Who to Vote for in 2008? Part I

I hope to post a series of potential presidential resumes in the hopes of raising awareness of the candidates and their beliefs. Hopefully someone will emerge and inspire me, but, so far, nobody has. Up first...

Barack Obama

Read Ben Shapiro's dissection of Obama's The Audacity of Hope to discover what Obama really stands for, and what he admires. I'll highlight the key aspects of Shapiro's piece:

"Obama is a fervent believer in global warming and wants to dramatically raise fuel efficiency standards as well as taxes on oil companies. He wants to raise minimum wage and expand the Earned Income Tax Credit. Though he says he's for free trade, he voted against CAFTA. He wants to spend billions more dollars on early education, though Head Start has been a debacle. He wants to heavily regulate health care and, in doing so, essentially nationalize it. He wants to raise taxes across the board.

"He cites as his economic guru Warren Buffett and quotes him as stating, '[Billionaires] have this idea that it's 'their money' and they deserve to keep every penny of it. What they don't factor in is all the public investment that lets us live the way we do.' (191) This is Marxist trash. 'Capital is therefore not a personal, it is a social power,' Marx wrote in 'The Communist Manifesto.' Viewing private property as social property is a mandate to tyranny. Yet that's precisely how Obama views private property: 'I simply believe that those of us who have benefited most from this new economy can best afford to shoulder the obligation of ensuring every American child has a chance for that same success.' (193)"

Here is where he stands on abortion - and he calls himself a man of faith? Supporting Roe v. Wade, approving of embryonic stem cell research, and voting in favor of $100 million essentially to be allocated to promote underage promiscuity does NOT strike me as being overly religious...

He's okay with the idea of flag burning.

He voted against the Bush tax cuts which have resulted in the DOW setting multiple record highs this year, along with the lowest unemployment rate in 5 years, back in October. He's also against personal retirement accounts to reform a disastrous Social Security program.

He voted against the appointment of Justice Sam Alito, supposedly on the basis of his record of siding with "the powerful over the powerless." Read up on Sam Alito at The Moderate Voice and let me know if it sounds like someone you can get behind - sounds good to me.

He voted against re-authorization of the Patriot Act - you know, because he doesn't want to infringe upon our individual rights...and I guess implementation of the Patriot Act hasn't been successful since 9/11, right?

He loves illegal aliens.

He favors universal health care, Hillary's pet project. That sounds rosy, right?...well, here's the truth from John Stossel.

After reviewing all this material, I'm not so sure Obama's a moderate - sounds like a loony lefty to me. More profiles to come - as always, additional information is always welcome.

What’s In A Name?

I’ll start this game…how about “Mohammed” (and its derivatives)? (from America Alone by Mark Steyn):

“…Not long after September 11, I said, just as an aside, that these days whenever something goofy turns up on the news chances are it involves some fellow called Mohammed. It was a throwaway line, but if you want to compile chapter and verse, you can add to the list every week.

“A plane flies into the World Trade Center? Mohammed Atta.

“A sniper starts killing gas station customers around Washington, D.C.? John Allen Muhammed (CH: the “Biography” shows the timeline of the murders).

“A guy fatally stabs a Dutch movie director? Mohammed Bouyeri.

“A gunman shoots up the El Al counter at Los Angeles airport? Hesham Mohamed Hedayet.

“A terrorist slaughters dozens in Bali? Noordin Mohamed.

“A British subject self-detonates in a Tel Aviv bar? Asif Mohammed Hanif.

“A terrorist cell bombs the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? Ali Mohamed.

“A gang rapist preys on the women of Sydney? Mohammed Skaf.

“A group of Dearborn, Michigan, men charged with cigarette racketeering in order to fund Hezbollah? Fadi Mohamad-Musbah Hammoud, Mohammed Fawzi Zeidan, and Imad Mohamad-Musbah Hammoud.

“A Canadian terror cell is arrested for plotting to bomb Ottawa and behead the prime minister? Mohammed Dirie, Amin Mohamed Durrani, and Yasim Abdi Mohamed….

