolish politicians in Washington.

13. To support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

They believe in the 2nd amendment of the US constitution on keeping and bearing arms, God bless them, couldn’t agree more!

14. To support the complete abolition of the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, so as to restore accountability for public servants.

They want public servants accountable and not immune to scrutiny or lawsuits, we need more accountability in public service, everyone would agree. The AIP is on the right track, no more immunity for public officeholders!

15. To support the rights of parents to privately or home school their children.

They want parents to have the right to home school children, as parents should have the right in every state.

16. To support the privatization of government services.

They want to privatize poorly run government agencies and services. The AIP is a free market, capitalist party, not a big government party, no surprise here.

17. To oppose the borrowing of money by government for any purposes other than for capital improvements.

They believe government should be mostly debt free! Every politician should believe government should be debt FREE! More political need to adopt this stance! Ever heard people complain about the deficit? I wish McCain and Obama believed in debt-free government.

18. To strengthen the traditional family and support individual accountability without government interference or regulation.

They want to strengthen families and moral values, again, God bless them! We need stronger traditional families and strong individual accountability.

19. To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience.

Jurors should judge the law and the facts, according to conscience, not a big deal here either.

20. To support “Jobs for Alaskans…First!”

They support expanding jobs for Alaskans, good for them!!

Missing from this list is secession, since they do not wish to accomplish it. The AIP does NOT advocate Alaska’s succession from the United States, that claim is simply false. The Alaskan Independence Party is nothing more than a conservative Alaskan state party which advocates the interests of Alaska as a state, not for secession.

The AIP does, however, acknowledge that their party was founded with the goal of getting Alaskan’s a right to vote on their statehood, much the same way Puerto Rico has a vote on its statehood. The AIP explains their goal under the goals section of their website, seen here, which is separate from their platform or political positions:

The Alaskan Independence Party’s goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:

1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.
4) Become a State.

The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party’s founding father, Joe Vogler, which was for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.

Note the word “was” since the AIP no longer supports what Joe Vogler stood for with regard to secession. While it seems shocking to anyone in the lower 48 that the AIP would even discuss the topic of secession, Alaska only became a state of the union in 1958, which is 50 short years ago. The state-level politics in Alaska were, and still are very different from what we see here in the lower 48. The goal discusses the desire for a vote as a right of the people, not the desire for secession or the desire to advocate for secession.

The bottom line is that Joe Vogler, the AIP founder, supported Alaska’s secession and despised the United States federal government, however, the current AIP does not advocate secession nor do they include secession as part of their party’s platform. The AIP is not pushing for the vote nor are they pushing for secession, it’s just simply not true.

Furthermore, the AIP recognizes the constitution of the United States as the law of the land, just above the Alaska state constitution. The AIP supports Alaska’s rights as a state, the same rights every state has as part of the United States.

Finally, throughout Alaska, the AIP is simply known as an average third-party organization which advocates for the rights of Alaskans. Todd Palin’s membership was well known when Sarah Palin was mayor and while she was governor and, of course, Alaskans do not see an issue since the AIP is a legitimate state-level third-party in Alaska.

Go read more and research yourself at the Alaskan Independence Party website.

There is no secret, no cover up, and nothing to hide with regard to Todd and Sarah Palin’s association with the Alaskan Independence Party. For the record, Todd Palin is no longer a member of the AIP and Sarah Palin never was.

Myth #2: As mayor, Sarah Palin created or supported a policy which forced rape victims to pay for their own forensic testing.

Truth: Palin did not create this policy, nor did she endorse it as Mayor of Wasilla.

Here is the explanation and discussion of this myth. The background of this claim is that the city of Wasilla, and numerous other municipalities in Alaska, had charged a victim’s insurance company for the cost of forensic analysis related to a rape kit. This practice, which was used rarely as rape rarely occurred in Wasilla, was not instituted by Sarah Palin as Mayor nor did she ever endorse the policy.

LifeNews.com reports on this myth:

At least since September 8 the extreme left has been pushing a lie that Governor, then Mayor, Sarah Palin “charged rape victims for rape kits” performed upon them in the Alaskan town of Wasilla.

The charge stems from a May 22, 2000 article in the local Wasilla paper The Frontiersman and has been spun from a comment made by the Wasilla Police Chief. This comment was somehow made into a Sarah Palin policy.

Evidence of the incident, though, shows no involvement by Palin at all. Still, many Old Media outlets continue to keep illegitimately linking this rape kit billing claim to Sarah Palin, even though the truth is easily discovered.

As mentioned, first up was The Frontiersman story from 2000.

In that story Police Chief Fannon was quoted as standing against legislation that would force local municipalities to pick up the costs of rape kits being performed. In the interview Fannon said that, upon conviction, he favored the criminals being charged for the costs.

The story mentions that Fannon claimed that at the time Wasilla did have a policy that rape victims’ insurance would be charged for the kits being performed but there was no mention that victims themselves were charged and no claim that any ever were.

It should be pointed out that The Frontiersman is the local Wasilla paper, so, consequently, the story did not mention what the policy was in any other Alaskan city outside the area the paper covers other than to say that “most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams.” This last phrase has been focused on by Palin’s detractors and spun from “some municipalities” into “all” (except Wasilla) and presented as some sort of proof that she hates rape victims.

