If Joe the Plumber were Jawad the Suspected Terrorist, civil liberties activists would stampede the halls of Congress on his behalf. Liberal columnists would hyperventilate over the outrageous invasions of his privacy by Ohio state and local employees. The ACLU would demand the Big Brother snoopers’ heads. And Democratic leaders would convene immediate hearings and parade him around the Beltway as the new poster boy/victim of unlawful domestic spying.
But because peaceful American citizen Joe Wurzelbacher is an outspoken enemy of socialism, rather than an enemy of America, the defenders of privacy have responded to his plight with an impenetrable cone of silence.
After the last presidential debate, during which John McCain invoked Joe the Plumber’s anti-socialism shot heard ’round the world, several taxpayer-subsidized employees in Ohio immediately rifled through government databases in search of damning information. The Columbus Dispatch identified Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, as one of the dirt-diggers. She also happens to support Barack Obama and contributed the maximum amount to his presidential campaign.
On Wednesday, Jones-Kelley admitted that the records checks on Wurzelbacher that she approved were far more extensive than she first acknowledged. In addition to pawing through his child-support papers, the agency “also checked Wurzelbacher in its computer systems to determine whether he was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes.”
Jones-Kelley argued that plumbing the plumber’s information was no big deal because the agency always checks up on citizens who come into public light. Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland quickly pooh-poohed the civil liberties infringements and denied any nefarious political motives.
If that doesn’t send a chill up your spine, you don’t have a spine.
In addition to Jones-Kelley, investigators have uncovered at least three additional suspicious uses of state computer systems to access Wurzelbacher’s data. Toledo police records clerk Julie McConnell has been charged with gross misconduct for accessing the Law Enforcement Automated Data System to retrieve Wurzelbacher’s address. She reportedly did it as a favor to a reporter. Authorities also say the Cuyahoga County social services office was compromised and an outside contractor with access to the state attorney general’s test account similarly searched Wurzelbacher’s data. Moreover, his driver’s-license and vehicle-registration information were obtained from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
I contacted the ACLU twice this week for comment about this rampant plundering of Joe the Plumber’s records. Like the Genesis song goes: No reply at all. (That was the same reply the ACLU gave me two months ago when I asked if they had any reaction to the Chicago gangland tactics of a MoveOn spin-off group that announced it was trolling campaign finance databases and targeting conservative donors with warning letters in a thuggish attempt to depress Republican fundraising.)
For the last seven years, these left-wing privacy champs have lobbied on behalf of foreign enemy combatants. The ACLU fought unsuccessfully to kill the Bush administration’s post-9/11 effort to monitor terrorist communications in the United States. The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and USA Today went ballistic over the government’s bank surveillance program to trace terrorist financing.
Those same papers fumed earlier this year when State Department contractors illegally sifted through the passport files of Obama (and Hillary Clinton and John McCain). Obama mouthpiece Bill Burton intoned after the passport scandal: “Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes.”
But when freelance members of the Obama Goon Squad take it upon themselves to do opposition research on The One’s citizen critics and rummage through government databases, where are all the privocrats? And how safe will your state tax and IRS records be if Dear Leader is elected?
Archive for October, 2008
Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, continues to share her thoughts about her great-nieces’ “honor killing”, despite death threats and threats of litigation.
See the previous posts:
Amina and Sarah
Over the past months, I have learned so much about these two very brave and strong young women! These girls loved one another and if you look at their pictures, you can see this love between them, it is obvious they shared more than just sisterhood. They shared terror, they shared beatings and they shared death!
Both of these girls were very athletic. Sarah loved tennis, soccer and I have heard that she put everything into her sports! The same is said concerning Amina as she too, loved soccer and other sports as well. They superseded many of their aspirations as it was important for these girls to be the best at everything. Now, I can understand why.
Sarah and Amina were over achievers as I feel, this was a form of escapism for them. They knew making high grades would give them a better chance at reaching freedom; however, they did not realize Yaser would never allow them to have the freedom they both sought. I do not understand this mindset but, I can see why they had to try! Especially, Amina as she so desired to have a normal American life. This, along with her outspokenness got Amina on the bad side of her dad, early on in her life! Sarah, seemed to be more quiet and accepted her dad’s mandates with silence. Even so, these girls paid the highest price for seeking freedom, thinking for themselves and of course, the American boyfriends which were held secretively from Yaser.
