Direct from the Obama 08 website:
The three World Trade Center buildings were demolished by professionals, not by a motley crew of 19 Arabs under the direction of one Osama bin Laden
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rubenbotello/gGBNMN
The three World Trade Center buildings were demolished by professionals, not by a motley crew of 19 Arabs under the direction of one Osama bin Laden who was dying if not already dead in the Middle East at the time (9/11/01). The real question is "Who are these professionals who demolished the buildings and who paid them?" It was an inside job, folks. Ya think Hillary or McCain will chase them down?
Certainly, the oil industry had the most to gain from this atrocity and you can follow its blood money right into the Oval Office where its puppet politicians covered up the truth to cover up the lies they used to invade Iraq. Invasion and occupation of Iraq to save them from themselves, yeh right. It should remind you of the invasion and occupation of the Americas to save the Indians from ourselves, too.
"War is a racket. It always has been," perhaps the most decorated Major General in Marine Corps history once said.
"I was a high class muscleman for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers," USMC General Smedley Butler confessed. "In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism." (see http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm)
Ruben at http://www.blazingstar.org/
*****
NOTE: What else can we expect from the website of Barack Obama? What kind of a candidate would allow anyone to post on their main website without moderation? We have had the New Black Panther party on his website so nothing should surprise. Would it still be there if people hadn't complained? Have voters really looked at Obama or are they caught up in his "CHANGE" that he started talking about during the Reagan Presidency? What kind of "CHANGE" are we talking about is what we would like to know. If this is an example, then we do not need Obama's kind of "CHANGE!"
Monday, March 31, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Is Barack Obama a Muslim wolf in Christian wool?
By Reuven Koret
March 27, 2008
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12745.htm
The glib handling of criticism of his relationship with the anti-American ("God Damn America!") and anti-Israel ("a dirty word for Negroes") Reverend James Wright may have bought him a little time. But the legacy of dissimulation about his long-concealed identity is about to come crashing down around the ears of Barack Hussein Obama, courtesy of the assembled testimony of his family, friends, classmates and teachers.
The accumulated research indicates that Obama was in his childhood a devout Muslim, the son of a devout Muslim, the step-son of a devout Muslim and the grandson and namesake ("Hussein") of a devout Muslim. He was registered in school as a Muslim and demonstrated his ability to chant praise to Allah in impressive Arab-accented tones even as an adult. Just as he has not disavowed his "uncle" Jeremiah, neither has he disavowed his Muslim faith that he was born into, raised with, celebrated and never abandoned. He just covered it over with a thin veneer of his own self-styled "Christianity."
Although as an adult he would register as a Christian, and occasionally attend a Christian Church (but apparently not often enough to listen to the preaching of his pastor, or so he would claim) this was a necessary step for a man who from earliest boyhood has nurtured the precocious ambition to be President of the United States.
He was entered into the Roman Catholic, Franciscus Assisi Primary School, in Jakarta, Indonesia, on January 1, 1968, registered under the name Barry Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen whose religion was listed as Islam. Catholic schools accept non-Catholics worldwide. Non-Catholic students are typically excused from religious instruction and ceremony.
In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.'"Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07]
Three years later, in 1971, Obama enrolled in the Besuki Primary School, a government school, as Barry Soetoro, Muslim. In third grade, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want To Be a President.' His third grade teacher: Fermina Katarina Sinaga "asked her class to write an essay titled 'My dream: What I want to be in the future.' Senator Obama wrote 'I want to be a President,' she said." [The Los Angeles Times, 3/15/07]
All Indonesian students are required to study religion at school and a young Barry Soetoro, being a Muslim, would have been required to study Islam daily in school.
He would have been taught to read and write Arabic, to recite his prayers properly, to read and recite from the Quran and to study the laws of Islam.
In his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," Obama mentions studying the Koran and describes the public school as "a Muslim school."
"In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies."
According to Tine Hahiyary, one of Obama's teachers and the principal from 1971 through 1989, Barry actively took part in the Islamic religious lessons during his time at the school. "I remembered that he had studied "mengaji" (recitation of the Quran)" Tine said.
The author of the Laotze blog writes from Jakarta: "The actual usage of the word 'mengaji' in Indonesian and Malaysian societies means the study of learning to recite the Quran in the Arabic language rather than the native tongue. "Mengagi" is a word and a term that is accorded the highest value and status in the mindset of fundamentalist societies here in Southeast Asia. To put it quite simply, 'mengaji classes' are not something that a non practicing or so-called moderate Muslim family would ever send their child to. To put this in a Christian context, this is something above and beyond simply enrolling your child in Sunday school classes."
"The fact that Obama had attended mengaji classes is well known in Indonesia and has left many there wondering just when Obama is going to come out of the closet." "
As I've stated before, the evidence seems to quite clearly show that both Ann Dunham and her husband Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo were in fact devout Muslims themselves and they raised their son as such."
The Obama Campaign told the LA Times he wasn't a "practicing Muslim." (3/14/2007). But his official website says: "Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, And Is a Committed Christian" (11/12/2007) That's not what his friends and classmates have said. Classmate Rony Amiris describes young Barry as enjoying playing football and marbles and of being a very devout Muslim. Amir said, "Barry was previously quite religious in Islam. We previously often asked him to the prayer room close to the house. If he was wearing a sarong, he looked funny," said Rony.
Amiris, now the manager of Bank Mandiri, Jakarta, recently said, "Barry was previously quite religious in Islam. His birth father, Barack Hussein Obama was a Muslim economist from Kenya. Before marrying Ann Dunham, Hussein Obama was married to a woman from Kenya who had seven children. All the relatives of Barry's father were very devout Muslims"
Emirsyah Satar, CEO of Garuda Indonesia, was quoted as saying, "He (Obama) was often in the prayer room wearing a 'sarong', at that time."
"He was quite religious in Islam but only after marrying Michelle, he changed his religion." So Obama, according to his classmates and friends was a Muslim until the confluence of love and ambitious, caused him to adopt the cloak of Christianity: to marry Michelle and to run for President of the United States.
In "Dreams," Obama sheds light on his formative years and the political views of his mother, an anthropologist and Islamophile who hated America and subsequently "went native." (It was her mother -- Barry's "other" grandmother who cared for him in his druggie teenage years -- that he would describe as a "typical white person" who was, he said scoldingly, fearful of black men and prone to making stereotypical racial remarks.)
Obama Senior also had three sons by another woman who are all Muslim. Although Obama claims Senior was an atheist, Senior was buried as a Muslim.
Barack Obama's brother Roy opted for Islam over Christianity, as the Senator recounted in his book when describing his 1992 wedding. "The person who made me proudest of all," Obama wrote, "was Roy. Actually, now we call him Abongo, his Luo name, for two years ago he decided to reassert his African heritage. He converted to Islam, and has sworn off pork and tobacco and alcohol."Abongo "argues that the black man must "liberate himself from the poisoning influences of European culture." He urged his younger brother to embrace his African heritage.
In Kenya while he was a Senator, Obama stumped for his cousin, opposition leader Raila Odinga, the son of Senior's sister, a direct first cousin and nephew of Obama's father.
On August 29, 2007, Raila Odinga and Shiekh Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya signed a Memorandum of Understanding in which it pledges the support of Kenyan Moslems for Raila's election. In return, as President of Kenya, Raila agrees ... within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions [and] within one year to facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters -- everywhere in Kenya, not just in "Muslim declared regions" -- and to popularize Islam, the only true religion ... by ordering every primary school in Kenya in the regions to conduct daily Madrassa classes.
In an interview with the New York Times, published on April 30th, Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's younger half sister, told the Times, "My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim."
Obama describes his new found "Christian" faith as: (1) Suspicious of dogma (2) Without any monopoly on the truth (3) Nontransferable to others (4) Infused with a big healthy dose of doubt, and (5) Indulgent of and compatible with all other religions.
On February 27th, speaking to Kristof of The New York Times, Barack Hussein Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset."
In an interview with Nicholas Kristof, published in The New York Times, Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent."
The opening lines of the Adhan (Azaan) is the Shahada: "Allah is Supreme!
Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! I witness that there is no god but Allah I witness that there is no god but Allah I witness that Muhammad is his prophet? "
According to Islamic scholars, reciting the Shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith, makes one a Muslim. This simple yet profound statement expresses a Muslim's complete acceptance of, and total commitment to, the message of Islam. Obama chanted it with pride and finesse.
An American Expat in Southeast Asia blog, written by an American who has lived in Indonesia for 20 years and has met with both the Taliban and al-Qaeda, contains the following:
"Barack Hussein Obama might have convinced some Americans that he is no longer a Muslim, but so far he has not convinced many in the world's most populous Muslim country who still see him as a Muslim and a crusader for Islam and world peace."
"Barack Hussein Obama's race, his staunch opposition to the war in Iraq, his sympathy to Islam and Muslims worldwide and his Muslim heritage receive the Indonesian media coverage. There is no mention of his apostasy."
"A good example of how some of the Indonesian media is reporting on Obama's religion can be found in the following."
"What I found interesting in the article was the use of the word 'mengaku' when refering to Obama's conversion from Islam to Christianity. The word 'mengaku' in Indonesian means "claimed" and as such leaves the insinuation to the native Indonesian reader being that Obama might actually still be a Muslim.
But this is how Indonesians see Obama, they don't see him as an apostate at all, they see him as a crusader for the cause of Islam."
Obama wants it both ways, has always wanted it both ways. Black and white, Indonesian and American, Muslim and Christian. He loves playing one off the other, using one to hide the other even as the traces of the truth may be assembled to reveal the whole cloth of deception and self-promotion he has been weaving so skillfully since his childhood. No wonder he is a man of change. He IS a changeling, a veritable chameleon, adapting and amending his life story to fit the circumstances.
The charm may have worked once. It still works on some. It won't work forever in the age of the Internet. The fog of ambiguity and dissimulation is dissipated by the harsh, unforgiving and scrutiny of the blogosphere and its unlimited access to historical facts and time-stamped testimony.
Many have been puzzled why Obama could claim not to be familiar with Wright's rants. It turns out the Trinity Church, like many African-American churches, happily accepts believing Muslims within its congregation. And evidently many Muslims have no problems surrounding themselves with an anti-American, anti-Israel preacher who week in and week out wins the amens of his adoring congregation.
On Feb 15/08, Usama K. Dakdok, President of The Straight Way of Grace Ministry called Obama's Church and reported the following conversation: " I then asked the person who answered what I needed to do to join. She told me that I needed to attend two Sunday School classes in a row and then I would walk the aisle. I replied, "That sounds easy. One last question please. If I am Muslim and I believe in the Prophet Mohammed, peace be unto him and I also believe in Jesus, peace be unto him, do I have to give up my Islamic faith to be a member in your church? She answered: "No, we have many Muslim members in our church."
Indeed.
Credit for these reports and revelations -- assembling the statements of those who love and admire Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama -- belong primarily to the writers, researchers, and journalists cited in and contributing to the above references. Special hat tip to Ted Belman of Israpundit for putting most of the pieces together. One can be sure that more, much more, is on the way, before the first black muslim president enters the White House. Or not.
*****
Note:
Who are the Democrats electing as their nominee? Are they so intent on having a liberal represent their party that they have thrown caution to the wind with nominating someone fairly new on the scene with a Muslim background. What does this say about today's Democrat Party? More articles like this will be posted as they are found to show who is the 'real' Obama.
My bold and highlight!
March 27, 2008
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12745.htm
The glib handling of criticism of his relationship with the anti-American ("God Damn America!") and anti-Israel ("a dirty word for Negroes") Reverend James Wright may have bought him a little time. But the legacy of dissimulation about his long-concealed identity is about to come crashing down around the ears of Barack Hussein Obama, courtesy of the assembled testimony of his family, friends, classmates and teachers.
The accumulated research indicates that Obama was in his childhood a devout Muslim, the son of a devout Muslim, the step-son of a devout Muslim and the grandson and namesake ("Hussein") of a devout Muslim. He was registered in school as a Muslim and demonstrated his ability to chant praise to Allah in impressive Arab-accented tones even as an adult. Just as he has not disavowed his "uncle" Jeremiah, neither has he disavowed his Muslim faith that he was born into, raised with, celebrated and never abandoned. He just covered it over with a thin veneer of his own self-styled "Christianity."
Although as an adult he would register as a Christian, and occasionally attend a Christian Church (but apparently not often enough to listen to the preaching of his pastor, or so he would claim) this was a necessary step for a man who from earliest boyhood has nurtured the precocious ambition to be President of the United States.
He was entered into the Roman Catholic, Franciscus Assisi Primary School, in Jakarta, Indonesia, on January 1, 1968, registered under the name Barry Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen whose religion was listed as Islam. Catholic schools accept non-Catholics worldwide. Non-Catholic students are typically excused from religious instruction and ceremony.
In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.'"Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07]
Three years later, in 1971, Obama enrolled in the Besuki Primary School, a government school, as Barry Soetoro, Muslim. In third grade, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want To Be a President.' His third grade teacher: Fermina Katarina Sinaga "asked her class to write an essay titled 'My dream: What I want to be in the future.' Senator Obama wrote 'I want to be a President,' she said." [The Los Angeles Times, 3/15/07]
All Indonesian students are required to study religion at school and a young Barry Soetoro, being a Muslim, would have been required to study Islam daily in school.
He would have been taught to read and write Arabic, to recite his prayers properly, to read and recite from the Quran and to study the laws of Islam.
In his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," Obama mentions studying the Koran and describes the public school as "a Muslim school."
"In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies."
According to Tine Hahiyary, one of Obama's teachers and the principal from 1971 through 1989, Barry actively took part in the Islamic religious lessons during his time at the school. "I remembered that he had studied "mengaji" (recitation of the Quran)" Tine said.
The author of the Laotze blog writes from Jakarta: "The actual usage of the word 'mengaji' in Indonesian and Malaysian societies means the study of learning to recite the Quran in the Arabic language rather than the native tongue. "Mengagi" is a word and a term that is accorded the highest value and status in the mindset of fundamentalist societies here in Southeast Asia. To put it quite simply, 'mengaji classes' are not something that a non practicing or so-called moderate Muslim family would ever send their child to. To put this in a Christian context, this is something above and beyond simply enrolling your child in Sunday school classes."