On top of all of that, there are no stories prior to Sarah Palin being offered the billet as VP by John McCain that makes the claim that Palin was informed of or involved in this policy of charging rape victims for rape kits. And, since there was only one rape reported in the city between 1996 and 2000 when the story first came to the papers, it’s no wonder she wasn’t aware of the policy. When would it ever have come up? Does anyone think that any given mayor of any American town is fully cognizant of every single policy or law in their city, especially if it is a law not in use because of a lack of situations to bring it to light?

For her part, Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella has said that the governor “does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test.”

In the end, it seems that this story is a wild exaggeration about Palin’s role in this policy. There is no proof that she ever knew about the policy until long after the situation hit the news, it is untrue that her town was “unique” in blocking the measure, no evidence that she, herself, was notorious for the policy, and no proof that any victims were ever charged for rape kits. In fact, according to the Uniform Crime Report there were only 5 rapes reported in the 6 years she was mayor of Wasilla and four of those happened after the state law in question was passed.

Once again, this rumor was started by rampant speculation and misreporting of the facts, if you can call them that. Sarah Palin never created or condoned the practice of charging rape victims for a forensic exam, it just isn’t true. Furthermore, there was only 1 rape actually reported in Wasilla during the years of 1996 to 2000, while Palin was mayor. Therefore, the issue of rape victims being charged for a forensic kit clearly wasn’t as big of an issue as the media and Palin-haters are now making it out to be.

For the record, I vehemently oppose forcing rape victims to pay for a forensic exam and Sarah Palin opposes it as well.

While we’re on the subject, I’ll use this opportunity to let FactCheck.org debunk even more Palin lies and myths:

* Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.

* She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a “What if?” question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin’s first term.

* Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a “courtesy” when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

* Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska’s schools. She has said that students should be allowed to “debate both sides” of the evolution question, but she also said creationism “doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

Lies, lies, and more lies, debunked! The Palin-haters have tried to destroy her by attaching false rumors to her record. The book-bannig lie has been repeated as well, however, it’s also completely untrue and was a smear started by a liberal blog, not even remotely rooted in fact.

Unfortunately voters today don’t take the opportunity to research things for themselves, rather they rely on the media, which is failing us this election season.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentator for YouDecide2008.com

Today the House finished passing the Senate’s version of the bailout bill worth roughly $700 billion. Or did they? In actuality, the bill will run taxpayers more than $850 BILLION since it’s full of unnecessary pork barrel spending and earmarks. The thing that drives me crazy over this vote is that you and I, Republican and Democrat, vote these politicians into office to speak for us, their constituents, the taxpayers.

Now they have looked us straight in eye and said “Sucker!” This after the American people inundated congress with emails and phone calls expressing anger and disgust against this bailout plan. We elect these people to represent us, the American people. Instead, congress with their average approval rating of 17.8%, or lower depending on the source, did their own thing which will simply lower their approval rating even more. In fact, they’re 10 points lower President Bush, you do the math there. Estimates now say congress will fall to near 10% approval rating following this bailout legislation, can you go much lower than that?

Next question, if these people don’t listen to us, why are they there? If we as Democrats, Republicans, and Independents opposed socializing part of the economic system, why did congress ignore us? Our own representative here in Northern Virginia voted “Yea” on the bailout bill twice. First for the original House version which failed and then “Yea” again on the revised Senate version. This was after days of urging him to do otherwise via email and phone calls. Congressman Wolf is up for reelection, however, I’m no longer inclined to vote for him since I believe he couldn’t care less about what his constituents think, only about going along with the political train conducted by the failing Nancy Pelosi, with her approval rating in the teens, again lower than Bush’s if you’re keeping score.

Look what happened today, let’s review for anyone who missed the insanity. We were told that the bailout bill had to be passed so Wall Street could breathe again and stocks would go back up. Instead, as the bailout bill was passed by the House, stocks took a dive and all ended considerably lower today following this amazing bailout. What happens now? More bailouts? More checks? Please legislators with your infinite wisdom, please tell me who you bailout now?

The passed version of this bill was full of pork but they better add one more condition, complimentary doses of Prozac for Americans feeling depressed and disgusted with congress in general.

Some politicians, such as John McCain, are trying to rename this a “rescue” plan to get away from the word “bailout.” Please, don’t buy the propaganda, this is nothing but a bailout plan for people who don’t deserve a bailout and never did.

So how does this happen? How do these people get in office, gain power, and then ignore their constituents? It’s simple really, we keep electing the same ones over and over again. These politicians, including Republicans and Democrats, Obama and McCain, all thought Americans were not competent enough and did not know enough to support the bailout. As a result, they overrode our say, sometimes 20 to 1 against this bailout, because we Americans are apparently too dumb to understand it all.

I can’t think of better retribution for these politicians other than to find them a new line of work and send them packing. They’ll be shocked working outside the beltway when they only get paid for actually showing up to work and they have to do what their boss tells them. As of now, the American taxpayer is their boss and they could give a rip.

Now for some education. Watch this entire 10 minute YouTube video and be enlightened:

Failed liberal policies of the 90s are to blame for this mess and now we’re being lectured by Obama? Please.