“…when I made my observation about multiple Mohammeds in the news, Merle Ricklefs, a professor at the National University of Singapore and South-East Asian editor of the sixteen-volume Encyclopedia of Islam, remarked sarcastically, ‘Deep thinking, indeed.’ Well, gosh, maybe it’s not terribly sophisticated. But then again, when you’re dealing with fellows who decapitate female aid workers in Iraq and engage in mass slaughter of Russian schoolchildren, maybe sophistication isn’t always helpful. Particularly when sophistication seems mostly to be a form of obfuscation by experts wedded to the notion that Islam is something that simply can’t be understood unless you’ve read all sixteen volumes of their Encyclopedia, or, better yet, written them. For those of us who aren’t professors of Islamic studies, the obvious course is to step back and try to work from first principles: What’s happening? Who’s doing it? The five-thousand-guys-named-Mo routine meets the ‘reasonable man’ test: it’s the first thing an averagely well-informed person who’s not a muticulti apologist notices – here’s the evening news and here comes another Mohammed.”

Well…glad to know SOMEONE thinks I’m a “reasonable man”…

What do you suppose is now the most common baby boy's name in Britain?...

MOHAMMED.

I think it's fitting to throw in another endorsement for sensible Melanie Phillips' Londonistan.

Who’s got another name?

Should John Kerry be Thrown in Jail?

First, a little background as to why this question may be legitimate: the text of the Logan Act:

“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned no more than three years, or both.

“This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.”

Follow the link for more of the historical background of the act. There seem to be no prosecutions under the act, with some historical references. But, in this time of war, I wonder if the act will gain more prominence…here’s why:

1) John Kerry is planning to begin his own “Middle East Tour: 2006” with stops in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Israel. The purpose of the trip? According to The Boston Globe, “he will meet with the head(s) of state in all of those countries.” Hmmm…I wonder if he will discuss “any disputes or controversies” those countries have had with the United States recently…

Just look at the way liberals gush over him on his website. A few samples:

“Not surprisingly, those fine folks currently inhabiting the West Wing don't like this latest example of Senator Kerry working hard to carry out the wishes of the American people one little bit.”

“The more that Dems like Senator Kerry can show that the U.S. is NOT George Bush, the more we can show a different, better vision for how America can be in the world, the better it will be for America, and - hopefully - the more likely more Americans will wake up and continue to elect thinking, rational, mature people (usually Democrats) to run the country.”

“This is the sort of leadership I long to see in our country. This is the reason why the rest of the world respects John Kerry. It's one of the many reasons I respect him. I'm glad that we have people like him out there trying to neutralize some of the damage our president has done to our ability to get along with the rest of the world. It's a dangerous trip, and Senator Kerry has my utmost appreciation for undertaking it.”

Ugh. Were these people raised on Kool-Aid or what? (or maybe just this book – via Mary Katharine Ham)

Note that Kerry cites Ronald Reagan’s negotiating with Soviets after referring to them as the “evil empire”…ummm, quick point here: REAGAN WAS THE PRESIDENT. Nice try.

2) Bill Richardson of New Mexico meets with North Korean officials. What is going on here? The news brief plainly states: “Richardson will not be acting as an official representative of the Bush administration at Friday's meeting.” Okay – then it’s a VIOLATION OF THE LAW. Plain and simple! Unintentionally or not, the piece makes it quite clear that Richardson’s main motivation for the meeting is to bolster his chances for a presidential run in 2008. This makes me sick – turning your back on the United States in the hopes of representing it as President? What sense does this make?

Despite claims that he won’t make an official decision until January, there’s reason to believe that he’s running – he said so. Apparently, his two distinct advantages are his “diplomatic skill” and his “Hispanic heritage” – from Fox News:

“‘I am Hispanic, which I believe is an asset,’ Richardson said. ‘But I'm not running as an Hispanic, I am running as an American who is proud to be Hispanic.’”

