You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Election 2008’ category.

During his recent trip to Israel for the nation’s 60th anniversary, President Bush delivered what should be heralded as an incredible and insightful speech on, well, the nature of good vs. evil. As per its usual, the MSM seems to have missed the point, dismissing it as a cheap attack on Sen. Obama’s announcement that he would be willing to negotiate with extremists such as Iran. In so doing, they unfortunately have detracted attention from the actual speech, which pointed out the parallels between Israel’s situation and past fights against violent and evil men.

The President points out that we cannot give up on Israel, nor can we pretend that Hamas, Hezbollah, and the like are simply misunderstood. They are petty, evil men who kill innocents, and no amount of dialogue will change their nature as such. It would do us well to listen to the President in this, as some principles, no matter how long adhered to, never really get old.

Relevant part of the speech included below, just for giggles.

The fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time. It is more than a clash of arms. It is a clash of visions, a great ideological struggle. On the one side are those who defend the ideals of justice and dignity with the power of reason and truth. On the other side are those who pursue a narrow vision of cruelty and control by committing murder, inciting fear, and spreading lies.

This struggle is waged with the technology of the 21st century, but at its core it is an ancient battle between good and evil. The killers claim the mantle of Islam, but they are not religious men. No one who prays to the God of Abraham could strap a suicide vest to an innocent child, or blow up guiltless guests at a Passover Seder, or fly planes into office buildings filled with unsuspecting workers. In truth, the men who carry out these savage acts serve no higher goal than their own desire for power. They accept no God before themselves. And they reserve a special hatred for the most ardent defenders of liberty, including Americans and Israelis.

And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the “elimination” of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant “Death to Israel, Death to America!” That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that “the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties.” And that is why the President of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel’s population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.

The good “Reverend” just never ceases to amaze me with the hypocrisy that spews out of his mouth.

April 29, 2008 —

Barack Obama made a call for nonviolence in the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict – infuriating the Rev. Al Sharpton, who accused the presidential candidate of trying to “grandstand in front of white people,” sources told The Post.

During what a source described as a “heated” phone call yesterday, Sharpton told Obama he was disappointed with the Illinois senator’s words on Friday, when Obama said “resorting to violence to express displeasure” was “completely unacceptable and counterproductive.”

“[Obama] issues this statement and not a single rock had been thrown,” said a source. “How does the candidate of change ask people to accept a verdict that is unjust?”

The source said Sharpton had hoped Obama would “side with the Bell family” and not use it as an “opportunity to grandstand in front of white people.”

An Obama spokesman described the conversation as a chance to “hear [Sharpton’s] views and to get his perspective.”

Grandstanding in front of white people? Really?!? So saying that violent protest is not in the best interest of either the law enforcement or the black community is not only siding against the family of Mr. Bell but is also a slap in the face of black Americans and selling out to white voters? As a “typical white person” I think I can answer emphatically that Baracks comments didnt appeal to me, but came across as standard political double speak. He managed to remain completely neutral in admonishing any side in this matter, while allowing that some form of protest could be acceptable as long as it was nonviolent. Well, kudos to him for not endorsing violence anyway. 

 Even more amazing is the fact that even if  the allegations were true, “Reverend” Al would accuse anyone of grandstanding. I guess that grandstanding only becomes grandstanding when its done for white people.  Just another day of life in the US of KKKA.

Some people never learn the lessons that have cost us so dearly. In yet another example of Democrats efforts for peace at any price, Jimmy Carter has decided to meet with Hamas in Syria.

NEW YORK CITY —  Former President Jimmy Carter is reportedly preparing an unprecedented meeting with the leader of Hamas, an organization that the U.S. government considers one of the leading terrorist threats in the world.

The Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Tuesday that Carter was planning a trip to Syria for mid-April, during which he would meet with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas, on April 18.

Deanna Congileo, Carter’s press secretary, confirmed in an e-mail to FOXNews.com that Carter will be in the Mideast in April. Pressed for comment, Congileo did not deny that the former president is considering visiting Meshal.