Judge Andrew Napolitano on his radio show, from September 19th, summed up this bailout nonsense with the most eloquent and accurate description I’ve heard thus far. Listen to this clip, it is one of the best you will ever hear concerning this bailout and it applies to both Republicans and Democrats:

How can you argue with Judge Napolitano? Congress has overstepped it’s constitutional authority once again and we the American people are paying the price. What’s more, we have two major presidential candidates who both support the bailout and are both on the same page, against the American people. John McCain and Barack Obama are both fighting over who get’s the most credit for stealing part of our capitalist society and socializing it, this is an amazing milestone we’ve reached.

This was me earlier today, I feel Cody’s pain:

I’ll let the great Neil Cavuto on the Fox Business Network wrap this up for me since he is speaking my mind here:

God save America from the crisis being imposed on us by congress and their incompetence.

At this point, I’m voting for McCain based on the fact that Sarah Palin is one heartbeat away from the Presidency and I believe McCain will actually keep America safe from terrorism. Plus, Obama’s corruption, lies, and scandals make McCain’s shortcomings look non-existent.

Conservative Gal is a regular commentator for YouDecide2008.com

There’s only one way to describe the McCain/Palin rally this morning in Fairfax, VA: mind-blowing!

Starting my day out at 5am so so I would be able to get in the inner circle next to the stage, I was not going to miss Sarah Palin blowing a kiss at me! The best surprise of all was the introduction to McCain and Palin turned out to be Fred Thompson! Anybody familiar with my commentaries knows full well I was a self-described Fred-head from the beginning with Thompson. So this was by far one of the major highlights of the rally for me personally.

Cindy McCain spoke first and, if you can believe this, is everything you imagine a first lady to be, and more. Hearing her speak today, she was very clear, articulate, and confident in her statements and support of her husband. This is similar to our current first lady, Laura Bush.

In some of my past commentaries I think I spoke too harshly of Cindy McCain. Last week at the convention I watched her biographical video which included her work with children and operation SMILE. She’s got more experience in international charitable and social work than Biden and Obama put together. I got such a warm sense from her today and yet she was tuned into the speech and seemed delighted to be there. You’d think hearing the same stump speeches several times a day, you’d be sick of it by now. Plus, boy can that girl rock a pair of Coco Chanel sunglasses!

Here comes the good part. Can you say “Sarah Palin!” This is my own personal bias, as if it could be possible, but I think she’s even more gorgeous in person. But that’s not shocking since RepubliChicks are usually pretty hot. I was taken by how humble her and her husband Todd really are in person.

Her speech was very cookie-cutter but delivered with ferocity. For me personally, the highlight of the speech was when Sarah addressed the veterans who were in the VIP seating. Sarah pointed to a sign in the crowd which said something about being a mother of a soldier and stated that being a mother of soldier, her son Track, she wouldn’t want anyone other than John McCain in the White House because she trusted him to take care of our military.

At one point, after her speech during McCain’s speech, Palin looked over in our direction, about 10 to 15 feet from the podium, at the ladies behind me who had a Sarah Palin elephant made on one their daughters. It was complete with the glasses and hairdo. Sarah grabbed her husband’s hand and pointed at it and they both had a chuckle over it.

You would have thought that you were going to a concert that was sold out for months.

As for McCain, his speech was good and I was surprised at how much I actually did appreciate it. The excitement of the crowd contributed to a very energized McCain. He made a big point of thanking veterans and resolving to support them in every way possible. I feel much more comfortable pulling the lever for McCain considering my past criticism. With the choice of Palin, he has erased some of my fears that he would be playing mainly to moderates and independents. His message of being a “maverick against his own party” is present in order to appeal to them, however, Palin’s conservative principles more than make up for my disagreements with McCain.

The McCain protesters / Obama supporters which showed up, somewhere around 10, were pretty pathetic. The legions of McCain supporters walking by simply drowned them out chanting “U-S-A!” There were no fights, no thing as the opposition was pretty weak. A walking polar bear came up to me while I bought some pins from a veteran. He began to educate me on the plight of global warming. I explained to him that he ought to not bother people or he’d better be able to run fast in that polar bear costume.

One thing that I was awestruck to find were how diverse the age range in the crowd was. There were many people in their 20s, like me, and even younger. Alongside them were working professionals up to senior citizens, all gathered for the event. It dispelled a lot of the notion to me that young people are so bent on Obama, the crowd of 23,000 was full of young voters and supporters.

The energy was absolutely overwhelming. We’ve gone through over a year and a half of the majestic Barack Obama coming to deliver us all. Thankfully that flame is now dying out and has made way for McCain to choose a principled conservative in the form of Sarah Palin. As the Obama campaign seems to be faltering at the sight of Palin, the enthusiasm is running deep and is re-energizing the Republican party as a whole.

We may not have been a part of the Obamacropolis with the Greek columns but we came out in droves to stand 23,000 strong in Fairfax, VA.

Go McCain/Palin!

Where is the Obama vs. McCain discussion? Clearly Obama has been trying to bring the focus of the campaign back to his differences with John McCain, however, it’s delightful to watch the media portray this campaign as if Barack Obama is running solely against Sarah Palin, forget McCain and Biden.

The question begs exploration, how did Palin instantly become the candidate to which Obama is being compared? Nobody is comparing John McCain to Joe Biden, I haven’t even heard Biden’s name in days since Palin rocked the RNC.

Perhaps it has to do with the fact that regardless of what happens in this election, Obama and Palin will be around a lot longer in the political world than either McCain or Biden.