"The fact that Obama had attended mengaji classes is well known in Indonesia and has left many there wondering just when Obama is going to come out of the closet." "
As I've stated before, the evidence seems to quite clearly show that both Ann Dunham and her husband Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo were in fact devout Muslims themselves and they raised their son as such."
The Obama Campaign told the LA Times he wasn't a "practicing Muslim." (3/14/2007). But his official website says: "Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, And Is a Committed Christian" (11/12/2007) That's not what his friends and classmates have said. Classmate Rony Amiris describes young Barry as enjoying playing football and marbles and of being a very devout Muslim. Amir said, "Barry was previously quite religious in Islam. We previously often asked him to the prayer room close to the house. If he was wearing a sarong, he looked funny," said Rony.
Amiris, now the manager of Bank Mandiri, Jakarta, recently said, "Barry was previously quite religious in Islam. His birth father, Barack Hussein Obama was a Muslim economist from Kenya. Before marrying Ann Dunham, Hussein Obama was married to a woman from Kenya who had seven children. All the relatives of Barry's father were very devout Muslims"
Emirsyah Satar, CEO of Garuda Indonesia, was quoted as saying, "He (Obama) was often in the prayer room wearing a 'sarong', at that time."
"He was quite religious in Islam but only after marrying Michelle, he changed his religion." So Obama, according to his classmates and friends was a Muslim until the confluence of love and ambitious, caused him to adopt the cloak of Christianity: to marry Michelle and to run for President of the United States.
In "Dreams," Obama sheds light on his formative years and the political views of his mother, an anthropologist and Islamophile who hated America and subsequently "went native." (It was her mother -- Barry's "other" grandmother who cared for him in his druggie teenage years -- that he would describe as a "typical white person" who was, he said scoldingly, fearful of black men and prone to making stereotypical racial remarks.)
Obama Senior also had three sons by another woman who are all Muslim. Although Obama claims Senior was an atheist, Senior was buried as a Muslim.
Barack Obama's brother Roy opted for Islam over Christianity, as the Senator recounted in his book when describing his 1992 wedding. "The person who made me proudest of all," Obama wrote, "was Roy. Actually, now we call him Abongo, his Luo name, for two years ago he decided to reassert his African heritage. He converted to Islam, and has sworn off pork and tobacco and alcohol."Abongo "argues that the black man must "liberate himself from the poisoning influences of European culture." He urged his younger brother to embrace his African heritage.
In Kenya while he was a Senator, Obama stumped for his cousin, opposition leader Raila Odinga, the son of Senior's sister, a direct first cousin and nephew of Obama's father.
On August 29, 2007, Raila Odinga and Shiekh Abdullah Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya signed a Memorandum of Understanding in which it pledges the support of Kenyan Moslems for Raila's election. In return, as President of Kenya, Raila agrees ... within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions [and] within one year to facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters -- everywhere in Kenya, not just in "Muslim declared regions" -- and to popularize Islam, the only true religion ... by ordering every primary school in Kenya in the regions to conduct daily Madrassa classes.
In an interview with the New York Times, published on April 30th, Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's younger half sister, told the Times, "My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim."
Obama describes his new found "Christian" faith as: (1) Suspicious of dogma (2) Without any monopoly on the truth (3) Nontransferable to others (4) Infused with a big healthy dose of doubt, and (5) Indulgent of and compatible with all other religions.
On February 27th, speaking to Kristof of The New York Times, Barack Hussein Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset."
In an interview with Nicholas Kristof, published in The New York Times, Obama recited the Muslim call to prayer, the Adhan, "with a first-class [Arabic] accent."
The opening lines of the Adhan (Azaan) is the Shahada: "Allah is Supreme!
Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! I witness that there is no god but Allah I witness that there is no god but Allah I witness that Muhammad is his prophet? "
According to Islamic scholars, reciting the Shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith, makes one a Muslim. This simple yet profound statement expresses a Muslim's complete acceptance of, and total commitment to, the message of Islam. Obama chanted it with pride and finesse.
An American Expat in Southeast Asia blog, written by an American who has lived in Indonesia for 20 years and has met with both the Taliban and al-Qaeda, contains the following:
"Barack Hussein Obama might have convinced some Americans that he is no longer a Muslim, but so far he has not convinced many in the world's most populous Muslim country who still see him as a Muslim and a crusader for Islam and world peace."
"Barack Hussein Obama's race, his staunch opposition to the war in Iraq, his sympathy to Islam and Muslims worldwide and his Muslim heritage receive the Indonesian media coverage. There is no mention of his apostasy."
"A good example of how some of the Indonesian media is reporting on Obama's religion can be found in the following."
"What I found interesting in the article was the use of the word 'mengaku' when refering to Obama's conversion from Islam to Christianity. The word 'mengaku' in Indonesian means "claimed" and as such leaves the insinuation to the native Indonesian reader being that Obama might actually still be a Muslim.
But this is how Indonesians see Obama, they don't see him as an apostate at all, they see him as a crusader for the cause of Islam."
Obama wants it both ways, has always wanted it both ways. Black and white, Indonesian and American, Muslim and Christian. He loves playing one off the other, using one to hide the other even as the traces of the truth may be assembled to reveal the whole cloth of deception and self-promotion he has been weaving so skillfully since his childhood. No wonder he is a man of change. He IS a changeling, a veritable chameleon, adapting and amending his life story to fit the circumstances.
The charm may have worked once. It still works on some. It won't work forever in the age of the Internet. The fog of ambiguity and dissimulation is dissipated by the harsh, unforgiving and scrutiny of the blogosphere and its unlimited access to historical facts and time-stamped testimony.
Many have been puzzled why Obama could claim not to be familiar with Wright's rants. It turns out the Trinity Church, like many African-American churches, happily accepts believing Muslims within its congregation. And evidently many Muslims have no problems surrounding themselves with an anti-American, anti-Israel preacher who week in and week out wins the amens of his adoring congregation.
On Feb 15/08, Usama K. Dakdok, President of The Straight Way of Grace Ministry called Obama's Church and reported the following conversation: " I then asked the person who answered what I needed to do to join. She told me that I needed to attend two Sunday School classes in a row and then I would walk the aisle. I replied, "That sounds easy. One last question please. If I am Muslim and I believe in the Prophet Mohammed, peace be unto him and I also believe in Jesus, peace be unto him, do I have to give up my Islamic faith to be a member in your church? She answered: "No, we have many Muslim members in our church."
Indeed.
Credit for these reports and revelations -- assembling the statements of those who love and admire Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama -- belong primarily to the writers, researchers, and journalists cited in and contributing to the above references. Special hat tip to Ted Belman of Israpundit for putting most of the pieces together. One can be sure that more, much more, is on the way, before the first black muslim president enters the White House. Or not.
*****
Note:
Who are the Democrats electing as their nominee? Are they so intent on having a liberal represent their party that they have thrown caution to the wind with nominating someone fairly new on the scene with a Muslim background. What does this say about today's Democrat Party? More articles like this will be posted as they are found to show who is the 'real' Obama.
My bold and highlight!
Friday, March 28, 2008
Obama for Tax Increases
Barack Obama appears to be proposing a tax increase for all Americans who make more than $75,000 per year. Key graphs:
Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's "Closing Bell" asked, "Who should pay more and who should pay less?" Predictably, the politician chose to talk about who would benefit from his higher tax plan, not who would get socked the hardest. But from his answers it sounds like the "wealthy" in his mind are those making more than $75,000.
"I would not increase taxes for middle class Americans and in fact I want to.... provide a tax cut for people who are making $75,000 a year or less,'' he said. "For those folks, I want an offset on the payroll tax that would be worth as much as $1,000 for a family.
He is also proposing to raise the capital gains tax, but refuses to say by how much: http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282008/news/nationalnews/barack__id_hike_capital_gains_tax_103875.htm
Barack Obama thinks higher taxes are a good thing
Andrew Malcolm and Mark Silva, Los Angeles Times, Top Of The Ticket Blog
March 28, 2008
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/obamathetaxrais.html
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama went after the "We're not paying enough taxes to the government" vote today during a television interview in New York.
First, he said the Bush tax cuts ought to die. He likes that top marginal rate of 39%. Although the non-partisan National Journal recently declared him the most liberal of the 100 senators, Obama denied being a "wild-eyed liberal," which wasn't what the Journal called him, but it sounds good on TV where everything moves by so quickly.
Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's "Closing Bell" asked, "Who should pay more and who should pay less?" Predictably, the politician chose to talk about who would benefit from his higher tax plan, not who would get socked the hardest. But from his answers it sounds like the "wealthy" in his mind are those making more than $75,000.
"I would not increase taxes for middle class Americans and in fact I want to.... provide a tax cut for people who are making $75,000 a year or less,'' he said. "For those folks, I want an offset on the payroll tax that would be worth as much as $1,000 for a family.
"Senior citizens who are bringing in less than $50,000 a year in income, I don't want them to have to pay income tax on their Social Security. And as part of my overall approach to housing, I actually want to provide an additional 10 percent mortgage deduction, a credit, mortgage interest credit, for those who currently don't itemize."
"Why raise taxes at all in an economic slowdown?'' Bartiromo asked. "Isn't that going to put a further strain on people?"
"Well, look," said Obama, "there's no doubt that anything I do is going to be premised on what the economic situation is when I take office.''
Obama said, "I'm going to be sworn in in January -- we don't know what the economy's going to look like at that point."
He was asked about the liberal tag. "I believe in capitalism and I want to do what works,'' the senator replied. " But what I want to make sure of is it works for all America and not just a small sliver of America."
"Obama’s completely disingenuous dodge on whether he would raise taxes during a time of economic slowdown is belied by his vote earlier this month," said Alex Conant, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. "Obama’s claims to the contrary, his votes to raise taxes on people earning as little as $31,850 are straight from the Democrats’ tax-and-spend playbook."
******
If this man believes in Capitalism, there are pigs flying by my window. I would say he believes more in Robin Hood -- take from the rich and this time middle class and give to the poor which means handouts instead of working for what they have. He has a biased view of America IMHO that does not bode well for Americans who have worked hard to become successful.
My bold and highlight!
Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's "Closing Bell" asked, "Who should pay more and who should pay less?" Predictably, the politician chose to talk about who would benefit from his higher tax plan, not who would get socked the hardest. But from his answers it sounds like the "wealthy" in his mind are those making more than $75,000.
"I would not increase taxes for middle class Americans and in fact I want to.... provide a tax cut for people who are making $75,000 a year or less,'' he said. "For those folks, I want an offset on the payroll tax that would be worth as much as $1,000 for a family.
He is also proposing to raise the capital gains tax, but refuses to say by how much: http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282008/news/nationalnews/barack__id_hike_capital_gains_tax_103875.htm
Barack Obama thinks higher taxes are a good thing
Andrew Malcolm and Mark Silva, Los Angeles Times, Top Of The Ticket Blog
March 28, 2008
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/obamathetaxrais.html
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama went after the "We're not paying enough taxes to the government" vote today during a television interview in New York.
First, he said the Bush tax cuts ought to die. He likes that top marginal rate of 39%. Although the non-partisan National Journal recently declared him the most liberal of the 100 senators, Obama denied being a "wild-eyed liberal," which wasn't what the Journal called him, but it sounds good on TV where everything moves by so quickly.
Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's "Closing Bell" asked, "Who should pay more and who should pay less?" Predictably, the politician chose to talk about who would benefit from his higher tax plan, not who would get socked the hardest. But from his answers it sounds like the "wealthy" in his mind are those making more than $75,000.
"I would not increase taxes for middle class Americans and in fact I want to.... provide a tax cut for people who are making $75,000 a year or less,'' he said. "For those folks, I want an offset on the payroll tax that would be worth as much as $1,000 for a family.
"Senior citizens who are bringing in less than $50,000 a year in income, I don't want them to have to pay income tax on their Social Security. And as part of my overall approach to housing, I actually want to provide an additional 10 percent mortgage deduction, a credit, mortgage interest credit, for those who currently don't itemize."
"Why raise taxes at all in an economic slowdown?'' Bartiromo asked. "Isn't that going to put a further strain on people?"
"Well, look," said Obama, "there's no doubt that anything I do is going to be premised on what the economic situation is when I take office.''
Obama said, "I'm going to be sworn in in January -- we don't know what the economy's going to look like at that point."
He was asked about the liberal tag. "I believe in capitalism and I want to do what works,'' the senator replied. " But what I want to make sure of is it works for all America and not just a small sliver of America."
"Obama’s completely disingenuous dodge on whether he would raise taxes during a time of economic slowdown is belied by his vote earlier this month," said Alex Conant, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. "Obama’s claims to the contrary, his votes to raise taxes on people earning as little as $31,850 are straight from the Democrats’ tax-and-spend playbook."
******
If this man believes in Capitalism, there are pigs flying by my window. I would say he believes more in Robin Hood -- take from the rich and this time middle class and give to the poor which means handouts instead of working for what they have. He has a biased view of America IMHO that does not bode well for Americans who have worked hard to become successful.
My bold and highlight!
Monday, March 24, 2008
Obama Soft On Crime?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Law and Order: Obama doesn't talk much about his views on crime and punishment — at least not in front of general audiences — and for good reason.
While his Web site says he's "a strong proponent of tougher measures to fight crime," his record tells a different story.
As an Illinois state senator, for example, he acted more as a friend to criminals than to cops, legislating among other things:
• Curbs on what he called a "broken" death penalty system.
• A measure to expunge some criminal records and give job grants to ex-cons.
• Tougher handgun controls.
• A vote against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang.
• Opposition to a bill requiring juveniles to be prosecuted as adults for firing a gun at or near a school.
At the federal level, Obama would:
• Repeal "unfair" mandatory sentences for crack convictions.
• Provide drug counseling instead of jail time for some abusers.
• Rethink criminal penalties for pot.
• Ban profiling by federal law enforcement, even if it helps catch violent criminals including terrorists.
• Strengthen hate-crime laws and beef up civil rights enforcement against police chiefs who profile.
• Provide job training, drug rehab and counseling for ex-cons.
• "Re-enfranchise" felons denied the right to vote.
In addition, Obama, who once vowed to repeal the Patriot Act, still talks about reforming it. He also once proposed banning executions of inmates, arguing he was against capital punishment.
It's not clear where Obama stands on the issue now, but he does think death row and the entire U.S. penal system are stacked against blacks. While so far only alluding to racism as the culprit, his mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright minces no words in blaming "racist white America."