We’ll see about that when the campaign starts – I’m sure he’ll provide us with plenty of material.

I don’t know what will come of either of these meetings. But, as far as I’m concerned, the results of the meetings really are not the point. What’s more important to recognize is that these two Democratic representatives are undermining the role of the Commander-in-Chief and taking foreign policy into their own hands. Since they are both doing so without consent from the United States, they should be punished accordingly, under the Logan Act.

Isn’t it clear that people like Kerry and Richardson DON’T have the interests of the American people at heart? Political posturing at the potential expense of our national security is an absolute disgrace and should be viewed as such. Let’s hope other Dems don’t follow in their footsteps the second they get a whiff of power…

Do Moonbats Fly North?

After Obama-mania left New Hampshire, Howie Carr points out the evidence:

“New Hampshire is Blue Hampshire. It’s gone from the Granite State to the Granola State. From Live Free or Die to just plain Live Free. No wonder the Old Man of the Mountain toppled over. Who would have ever predicted that New Hampshire would someday send clones of Bernie Sanders and Cindy Sheehan to Congress?

“This is all very depressing to the Massachusetts natives who fled north thinking they could escape the insanity. ‘Where do I go next?’ one of them moaned to me Monday

“In 2004, many New Hampshire Republicans thought the state was stolen from George Bush by busloads of Bay State students who allegedly took advantage of notoriously lax same-day registration.

“Now the moonbats will be heading north, and they’ll be staying, at least until the presidential primary.

“But there is a silver lining to this dark cloud. This blue tidal wave should save the New Hampshire primary. New Hampshire is no longer out of the mainstream. It’s as nutty as everywhere else.”

I wasn’t too convinced after reading this piece, so I went looking for answers – and I found some.

1) They certainly teach in New Hampshire. Nutty Professor William Woodward “teaches” at the University of New Hampshire, spouting wild conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 – at a public university, funded by taxpayer money. He’s a member of the unhinged wacko group “Scholars for 9/11 Truth” whose main contention is that 9/11 was an inside job. Peruse the website and try not to vomit. Here is one article that I HAD to read (and no I did NOT write it – can you TELL?):

“If the official story is wrong, then what did happen? As you might expect, there's quite a bit of dissension on this point. Like any movement, the Truth Movement is beset by internecine fights between different factions: those who subscribe to what are termed LIHOP theories (that the government "let it happen on purpose") and the more radical MIHOP ("made it happen on purpose") contingent. Even within these groups, there are divisions: Some believe the WTC was detonated with explosives after the planes hit and some don't even think there were any planes.

“To the extent that there is a unified theory of the nature of the conspiracy, it is based, in part, on the precedent of the Reichstag fire in Germany in the 1930s. The idea is that just as the Nazis staged a fire in the Reichstag in order to frighten the populace and consolidate power, the Bush Administration, military contractors, oil barons and the CIA staged 9/11 so as to provide cause and latitude to pursue its imperial ambitions unfettered by dissent and criticism.”

There’s that whole “Bush is a Nazi” thing again…

Here is more on Woodward’s moonbat antics.

2) They certainly vote that way in New Hampshire. Take a look at this op-ed from the Washington Post. The figures point to a staggering voting trend in New Hampshire – the inclination to vote Democrat. Hmmm…wonder why that is, since, as the column points out, the state hasn’t been under complete Democratic control since 1874…

Maybe because…

3) People from Massachusetts DO move there! Look at this staggering statistic:

“…on net, 78,201 former Massachusetts residents fled to the Granite State between 1990 and 2002 - with a sharp acceleration in movement over the last five years. In 1997-98, on net, the Bay State lost 5,014 residents; that number almost doubled to 9,953 by 2001-2002, a 98.5% increase.”

And we all know how blue a state Massachusetts is. But has the moonbattery affected all New Hampshire residents?