The next question which begs exploration is whether McCain can ride into office on Palin’s coattails? Has Palin become the candidate to beat in this election, much like Obama was just a few short weeks ago?

Every discussion of Palin’s experience involves comparisons to Obama’s experience, which doesn’t bode well for Obama. Picture this, the top name on the Democratic ticket is having to defend his experience against the number 2 spot on the Republican ticket.

Surely even if McCain chose Romney or Pawlenty there would be discussion about the total amount of experience on each ticket, I’m just wondering why so much attention is being given to Palin’s experience versus Obama’s?

I think I can answer that question by pointing to the Obama campaign’s first attack on Sarah Palin minutes after she was picked as McCain’s VP on August 29th:

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.” – Bill Burton, Obama Campaign Spokesman.

The Obama campaign immediately went down the road of questioning experience, a charge they have been defending against since the early primary season. Not only questioning experience, but foreign policy experience no less! Countless democrats including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Bill Clinton all questioned Obama’s experience during the primaries, basically saying he was not qualified to be President. Sound familiar?

What’s more, the statement ignores the fact that she’s a Governor, not just a “former mayor.”

I believe the Obama campaign is responsible for bringing this campaign to where it is, a discussion of Palin’s experience versus Obama’s experience. I can think of a dozen other ways the Obama campaign could have stated their beef with McCain’s choice and let me tell you, I wouldn’t include the word “experience” in any of them.

I’m betting if they could, that statement would be reworded and would be a little more thought out than instantly bringing to light the fact that Obama himself is constantly being attacked with the exact same charge.

Here, let me reword the statement as if it came from McCain’s campaign in a similar fashion against Obama:

“Today, the Democratic Party put a former community organizer from Illinois with zero foreign policy or executive experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.”

The sword cuts both ways, my friends, so be careful how you attack an opponent lest you be caught with your pants down.

To quote Peggy Noonan:

Because she jumbles up so many cultural categories, because she is a feminist not in the Yale Gender Studies sense but the How Do I Reload This Thang way, because she is a woman who in style, history, moxie and femininity is exactly like a normal American feminist and not an Abstract Theory feminist; because she wears makeup and heels and eats mooseburgers and is Alaska Tough, as Time magazine put it; because she is conservative, and pro-2nd Amendment and pro-life; and because conservatives can smell this sort of thing — who is really one of them and who is not — and will fight to the death for one of their beleaguered own; because of all of this she is a real and present danger to the American left, and to the Obama candidacy.

Women everywhere have been standing up for Palin and rejecting the liberal media establishment’s sexist rhetoric and criticism:

The liberal media’s criticism comes on the heels of some sexist criticism I’ve received lately. So as you can imagine, I’m rather revved up by the issue.

Here’s my biggest question: Why can’t these pro-choice liberal women in the media give Mrs. Palin the decency of respecting her choices? Isn’t that the concept of “choice,” that women have a choice which needs to be respected? Mrs. Palin’s daughter, Bristol, chose life for her unborn baby which is another choice that should be respected.

Here’s yet another report on the sexism bias against Mrs. Palin:

Some in the media question her ability as a Vice President because of the fact that she has dared to have children, a loving husband, and a career all at the same time.

Next question: Where was the concern when Joe Biden became a senator after his wife was tragically killed?

Here’s a quote from a New York Post story covering the sexism against Palin:

HOLY hoop skirts: When did the clock tick back to 1958?

When Joe Biden tragically lost his wife and infant daughter in a car wreck in 1972, not a single colleague, friend or competitor advised him to quit his newly won Senate seat to raise his two little surviving sons.

Rather, he was sworn into office from the injured boys’ bedside, and took to commuting an hour and a half each way from Delaware to Washington. And when Biden’s second wife gave birth to a daughter, no one thought to ask him to step aside and stay home.

They all do it. John Kennedy did it; so did Barack Obama: Men run for office and serve in elected positions while creating small children without ever being patronized as “super dads” or “multi-taskers.”

Nor are they penalized, ridiculed or dismissed for ignoring their kids. They’re good dads.

If Sarah Palin, tapped as John McCain’s running mate, were a man, it’s unlikely we’d even be having this conversation. (A man, or a Democrat.)

Has feminism not fought to give women the ability to pursue a professional career alongside their male counterparts? Instead I have watched liberal female reporters, mainly at CNN, sit and question whether or not Palin considered her family when she accepted the VP position. Well my question to them, most of whom probably also have children, is did anyone question your decision to become a professional news anchor with regard to your children at home? Of course not, but you won’t give Mrs. Palin the same courtesy simply because you’re all afraid of her politics.

The liberal media establishment is trashing Sarah Palin not because of her issues, her record, or her qualifications. They are trashing Mrs. Palin because she is a strong, conservative woman who threatens the liberal feminist agenda. This in the same token as Clarence Thomas during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing when he was trashed for being a conservative African-American. Mr. Thomas was supremely qualified with impeccable credentials, yet he didn’t fit the liberal template for an African-American so he was demonized by the liberal media establishment.

Here’s to Sarah Palin overcoming the liberal media assault and triumphing similarly to Clarence Thomas. God bless the Republican Party for standing with Mrs. Palin and rejecting the sexism which the Democratic Party allowed to run rampant against Hillary
Clinton. In closing, liberals keep saying she’s a “scary one heartbeat away from the Presidency”, DUH!!! that’s the only reason why I’m voting for John McCain!!!