"The brothers are in prison" largely because of their skin color, he claims.
And a racist white majority put them there, he believes, by "structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons."
In Wright's conspiracy, personal responsibility plays no role. This is the same adviser who told Obama that there are "more black men in prison than in college"—a statement that Obama parroted until he was told that it was false.
Unfortunately, Obama listens to his preacher and buys into his conspiracy theories. "In our criminal justice system, African-Americans and whites are arrested at very different rates," Obama recently complained. "It has to do with how we pursue racial justice."
He vows to pursue it with gusto, unleashing civil rights cops on police chiefs and district attorneys who dare to arrest and prosecute criminals who happen to be of color.
In last Tuesday's speech explaining his ties to Wright, he reiterated his desire to do more to enforce civil rights laws.
He cites the Jena Six case as an example of racial injustice. But one of the thugs he defends as a victim of Louisiana racism recently was arrested again for assault. The 6-6 Bryant Purvis allegedly choked and slammed a classmate's head on a table after helping five other blacks beat a white student within an inch of his life.
Would Obama go soft on such brutal crime in the name of racial equality? No justice, no peace? Obama for now speaks only in code, saying he'll fix "a criminal justice system that's broken." But how exactly is it broken? And who would he appoint to help fix it?
Who will he pick as his attorney general? His top civil rights cop? Is his pal Rep. John Conyers on the short list? Rep. Keith Ellison?
What about federal judges? Will they be frustrated social workers who go easy on criminals to "reintegrate" them into society?
More important, what kind of justices does Obama have in mind to replace aging veterans on the high court, which decides the constitutionality of capital punishment cases?
We shudder to think.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=291251769393224#
*****
Why hasn't Obama's soft on crime record been brought forward before the primary voting was started to tell voters about his on the record on crime? He talks a good talk using a teleprompter but his record is one of being soft of criminals and his statements lean toward allowing criminals to go free because of color. If you do the crime, you should pay the time without regard to race.
This is another example of why Obama would be bad for America. My question would be who is going to run the Country -- Obama or Rev Wright? Seems he thinks more of Wright's ideas then anyone else over the years. Obama looks to be only representing Illinois blacks not the rest of the State which brings up the question would he only represent blacks if elected President?
Voters need to take a look at his voting record and seriously listen to what he is saying. We have already discovered that his campaign motto "Change" he has used since the 1980's when President Reagan was President. Looks to me like he is more talk and no action if over 20 years later he is using the same word -- "CHANGE!" Voters BEWARE of someone that recently came on the national scene with little experience to be President!
My bold and highlight!
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Law and Order: Obama doesn't talk much about his views on crime and punishment — at least not in front of general audiences — and for good reason.
While his Web site says he's "a strong proponent of tougher measures to fight crime," his record tells a different story.
As an Illinois state senator, for example, he acted more as a friend to criminals than to cops, legislating among other things:
• Curbs on what he called a "broken" death penalty system.
• A measure to expunge some criminal records and give job grants to ex-cons.
• Tougher handgun controls.
• A vote against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang.
• Opposition to a bill requiring juveniles to be prosecuted as adults for firing a gun at or near a school.
At the federal level, Obama would:
• Repeal "unfair" mandatory sentences for crack convictions.
• Provide drug counseling instead of jail time for some abusers.
• Rethink criminal penalties for pot.
• Ban profiling by federal law enforcement, even if it helps catch violent criminals including terrorists.
• Strengthen hate-crime laws and beef up civil rights enforcement against police chiefs who profile.
• Provide job training, drug rehab and counseling for ex-cons.
• "Re-enfranchise" felons denied the right to vote.
In addition, Obama, who once vowed to repeal the Patriot Act, still talks about reforming it. He also once proposed banning executions of inmates, arguing he was against capital punishment.
It's not clear where Obama stands on the issue now, but he does think death row and the entire U.S. penal system are stacked against blacks. While so far only alluding to racism as the culprit, his mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright minces no words in blaming "racist white America."
"The brothers are in prison" largely because of their skin color, he claims.
And a racist white majority put them there, he believes, by "structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons."
In Wright's conspiracy, personal responsibility plays no role. This is the same adviser who told Obama that there are "more black men in prison than in college"—a statement that Obama parroted until he was told that it was false.
Unfortunately, Obama listens to his preacher and buys into his conspiracy theories. "In our criminal justice system, African-Americans and whites are arrested at very different rates," Obama recently complained. "It has to do with how we pursue racial justice."
He vows to pursue it with gusto, unleashing civil rights cops on police chiefs and district attorneys who dare to arrest and prosecute criminals who happen to be of color.
In last Tuesday's speech explaining his ties to Wright, he reiterated his desire to do more to enforce civil rights laws.
He cites the Jena Six case as an example of racial injustice. But one of the thugs he defends as a victim of Louisiana racism recently was arrested again for assault. The 6-6 Bryant Purvis allegedly choked and slammed a classmate's head on a table after helping five other blacks beat a white student within an inch of his life.
Would Obama go soft on such brutal crime in the name of racial equality? No justice, no peace? Obama for now speaks only in code, saying he'll fix "a criminal justice system that's broken." But how exactly is it broken? And who would he appoint to help fix it?
Who will he pick as his attorney general? His top civil rights cop? Is his pal Rep. John Conyers on the short list? Rep. Keith Ellison?
What about federal judges? Will they be frustrated social workers who go easy on criminals to "reintegrate" them into society?
More important, what kind of justices does Obama have in mind to replace aging veterans on the high court, which decides the constitutionality of capital punishment cases?
We shudder to think.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=291251769393224#
*****
Why hasn't Obama's soft on crime record been brought forward before the primary voting was started to tell voters about his on the record on crime? He talks a good talk using a teleprompter but his record is one of being soft of criminals and his statements lean toward allowing criminals to go free because of color. If you do the crime, you should pay the time without regard to race.
This is another example of why Obama would be bad for America. My question would be who is going to run the Country -- Obama or Rev Wright? Seems he thinks more of Wright's ideas then anyone else over the years. Obama looks to be only representing Illinois blacks not the rest of the State which brings up the question would he only represent blacks if elected President?
Voters need to take a look at his voting record and seriously listen to what he is saying. We have already discovered that his campaign motto "Change" he has used since the 1980's when President Reagan was President. Looks to me like he is more talk and no action if over 20 years later he is using the same word -- "CHANGE!" Voters BEWARE of someone that recently came on the national scene with little experience to be President!
My bold and highlight!
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Background on Obama
Obama received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Columbia in 1983, then worked at Business International Corporation and New York Public Interest Research Group before moving to Chicago in 1985 to take a job as a community organizer.[15][16] He entered Harvard Law School in 1988.[17] In 1990, The New York Times reported his election as the Harvard Law Review's "first black president in its 104-year history".[18] Obama completed his law degree magna cum laude in 1991, then returned to Chicago where he headed a voter registration drive and began writing his first book, Dreams from My Father, published in 1995.[19][20] As an associate attorney with Miner, Barnhill & Galland from 1993 to 1996, he represented community organizers, discrimination claims, and voting rights cases.[21] He was also a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1993 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004.[22]
Did Obama join Rev Wright's Church BEFORE he went to Law School and is Wright one of the people behind him going to Harvard?
This link details his rise: http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/jan05/cover.php
The link contains this from 1985:
Upon graduating from Columbia, Obama attempted a career as a community organizer. He wrote that when classmates weren’t sure what that was, he didn’t have a sufficient answer for them. “Instead, I’d pronounce the need for change,” he wrote. “Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds. Change in the Congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won’t come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.
“That’s what I’ll do, I’ll organize black folks. At the grass roots. For change.”
Why hasn't the media told everyone that his campaign phrase "CHANGE" came from 1985 and is not new? Why hasn't the media questioned what he has been doing for the last 28 years to make a change? From his speech this week and follow up comments looks to me like he blames whites for change not happening. He worked for ACORN before he went to law school which has been indicted in several states for voter fraud but how much voter fraud did they commit for Dems that they no indictments were issued? Is his rise to fame by knocking out all opponents part of the ACORN voter fraud? Did Obama plan to win the election on the backs of ACORN? Inquiring minds want to know.
Did Obama join Rev Wright's Church BEFORE he went to Law School and is Wright one of the people behind him going to Harvard?
This link details his rise: http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/jan05/cover.php
The link contains this from 1985:
Upon graduating from Columbia, Obama attempted a career as a community organizer. He wrote that when classmates weren’t sure what that was, he didn’t have a sufficient answer for them. “Instead, I’d pronounce the need for change,” he wrote. “Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds. Change in the Congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won’t come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.
“That’s what I’ll do, I’ll organize black folks. At the grass roots. For change.”
Why hasn't the media told everyone that his campaign phrase "CHANGE" came from 1985 and is not new? Why hasn't the media questioned what he has been doing for the last 28 years to make a change? From his speech this week and follow up comments looks to me like he blames whites for change not happening. He worked for ACORN before he went to law school which has been indicted in several states for voter fraud but how much voter fraud did they commit for Dems that they no indictments were issued? Is his rise to fame by knocking out all opponents part of the ACORN voter fraud? Did Obama plan to win the election on the backs of ACORN? Inquiring minds want to know.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Key Questions Still Left After Obama Speech
By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:30 PM PT
The beauty of a speech is that you don't just give the answers, you provide your own questions. "Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes." So said Barack Obama, in his Philadelphia speech about his pastor, friend, mentor and spiritual adviser of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.
An interesting, if belated, admission. But the more important question is: which "controversial" remarks?
Wright's assertion from the pulpit that the U.S. government invented the HIV virus "as a means of genocide against people of color"? Wright's claim that America was morally responsible for 9/11 — "chickens coming home to roost" — because of, among other crimes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
(Obama says he missed church that day. Had he never heard about it?)
What about the charge that the U.S. government (of Franklin Roosevelt, mind you) knew about Pearl Harbor, but lied about it? Or that the government gives drugs to black people, presumably to enslave and imprison them?
Obama condemns such statements as wrong and divisive, then frames the next question: "There will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?"
But that is not the question. The question is, Why didn't he leave that church? Why didn't he leave — why doesn't he leave even today — a pastor who thundered not once but three times from the pulpit (on a DVD the church proudly sells) "God damn America"?
Obama's 5,000-word speech, fawned over as a great meditation on race, is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction.
His defense rests on two central propositions: (a) moral equivalence, and (b) white guilt.
(a) Moral equivalence. Sure, says Obama, there's Wright, but at the other "end of the spectrum" there's Geraldine Ferraro, opponents of affirmative action and his own white grandmother, "who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." But did she shout them in a crowded theater to incite, enrage and poison others?
"I can no more disown (Wright) than I can my white grandmother." What exactly was grandma's offense? Jesse Jackson himself once admitted to the fear he feels from the footsteps of black men on the street.
And Harry Truman was known to use epithets for blacks and Jews in private, yet is revered for desegregating the armed forces and recognizing the first Jewish state since Jesus' time. He never spread racial hatred. Nor did grandma.
Yet Obama compares her to Wright.
Does he not see the moral difference between the occasional private expression of the prejudices of one's time and the use of a public stage to spread racial lies and race hatred?
(b) White guilt. Obama's purpose in the speech was to put Wright's outrages in context. By context, Obama means history. And by history, he means the history of white racism. Obama says, "We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country," and then proceeds to do precisely that. And what lies at the end of his recital of the long train of white racial assaults from slavery to employment discrimination?
Jeremiah Wright, of course.
This contextual analysis of Wright's venom, this extenuation of black hate speech as a product of white racism, is not new. It's the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance.
That's why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt, while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination.
But Obama was supposed to be new. He flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor.
Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign.
Then answer this, Senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness?
This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at Ground Zero.
It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well.
Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290899211643217
****
My bold and highlights. I found this speech and his attempt to make whites feel guilty a slap in the face to people who look at what a person stands for not the color of their skin. People like Rev Wright and Obama who defends him are no different then the other side of the coin where someone condemns someone because of their race. Racism isn't reserved for whites only as some would have us believe. Wright's anger at the United States and whites makes me wonder why he is here taking advantage of all America has to offer.
Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:30 PM PT
The beauty of a speech is that you don't just give the answers, you provide your own questions. "Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes." So said Barack Obama, in his Philadelphia speech about his pastor, friend, mentor and spiritual adviser of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.
An interesting, if belated, admission. But the more important question is: which "controversial" remarks?
Wright's assertion from the pulpit that the U.S. government invented the HIV virus "as a means of genocide against people of color"? Wright's claim that America was morally responsible for 9/11 — "chickens coming home to roost" — because of, among other crimes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
(Obama says he missed church that day. Had he never heard about it?)
What about the charge that the U.S. government (of Franklin Roosevelt, mind you) knew about Pearl Harbor, but lied about it? Or that the government gives drugs to black people, presumably to enslave and imprison them?
Obama condemns such statements as wrong and divisive, then frames the next question: "There will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?"
But that is not the question. The question is, Why didn't he leave that church? Why didn't he leave — why doesn't he leave even today — a pastor who thundered not once but three times from the pulpit (on a DVD the church proudly sells) "God damn America"?
Obama's 5,000-word speech, fawned over as a great meditation on race, is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction.
His defense rests on two central propositions: (a) moral equivalence, and (b) white guilt.
(a) Moral equivalence. Sure, says Obama, there's Wright, but at the other "end of the spectrum" there's Geraldine Ferraro, opponents of affirmative action and his own white grandmother, "who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." But did she shout them in a crowded theater to incite, enrage and poison others?
"I can no more disown (Wright) than I can my white grandmother." What exactly was grandma's offense? Jesse Jackson himself once admitted to the fear he feels from the footsteps of black men on the street.
And Harry Truman was known to use epithets for blacks and Jews in private, yet is revered for desegregating the armed forces and recognizing the first Jewish state since Jesus' time. He never spread racial hatred. Nor did grandma.
Yet Obama compares her to Wright.
Does he not see the moral difference between the occasional private expression of the prejudices of one's time and the use of a public stage to spread racial lies and race hatred?
(b) White guilt. Obama's purpose in the speech was to put Wright's outrages in context. By context, Obama means history. And by history, he means the history of white racism. Obama says, "We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country," and then proceeds to do precisely that. And what lies at the end of his recital of the long train of white racial assaults from slavery to employment discrimination?