“President Carter is planning a trip to the Mideast next week; however, we are still confirming details of the trip and will issue a press release by the end of this week,” wrote Congileo. “I cannot confirm any specific meetings at this point in time.”

Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid being arrested by the Israeli government, leads Hamas from his seat in Damascus, where he is a guest of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The State Department has designated Hamas a “foreign terrorist organization,” and some groups hold Meshal personally responsible for ordering the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack once said of the prospect of meeting with Meshal, “That’s not something that we could possibly conceive of.”

Some Carter critics called the latest reports typical of the ex-president.

“It’s about par for the course from President Carter, demonstrating a lack of judgment typical of what he does,” said John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. “To go to Syria to visit Hamas at this point is just an ill-timed, ill-advised decision on his part.”

“I’m not surprised that Carter would do this, as he has been supporting Palestinian extremism for many years,” said Steve Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a watchdog group.

Carter would be the first Western leader of his stature to meet with the Hamas chief. Though Meshal met with Clinton officials in the 1990s, the Bush administration has sought to isolate Hamas, enforcing rigid sanctions on its government in Gaza and refusing to meet with its leaders unless it recognizes Israel and abandons terror.

“I think this [visit] undermines the U.S. policy of isolating Hamas,” said Emerson. “I think this encourages Europeans to further dilute their sanctions against the Hamas government.”

“When you put the prestige of a former president of the United States in a meeting with one of its terrorist leaders, you’re giving it a legitimacy and currency it never had,” said Bolton.

But Ibrahim Hooper, communications director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a non-profit advocacy group, said Carter’s efforts demonstrate he’s a true partner in peace.

“I think if true, this report would indicate that President Carter is willing to travel any road in search of peace,” he said. “I think President Carter would only undertake such a mission if he believed that something could be achieved in terms of peace and reconciliation in the region.”

Hooper added that because of Carter’s reputation among Palestinians he might be able to bring some pressure to bear.

“Obviously President Carter has a great amount of credibility in the region because of his past efforts seeking peace internationally,” Hooper said.

The Al-Hayat report stated that Carter would be traveling in his capacity as head of the Carter Center, and not in his capacity as a former president.

“That’s a distinction that’s absurd,” said Emerson.

“Maybe he’ll give up his pension, but he’s always a former president,” said Bolton.

Unfortunately, this is just the latest in the trend of diplomatic efforts by Democratic party leaders.  Nancy Pelosi, Jim McDermont, both had smashingly successful talks in the middle east (yes thats called sarcasm). Even leading presidential candidate Barack H. Obama wants to start a new dialog with Iran. Maybe Jimmy is on to something here though. No matter that the Hamas charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, removal of infidels from muslim lands and even states that peace conferences are “ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Muslims as arbitraters.” Yes no matter how useless and wasteful negotiating with this group is Mr. Peanut may one day yet be able to say we again have “Peace for our time.”

Kudos to Walter Williams for speaking the truth.

Obama’s success is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we’ve come in resolving matters of race. I’m 72 years old. For almost all of my life, a black having a real chance at becoming the president of the United States was at best a pipe dream. Obama has convincingly won primaries in states with insignificant black populations. As such, it further confirms what I’ve often said: The civil rights struggle in America is over and it’s won. At one time black Americans did not have the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.

Here you go America!

text from the article at Politico.com

The Clinton’s joint returns show them earning more than $109 million over a period of seven years.

The biggest source of income is Bill Clinton’s speeches — source of $51 million. He made another $30 million from books; Hillary made about $10 million from her book.

Spokesman Jay Carson says, in a statement:

The Clintons have now made public thirty years of tax returns, a record matched by few people in public service. None of Hillary Clinton’s presidential opponents have revealed anything close to this amount of personal financial information.

What the Clintons’ tax returns show is that they paid more than $33,000,000 in federal taxes and donated more than $10,000,000 to charities over the past eight years. They paid taxes and made charitable contributions at a higher rate than taxpayers at their income level.