4) I don’t think so, but hopefully Republicans don’t follow the logic of Mary Maxwell, who calls herself a “Republican” – thankfully, she only won 11% of the vote in the Republican primary. From her website:

a) she is against increases in defense (read: “military”) spending
b) she is against the Patriot Act
c) she thinks, no, IS CERTAIN, that 9/11 was an inside job
d) she thinks Donald Rumsfeld is sociopathic

Sound like a Republican to you? More like a moonbat to me…

But at least now we know: Moonbats do indeed fly North…now, what to do about it…

Who Is Aung San Suu Kyi?

You should know. More from CNN.

Some quick facts:

1) She was freely elected by the Burmese people with an overwhelming 82% majority in 1990 – a general election called for by the military junta in power. The party she represented is called the National League for Democracy.

2) The military did not recognize her victory, instead putting Suu Kyi under house arrest.

3) She was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 – her sons accepted the honor on her behalf in Oslo, Norway.

4) She has not seen her children since 1999, as they live in the United Kingdom, and she is again under house arrest.

5) Suu Kyi was supposed to be granted freedom from house arrest in May of this year, but the Burmese government extended the house arrest for another year – she is still being held under Burma’s State Protection Act.

Myanmar has drawn comparisons to North Korea, primarily for three reasons: geographic location, military rule, and closed economies. But some hope:

“Unlike North Korea, however, Burma's military government (which refers to the country as Myanmar) faces a significant opposition movement. Likewise, the military junta, which has failed to recognize the 1990 elections won by the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD), appears to be on the threshold of reintroducing some measure of democracy.

“Although opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest and the NLD has boycotted the national convention, the 1,000- plus delegates at the convention plan to complete a new constitution by year's end as part of the government's ‘seven-stage path to democracy.’

“The government promises to put the new constitution to a vote in a national referendum followed by multiparty elections that reserve a certain portion of seats in the new parliament for the government party.”

More reason for a newly elected government? Human rights abuse and underage military service (from the same source):

“…critics of the regime describe a dismal human rights situation. Human Rights Watch has cited the regime for the detention of 1,300 political prisoners, the killing of protesters, and the use of 70,000 child soldiers, which is the largest concentration of under-18 conscripts in the world.

“According to Jeremy Woodrum of the U.S. Campaign for Burma, ‘over a million refugees, most of them from eastern Burma along the border with Thailand and China, are fleeing because the regime has burned down 3,000 villages over the last 10 years’ as part of an effort to target civilian populations in areas that provide a base for ethnic armies.

“This flow of refugees, as well as drug trafficking and the spread of infectious diseases, has made it very difficult for Asia to ignore Burma. These problems extend beyond the region as well. ‘Burma presents a serious security threat to the region and requires attention from the United States and the U.N. Security Council,’ argued Green, citing how the Security Council is moving forward to address Burma's rights record.”

So what has the United States been doing? As recently as September, First Lady Laura Bush called for Suu Kyi’s release, while also asking for action from the U.N. Security Council – action which has been slow. Here’s why (emphasis mine):

“‘It's really important for Burma's neighbors to speak with one voice,’ the first lady said. While the United States believes strong sanctions are the best way to force change in the country, others favor discussions with the generals.”

Discussions with hostile regimes…sound familiar?

More on U.S. policy towards Myanmar, as well as comparisons to North Korea, here.

The European Union has also tried to crack down on Myanmar. So has Amnesty International.

Also, this past November, Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy Party asked for U.N. help, though there have been claims from both China and Russia that Myanmar represents no threat to stability in the Southeast Asian region…

Really? I suppose China and Russia don’t consider money-laundering a threat. Or a potential AIDS pandemic. Or the outflow of Burmese refugees to neighboring countries, numbering in the millions… primarily for the sex trade industry.

I’ll continue to track her story. I’ll leave you with her Nobel Prize acceptance speech from 1991. Who could predict that “Burma's long struggle for peace, freedom and democracy” would reach such epic proportions…

The Dennis Prager Mess

Here is the column that started it all. Keith Ellison, newly elected Democratic Congressman in Minnesota, is a Muslim.

Who cares, right? No big deal. First Muslim Congressman – great for diversity, multiculturalism, blah blah blah…

Ellison has stated that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the Koran.