Jeremiah Wright, of course.
This contextual analysis of Wright's venom, this extenuation of black hate speech as a product of white racism, is not new. It's the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance.
That's why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt, while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination.
But Obama was supposed to be new. He flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor.
Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign.
Then answer this, Senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness?
This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at Ground Zero.
It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well.
Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290899211643217
****
My bold and highlights. I found this speech and his attempt to make whites feel guilty a slap in the face to people who look at what a person stands for not the color of their skin. People like Rev Wright and Obama who defends him are no different then the other side of the coin where someone condemns someone because of their race. Racism isn't reserved for whites only as some would have us believe. Wright's anger at the United States and whites makes me wonder why he is here taking advantage of all America has to offer.
Obama's Real Faith (IBD, Jan. 23, '07)
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Recent media questions about Barack Obama's Afrocentric faith were, in fact, raised by an IBD editorial more than a year ago.
Campaign 2008: Those spreading rumors that Barack Hussein Obama is a "closet Muslim" are off the mark. His religion has little to do with Islam and everything to do with a militantly Afrocentric movement that's no less troubling.
Read More: Election 2008 Religion
Surrogates for Hillary Clinton and GOP front-runners hope to tarnish golden boy Obama by making him out to be some kind of Manchurian candidate for Islamist masters because he shares a name with Saddam Hussein and is the son of a Muslim.
True, his late father was a Muslim, but he can hardly be described as "radical," as the rumors have put it. He turned atheist in his early 20s before Obama was even born.
His mother is from a Christian background but eschewed organized religion altogether. She and her parents (one Baptist, the other Methodist) ended up raising Obama after her two marriages failed.
Yes, his former stepfather, an Indonesian oil executive, also was a Muslim, albeit a secular one. Obama describes him as "nonpracticing," and he spent only five years with the man before he and his mother split up.
If, as rumors claim, Obama's stepfather nurtured a "lifelong relationship with Islam" for his stepson, why isn't his daughter a practicing Muslim? Obama's Indonesian half-sister, now a University of Hawaii professor, is a "hottie" who dresses in Westernized clothing, students say.
What about the supposed "Wahhabi madrassa" Obama attended for "four years" in Jakarta? Actually, he went to a Muslim school for two years, and a Catholic school for the same amount of time. "I was sent first to a neighborhood Catholic school," Obama wrote in his autobiography, "and then to a predominantly Muslim school."
Obama said he was drawn to Christ after college while working with black churches on inner-city projects. Soon he knelt "beneath the cross" at one of them, he said in a recent speech, and "embraced Christ." If he were Muslim, this act alone would be punishable by death.
Trouble is, Obama embraced more than Christ when he answered the altar call 20 years ago at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Southside Chicago. The 8,000-member church describes itself as "unashamedly black" and holds classes in "African-centered Bible study." Obama also pledged to honor something called the "Black Value System," which is a code of nonbiblical ethics written by blacks, for blacks.
This is what should give American voters pause.
According to its Web site, Trinity puts the "black community" first. Black members are encouraged to pursue education and skills exclusively to advance their community, and allocate their money exclusively to support "black institutions" and black leaders.
In short, it preaches from the gospel of blackness and black power. There's little room for white Christians at Obama's church. It disavows the pursuit of "middleclassness" — code for whiteness — arguing that middleclassness is a conspiracy by white leaders to keep talented African-Americans "captives."
Obama, meanwhile, has been getting in touch with his African roots. He recently visited relatives in Kenya for the first time; he dropped the nickname Barry for the more African-sounding Barack.
"I believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change," he recently asserted. He said his faith has also led him to question "the idolatry of the free market." This reflects Trinity church doctrine that no African-American can really rise to the top echelons of a "racist, competitive" white society on merit.
Obama, in turn, calls the dashiki-wearing minister of this militantly black church his "spiritual adviser" and mentor. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright said of Obama and his other congregants: "We are an African people, and remain true to our native land, the mother continent." He wants health care for all and more housing for the poor, and calls those who voted for President Bush (and his tax cuts) "stupid."
Do such beliefs translate into a political agenda tailored to African-Americans? Would Obama, despite his agreeably race-neutral and nonthreatening public persona, govern and petition on behalf of one group and not necessarily for the greater good of the country?
White House challengers such as Clinton think Obama's childhood brushes with Islam will make Americans nervous. But it's his adult conversion to black nationalism and socialism that makes this otherwise attractive minority candidate unfortunately so unattractive.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290905147114601
My bold and highlights!
Posted Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Recent media questions about Barack Obama's Afrocentric faith were, in fact, raised by an IBD editorial more than a year ago.
Campaign 2008: Those spreading rumors that Barack Hussein Obama is a "closet Muslim" are off the mark. His religion has little to do with Islam and everything to do with a militantly Afrocentric movement that's no less troubling.
Read More: Election 2008 Religion
Surrogates for Hillary Clinton and GOP front-runners hope to tarnish golden boy Obama by making him out to be some kind of Manchurian candidate for Islamist masters because he shares a name with Saddam Hussein and is the son of a Muslim.
True, his late father was a Muslim, but he can hardly be described as "radical," as the rumors have put it. He turned atheist in his early 20s before Obama was even born.
His mother is from a Christian background but eschewed organized religion altogether. She and her parents (one Baptist, the other Methodist) ended up raising Obama after her two marriages failed.
Yes, his former stepfather, an Indonesian oil executive, also was a Muslim, albeit a secular one. Obama describes him as "nonpracticing," and he spent only five years with the man before he and his mother split up.
If, as rumors claim, Obama's stepfather nurtured a "lifelong relationship with Islam" for his stepson, why isn't his daughter a practicing Muslim? Obama's Indonesian half-sister, now a University of Hawaii professor, is a "hottie" who dresses in Westernized clothing, students say.
What about the supposed "Wahhabi madrassa" Obama attended for "four years" in Jakarta? Actually, he went to a Muslim school for two years, and a Catholic school for the same amount of time. "I was sent first to a neighborhood Catholic school," Obama wrote in his autobiography, "and then to a predominantly Muslim school."
Obama said he was drawn to Christ after college while working with black churches on inner-city projects. Soon he knelt "beneath the cross" at one of them, he said in a recent speech, and "embraced Christ." If he were Muslim, this act alone would be punishable by death.
Trouble is, Obama embraced more than Christ when he answered the altar call 20 years ago at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Southside Chicago. The 8,000-member church describes itself as "unashamedly black" and holds classes in "African-centered Bible study." Obama also pledged to honor something called the "Black Value System," which is a code of nonbiblical ethics written by blacks, for blacks.
This is what should give American voters pause.
According to its Web site, Trinity puts the "black community" first. Black members are encouraged to pursue education and skills exclusively to advance their community, and allocate their money exclusively to support "black institutions" and black leaders.
In short, it preaches from the gospel of blackness and black power. There's little room for white Christians at Obama's church. It disavows the pursuit of "middleclassness" — code for whiteness — arguing that middleclassness is a conspiracy by white leaders to keep talented African-Americans "captives."
Obama, meanwhile, has been getting in touch with his African roots. He recently visited relatives in Kenya for the first time; he dropped the nickname Barry for the more African-sounding Barack.
"I believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change," he recently asserted. He said his faith has also led him to question "the idolatry of the free market." This reflects Trinity church doctrine that no African-American can really rise to the top echelons of a "racist, competitive" white society on merit.
Obama, in turn, calls the dashiki-wearing minister of this militantly black church his "spiritual adviser" and mentor. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright said of Obama and his other congregants: "We are an African people, and remain true to our native land, the mother continent." He wants health care for all and more housing for the poor, and calls those who voted for President Bush (and his tax cuts) "stupid."
Do such beliefs translate into a political agenda tailored to African-Americans? Would Obama, despite his agreeably race-neutral and nonthreatening public persona, govern and petition on behalf of one group and not necessarily for the greater good of the country?
White House challengers such as Clinton think Obama's childhood brushes with Islam will make Americans nervous. But it's his adult conversion to black nationalism and socialism that makes this otherwise attractive minority candidate unfortunately so unattractive.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290905147114601
My bold and highlights!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Obama Merely Changes The Subject
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Election '08: Rather than break ties with his demagogic, anti-American pastor, Barack Obama used a speech on race to excuse his behavior and sweep the controversy under the rug. Passing the buck is not very presidential.
Speaking in Philadelphia, steps away from where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were enacted, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president delivered an address that used the words "race" or "races" 11 times, "racial" or "racially" 15 times, and "racism" or "racist" six times.
But Obama's recent troubles, which this much-hyped speech was supposed to put past him, are not about race relations. They're about one churchman who happens to be black, whose views from the pulpit are repugnant and from whom Obama doesn't seem to have the guts to distance himself.
Reacting to being linked with a bigoted conspiracy theorist by lecturing the nation on race is like disgraced ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer responding to his getting caught patronizing an international prostitution ring by giving a speech on the female physique.
The supposed divide between black and white is not the issue here; Obama's longtime association with Jeremiah Wright is.
This is a man who believes the U.S. government formulated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks and that it is also responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Yes, Obama claimed in his speech to have "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." But he quickly proceeded to equivocate regarding them.
The problem, according to Obama, is not that Wright is wrong about America being a racist society, but that he "sees white racism as endemic." The problem is not that Wright has made statements that clearly seem anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, but that he, as Obama puts it, "sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."
Obama's pastor of 20 years is nothing more than "imperfect," as Obama sees it. And so, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community." He won't quit this church where hate is spewed, and he doesn't explain why over all the years he has never tried to straighten Wright out.
The rest of Obama's speech was spent explaining and rationalizing hate such as Wright's rather than denouncing it. Wright's words "reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through," the result of which has been "a cycle of violence, blight and neglect" still haunting America.
The solutions? Expanded government for one, of course. But while Obama concedes that "the erosion of black families" is "a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened," he fails to understand what "Wealth and Poverty" author George Gilder knew back in 1981:
"What actually happened since 1964 was a vast expansion of the welfare rolls that halted in its tracks an ongoing improvement in the lives of the poor, particularly blacks, and left behind . . . a wreckage of broken lives and families worse than the aftermath of slavery."
Another of Obama's answers is that black anger and white resentment should give way to "the real culprits" — capitalists, or as Obama puts it, "a corporate culture rife with inside-dealing, questionable accounting practices and short-term greed" and Washington lobbyists who support it.
The early reaction to Obama's speech amounted to more media fawning on the order of that which was spoofed in a recent "Saturday Night Live" sketch. The Reuters headline was "Obama denounces preacher, urges race healing." The Boston Globe titled its story "Obama calls for racial unity." And the Washington Post proclaimed: "Obama Confronts Race in U.S." A CNN analyst even compared it to Lincoln's 1858 "A House Divided" classic.
Lincoln, however, used that occasion to warn that "this government cannot endure, permanently half-slave and half-free . . . . It will become all one thing or all the other." Unlike Obama, Honest Abe wasn't trying to have it both ways.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290732552237836
My bold and highlighted!
Election '08: Rather than break ties with his demagogic, anti-American pastor, Barack Obama used a speech on race to excuse his behavior and sweep the controversy under the rug. Passing the buck is not very presidential.
Speaking in Philadelphia, steps away from where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were enacted, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president delivered an address that used the words "race" or "races" 11 times, "racial" or "racially" 15 times, and "racism" or "racist" six times.
But Obama's recent troubles, which this much-hyped speech was supposed to put past him, are not about race relations. They're about one churchman who happens to be black, whose views from the pulpit are repugnant and from whom Obama doesn't seem to have the guts to distance himself.
Reacting to being linked with a bigoted conspiracy theorist by lecturing the nation on race is like disgraced ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer responding to his getting caught patronizing an international prostitution ring by giving a speech on the female physique.
The supposed divide between black and white is not the issue here; Obama's longtime association with Jeremiah Wright is.
This is a man who believes the U.S. government formulated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks and that it is also responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Yes, Obama claimed in his speech to have "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." But he quickly proceeded to equivocate regarding them.
The problem, according to Obama, is not that Wright is wrong about America being a racist society, but that he "sees white racism as endemic." The problem is not that Wright has made statements that clearly seem anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, but that he, as Obama puts it, "sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."
Obama's pastor of 20 years is nothing more than "imperfect," as Obama sees it. And so, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community." He won't quit this church where hate is spewed, and he doesn't explain why over all the years he has never tried to straighten Wright out.
The rest of Obama's speech was spent explaining and rationalizing hate such as Wright's rather than denouncing it. Wright's words "reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through," the result of which has been "a cycle of violence, blight and neglect" still haunting America.
The solutions? Expanded government for one, of course. But while Obama concedes that "the erosion of black families" is "a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened," he fails to understand what "Wealth and Poverty" author George Gilder knew back in 1981:
"What actually happened since 1964 was a vast expansion of the welfare rolls that halted in its tracks an ongoing improvement in the lives of the poor, particularly blacks, and left behind . . . a wreckage of broken lives and families worse than the aftermath of slavery."
Another of Obama's answers is that black anger and white resentment should give way to "the real culprits" — capitalists, or as Obama puts it, "a corporate culture rife with inside-dealing, questionable accounting practices and short-term greed" and Washington lobbyists who support it.
The early reaction to Obama's speech amounted to more media fawning on the order of that which was spoofed in a recent "Saturday Night Live" sketch. The Reuters headline was "Obama denounces preacher, urges race healing." The Boston Globe titled its story "Obama calls for racial unity." And the Washington Post proclaimed: "Obama Confronts Race in U.S." A CNN analyst even compared it to Lincoln's 1858 "A House Divided" classic.
Lincoln, however, used that occasion to warn that "this government cannot endure, permanently half-slave and half-free . . . . It will become all one thing or all the other." Unlike Obama, Honest Abe wasn't trying to have it both ways.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290732552237836
My bold and highlighted!
Speech doesn't pander; does it explain?
By: Roger Simon
March 18, 2008 02:36 PM EST
Barack Obama spoke calmly and reasonably Tuesday about a subject that often lacks both calm and reason in America: race.
Obama’s speech was temperate and built on logic, not fiery or built on passion. It was meant to be calming.
It was a speech that attempted to connect the dots of race in American history from slavery to Jim Crow to black anger, to white fear, to, ultimately, the hope of reconciliation. Where it was strongest was in appealing to the better angels of the American spirit: the notion that we can all come together.