You can download them, and see a summary, here. They include detailed returns for 2000 through 2006, and the request for an extension for last year.

If you’re poring over them, let me know what you find.

ALSO: The returns went early to Drudge — who has been extremely hard on Hillary for months — as good proof as any since the time of Machiavelli that it’s better to be feared than loved.

UPDATE: The interesting part, of course, is the roughly $18 million that the summary doesn’t account for.

18 million you say? You mean the Clinton’s have $18 million that no one know’s where it could have come from? Ok… Ill be that guy. Here’s an idea where all that money could have come from.  In all fairness though, we have never seen illegal funds finding its way into the Clintons pockets in the past or even recently. Thats right people… move along! Nothing to see here!

… good. It almost gets you excited to support the one-time possible Republican Senator-turned Democrat.

This ad certainly sets the tone for the campaign, even though it will only be aired in New Mexico for now. McCain will attempt to run on his “Americanism” and the fact that he was a POW. We’ll see how this works out. He has a penchant for overplaying a line, and we need to look back only as far as 2004 to see how far that kind of thing will get you: people still joke about John Kerry, who (did you know?) once served in Vietnam.

In which the media suddenly discovers Hillary Clinton is a brazen, bald-faced, so-obvious-you-can-watch-her-nose-grow liar.

CBS was first to see the light. Twice.

Now, via Hot Air, the NAFTA chickens have landed. MSNBC let them into the coop.

As Rush would say, you just can’t make this stuff up, folks.

At the sunrise Easter service I attended yesterday, my pastor threatened people opposed to our church with a quote from rapper Ice Cube: “You picked the wrong folk to mess with.”

The title of my pastor’s sermon was “How to Handle a Public Lynching.” Appropriately, then, he coupled his Ice Cube quote with a little touch of blasphemy, saying that a fellow church member of mine who had …

… likened the U.S. to the Ku Klux Klan and declared it damned for its “state-sponsored terrorism,” is facing the same challenges Jesus did. “No one should start a ministry with lynching, no one should end their ministry with lynching,”

I don’t really attend Trinity United Church of Christ, where Barack Obama is a member and where these comments constituted the main points in the Easter morning message on the resurrection of Christ.

But if this sermon sounds a little off to you, you must be a “typical white person.” You see, as Barack has also said, “if you go there on Easter on this Easter Sunday and you sat down there in the pew you would think this is just like any other church.”

For some reason, I had thought that Easter Sunday was about Christ’s death and miraculous resurrection, providing salvation to all of humanity, blacks and whites, through God’s amazing saving grace.

My mistake, Messiah. My mistake.

Yglesias with the scoop.

On March 17th, Hillary described the trip this way:

I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.

Captain Ed has the exit question:

Hillary Clinton lied about Tuzla. She lied about it to make people believe in her qualifications to handle national crises. If she sells her Tuzla greeting as a harrowing encounter with death, what other delusions would she try to sell us as President?

UPDATE 03/24: This video, via Hot Air, knocks the socks off the one above.

Creeping Sharia cites a juicy BizzyBlog post.

The July 22, 2007 Trinity United Church of Christ bulletin reprinted an article written by Mousa Abu Marzook, deputy of the political bureau of Hamas. Originally printed in the LA Times as “Hamas’ stand“, Pastor Wright added a new title, “A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle”. The Times was criticized for giving a “Platform To Genocidal Terrorist.” Where does that leave Obama’s church? Marzook is a known terrorist and created an extensive Hamas network in the United States.

The smoking gun is here in Obama’s church bulletin. Was Obama there? Does he support Hamas? Expect Obama and his supporters to simply ignore this tacit if not direct support of a terrorist organizaton.

Visit Creeping Sharia for the photo scan of the bulletin. Maybe Wright really did mean it when he said “God damn America.” After all, Hamas has called for attacks on the US.

Quote of the Week

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." -- Thomas Jefferson