BIG PROBLEM.

Last time I checked, this country was not founded on Islamic principles – but Judeo-Christian ones (check out Bill O’Reilly’s Culture Warrior). Therefore, if Ellison is going to swear to uphold the principles of THIS COUNTRY (and NOT of any religion), then his oath should be taken on the Bible. This is not a religious issue, but a values issue. It is not being disrespectful to Islam, the Koran, or Keith Ellison himself. He is free to practice his religion and serve the people of Minnesota.

But he has to recognize that this country comes first – and he was elected to uphold, rather than subvert, its values. It also shows, yet again, a lack of assimilation. If you live in the United States – play by the rules. Or we should kick you out.

So who, exactly, is Keith Ellison? Power line did some digging:

“Keith Ellison is the endorsed Democratic candidate for Congress in Minnesota's solidly Democratic Fifth District (Minneapolis). Ellison's local leadership of the Nation of Islam, his defense of the ‘truth’ of an attack on Minneapolis Jews as ‘the most racist white people,’ his affiliation with convicted murderer and Vice Lords gang leader Sharif Willis, his support of the Vice Lords gangbangers charged (and subsequently convicted) with the murder of Minneapolis police officer Jerry Haaf, his outrageous attacks on law enforcement authorities, his demand that Symbionese Liberation Army terrorist Sara Jane Olson be freed, his concern for the continuing freedom of convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur on the lam in Havana -- not one of these elements of Ellison's public record has seen the light of day in the local media.”

More background from the Washington Times, which highlights Democratic disapproval with Ellison’s ties to CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations):

“But it is top Democrats who have issued some of the most stinging rebukes of CAIR. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's second-leading Democrat, has said that CAIR ‘is unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its association with groups that are suspect.’ Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, has stated flatly that CAIR ‘has ties to terrorism.’ Mr. Schumer has special disdain for Mr. Awad and CAIR's other co-founder, Omar Ahmad, saying in a 2003 hearing that both men have ‘intimate connections with Hamas.’"

If you need to be reminded about Hamas, read this.

So what will happen if Ellison takes his oath on the Koran, instead of the Bible?

Prager’s take: “Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America.”

This is dead on. As Monica Crowley has repeatedly noted on her radio program, radical Islamists are patient. Any small step into infiltrating American culture will be viewed as a huge victory. As I’ve blogged about before, whether it’s “Flying While Muslim!”, not being allowed to pray while at the gym, or not taking an oath of office on a Bible, the wheels are in motion – not for “tolerance”, but radical takeover.

Here is Prager’s follow-up responding to the original outrage over the first column:

“Why wouldn't Ellison bring a Bible along with the Koran? That he chose not to is the narcissism of multiculturalism that I referred to: The individual's culture trumps the national culture.

“You don't have to be Christian to acknowledge that the Bible is the source of America's values. Virtually every founder of this country knew that and acknowledged it. The argument that founders such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were deists, even if accurate (it is greatly exaggerated), makes my point, not my opponents'. The founders who were not believing Christians venerated the Bible as the source of America's values just as much as practicing Christians did.

“America derives its laws from its Constitution. It derives its values from the Bible. We don't get inalienable rights from the Constitution; we get them from God. Which is exactly what the signers of the Declaration of Independence wrote: We are endowed with inalienable rights by our Creator, not by government and not by any man-made document. And that Creator and those inalienable rights emanate from the Bible. Keith Ellison's freedom to openly believe and practice Islam and to run for elective office as a Muslim is a direct result of a society molded by the Bible and the people who believed in it, a fact he should be willing to honor as he is sworn in.”
Keith Ellison is forcing the issue here. Bring both books if you want, but stop crying racism and Islamophobia every time someone wants to stand up for America.

I praise Dennis Prager – do you?

Debunking Global Warming

Here it is.

I’m in the process of reading it and will probably highlight some stuff later. I just hope I don’t fall asleep while doing so (thanks Tim for that link).