Where it was weakest was in explaining the very reason for the speech: how the inflammatory, even repugnant, comments of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, are understandable.
Wright, who has been Obama’s pastor for 20 years, has said America had brought on the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — “America’s chickens are coming home to roost” — and that “We started the AIDS virus.”
Without citing such statements specifically, Obama sought to explain them, though he first condemned them. Speaking in slow, measured tones, Obama said Wright used “incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation, that rightly offend white and black alike.”
But, for the first time, Obama admitted what he previously had denied: that he was present when Wright had made some of his outrageous comments.
“Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church?” Obama said. “Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely — just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.”
Obama did not say, however, that he had ever expressed his disagreement to Wright or in any way attempted to get Wright to moderate or change his views.
Instead, Obama said Wright was “more than snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and YouTube.”
Obama mentioned once again that Wright was a “Marine” and “has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country” and has spent his time “housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.”
Obama also said, in effect, that some white people simply don’t get black churches.
“They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear,” Obama said. “The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and, yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.”
It was the key to his speech and his toughest sell: that the black experience in America has been different from the white experience and that white people have to expect the “bitterness and bias” of black people while recognizing their own history of white racism.
Obama encapsulated that within his own family by speaking of his white grandmother, “a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”
The speech was also, in part, the speech of a constitutional law professor building a case.
“We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country,” Obama said. “But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.”
If Obama was not attempting to excuse the statements of Wright, he was certainly attempting to put them in context.
“For the men and women of Rev. Wright’s generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away, nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years,” he said.
But Obama also attempted to explain white resentment by saying that when white Americans “are told to bus their children to a school across town, when they hear that an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed, when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.”
And although the speech was not interrupted by applause very many times, Obama’s attack on some in the media was greeted that way. “Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism,” he said as the audience clapped.
But Obama said that things could get better and that his running for president was a sign that things had gotten better and that the races in America could join together in a common goal.
“The profound mistake of Rev. Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society,” Obama said, “it’s that he spoke as if our society was static, as if no progress has been made, as if this country — a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black, Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old — is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past.”
That, of course, is what the Hillary Clinton campaign resents the most about the Obama campaign: that he uses race politically. That he says a vote for him is a sign that America’s racial healing has begun.
In the end, Obama’s speech was about hope and redemption, and there was no doubt who was supplying the hope and who was the redeemer.
“This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected,” Obama said. “And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation — the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.”
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=C2EC88D8-3048-5C12-0003A7A1BE877D47
*****
My bold and highlighted.
March 18, 2008 02:36 PM EST
Barack Obama spoke calmly and reasonably Tuesday about a subject that often lacks both calm and reason in America: race.
Obama’s speech was temperate and built on logic, not fiery or built on passion. It was meant to be calming.
It was a speech that attempted to connect the dots of race in American history from slavery to Jim Crow to black anger, to white fear, to, ultimately, the hope of reconciliation. Where it was strongest was in appealing to the better angels of the American spirit: the notion that we can all come together.
Where it was weakest was in explaining the very reason for the speech: how the inflammatory, even repugnant, comments of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, are understandable.
Wright, who has been Obama’s pastor for 20 years, has said America had brought on the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — “America’s chickens are coming home to roost” — and that “We started the AIDS virus.”
Without citing such statements specifically, Obama sought to explain them, though he first condemned them. Speaking in slow, measured tones, Obama said Wright used “incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation, that rightly offend white and black alike.”
But, for the first time, Obama admitted what he previously had denied: that he was present when Wright had made some of his outrageous comments.
“Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church?” Obama said. “Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely — just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.”
Obama did not say, however, that he had ever expressed his disagreement to Wright or in any way attempted to get Wright to moderate or change his views.
Instead, Obama said Wright was “more than snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and YouTube.”
Obama mentioned once again that Wright was a “Marine” and “has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country” and has spent his time “housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.”
Obama also said, in effect, that some white people simply don’t get black churches.
“They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear,” Obama said. “The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and, yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.”
It was the key to his speech and his toughest sell: that the black experience in America has been different from the white experience and that white people have to expect the “bitterness and bias” of black people while recognizing their own history of white racism.
Obama encapsulated that within his own family by speaking of his white grandmother, “a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”
The speech was also, in part, the speech of a constitutional law professor building a case.
“We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country,” Obama said. “But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.”
If Obama was not attempting to excuse the statements of Wright, he was certainly attempting to put them in context.
“For the men and women of Rev. Wright’s generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away, nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years,” he said.
But Obama also attempted to explain white resentment by saying that when white Americans “are told to bus their children to a school across town, when they hear that an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed, when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.”
And although the speech was not interrupted by applause very many times, Obama’s attack on some in the media was greeted that way. “Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism,” he said as the audience clapped.
But Obama said that things could get better and that his running for president was a sign that things had gotten better and that the races in America could join together in a common goal.
“The profound mistake of Rev. Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society,” Obama said, “it’s that he spoke as if our society was static, as if no progress has been made, as if this country — a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black, Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old — is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past.”
That, of course, is what the Hillary Clinton campaign resents the most about the Obama campaign: that he uses race politically. That he says a vote for him is a sign that America’s racial healing has begun.
In the end, Obama’s speech was about hope and redemption, and there was no doubt who was supplying the hope and who was the redeemer.
“This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected,” Obama said. “And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation — the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.”
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=C2EC88D8-3048-5C12-0003A7A1BE877D47
*****
My bold and highlighted.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Hillary: I'll Ban Armed Private Contractors In Iraq
Monday, March 17, 2008
HILLARY CLINTON
Hillary: I'll Ban Armed Private Contractors In Iraq
Speaking this morning, Hillary hits Obama for not ruling out continuing to use armed private contractors in Iraq. She wants to ban such contractors.
Those contractors are protecting Iraqi government officials. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as Hillary once called for threatening to take away Iraqi lawmakers' security if they didn't reach a deal. And at least one Democrat didn't find that to be a wise move:
Addressing Mrs. Clinton’s latest proposal to cap American troops and to threaten Iraqi leaders with cuts in funding, Mr. Biden lowered his voice and leaned in close over the table.“From the part of Hillary’s proposal, the part that really baffles me is, ‘We’re going to teach the Iraqis a lesson.’ We’re not going to equip them? O.K. Cap our troops and withdraw support from the Iraqis? That’s a real good idea.”The result of Mrs. Clinton’s position on Iraq, Mr. Biden says, would be “nothing but disaster.”
She goes on to talk about how she'll go after the favorite Democratic bogeyman, the infamous "no-bid" contracts.
"There's been a lot of talk about earmarks in this town (and she hasn't released her lists; credit Obama for going that far) but no-bid contracts are ten times more costly than earmarks. When I introduced my legislation, I could not get, as of this moment, Senator McCain's support for that."
03/17 09:49 AM
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzZmYTJjMmM5ZWU5ZWExNjZjNDc0NzNiMGQwYmQzNDE=
HILLARY CLINTON
Hillary: I'll Ban Armed Private Contractors In Iraq
Speaking this morning, Hillary hits Obama for not ruling out continuing to use armed private contractors in Iraq. She wants to ban such contractors.
Those contractors are protecting Iraqi government officials. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as Hillary once called for threatening to take away Iraqi lawmakers' security if they didn't reach a deal. And at least one Democrat didn't find that to be a wise move:
Addressing Mrs. Clinton’s latest proposal to cap American troops and to threaten Iraqi leaders with cuts in funding, Mr. Biden lowered his voice and leaned in close over the table.“From the part of Hillary’s proposal, the part that really baffles me is, ‘We’re going to teach the Iraqis a lesson.’ We’re not going to equip them? O.K. Cap our troops and withdraw support from the Iraqis? That’s a real good idea.”The result of Mrs. Clinton’s position on Iraq, Mr. Biden says, would be “nothing but disaster.”
She goes on to talk about how she'll go after the favorite Democratic bogeyman, the infamous "no-bid" contracts.
"There's been a lot of talk about earmarks in this town (and she hasn't released her lists; credit Obama for going that far) but no-bid contracts are ten times more costly than earmarks. When I introduced my legislation, I could not get, as of this moment, Senator McCain's support for that."
03/17 09:49 AM
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzZmYTJjMmM5ZWU5ZWExNjZjNDc0NzNiMGQwYmQzNDE=
Part II, Facts about Obama
Obama and Racists, Anti-Semites, and Catholic-haters
Obama either does not understand or does not care that his association with, and even promotion or endorsement of, racists, anti-Semites, and Catholic-haters enables and empowers their bigotry.
(1) Obama and the New Black Panther Party.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGrXCt hosted at Obama’s official campaign Web site (as of March 12 2008, and it has been there for quite a while) proclaims that the New Black Panther Party supports Barack Obama. Noting that this page has acquired 396 points (presumably from activities with Obama ‘08 or ratings from other participants), it is difficult to believe that Obama’s staff is not aware of this page. The Anti-Defamation League (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/Black_Panther.asp?xpicked=3&item=Black_Panther) describes the New Black Panther Party as follows:
Founder: Aaron Michaels
Leader: Malik Zulu Shabazz
Headquarters: Washington, D.C.
Founded: 1990
Ideology: A mix of black nationalism, Pan-Africanism and racist and anti-Semitic bigotry Influences: Original Black Panthers, Black Panther Militia, Nation of Islam[Khallid Abdul] Muhammad’s rise through the group’s hierarchy was abruptly halted in November 1993, after he delivered a notoriously anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, homophobic and racist speech at New Jersey’s Kean College. In his remarks, Muhammad referred to Jews as “bloodsuckers,” called for genocide against whites, vulgarly ridiculed Pope John Paul II and demeaned homosexuals. The speech attracted significant media attention, and Muhammad was condemned by a wide range of religious and political leaders - including the U.S. Congress, which issued a condemnation in 1994 that decried the speech as “outrageous hatemongering of the most vicious and vile kind.” Farrakhan responded to the controversy by removing Muhammad from the group’s leadership, although the NOI leader noted that he faulted only the form, not “the truth,” of Muhammad’s remarks.
(2) Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Ronald Reagan (R-CA) and Lou Barletta (D-PA) were all offered endorsements by hate organizations (Independence Party, Ku Klux Klan). None of them even had to be asked to reject these endorsements without hesitation, qualification, or equivocation. Barack Obama, in contrast, refused to use the word “reject” in connection with support from Louis Farrakhan, the racist and anti-Semitic leader of the Nation of Islam, until Tim Russert and Hillary Clinton cornered him during the February 26, 2008 Democratic debate. Only when they asked him three times to “reject” Farrakhan’s support did Obama, with obvious reluctance, do so. Farrakhan is on record as calling the Pope the Antichrist while saying that white people are “potential humans” who “haven’t evolved yet.”
(3) Al Sharpton and the National Action Network. This is a verbatim quote from Obama’s
appearance at the National Action Network in April 2007, where he posed arm in arm with Sharpton (http://www.nationalactionnetwork.net/html/press_releases.html): “Reverend Sharpton is a voice for the voiceless, and a voice for the dispossessed. What National Action Network has done is so important to change America, and it must be changed from the bottom up.” Sharpton’s long record of inciting hatred of white people and especially Jews includes the Tawana Brawley scandal (1988), Crown Heights riots (1991), and Freddy’s Fashion Mart incident (1995) in which one of Sharpton’s deranged followers burned a Jewish-owned store with the loss of seven innocent lives. This is what the National Action Network, while under Sharpton’s leadership and supervision, did at Freddy’s.
“The street leader of the boycott, Morris Powell, was the head of Sharpton’s “Buy Black” Committee. Repeatedly referring to the Jewish proprietors of Freddy’s as “crackers,” Powell and his fellow protesters menacingly told passersby, “Keep [going] right on past Freddy’s, he’s one of the greedy Jew bastards killing our [black] people. Don’t give the Jew a dime.”” (”The Nine Lives of Al Sharpton” By John Perazzo http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=CB9E239A-DF92-4214-BE61-C935E5553C4A)
“…in 1995 eight people died in a murderous rampage inspired by Mr. Sharpton. … Picketers from Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network, sometimes joined by “the Rev.” himself, marched daily outside the store, screaming about “bloodsucking Jews” and “Jew bastards” and threatening to burn the building down. After weeks of increasingly violent rhetoric, one of the protesters, Roland Smith, took Mr. Sharpton’s words about ousting the “white interloper” to heart.” (”Democrats Embrace ‘Impresario of Hatred’” by Fred Siegel, http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004192?)
(4) MoveOn.org and its now disgraced Action Forum. Barack Obama has solicited and received the support of MoveOn.org, which published not only a vicious insult to General David Petraeus but also a derogatory photomanipulation of Pope Benedict waving a gavel in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. This “Catholics are taking over America” picture was entirely consistent with the anti-Catholic, as well as anti-Semitic and anti-Evangelical, hate speech that MoveOn.org welcomed on its now disgraced Action Forum. Contrary to MoveOn’s assertions that the Action Forum was an “open forum” for whose content MoveOn was not responsible, MoveOn’s moderators were exercising complete editorial control by deleting material they found disagreeable. The hate speech against Jews, Catholics, Evangelicals, and others was allowed to stand, along with conspiracy theories that blamed the U.S. Government, Jews, and others for 9/11.
Here are a few examples of Action Forum content that garnered overwhelming approval from the other participants:
* “Removing all Israeli obsessed Jews from congress would stop a lot of killing.”* “[Condoleeza] Rice and [Colin] Powell ARE ‘house slaves.’”* “Call for the arrest and immediate incarceration of the Catholic Pedophiles of America.”* “The victim class will expand until you too can be jailed for ridiculously minor offenses while the Catholics are raping your children.”* “Not to get nasty but jews have a long history of subverting governments for their own enrichment and glory to the detriment of whole societies.”* “Israel is guilty of war crimes in their cowardely attack on Lebanon and the whining, arrogant Jew [Tom Lantos] wants Lebanon to demonstrate responsibility!”
If there is any remaining doubt as to whether MoveOn’s moderators knew about the hate speech that pervaded the Action Forum, the Action Forum FAQ page (http://www.actionforum.com/general/faq.html#1, still online as of March 1 2008) should eliminate it.