As stated above in the first video by Renee Amoore, we’re Republican women, we know what we’re doing, we know who we are, we’re not gonna take it, and we will get with you, when you keep messing with us, you have a good day!

In case you haven’t seen it, take a gander below:

The ad from Hilton was in response to this McCain ad:

I was quite disgusted that McCain would use images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton to begin with when trying to paint Obama as a liberal celebrity. Clearly those two women don’t have all their ducks in a row and seem to be missing a few marbles from the bag, if you get my drift.

The Hilton ad, however, is pretty funny. I do agree with some of her positions such as leaving a high carbon footprint by flying to Maui for the best tan. Her bipartisan energy plan makes sense as well along with the tax incentives for auto makers. In fact, her positions may be clearer than the actual candidate’s positions. Of course, I also support painting the White House pink but anyone who knows me probably already knew that.

I’m not the only one who found it provocative, according to Fox News it’s been picked up by a congressman who mentioned Paris Hilton during a debate:

Move over T. Boone Pickens. It’s Paris Hilton’s turn to steer the energy debate.

Texas Rep. Michael Burgess gave the socialite unexpected clout in the raging policy feud on Capitol Hill on Thursday, urging colleagues to consider the energy plan she proposed in a mock campaign ad.

“Even Paris Hilton had an energy plan that she’s talking about,” Burgess told reporters, as he and other House Republicans continued to protest Democrats who blocked a vote on offshore oil drilling before breaking for a five-week recess.

“Well, let’s bring up the Paris Hilton plan,” Burgess said.

There may have been just a trace of sincerity to that.

McCain and Obama are both boring, I think I’ve found my candidate.

The article below is lengthy so to save you eyes, you can listen to the entire statement in audio form here:

Dave Ramsey Audio
(Click Play to Listen)

Here is the entire article from Dave Ramsey should you want to read it:

Butt Scratching and Bass Fishing
by Dave Ramsey

A couple of weeks ago, I worked late like I sometimes need to do to run my business. It was a nice Tennessee summer evening, and I was enjoying the drive home. About 7:30, as I pulled to a stop light a few blocks from my office, I noticed a light on in the corner office of a friend’s office building. Through the twilight I could make out my friend’s silhouette as he bent over his desk. Being a fellow entrepreneur, I knew what he was doing.

He was pouring over some receivables. Some turkey hadn’t paid him, and he was trying to make his accounts balance so he would have the cash to make it another day. In that instant, I had a flashback to some of the ridiculous statements I’ve been hearing on the talking-head news channels and from some individuals during this political year. And I’ll be honest—I instantly felt the heat of anger flow through my body.

Let me tell you why. You see, my friend who I saw working late—we’ll call him Henry—is a great guy. He’s what you want your son to grow up to be. He loves God, his country, his wife, and his kids. He didn’t have the academic advantage of attending a big-name university. Instead, he started installing heating and air systems as a grunt laborer after he graduated from high school. He was and is a very hard and diligent worker, and before long, the boss taught him the trade. But when he was 24, after 6 years of service, the company he was working for got into financial trouble and laid him off.

Henry still had his tools, so he bought an old pickup to haul around his materials and tools, and suddenly he was in business. He knew about heating and air-conditioning, but not about business, so he made a lot of mistakes.

He persisted. He took accounting and management at the community college to learn about business. He started reading books on business, HVAC, marriage, kids, God, and anything else someone he respected recommended. Today he is one of the best-read men I know. Soon, because of his fabulous service and fair prices, he developed a great reputation, and his little business began to grow. Henry started 15 years ago, and now he has 17 employees whose families are fed because he does a great job. He is in church on Sunday and seldom misses his kids’ Little League games. Sometimes he has to miss a game because some poor soul has their AC go out in the 96-degree Tennessee summer heat, but Henry makes sure they are served. He is, by all standards, a good man. He is, by all standards, what makes America great.

Henry and I are friends, and so he asked me some financial questions last year. I learned in the process that his personal taxable income last year was $328,000. I smiled with pride for this 70-hour a week guy because he is living the dream.

At the stop light that evening, I also thought of another guy I know—and that is where the anger flash came from. We will call him John. While John does not have the same drive Henry has, I can say that he, too, is a good man.

John also graduated from high school and did not attend a big-name university. He went to work at a local factory 15 years ago. When 5:00pm comes around, John has probably already made it to his car in the parking lot. He comes in 5 minutes late, takes frequent breaks, and leaves 5 minutes early. However, to his credit, he is steady and works hard.

Over the years, due to his steadiness and seniority, he has worked his way up to about $75,000 per year in that same factory. He seldom misses his kid’s ballgames, but most nights you will find him in front of the TV where he has become an expert on “American Idol,” “The Biggest Loser,” and who got thrown off the island. When he is not in front of the TV, he spends a LOT of time and money bass fishing on our local lake. He never works over 40 hours a week and hasn’t read a non-fiction book since high school.
This is America, and there is nothing wrong with either set of choices. Nothing wrong, that is, until the politicians and socialists get involved.