How A Gym Becomes A Mosque

Via Debbie Schlussel.

The headline in the Detroit News Online makes sure to mention that Wardeh Sultan, the woman who was interrupted while praying at a gym and complained about it, is a “Dearborn resident.” Okay, so she’s a United States citizen. Great. Now that that has been established, we’re going to complain about civil rights abuse:

“Fitness USA, a gym chain, is investigating an alleged civil rights violation involving a local Muslim woman who says her afternoon prayer was interrupted by a fellow patron, and that her complaint to management about the situation was rejected.

“‘The manager told me, 'You have to respect her (the patron), but she does not have to respect your God,' said Wardeh Sultan of Dearborn. ‘I’ve had my membership for seven or eight years, and I've never had a problem with praying there.’

“‘I told that manager, 'I can't believe you said that,' Sultan said. ‘Honestly, I feel humiliated and I feel ashamed, right now, to go back to Fitness USA.’”

Here’s the response from the gym (emphasis mine):

“‘We will, as we will with any complaint involving our staff and a member, be doing a full and thorough investigation of the matter and take any appropriate action we need to take,’ said Jodi Berry, executive director of Fitness USA. ‘We want every member to get a good exercise experience every time they come to the club.’"

An EXERCISE experience – not a PRAYER experience. But here’s the clincher of the article, the last thought columnist Gregg Krupa leaves for his audience:

“‘We're here in the great United States and for this happening, it truly breaks my heart,’ she said. ‘You know, things are starting to change backwards, instead of frontward. We need to keep this United States, our country, up on our shoulders. We don't want it to go down.’”

Well, Sultan did get one thing right – things ARE starting to change BACKWARDS. And it starts with people like her. Now, I’m not overly familiar with the Muslim faith, but I would venture a guess and say that there’s no requirement for someone of that faith to pray in a gym. I can certainly sympathize with adhering to your religion, praying five times a day, and all that. But AT THE GYM?

Sultan’s defender, Imad Hamad, regional director of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, says that it’s okay for Christians and Jews to pray openly and publicly, but not Muslims. If anyone has ever seen a Christian or a Jew pray openly in a gym, please let me know. As Schlussel notes, if she saw ANYONE openly praying at a gym, regardless of faith, that would disturb her.

Why? Because it’s a GYM – not a house of worship.

Don’t be surprised if this gym designates a “non-denominational” prayer room, or something like that, to appease these whiners.

Is there any such thing as assimilation anymore?

Global Warming Madness – Maybe I was RIGHT?

Look what I found via the Washington Times. Here’s the most important excerpt (emphasis mine):

"’Senator Inhofe believes that poorly conceived policy decisions will result from the media's nonstop hyping of 'extreme scenarios' and dire climate predictions,’ said committee Communications Director Marc Morano. ‘This hearing will serve to advance the interests of sound science and encourage rational policy decisions.’"

What “nonstop hyping”??? Well, let’s see what causes global warming:

1) The sun causes global warming.
2) Trees cause global warming.
3) Deforestation also causes global warming.
4) Humans (in particular, President Bush) cause global warming – ESPECIALLY when there are too many of them.
5) Power plants, cars, airplanes, and buildings cause global warming.
6) Agriculture causes global warming.
7) Watching TV or listening to a stereo cause global warming.
8) Cigarette smoking causes global warming.
9) Dandruff causes global warming.
10) Flatulent sheep (I can’t make this up) cause global warming.

This seems to be only a partial list! The world is doomed – just look at what global warming DOES:

1) worsens allergies
2) increases stress levels
3) destroys bananas (but, fortunately, also helps to grow them)
4) causes bubonic plague
5) causes blizzards
6) leads the Earth to spin out of control
7) destroys gene pools
8) reduces fertility in humans (which has to be a good thing, right? Too many of us already…)
9) no maple syrup???
10) changes the sex of an animal

Again – there’s WAY more that global warming does (see Spiked) according to…well, everyone.

I’m very much looking forward to this hearing – aren’t you?