“How can I make sure someone at MoveOn reads my post? All comments are read at least twice. While there is no single criteria, comments that suggest a possible MoveOn action and are not duplicative are likely to be immediately passed on, or included in a summary to the whole MoveOn team. Ratings, while important, are not definitive and some comments with few or low ratings are included in the summaries. Important issues are sometimes followed up with a survey to a sampling of the membership.”
(5) Jeremiah Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ. Barack Obama is a member of a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa” whose pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said “white America” got a “wake up call” on 9/11. Wright also accompanied Louis Farrakhan on a visit to Moammar Khadafy, and the church recently honored Farrakhan with a Trumpet Award.
Now let’s take a look at Jeremiah Wright’s own “War in Iraq IQ Test” (http://www.cfba.info/iq/index.html as of March 12 2008)
41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992? A: Over 6542. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between 1972 and 1990? A: 30+43. Q: How much does the U.S. fund Israel a year? A:$5 billion
44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons? A: 8
45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got? A: 0
46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got? A: Over 10,000
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons? A: The US
48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have? A: Over 400
49. Q: Has Israel ever allowed UN weapon inspections? A: No
50. Q: What percentage of the Palestinian territories are controlled by Israeli settlements? A: 42%
51. Q: Is Israel illegally occupying Palestinian land? A: Yes52. Q: Which country do you think poses the greatest threat to global peace: Iraq or the U.S.? A: ????
The Trinity United Church of Christ is also “A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA” (http://www.tucc.org/about.htm), and its parent, the United Church of Christ, has ties to the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center. Per the Anti-Defamation League at http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ChJew_31/4848_31.htm,
New York, NY, January 10, 2006 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is troubled by the United Church of Christ’s continuing partnership with the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, a radicalized Palestinian Christian group whose leaders have openly questioned Israel’s right to exist.
Sabeel speaks for itself at http://www.sabeel.org/old/news/newslt19/sabeel.htm (link valid as of March 13 2008)
It was on May 15 , 1948 that the state of Israel was established, and the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe) is remembered.
That is, according to Sabeel, the establishment of Israel itself (as opposed to the “occupation” that Jeremiah Wright condemns) was a “catastrophe.” Obama’s close ties to Jeremiah Wright and second-hand ties to Sabeel speak more eloquently than any words about the real depth of his support for America’s ally and fellow democracy in the Middle East.
ABC News (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1) quotes Wright from sermons given in 2003 and on September 16 2001 (five days after 9/11):
The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people.We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.
http://husaria.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/anti-obama-viral-email-project/
My bold and highlight
Obama either does not understand or does not care that his association with, and even promotion or endorsement of, racists, anti-Semites, and Catholic-haters enables and empowers their bigotry.
(1) Obama and the New Black Panther Party.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGrXCt hosted at Obama’s official campaign Web site (as of March 12 2008, and it has been there for quite a while) proclaims that the New Black Panther Party supports Barack Obama. Noting that this page has acquired 396 points (presumably from activities with Obama ‘08 or ratings from other participants), it is difficult to believe that Obama’s staff is not aware of this page. The Anti-Defamation League (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/Black_Panther.asp?xpicked=3&item=Black_Panther) describes the New Black Panther Party as follows:
Founder: Aaron Michaels
Leader: Malik Zulu Shabazz
Headquarters: Washington, D.C.
Founded: 1990
Ideology: A mix of black nationalism, Pan-Africanism and racist and anti-Semitic bigotry Influences: Original Black Panthers, Black Panther Militia, Nation of Islam[Khallid Abdul] Muhammad’s rise through the group’s hierarchy was abruptly halted in November 1993, after he delivered a notoriously anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, homophobic and racist speech at New Jersey’s Kean College. In his remarks, Muhammad referred to Jews as “bloodsuckers,” called for genocide against whites, vulgarly ridiculed Pope John Paul II and demeaned homosexuals. The speech attracted significant media attention, and Muhammad was condemned by a wide range of religious and political leaders - including the U.S. Congress, which issued a condemnation in 1994 that decried the speech as “outrageous hatemongering of the most vicious and vile kind.” Farrakhan responded to the controversy by removing Muhammad from the group’s leadership, although the NOI leader noted that he faulted only the form, not “the truth,” of Muhammad’s remarks.
(2) Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Ronald Reagan (R-CA) and Lou Barletta (D-PA) were all offered endorsements by hate organizations (Independence Party, Ku Klux Klan). None of them even had to be asked to reject these endorsements without hesitation, qualification, or equivocation. Barack Obama, in contrast, refused to use the word “reject” in connection with support from Louis Farrakhan, the racist and anti-Semitic leader of the Nation of Islam, until Tim Russert and Hillary Clinton cornered him during the February 26, 2008 Democratic debate. Only when they asked him three times to “reject” Farrakhan’s support did Obama, with obvious reluctance, do so. Farrakhan is on record as calling the Pope the Antichrist while saying that white people are “potential humans” who “haven’t evolved yet.”
(3) Al Sharpton and the National Action Network. This is a verbatim quote from Obama’s
appearance at the National Action Network in April 2007, where he posed arm in arm with Sharpton (http://www.nationalactionnetwork.net/html/press_releases.html): “Reverend Sharpton is a voice for the voiceless, and a voice for the dispossessed. What National Action Network has done is so important to change America, and it must be changed from the bottom up.” Sharpton’s long record of inciting hatred of white people and especially Jews includes the Tawana Brawley scandal (1988), Crown Heights riots (1991), and Freddy’s Fashion Mart incident (1995) in which one of Sharpton’s deranged followers burned a Jewish-owned store with the loss of seven innocent lives. This is what the National Action Network, while under Sharpton’s leadership and supervision, did at Freddy’s.
“The street leader of the boycott, Morris Powell, was the head of Sharpton’s “Buy Black” Committee. Repeatedly referring to the Jewish proprietors of Freddy’s as “crackers,” Powell and his fellow protesters menacingly told passersby, “Keep [going] right on past Freddy’s, he’s one of the greedy Jew bastards killing our [black] people. Don’t give the Jew a dime.”” (”The Nine Lives of Al Sharpton” By John Perazzo http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=CB9E239A-DF92-4214-BE61-C935E5553C4A)
“…in 1995 eight people died in a murderous rampage inspired by Mr. Sharpton. … Picketers from Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network, sometimes joined by “the Rev.” himself, marched daily outside the store, screaming about “bloodsucking Jews” and “Jew bastards” and threatening to burn the building down. After weeks of increasingly violent rhetoric, one of the protesters, Roland Smith, took Mr. Sharpton’s words about ousting the “white interloper” to heart.” (”Democrats Embrace ‘Impresario of Hatred’” by Fred Siegel, http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004192?)
(4) MoveOn.org and its now disgraced Action Forum. Barack Obama has solicited and received the support of MoveOn.org, which published not only a vicious insult to General David Petraeus but also a derogatory photomanipulation of Pope Benedict waving a gavel in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. This “Catholics are taking over America” picture was entirely consistent with the anti-Catholic, as well as anti-Semitic and anti-Evangelical, hate speech that MoveOn.org welcomed on its now disgraced Action Forum. Contrary to MoveOn’s assertions that the Action Forum was an “open forum” for whose content MoveOn was not responsible, MoveOn’s moderators were exercising complete editorial control by deleting material they found disagreeable. The hate speech against Jews, Catholics, Evangelicals, and others was allowed to stand, along with conspiracy theories that blamed the U.S. Government, Jews, and others for 9/11.
Here are a few examples of Action Forum content that garnered overwhelming approval from the other participants:
* “Removing all Israeli obsessed Jews from congress would stop a lot of killing.”* “[Condoleeza] Rice and [Colin] Powell ARE ‘house slaves.’”* “Call for the arrest and immediate incarceration of the Catholic Pedophiles of America.”* “The victim class will expand until you too can be jailed for ridiculously minor offenses while the Catholics are raping your children.”* “Not to get nasty but jews have a long history of subverting governments for their own enrichment and glory to the detriment of whole societies.”* “Israel is guilty of war crimes in their cowardely attack on Lebanon and the whining, arrogant Jew [Tom Lantos] wants Lebanon to demonstrate responsibility!”
If there is any remaining doubt as to whether MoveOn’s moderators knew about the hate speech that pervaded the Action Forum, the Action Forum FAQ page (http://www.actionforum.com/general/faq.html#1, still online as of March 1 2008) should eliminate it.
“How can I make sure someone at MoveOn reads my post? All comments are read at least twice. While there is no single criteria, comments that suggest a possible MoveOn action and are not duplicative are likely to be immediately passed on, or included in a summary to the whole MoveOn team. Ratings, while important, are not definitive and some comments with few or low ratings are included in the summaries. Important issues are sometimes followed up with a survey to a sampling of the membership.”
(5) Jeremiah Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ. Barack Obama is a member of a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa” whose pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said “white America” got a “wake up call” on 9/11. Wright also accompanied Louis Farrakhan on a visit to Moammar Khadafy, and the church recently honored Farrakhan with a Trumpet Award.
Now let’s take a look at Jeremiah Wright’s own “War in Iraq IQ Test” (http://www.cfba.info/iq/index.html as of March 12 2008)
41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992? A: Over 6542. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between 1972 and 1990? A: 30+43. Q: How much does the U.S. fund Israel a year? A:$5 billion
44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons? A: 8
45. Q: How many nuclear warheads has Iraq got? A: 0
46. Q: How many nuclear warheads has US got? A: Over 10,000
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons? A: The US
48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have? A: Over 400
49. Q: Has Israel ever allowed UN weapon inspections? A: No
50. Q: What percentage of the Palestinian territories are controlled by Israeli settlements? A: 42%
51. Q: Is Israel illegally occupying Palestinian land? A: Yes52. Q: Which country do you think poses the greatest threat to global peace: Iraq or the U.S.? A: ????
The Trinity United Church of Christ is also “A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA” (http://www.tucc.org/about.htm), and its parent, the United Church of Christ, has ties to the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center. Per the Anti-Defamation League at http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ChJew_31/4848_31.htm,
New York, NY, January 10, 2006 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is troubled by the United Church of Christ’s continuing partnership with the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, a radicalized Palestinian Christian group whose leaders have openly questioned Israel’s right to exist.
Sabeel speaks for itself at http://www.sabeel.org/old/news/newslt19/sabeel.htm (link valid as of March 13 2008)
It was on May 15 , 1948 that the state of Israel was established, and the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe) is remembered.
That is, according to Sabeel, the establishment of Israel itself (as opposed to the “occupation” that Jeremiah Wright condemns) was a “catastrophe.” Obama’s close ties to Jeremiah Wright and second-hand ties to Sabeel speak more eloquently than any words about the real depth of his support for America’s ally and fellow democracy in the Middle East.
ABC News (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1) quotes Wright from sermons given in 2003 and on September 16 2001 (five days after 9/11):
The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people.We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.
http://husaria.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/anti-obama-viral-email-project/
My bold and highlight
Obama's 'I Didn't Inhale' Defense
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, March 17, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Election 2008: Barack Obama's story that he never once heard his preacher trash whites and America in hundreds of sermons sounds like Bill Clinton claiming he never inhaled while smoking dope.
The mushrooming church scandal has taken the shine off the golden boy of politics, a two-decade regular at "unashamedly black" Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
With his phony defense, the Democrat front-runner has exposed himself as both a typical Beltway spinmeister and a hypocrite.
From the start of his presidential campaign, Obama has positioned himself as a straight shooter and a uniter — the very antidote to the sinister Clintonian politics of the past.
"Voters don't believe what politicians say. They get cynical," he said during the Nevada primary in response to what he described as dishonest "tricks" by both Clintons. "We have to change that politics, and that's why I'm running for president."
"You know what I'm saying is true," he reassured voters.
Yet his denial over Rev. Jeremiah Wright's vitriol does not ring true. He's suddenly shocked — shocked! — that his black nationalist church would spew anti-American venom.
"I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally," he insisted, "either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew."
Back in February 2007, however, Obama knew Wright might be a political liability. His chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod, was so worried about his provocative statements that he urged Obama to withdraw a request that Wright deliver an invocation at his presidential campaign kickoff.
Reluctantly, Obama "uninvited" his long-time friend and mentor, according to Wright's own account at the time, telling him "it's best for you not to be out there in public."
And earlier this year, Obama had to release a statement distancing himself from a decision by Wright to honor black bigot Louis Farrakhan with a "lifetime achievement" award in Wright's name. In its November/December issue, Obama's church magazine heaped praise on Farrakhan in a cover story.
Obama seemed neither surprised nor very offended. "I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders," he shrugged.
Only the magazine, published by Wright's daughters out of church offices, never mentioned Farrakhan's work with ex-cons.
Obama claims he never heard Wright suggest as he did in a Sept. 16, 2001, sermon that America brought the 9/11 attacks on itself.
But he said essentially the same thing, only worse, in 2005 — this time, in the same church magazine, Trumpet, that Obama and his family receive as members. There on page 7 of the August 2005 issue, Wright blames the attacks on "white America," suggesting outrageously and cold-bloodedly that the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11 was retribution for America's past racism.
Obama argues his pastor's hate speech was strung together and compiled in the media out of hundreds of sermons over the course of a lifetime. "They basically culled five or six sermons out of 30 years of preaching," he complained.
In fact, the clips shown represent Wright's bread and butter. These are just the Greatest Hits he sells as DVDs in the church bookstore. Obama, a church regular whose membership spans 1,040 sermons, expects us to believe he not only missed these particular lessons, but was unaware of such bile ever coming from the pulpit of his home church.
"If I had been in church those days, I would have objected fiercely to them and I would have told him personally," he now claims.
Really? A reporter witnessed Obama nod his head in agreement during a July 22, 2007, sermon in which Wright trashed the "United States of White America."
Here's another whopper Obama tells concerning Wright: "He hasn't been my political adviser, he's been my pastor."
Yet it turns out Wright quietly had a formal role in Obama's campaign, and was only pushed out last week as a member of his spiritual advisory committee when the tapes hit the airwaves.
Spinning harder, Obama claimed Wright's remarks are not "reflective of the church."
Yet the videos clearly show fellow members whooping and thumping in their applause of Wright's hateful rants. These weren't just a smattering of amens and hallelujahs. They were standing ovations.
Point is, these are the folks with whom the Obamas worship and socialize. Yet we're expected to believe Obama never heard the same incendiary remarks from them, either?