I have seen several elitist people on the talking-head channels make the statement lately that people making over $250,000 per year have a “moral imperative” to pay more in taxes to take care of the country’s problems. This is not only infuriating—it is economically, spiritually, and morally crazy! Where in the world do these twits get off saying that Henry should be punished for his diligence? If you are John, where do you get off trying to take Henry’s hard-earned money away from him in the name of
your misguided “fairness”? If you want to sit on the lake, drink beer, scratch your butt, and bass fish, that is perfectly fine with me. I am not against any of those activities and have engaged in some of them myself at one time or another. But you HAVE NO RIGHT to talk about “moral imperatives” about what other people have earned due to their diligence. That money is not yours! You want some money? Go earn some! Get up, leave the cave, kill something, and drag it home.

We are in a dangerous place in our country today. A segment of our population has decided that it is the government’s job to provide all of their protection, provision, and prosperity. This segment has figured out that government doesn’t have the money to give them everything they want, so somebody else has to pay for it. That is how the “politics of envy” was born. “Tax the rich” has become the mantra of the left, and this political season it has been falsely dubbed a “moral imperative.”

Ninety percent of America’s millionaires are first-generation rich. They are Henry. To tax them because you think it is a “moral imperative” is legalizing governmental theft from our brightest, most charitable, and most productive citizens.

If I can get a law passed that says you must surrender all your cars to the government because it is the “moral imperative” of anyone who owns cars to support the latest governmental program, that would be a violation of private property rights and simply morally wrong. This new “moral imperative” to redistribute wealth is no different from that. It’s the SAME THING!

Please, America, re-think the politics of envy! You are sowing the seeds of our destruction when you punish the Henrys of our culture.

If you think taxing the populace to support government programs is the best way—and I don’t—then at least tax every single person the same! There are very few Henrys out here who would squawk much about paying a set percentage of their income—if everyone else did, too. But this idea of some buttscratching bass fisherman saying government should tax his neighbor and not him—just because his neighbor has succeeded—must stop.

So the next time an elitist media talking-head starts telling you it is the moral imperative of our culture to tax my friend Henry, change the channel.

The next time you see someone wealthy who feels guilty and is preaching the politics of envy, change the channel.

The next time you see some celebrity who feels guilt over their income preaching socialism, change the channel.

And the next time you run into a misguided, butt-scratching bass fisherman who says the evil rich people in our culture should have their private property confiscated because that is fair… well just shake your head walk away—and make sure to vote against his candidate.

If he and his type win, God help America.

© The Lampo Group, Inc. all rights reserved.

I felt that this was a prime critique of the political rhetoric we’ve been hearing this entire election season. Politicians act like people become wealthy by some immoral act other than working hard and making money. How can we as voters allow someone to be so reckless with our money?

Why is it OK to confiscate money and not other material things? Would it be right for the government to force someone with a large 28,000 square foot John Edwards size house to open portions of his home to people who own smaller homes out of fairness? Should families with 3 cars be forced to give one up for families who have 1 car, out of fairness? If not, then why is it OK for the government to take money out of your wallet in the same fashion?

If you’re not familiar with Dave Ramsey, you need to check him out here.

The point in all this is that even some Democrats expressed worry over pushing a bigger undue tax burden on the American people while at the same time they march the oil executives to Capital Hill over the price of gas! Personally I’d be in favor of the oil companies subpoenaing congress for once, then we could expose the real reason gas is $4 per gallon. Who gives congress the right to subpoena a particular industry that ticks them off every other week?

Look at these intellectually gifted legislators:

Did you see her colleagues to the right snickering because even they found it comical? Please, people who work 3 days a week on taxpayer money shouldn’t lecture anyone on “obscene salaries.”

The threat of higher taxes hasn’t stopped one liberal senator from supporting such a bill wholeheartedly. That would be none other than current presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain. That’s right, McCain supports such legislation creating a “cap and trade” system over carbon emissions. In theory, businesses would have a limited amount of “carbon emissions” every year. Upon reaching that cap, they’d have to purchase more and/or purchase them from businesses who haven’t used all theirs. It amounts to a completely regressive tax and cost increase which will hurt the lowest income earners the most, also known as the people Democrats claim to care about.

What is most irritating about this scenario is that you cannot name a single presidential candidate who has not completely lost his or her mind of the issue of “climate change,” a.k.a natural climate cycles which mankind cannot do anything about.

What irks me more is that should John McCain become president, conservatism will be kicked to the curb by just about every Washington politician, save a few who will not be welcome at the White House anymore. At this point I’m willing to concede four years to the Democrats so they can shove this “green” hoax on the American people and take the blame when we wake up and realize we’ve been duped.

Here’s another point, I watch these politicians scream all day long about global warming and the dangerous, utterly destructive forces of “climate change.” Then I watch them continue to fly and drive while they lecture everyone else to sell their cars and ride bikes. The hypocrisy is beyond measure. John McCain didn’t even bother to vote on the recent Lieberman-Warner bill yet he tells us government must solve the problem and it’s such a grave threat. So grave, Senator McCain, you were like, “eh, I’ll just skip it since I’m just trying to hoodwink people anyways, no need to fly all the way back to DC to earn my obscene salary…”

See, the thing is, if these politicians trying to sell us the abominable hoax known as global warming, you’d think they would at least pretend like they were willing to change their own lives. Wait, that’s right, they buy carbon “credits,” the next big hoax to be sprung on the American people. So you’re telling me if you can afford to waste your money on pretending that carbon credits actually make a difference, you have the permission to have a ridiculously huge “carbon footprint” while the the rest of us are supposed to ride bikes and turn our A/C down 5 degrees?