In fact, I have no clue as to how Yaser found out about Amina’s boyfriend. I do have an idea and I wish I could say I am wrong but, I feel it was my own niece who told! I am just not sure! I have heard that Yaser went through Amina’s cell phone bill and that is how he found out. I no longer believe this at all! I think my niece told him as it appears she did as he said…no matter the outcome! Yes, I am saying that I believe my niece had a hand in this. She made decisions which kept these girls in a horrible situation and in fear of their own dad! Why? I have begged Tissy to tell the truth for the sake of her girls. She has promised me over and over to do so. She has not and will not speak out against Yaser as she told me Yaser was a good dad and NEVER abused her girls! WOW! I could not believe what I was hearing! Never abused them….what about the sexual abuse? What about the multiple reports of these girls coming to school with welts on them? What about all the accounts of people who saw Amina’s braces embedded into her lips from Yasser kicking her? What about the times he went into the bedroom and threatened them with gun in hand? What about the threats to take Amina to Egypt where he could kill her legally? What about Sarah’s message to her friend, “My dad came into my room today and said not to get used to Mina being around because she is not going to be with us much longer?” All of this and still, my niece protects her murderous husband and threatened to sue me if I did not shut up about “honor killings.” So, sue me! I cannot, in good conscience, keep silent when two girls paid the ultimate price for simple freedoms we take for granted!
I will continue writing thier story as I speak with those who loved them…outside their Arabic relatives. It appears that on that side of the family, Yaser is now a hero! Islam, praises his dad for killing his own two sisters! He has said repeatedly, “the girls deserved what Yaser did and he did a da– good job too.” I have heard that the brothers of Yaser, the girls Egyptian uncles, have made the statement that the girls asked for what they got! This, from my niece who went straight back to Yasser’s family the day after the girls were buried! This told me that she was either scared and went back to keep more blood from being shed or, she was in agreement with what Yaser did and what the Said’s were saying. At this time, I have no clue where she stands as she is now with a new Muslim man and living across the country from any of her blood relatives. So as we have offered to get her help and and so have the police! She has turned away from her blood family and embraces the ways which helped place her babies in the ground! Even so, they are all free tonight while Amina and Sarah’s life ended almost a year ago! May God continue to shed light into this very dark world in which these girls were forced to live.
Christians, it might be time to reconsider purchasing a Mac or any other Apple product.
Apple Inc. is trying to defeat California’s Proposition 8, which would protect one of society’s core traditional institutions — heterosexual marriage.
Google was one of the first, announcing publicly last month its opposition to Prop. 8. Now Apple has donated $100,000 to kill the measure that is designed to overturn the California Supreme Court decision legalizing homosexual “marriage.”
In a statement posted on its website, the company notes it was among the first companies in the Golden State to offer same-sex partner benefits to its employees. “[W]e strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation,” says Apple.
Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com is not surprised by the computer maker’s decision.
“Apple Computer’s [co-founder] Steve Jobs was on the vanguard of promoting homosexuality voluntarily within his company years ago,” says Thomasson. “He really sees his spirituality out of India where he traveled. He sold his first computer with Steve Wozniak in 1976 for the price of $666.66.”
Since Apple is promoting the idea of homosexual marriage by trying to defeat Prop. 8, Thomasson believes people ought to react in what he considers to be a perfectly normal way.
I dont believe this pastor was telling people who to vote for, he was telling them which candidates support abortion and which do not support abortion. What is wrong with that? Everyone knows that the church is opposed to abortion, so why should this church lose their tax-exempt status over this?
Another church has been reported to the Internal Revenue Service for endorsing candidates. It’s located in the tiny New Mexico town of Espanola.