His plea of ignorance doesn't wash. And if he were sincere in his outrage, he would have distanced himself from these haters at the first opportunity.
He wouldn't be doing it as damage control only after the light is shone into the dark corners of his social and spiritual life.
Obama's image as a man of integrity is starting to fade along with his carefully crafted image as a refreshingly race-neutral candidate.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290645937799103#
Election 2008: Barack Obama's story that he never once heard his preacher trash whites and America in hundreds of sermons sounds like Bill Clinton claiming he never inhaled while smoking dope.
The mushrooming church scandal has taken the shine off the golden boy of politics, a two-decade regular at "unashamedly black" Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
With his phony defense, the Democrat front-runner has exposed himself as both a typical Beltway spinmeister and a hypocrite.
From the start of his presidential campaign, Obama has positioned himself as a straight shooter and a uniter — the very antidote to the sinister Clintonian politics of the past.
"Voters don't believe what politicians say. They get cynical," he said during the Nevada primary in response to what he described as dishonest "tricks" by both Clintons. "We have to change that politics, and that's why I'm running for president."
"You know what I'm saying is true," he reassured voters.
Yet his denial over Rev. Jeremiah Wright's vitriol does not ring true. He's suddenly shocked — shocked! — that his black nationalist church would spew anti-American venom.
"I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally," he insisted, "either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew."
Back in February 2007, however, Obama knew Wright might be a political liability. His chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod, was so worried about his provocative statements that he urged Obama to withdraw a request that Wright deliver an invocation at his presidential campaign kickoff.
Reluctantly, Obama "uninvited" his long-time friend and mentor, according to Wright's own account at the time, telling him "it's best for you not to be out there in public."
And earlier this year, Obama had to release a statement distancing himself from a decision by Wright to honor black bigot Louis Farrakhan with a "lifetime achievement" award in Wright's name. In its November/December issue, Obama's church magazine heaped praise on Farrakhan in a cover story.
Obama seemed neither surprised nor very offended. "I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders," he shrugged.
Only the magazine, published by Wright's daughters out of church offices, never mentioned Farrakhan's work with ex-cons.
Obama claims he never heard Wright suggest as he did in a Sept. 16, 2001, sermon that America brought the 9/11 attacks on itself.
But he said essentially the same thing, only worse, in 2005 — this time, in the same church magazine, Trumpet, that Obama and his family receive as members. There on page 7 of the August 2005 issue, Wright blames the attacks on "white America," suggesting outrageously and cold-bloodedly that the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11 was retribution for America's past racism.
Obama argues his pastor's hate speech was strung together and compiled in the media out of hundreds of sermons over the course of a lifetime. "They basically culled five or six sermons out of 30 years of preaching," he complained.
In fact, the clips shown represent Wright's bread and butter. These are just the Greatest Hits he sells as DVDs in the church bookstore. Obama, a church regular whose membership spans 1,040 sermons, expects us to believe he not only missed these particular lessons, but was unaware of such bile ever coming from the pulpit of his home church.
"If I had been in church those days, I would have objected fiercely to them and I would have told him personally," he now claims.
Really? A reporter witnessed Obama nod his head in agreement during a July 22, 2007, sermon in which Wright trashed the "United States of White America."
Here's another whopper Obama tells concerning Wright: "He hasn't been my political adviser, he's been my pastor."
Yet it turns out Wright quietly had a formal role in Obama's campaign, and was only pushed out last week as a member of his spiritual advisory committee when the tapes hit the airwaves.
Spinning harder, Obama claimed Wright's remarks are not "reflective of the church."
Yet the videos clearly show fellow members whooping and thumping in their applause of Wright's hateful rants. These weren't just a smattering of amens and hallelujahs. They were standing ovations.
Point is, these are the folks with whom the Obamas worship and socialize. Yet we're expected to believe Obama never heard the same incendiary remarks from them, either?
His plea of ignorance doesn't wash. And if he were sincere in his outrage, he would have distanced himself from these haters at the first opportunity.
He wouldn't be doing it as damage control only after the light is shone into the dark corners of his social and spiritual life.
Obama's image as a man of integrity is starting to fade along with his carefully crafted image as a refreshingly race-neutral candidate.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290645937799103#
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Barack Obama Fact Sheet: Part I
Obama’s Racial Identity Politics (from Dreams from My Father)
The following quotes are from Obama’s Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance (paperback, Three Rivers Press, ISBN 978-1-4000-8277-3, $14.95 U.S.). They suggest that, contrary to popular depictions as a multiracial unifier, Obama’s ideology was formed by Black identity politics. This ties in directly with his membership in a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa” and liberation theology. Suggestion: if you are FOR Obama, buy this book. Obama will get a royalty for the sale even if, after you verify the following for yourself, you decide to vote for someone else.
…I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites… (page xv)I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though… (page 93) [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/streetterms/ByAlpha.asp?strTerm=B, “Blow” = “Cocaine; to inhale cocaine; to smoke marijuana; to inject heroin”]That was the problem with people like Joyce [a college classmate of Italian, African-American, Native American, and French ethnicity]. They talked about the richness of their multicultural heritage and it sounced real good, until you noticed that they avoided black people. …
The truth was that I understood [Joyce], her and all the other black kids who felt the way she did. In their mannerisms, their speech, their mixed-up hearts, I kept recognizing pieces of myself. And that’s exactly what scared me. Their confusion made me question my own racial credentials all over again. …To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. (pages 99-100)
“[Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness] teaches me things,” I said. “About white people, I mean. See, the book’s not really about Africa. Or black people. It’s about the man who wrote it. The European. The American. A particular way of looking at the world. If you can keep your distance, it’s all there, in what’s said and what’s left unsaid. So I read the book to help me just understand just what it is that makes white people so afraid. Their demons. The way ideas get twisted around. It helps me understand how people learn to hate.” (page 103)
Pages 195-204: [Obama describes his relationship with Rafiq al-Shabazz, a self-proclaimed Black Nationalist]
The above material is relevant to claims that Barack Obama, as a person of multiracial ancestry, would be a “racial unifier.” Obama’s own statements suggest that, at least during his college years, he resisted integration into mainstream American society while criticizing other students for doing so. This becomes especially significant when placed side by side with his membership in a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa,” whose parent organization, the United Church of Christ, has ties to the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center: an entity whose Web site calls the establishment of Israel a “catastrophe.”
http://husaria.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/anti-obama-viral-email-project/
The following quotes are from Obama’s Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance (paperback, Three Rivers Press, ISBN 978-1-4000-8277-3, $14.95 U.S.). They suggest that, contrary to popular depictions as a multiracial unifier, Obama’s ideology was formed by Black identity politics. This ties in directly with his membership in a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa” and liberation theology. Suggestion: if you are FOR Obama, buy this book. Obama will get a royalty for the sale even if, after you verify the following for yourself, you decide to vote for someone else.
…I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites… (page xv)I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though… (page 93) [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/streetterms/ByAlpha.asp?strTerm=B, “Blow” = “Cocaine; to inhale cocaine; to smoke marijuana; to inject heroin”]That was the problem with people like Joyce [a college classmate of Italian, African-American, Native American, and French ethnicity]. They talked about the richness of their multicultural heritage and it sounced real good, until you noticed that they avoided black people. …
The truth was that I understood [Joyce], her and all the other black kids who felt the way she did. In their mannerisms, their speech, their mixed-up hearts, I kept recognizing pieces of myself. And that’s exactly what scared me. Their confusion made me question my own racial credentials all over again. …To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. (pages 99-100)
“[Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness] teaches me things,” I said. “About white people, I mean. See, the book’s not really about Africa. Or black people. It’s about the man who wrote it. The European. The American. A particular way of looking at the world. If you can keep your distance, it’s all there, in what’s said and what’s left unsaid. So I read the book to help me just understand just what it is that makes white people so afraid. Their demons. The way ideas get twisted around. It helps me understand how people learn to hate.” (page 103)
Pages 195-204: [Obama describes his relationship with Rafiq al-Shabazz, a self-proclaimed Black Nationalist]
The above material is relevant to claims that Barack Obama, as a person of multiracial ancestry, would be a “racial unifier.” Obama’s own statements suggest that, at least during his college years, he resisted integration into mainstream American society while criticizing other students for doing so. This becomes especially significant when placed side by side with his membership in a church with a “non-negotiable commitment to Africa,” whose parent organization, the United Church of Christ, has ties to the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center: an entity whose Web site calls the establishment of Israel a “catastrophe.”
http://husaria.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/anti-obama-viral-email-project/
Obama and the Minister
By RONALD KESSLER
March 14, 2008; Page A19
In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president.
The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006.
"We've got more black men in prison than there are in college," he began. "Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.
No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body."
Mr. Wright thundered on: "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers .
. .
We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God."
His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . ."
Concluding, Mr. Wright said: "We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . ."
Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement. In the church magazine, Trumpet, Mr. Wright spoke glowingly of the Nation of Islam leader. "His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening," Mr. Wright said of Mr. Farrakhan. "He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest."
After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Mr. Obama issued a statement. However, Mr. Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Mr. Farrakhan, and that Mr. Wright's church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader.
Instead, Mr. Obama said, "I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree." Trumpet is owned and produced by Mr. Wright's church out of the church's offices, and Mr. Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.
Meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland on Feb. 24, Mr. Obama described Mr. Wright as being like "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." He rarely mentions the points of disagreement.
Mr. Obama went on to explain Mr. Wright's anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state's support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his previous claim that his church gave the award to Mr. Farrakhan because of his work with ex-offenders, Mr. Obama appears to have made that up.
Neither the presentation of the award nor the Trumpet article about the award mentions ex-offenders, and Mr. Wright's statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way. Mr. Obama nonetheless told the Jewish leaders that the award to Mr. Farrakhan "showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community." That is an understatement.
As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be "provocative."
Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.
Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board" during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.
The title of Mr. Obama's bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" comes from one of Wright's sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.
Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright's perspective, Michelle Obama's comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.
Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.
The media have largely ignored Mr. Obama's close association with Mr. Wright. This raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country. Those questions deserve a clearer answer than Mr. Obama has provided so far.
Mr. Kessler, a former Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reporter, is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com and the author of "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack" (Crown Forum, 2007).
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
March 14, 2008; Page A19
In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president.
The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006."We've got more black men in prison than there are in college," he began. "Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.
No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body."
Mr. Wright thundered on: "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers .
. .
We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God."
His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . ."
Concluding, Mr. Wright said: "We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . ."
Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement. In the church magazine, Trumpet, Mr. Wright spoke glowingly of the Nation of Islam leader. "His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening," Mr. Wright said of Mr. Farrakhan. "He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest."
After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Mr. Obama issued a statement. However, Mr. Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Mr. Farrakhan, and that Mr. Wright's church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader.
Instead, Mr. Obama said, "I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree." Trumpet is owned and produced by Mr. Wright's church out of the church's offices, and Mr. Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.
Meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland on Feb. 24, Mr. Obama described Mr. Wright as being like "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." He rarely mentions the points of disagreement.
Mr. Obama went on to explain Mr. Wright's anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state's support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his previous claim that his church gave the award to Mr. Farrakhan because of his work with ex-offenders, Mr. Obama appears to have made that up.
Neither the presentation of the award nor the Trumpet article about the award mentions ex-offenders, and Mr. Wright's statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way. Mr. Obama nonetheless told the Jewish leaders that the award to Mr. Farrakhan "showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community." That is an understatement.
As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be "provocative."
Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.
Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board" during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.
The title of Mr. Obama's bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" comes from one of Wright's sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.
Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright's perspective, Michelle Obama's comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.
Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.
The media have largely ignored Mr. Obama's close association with Mr. Wright. This raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country. Those questions deserve a clearer answer than Mr. Obama has provided so far.
Mr. Kessler, a former Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reporter, is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com and the author of "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack" (Crown Forum, 2007).
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Friday, March 14, 2008
2008Obama reveals Rezko played a bigger fundraising role
http://mobile.chicagotribune.com/detail.jsp?key=150639&rc=top&full=1
By David Jackson
Chicago Tribune reporter
March 14, 2008 17:13
PMIndicted Chicago businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko was a more significant fundraiser for presidential candidate Barack Obama's earlier political campaigns than previously known. Rezko raised as much as $250,000 for the first three offices Obama sought, the senator told the Tribune on Friday.
Obama also said for the first time that his private real estate transactions with Rezko were not simply mistakes of judgment because Rezko was under grand jury investigation at the time of their 2005 and 2006 dealings. In addition, he said, "The mistake was he had been a contributor and somebody involved in politics."
In an extensive interview that he hoped would quell the lingering controversy over his relationship with Rezko, Obama said that voters concerned about his judgment should view it as "a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest."
But he added that voters should also "see somebody who is not engaged in any wrongdoing . . . and who they can trust."Obama said that when he questioned Rezko about news reports of his questionable political dealings, his friend assured him there was nothing wrong. "My instinct was to believe him," he said.
Asked if he ever thought Rezko would expect something from their relationship, Obama was definitive. "No, precisely because I'd known him for [many] years and he hadn't asked me for favors."
Since the Tribune in November 2006 revealed their personal financial dealings, Obama has called himself "boneheaded" for doing business with Rezko at a time when the Chicago dealmaker was widely reported to be under federal grand jury investigation.
The most vexing issue hits Obama right at home. The Obamas and the Rezkos bought adjacent South Side properties from the same seller on the same day in June 2005. They subsequently engaged in a series of private transactions to improve and re-divide their parcels, giving the Obamas a bigger yard and a buffer for their $1.65 million Georgian revival home.
Over the last year, Obama has been reluctant to discuss his dealings with Rezko. His efforts to deflect questions seemed successful until January, when Sen. Hillary Clinton effectively introduced Rezko to a national audience by invoking his name at a caustic Democratic debate in South Carolina.
On the eve of the crucial Ohio and Texas primaries earlier this month, Obama cut short a combative news conference in San Antonio when reporters peppered him with Rezko questions, saying such requests "can just go on forever."
Clinton faces her own set of unanswered questions--about her personal tax returns, her scheduling records as first lady and donations to the Clinton Presidential Library. But that doesn't negate the unease that even some Obama supporters have expressed about Obama's ties to Rezko.