Where is the voice of reason to counter the global warming hysteria? Will we end up like the UK which has imposed a “cap and trade” system on individual people? Will our taxes be higher to offset our carbon footprint? Does anyone care to speak out against this complete and utter falsity which will be shoved down everyone’s throat by each of the presidential candidates?

There is no conservative voice, no conservative leader to vote for in 2008. I digress, no need to go down that road. Conservatives need to buck up and look down the political road to the 2010 midterm elections.

Here’s my poll question, regardless of your political views:

This, directly from the transcript on his website, is what he was supposedly going to say:

“On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes, our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.”

This is what the Harvard-educated, articulate, intelligent Democratic candidate actually said:

“On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes—and I see many of them in the audience here today—our sense of patriotism is particularly strong”

Don’t believe me? Watch the video:

Is this really somebody we want to representing our country? He had a prepared speech for God’s sake and he couldn’t stick to it. Instead, he ad-libbed this line about seeing some of our “fallen heroes” in the audience with him.

At first, I though it must be a slip of the tongue, however after reviewing the clip and the transcript, all he had to do was read it off a cue card. He gaffed when actually trying to think for himself and add his own pizazz, his own flair. Unfortunately he sounded like Cole Sear.

I really think somebody needs to school him on what Memorial Day stands for. Let’s hope someone gives him a little lesson before July 4th. If he screws that up, he’s got Labor Day to work on. Just some practice reading the teleprompter and not adding his own ingenious insights will do.

First it was his stance against flag pins. Then there was an issue with not putting his hand over his heart while saying the pledge of allegiance. Now he doesn’t even know what Memorial Day stands for. Did they not teach him anything at Harvard? But wait, I guess patriotism and the history of America is not really in the oppressive liberal orthodoxy lesson plans of our institutions of “higher learning.”

It just astonishes me that people are convinced he’s the candidate to beat.

Now, switching gears, Hillary Clinton made a comment last week that she was staying in the race due to the possibility of anything, and I mean anything happening before June. In this case, she mentioned the possibility of assassination by bringing up Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The Obama campaign and the media created a firestorm over the issue which I thought was rather trumped up and over the top.

Video in case you missed it:

Keep in the mind, the last two Presidents shot were both white men, plus Bobby Kennedy who was a candidate, so don’t even begin playing the race card on the issue. Plus, we shouldn’t forget who has a history of deploying race on almost every issue in this campaign:

One more reason to hate the oil companies, black men stand a greater chance of getting shot while pumping gas, at least according to Michelle Obama. Furthermore, by the same logic, white people must be immune from gunfire at gas stations, which should sit well with the victims of the 2002 Washington, DC sniper attacks.

This whole issue is blown out of proportion, every presidential candidate, and public figure for that matter, stands the risk of being attacked in some form by some wacko. Of course it’s scary, but to not mention it would be politically correct, which is nonsense. Does John McCain or Hillary Clinton fair a greater chance of not being targeted? I highly doubt it. What about our current President Bush, a bunch of liberal kooks seem to really hate him, I’d be more concerned for his life.

In the end, it’s just easier to play the race card on the issue for more sympathy votes despite the fact that it’s a historical reference.

Don’t kid yourself, should Clinton take the nomination at this point, madness it will be. The liberal groups are urging mass riots at the Democratic convention should Obama not become the nominee at this point. Think I’m kidding, check out Re-create ‘68 and see for yourself. Here’s the goal of the organization:

Welcome to the “Re-create 68″ website, your virtual activists’ Convergence Center for the Denver Democratic National Convention of 2008. This website was created for all the grassroots people who are tired of being sold out by the Democratic Party.

R-68 agrees with the proposition, POTESTAS IN POPULO, “all power comes from the people.” What stands between the people and power are the party machines. The parties were devised as a means to represent the people. Today they represent nobody, not even party members, but only party bureaucracy. The people have been left without appropriate institutions for their representation. We intend to create those institutions!

Join us in the streets of Denver as we resist a two-party system that allows imperialism and racism to continue unrestrained.

I find this whole notion utterly hysterical as these liberal loons will basically be doing exactly what pundits like Rush would like them to do, continually embarrass and expose the Democratic Party for what it is.

As fun as it is contemplating the thought of liberal activists shutting down the Denver convention, let me get back to my point. Rush succeeded so strongly with “Operation Chaos” that he has liberal pundits and the Obama campaign trying to convince everyone that, had it not been for Rush, Obama would have won Indiana. They’re not even trying to marginalize him, they are using it as a reasoning for why Obama lost by less than 20,000 votes.

The Huffington Post, bastion of incoherent liberalism that it is, even went out on a limb to discuss the effects of “Operation Chaos” at length. For example, this post which explains it using the exit polls:

Did Rush Limbaugh actually impact the Democratic primary?

The loud-mouthed radio talk show host has been encouraging Republicans to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton to continue the “chaos” in the Democratic race. And a sampling of some key exit poll information suggests he may, to a certain extent, be having an effect.

Though at the end they concede his effect may have been minimal, the fact that they’re acknowledging and crediting it is victory enough.