Mike Naranjo pastors Rock Christian Fellowship, which uses a marquee outside of the church building to display messages to passersby. This being an election year, Naranjo put two large pictures on the sign, one of an aborted baby and the second of a healthy baby. He then put three pro-abortion candidates’ names under the picture of the aborted baby and three pro-life candidates’ names under the picture of the healthy baby.
“We put the last names of the candidates — Obama — that are pro-choice. And then on the other side we put the picture of a healthy baby and the last names of McCain and the other candidates that are pro-life,” he explains.
Naranjo contends it did not take long for Espanola residents and the media to react. “I mean, it stirred up,” he says. “It was like agitating an ants’ nest.”
Before the dust settled, Naranjo received a surprise in the mail. “And next I had heard, we were being reported by the Americans [United] for Separation of Church and State to the IRS,” he adds.
Naranjo suggests he was trying to provide a voter guide similar to those distributed by the American Family Association, but his church was focusing on one issue. “Now, the problem with this is the law,” he concludes. “In my opinion, it’s stifling the church, the very moral conscience of America.”
So far the church has no legal representation, although the Alliance Defense Fund has offered to do so. Americans United for Separation of Church and State reports that Naranjo told them he would “rather lose [his] 501(c)(3) than [his] soul.”
Why has this election been allowed to proceed without America knowing the truth about Obama’s eligibility? Only in America are people so blind that they refuse to acknowledge Obama’s attempts to hide important facts about his past.
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to help the nation avoid a constitutional crisis by halting Tuesday’s election until Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama documents his eligibility to run for the top office in the nation.
Democratic attorney Philip Berg had filed a lawsuit alleging Obama is ineligible to be president because of possible birth in Kenya, but as WND reported, a federal judge dismissed the complaint claiming Berg lacks standing to bring the action.
The 34-page memorandum that accompanied the court order from Judge R. Barclay Surrick concluded ordinary citizens can’t sue to ensure that a presidential candidate actually meets the constitutional requirements of the office.
Instead, Surrick said Congress could determine “that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the Presidency,” but that it would take new laws to grant individual citizens that ability.
“Until that time,” Surrick says, “voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring.”
“If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” – Abraham Lincoln
As Election Day rapidly approaches, many Americans are wondering why so many of their countrymen reject a genuine war hero with decades of experience, one whose pro-life, limited-government values pretty much reflect those of Middle America. Instead, these same countrymen are enthralled with a man who not only has no experience or qualifications for the job, but who is, in fact, the most radically left-wing major-party presidential candidate of our lifetime, having been mentored and supported for decades by terrorists (Ayers), communists (Davis), America-hating racists (Wright) and criminals (Rezko).
Doesn’t make much sense, does it?
After all, in past presidential contests, Americans have flatly rejected ultraliberal candidates like McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis – and those guys weren’t nearly as radicalized as Obama, who the nonpartisan National Journal rates as having the most left-wing voting record in the entire U.S. Senate – even more so than socialist Bernie Sanders! Moreover, recently it’s been proven, despite his campaign’s denials, that Obama was indeed a member of the socialist “New Party.” And Obama himself confesses that during his college days he intentionally sought out Marxists as friends.