Though Obama had insisted he has answered all inquiries, until Friday's interview his campaign's piecemeal written statements had left lingering uncertainties about whether the up-and-coming senator exchanged favors with the target of a federal probe.
The friendship between Obama and Rezko began in 1991, when Rezko was making his mark as a well-regarded, politically connected housing developer. Obama, a community organizer, won national recognition as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, and Rezko offered Obama a job building inner-city homes with his Rezmar Corp. Though Obama declined, a friendship and political alliance began.
When Obama launched his bid for the Illinois Senate in 1995, Rezko was his first substantial contributor.
The following year, Obama was elected, then re-elected in 1998. Rezko helped bankroll Obama's subsequent campaigns: Obama lost a primary bid for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000 but won re-election repeatedly as a state senator and then was sworn into the U.S. Senate in January 2005. Rezko, already under indictment by the time Obama announced his presidential run, has not contributed to or raised funds for that race.
dyjackson@tribune.com
My bold and highlight. SJ
By David Jackson
Chicago Tribune reporter
March 14, 2008 17:13
PMIndicted Chicago businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko was a more significant fundraiser for presidential candidate Barack Obama's earlier political campaigns than previously known. Rezko raised as much as $250,000 for the first three offices Obama sought, the senator told the Tribune on Friday.
Obama also said for the first time that his private real estate transactions with Rezko were not simply mistakes of judgment because Rezko was under grand jury investigation at the time of their 2005 and 2006 dealings. In addition, he said, "The mistake was he had been a contributor and somebody involved in politics."
In an extensive interview that he hoped would quell the lingering controversy over his relationship with Rezko, Obama said that voters concerned about his judgment should view it as "a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest."
But he added that voters should also "see somebody who is not engaged in any wrongdoing . . . and who they can trust."Obama said that when he questioned Rezko about news reports of his questionable political dealings, his friend assured him there was nothing wrong. "My instinct was to believe him," he said.
Asked if he ever thought Rezko would expect something from their relationship, Obama was definitive. "No, precisely because I'd known him for [many] years and he hadn't asked me for favors."
Since the Tribune in November 2006 revealed their personal financial dealings, Obama has called himself "boneheaded" for doing business with Rezko at a time when the Chicago dealmaker was widely reported to be under federal grand jury investigation.
The most vexing issue hits Obama right at home. The Obamas and the Rezkos bought adjacent South Side properties from the same seller on the same day in June 2005. They subsequently engaged in a series of private transactions to improve and re-divide their parcels, giving the Obamas a bigger yard and a buffer for their $1.65 million Georgian revival home.
Over the last year, Obama has been reluctant to discuss his dealings with Rezko. His efforts to deflect questions seemed successful until January, when Sen. Hillary Clinton effectively introduced Rezko to a national audience by invoking his name at a caustic Democratic debate in South Carolina.
On the eve of the crucial Ohio and Texas primaries earlier this month, Obama cut short a combative news conference in San Antonio when reporters peppered him with Rezko questions, saying such requests "can just go on forever."
Clinton faces her own set of unanswered questions--about her personal tax returns, her scheduling records as first lady and donations to the Clinton Presidential Library. But that doesn't negate the unease that even some Obama supporters have expressed about Obama's ties to Rezko.
Though Obama had insisted he has answered all inquiries, until Friday's interview his campaign's piecemeal written statements had left lingering uncertainties about whether the up-and-coming senator exchanged favors with the target of a federal probe.
The friendship between Obama and Rezko began in 1991, when Rezko was making his mark as a well-regarded, politically connected housing developer. Obama, a community organizer, won national recognition as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, and Rezko offered Obama a job building inner-city homes with his Rezmar Corp. Though Obama declined, a friendship and political alliance began.
When Obama launched his bid for the Illinois Senate in 1995, Rezko was his first substantial contributor.
The following year, Obama was elected, then re-elected in 1998. Rezko helped bankroll Obama's subsequent campaigns: Obama lost a primary bid for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000 but won re-election repeatedly as a state senator and then was sworn into the U.S. Senate in January 2005. Rezko, already under indictment by the time Obama announced his presidential run, has not contributed to or raised funds for that race.
dyjackson@tribune.com
My bold and highlight. SJ
General Confusion About Obama
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Politics: Barack Obama is endorsed by 10 retired generals and admirals who agree with him that Iraq is a "dumb" war. These are 10 good reasons the Founding Fathers made the commander in chief an elected civilian.
Obama's readiness for the role of commander in chief has been an issue in this campaign. So at a press conference Wednesday he surrounded himself with retired military officers who agreed with his policies toward Iraq and his competence to lead the military.
The officers have served their country honorably and well. Merrill McPeak (1) is a retired four-star general who commanded the air war in Desert Storm. He said Obama has demonstrated the steady temperament during the campaign that a commander in chief requires. Well, so did Jimmy Carter.
Regardless of who won which primary, "he was the same Barack Obama," McPeak said. "Steady, reliable. No shock Barack. No drama Obama." Apparently to be a military supporter of Obama requires an ability to speak, as well as march, in a rhythmic cadence.
Soldiers are trained to fight and win wars. It's not part of their job description to decide which wars to fight, which adversaries to oppose, which threats to respond to.
That's why the Founders decided that the commander in chief should be an elected civilian. Perhaps the first military officer to think a war was dumb, and that he knew more than his commander in chief, was named Benedict Arnold.
The question is not whether Obama is qualified to lead, but where he would lead us. Military leadership does not necessarily impart wisdom. For every George Patton, there is a George McClellan. McClellan, who badly led Union forces until Abraham Lincoln turned things over to Grant and Sherman, thought the Civil War was a dumb war and ran against the president.
Lincoln, in Obama's parlance, could also have been accused of having an "arrogant bunker mentality."
We can debate whether a war is dumb. But once our commander in chief commits our force, there are two types of war — those you win and those you lose. President Reagan's strategy in the Cold War was, "we win, they lose." Obama and his hallelujah chorus may not have noticed, but in Iraq we're winning. How dumb is that?
Obama, whose foreign policy includes talking to our enemies while invading our allies, told the assembled veterans at the VFW Convention in Kansas City, Mo., "All our top military commanders recognize that there is no military solution in Iraq."
Except, of course, for Gen. David Petraeus. McClellan probably would have been willing to endorse Obama. Petraeus would probably decline such an invitation for a photo-op.
No one at Wednesday's press conference asked what the generals and admirals thought about Obama's comments to a New Hampshire audience Monday. The senator answered a question about shifting U.S. troops from Iraq to Afghanistan as follows: "We've got to get the job done there, and that requires us to have enough troops so that we are not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure there."
Raiding villages and killing civilians?
As for the views of admirals and generals, we have our favorites among those who gave us freedom and preserved it, people such as John Paul Jones, who told the captain of a British ship of the line, "I have not yet begun to fight."
We also prefer the views of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, whose advice applies to the war on terror and all wars in which America finds itself — there is no substitute for victory.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290300370384164
****
(1) This editorial is correct and to add a footnote to McPeak. General McPeak may go down in history as one of the most disliked AF Chief of Staffs ever. Best known for his redesigned unform to make the AF look more like pilots of commercial aircraft which was scraped as soon as he left office. The traditional AF Order of the Sword was almost not awarded to McPeak because of the intense dislike of the man who only cared about fighter pilots and no one else in the AF. His opinions mean nothing. BTW, he also endorsed Kerry in 2004. My bold and highlights!
Posted Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Politics: Barack Obama is endorsed by 10 retired generals and admirals who agree with him that Iraq is a "dumb" war. These are 10 good reasons the Founding Fathers made the commander in chief an elected civilian.
Obama's readiness for the role of commander in chief has been an issue in this campaign. So at a press conference Wednesday he surrounded himself with retired military officers who agreed with his policies toward Iraq and his competence to lead the military.
The officers have served their country honorably and well. Merrill McPeak (1) is a retired four-star general who commanded the air war in Desert Storm. He said Obama has demonstrated the steady temperament during the campaign that a commander in chief requires. Well, so did Jimmy Carter.
Regardless of who won which primary, "he was the same Barack Obama," McPeak said. "Steady, reliable. No shock Barack. No drama Obama." Apparently to be a military supporter of Obama requires an ability to speak, as well as march, in a rhythmic cadence.
Soldiers are trained to fight and win wars. It's not part of their job description to decide which wars to fight, which adversaries to oppose, which threats to respond to.
That's why the Founders decided that the commander in chief should be an elected civilian. Perhaps the first military officer to think a war was dumb, and that he knew more than his commander in chief, was named Benedict Arnold.
The question is not whether Obama is qualified to lead, but where he would lead us. Military leadership does not necessarily impart wisdom. For every George Patton, there is a George McClellan. McClellan, who badly led Union forces until Abraham Lincoln turned things over to Grant and Sherman, thought the Civil War was a dumb war and ran against the president.
Lincoln, in Obama's parlance, could also have been accused of having an "arrogant bunker mentality."
We can debate whether a war is dumb. But once our commander in chief commits our force, there are two types of war — those you win and those you lose. President Reagan's strategy in the Cold War was, "we win, they lose." Obama and his hallelujah chorus may not have noticed, but in Iraq we're winning. How dumb is that?
Obama, whose foreign policy includes talking to our enemies while invading our allies, told the assembled veterans at the VFW Convention in Kansas City, Mo., "All our top military commanders recognize that there is no military solution in Iraq."
Except, of course, for Gen. David Petraeus. McClellan probably would have been willing to endorse Obama. Petraeus would probably decline such an invitation for a photo-op.
No one at Wednesday's press conference asked what the generals and admirals thought about Obama's comments to a New Hampshire audience Monday. The senator answered a question about shifting U.S. troops from Iraq to Afghanistan as follows: "We've got to get the job done there, and that requires us to have enough troops so that we are not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure there."
Raiding villages and killing civilians?
As for the views of admirals and generals, we have our favorites among those who gave us freedom and preserved it, people such as John Paul Jones, who told the captain of a British ship of the line, "I have not yet begun to fight."
We also prefer the views of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, whose advice applies to the war on terror and all wars in which America finds itself — there is no substitute for victory.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290300370384164
****
(1) This editorial is correct and to add a footnote to McPeak. General McPeak may go down in history as one of the most disliked AF Chief of Staffs ever. Best known for his redesigned unform to make the AF look more like pilots of commercial aircraft which was scraped as soon as he left office. The traditional AF Order of the Sword was almost not awarded to McPeak because of the intense dislike of the man who only cared about fighter pilots and no one else in the AF. His opinions mean nothing. BTW, he also endorsed Kerry in 2004. My bold and highlights!
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11
Obama's Pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Has a History of What Even Obama's Campaign Aides Say Is 'Inflammatory Rhetoric'
By BRIAN ROSS and REHAB EL-BURI
March 13, 2008—
Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."
In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family.
Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."
An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.
"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism.
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.
"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he told his congregation.
Sen. Obama told the New York Times he was not at the church on the day of Rev. Wright's 9/11 sermon. "The violence of 9/11 was inexcusable and without justification," Obama said in a recent interview. "It sounds like he was trying to be provocative," Obama told the paper.
Rev. Wright, who announced his retirement last month, has built a large and loyal following at his church with his mesmerizing sermons, mixing traditional spiritual content and his views on contemporary issues.
"I wouldn't call it radical. I call it being black in America," said one congregation member outside the church last Sunday.
"He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive," said another member of the congregation.
Rev. Wright, who declined to be interviewed by ABC News, is considered one of the country's 10 most influential black pastors, according to members of the Obama campaign.
Obama has praised at least one aspect of Rev. Wright's approach, referring to his "social gospel" and his focus on Africa," and I agree with him on that."
Sen. Obama declined to comment on Rev. Wright's denunciations of the United States, but a campaign religious adviser, Shaun Casey, appearing on "Good Morning America" Thursday, said Obama "had repudiated" those comments.
In a statement to ABCNews.com, Obama's press spokesman Bill Burton said, "Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they're offered from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church. Sen. Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees. But now that he is retired, that doesn't detract from Sen. Obama's affection for Rev. Wright or his appreciation for the good works he has done."
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4443788
*****
NOTE: My bold and highlight. If a pastor of my church spoke these words, I would get up and walk out never to darken the doorway of his church his again. For Obama to have continued to attend this church after 9/11 speaks volumes about Obama. No one who cares deeply for America, no matter your race would continue to attend this 'racist' church. You don't have to be white to be 'racist' as this pastor has proved. Do we want a President that goes to a church with a pastor like this in the White House that has had a huge influence on his life? Think about it! Samantha
By BRIAN ROSS and REHAB EL-BURI
March 13, 2008—
Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."
In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family.
Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."
An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.
"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism.
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.
"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he told his congregation.
Sen. Obama told the New York Times he was not at the church on the day of Rev. Wright's 9/11 sermon. "The violence of 9/11 was inexcusable and without justification," Obama said in a recent interview. "It sounds like he was trying to be provocative," Obama told the paper.
Rev. Wright, who announced his retirement last month, has built a large and loyal following at his church with his mesmerizing sermons, mixing traditional spiritual content and his views on contemporary issues.
"I wouldn't call it radical. I call it being black in America," said one congregation member outside the church last Sunday.
"He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive," said another member of the congregation.
Rev. Wright, who declined to be interviewed by ABC News, is considered one of the country's 10 most influential black pastors, according to members of the Obama campaign.
Obama has praised at least one aspect of Rev. Wright's approach, referring to his "social gospel" and his focus on Africa," and I agree with him on that."
Sen. Obama declined to comment on Rev. Wright's denunciations of the United States, but a campaign religious adviser, Shaun Casey, appearing on "Good Morning America" Thursday, said Obama "had repudiated" those comments.
In a statement to ABCNews.com, Obama's press spokesman Bill Burton said, "Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they're offered from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church. Sen. Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees. But now that he is retired, that doesn't detract from Sen. Obama's affection for Rev. Wright or his appreciation for the good works he has done."
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4443788
*****
NOTE: My bold and highlight. If a pastor of my church spoke these words, I would get up and walk out never to darken the doorway of his church his again. For Obama to have continued to attend this church after 9/11 speaks volumes about Obama. No one who cares deeply for America, no matter your race would continue to attend this 'racist' church. You don't have to be white to be 'racist' as this pastor has proved. Do we want a President that goes to a church with a pastor like this in the White House that has had a huge influence on his life? Think about it! Samantha
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Raw Story 
Posts