Do a little more searching and you’ll find numerous stories like this one:

Those looking for evidence of Limbaugh’s influence pointed to Clinton’s edge among Republicans in Indiana and North Carolina. In Indiana, 10 percent of Democratic primary voters described themselves as Republicans, a higher rate than in any state but Mississippi, and they went for Clinton by eight percentage points, according to exit polls. In North Carolina, they were 5 percent of the electorate, and went for her by 29 points.

Finally, as even more evidence that the media along with the Obama campaign are crediting Rush with Clinton’s victory, Chris Matthews unloaded on any Republican voter who dared meddle in the Democratic Primary:

What a crock! Where were these people when liberal activists were urging Democrat voters to crossover and vote for Mitt Romney in Michigan? Remember, less than a few short months ago, The Daily Kos was urging voters to extend the Republican Primary by giving Romney a victory in Michigan, here’s the the quote from Kos:

“(W)e want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us,” Kos writes. “We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan……(N)ot only do we help keep their field fragmented, but we also pollute Romney’s victory.”

Rush simply succeeded where the Daily Kos failed. So to Chris Matthews, and anyone else criticizing Rush, chew on that one. In the same fashion, nobody has been able to destroy Obama the way Clinton has. In essence, Democrats should be more upset that Clinton is allowing her candidacy to be used by Rush as a way to continue attacking Obama.

Clinton, for her part, has played the situation well. She’s joked about it and played it off cool as a cucumber. However, secretly I’m sure she’s thanking God everyday that “Operation Chaos” is out their keeping her campaign alive. No campaign advertising funds in the world could pay for the free votes Rush is tossing her way.

So kudos to Rush who singlehandedly save Hillary Clinton’s candidacy Tuesday night in Indiana. Plus, we also learned that when moderates and independents choose the Republican nominee, the pendulum can equally swing the other way.

The bottom line is that the success of “Operation Chaos” simply shows the state of this presidential race: pure chaos. There are weak candidates full of hope, change, and other empty crap they’re continually putting forth. Republicans are disgusted with McCain, Democrats are disgusted with the superdelegate system, perhaps this is the year of the third-party candidate.

Of course, Obama, Clinton, and McCain, all had to sign on to some type of “bailout” for homeowners suffering from a choice to not read their mortgage terms. Had this not been an insane election year, I’m doubting we’d have as much ridiculousness amongst the politicians. Of course you always have the nuts running around trying to handout taxpayer money but it’s nowhere near the Niagara Falls-like rush that occurs during a presidential election.

Changing the subject a bit, global warming has been a big topic this election cycle as well. So big in fact, that we all watch Obama, Clinton, and McCain talk about it and then get back on their buses, SUVs, and private jets to go to another event and tell more people about the “plight” of global warming. Never mind that the winter of 2007-2008 was one of the coldest on record, but don’t let facts get in the way of a good liberal argument. Furthermore, a new report showed NASA’s satellites recording a bout of global cooling:

A century of solar warming has ended; our planet is cooling.

NASA’s eight weather satellites recorded global cooling of .7 degree Celsius during the last year. The temperature decline nearly erased the one degree Celsius global warming of the previous 100 years.

In addition, record cold temperatures were recorded during the year in Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Chile, and Argentina. China had its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad experienced its first snow in recorded history. The winter snow coverage in North America was the most in 50 years.

The current global cooling is consistent with the two-year absence of sunspot activity observed by Kenneth Tapping, a solar researcher for Canada’s National Research Council. Tapping warns that a three-year succession of no sunspots, called a Maunder Minimum, has invariably preceded an extended period of cooling.

The Maunder Minimum of 1650, the most recent, was followed by 35 frigid winters, summers, major crop failures and famine.

Will Obama, Clinton, or McCain acknowledge the slightest possibility that our planet naturally warms and cools? Of course not, that would be downright sane and logical.

Unfortunately for anyone who enjoys intellectual honesty, scientific freedom, and the examination of facts, all three of the current candidates believe in man-made global warming and they believe it’s the biggest threat currently facing mankind. That alone is proof enough that we basically have three Democrats remaining as candidates now. Ignore the fact that the earth has gone through cooling and warming for thousands of years, it doesn’t fit into the latest media fad.

Furthermore, because politicians, including our lovely presidential candidates, have all lost their friggin’ minds, I soon will not be able to purchase the type of light bulb I prefer. Why is this you ask? Well it’s a little known fact that recent legislation will soon outlaw the incandescent bulb and force us all to buy mercury-containing compact fluorescent (CFL) bulbs. Do keep in mind that if the CFL bulb should break, you are to leave the room for an hour and let the mercury dissipate. That’s not a joke or exaggeration either. Obama, Clinton, and McCain all seem to be just peachy with this and buy into the insanity.

My point in all this, besides ranting, is that I am ready for the election to be held today. Either way we’re all going to be screwed into environmental fascism. Why is that liberals scream bloody murder over the Bush administration allegedly “stealing their freedom” yet they swoon with glee when the federal government literally does steal their freedom by telling them what kind of light bulb they can buy, what kind of gasoline they can use, or what kind of car they can drive?

Then again, that’s right, stealing our freedom is fine with liberals as long as it fits their agenda. In the case of the ‘08 election, each candidate supports the environmental fascism that is slowly coming upon us. That is, unless, the fraudulent hucksters pushing the global warming propaganda are exposed as the charlatans they truly are.

As such, I implore John McCain to drop his bid for the presidency and immediately instruct his delegates to support Fred Thompson.