So, how do we explain all this? Why are so many of us eager to turn our nation, the greatest and noblest on earth, over to an angry-at-America, hardcore left-wing “change agent” who will – with the help of a like-minded, Democrat-dominated Congress and a liberal-activist federal judiciary – bring about radical “change” to every area of our lives? Just consider:
Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history, having announced publicly: “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” This would remove all restrictions on abortion, including partial-birth abortion and parental notification laws, making America the abortion capital of the world. Of course, you know what kind of Supreme Court justices he would nominate, which as I have pointed out previously would end all hope of overturning Roe v. Wade in our lifetimes. He’s hands-down the most pro-homosexual candidate in history, promising to back virtually the entire radical “gay rights” agenda, including the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, essentially throwing open the door to gay marriage in all 50 states. And, as he proclaims in his “open letter to the LGBT community”: “I have also called for us to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” That will allow and encourage overt homosexuality throughout the armed forces, something military experts have long maintained will destroy the very fabric of America’s armed services. Sounds bad for Judeo-Christian values, you say? Dr. James Dobson’s influential Focus on the Family organization analyzed issue after issue and predicts – are you ready for this? – “hardship,” “persecution” and “suffering” as the fate of Christians if Obama becomes president. Obama “would be the most anti-gun president in American history,” warns the National Rifle Association, which points out that he has supported a complete ban on handguns, voted to ban most rifle ammunition, and supported increasing the tax on guns by 500 percent. Obama would devastate an already deeply troubled U.S. economy. Jacking up taxes, as he promises to do, during the worst financial crisis and credit meltdown since the Great Depression is breathtakingly foolish. No wonder three out of four CEOs of American companies say Obama would be a disaster. Apparently Obama, who constantly badmouths “CEOs” and “corporations,” doesn’t realize it is these very companies that create over 120 million of America’s 140 million jobs (the rest being created by government). In order to throttle the troublesome talk radio truth-tellers who caused him so much trouble during the election season, and to reward his cheerleaders in the elite press, Obama will attempt to muzzle conservative talk radio by resurrecting the horrendous “Fairness Doctrine.” Obama alone will be able to snatch defeat from the jaws of certain victory in Iraq. He is so weak, inexperienced and narcissistic, he will reflexively appease our nation’s enemies and thereby encourage the growth of evil the world over. Millions will suffer as a direct result.
Then there’s the issue of Obama’s truly disturbing past. It seems that no matter how stunning the revelations – some of which are finally emerging, no thanks to a shockingly irresponsible and infantile “mainstream press” – they don’t penetrate the public mind. Regardless of the evidence against him, people remain entranced by Obama:
Amidst ever-growing evidence of vote fraud in multiple states perpetrated by ACORN – the notorious left-wing group with which Obama, despite his public statements, has long and deep ties – the Obama campaign’s lawyers are now arguing that the Justice Department should not investigate any vote fraud claims until after the election. Instead, say Obama’s attorneys, Justice should investigate those citizens who have brought to light the evidence of voter fraud, for supposedly trying to intimidate poor people into not voting. And no wonder: Thirteen of Obama’s own campaign workers in Ohio have confessed to have fraudulently voted in that crucial swing state. Despite repeated indignant denials by the candidate and his campaign, Barack Obama was once a Muslim. If you question that fact as just a nasty “Internet rumor,” examine for yourself Obama’s registration papers to the Catholic school he attended in Indonesia, reproduced here by the Associated Press, which clearly indicate his religion at the time as “Islam.” Much more troubling are the radical Islamist ties he maintains today, as respected Islam expert Daniel Pipes documents. Even rabid anti-Semite and leader of the radical Nation of Islam group, Louis Farrakhan, says “the Messiah is absolutely speaking” through Obama. Which brings us to his most troubling association of all: Obama sat in the church pews for 20 years listening to and absorbing the anti-American, racist, hate-filled sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who claims, among his other lunatic rants, that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks and deliberately created AIDS in order to commit genocide against black people. Wright’s rage-filled preaching of “black liberation theology” – an anti-American, anti-White, Marxist philosophy disguised as Christianity – filled Obama’s mind and soul for two decades, and they have unquestionably influenced his worldview.
Sitting at the feet of Jeremiah Wright for two decades and being filled each week with such venom against America and white people can fairly be called a form of brainwashing. If you doubt this statement, try spending 30-60 minutes on YouTube and just listen to random video clips of Wright’s “sermons.” Then, imagine swallowing this poisonous concoction, in person, every week for 20 years. It would be transformative.
One can go on and on, it’s dizzying: Obama worked closely – for years – with William Ayers, a criminal and domestic terrorist who once bombed the Pentagon and other government buildings; there’s absolutely compelling evidence – including independent scientific forensic analysis – showing that Ayers wrote all or part of Obama’s best selling book “Dreams from My Father”; Obama received crucial funding and other financial benefits from notorious convicted Chicago criminal Tony Rezko; the Obama campaign refuses to produce a simple birth certificate to dispel persistent claims in multiple lawsuits that question the candidate’s constitutional qualifications to be U.S. president – it goes on and on, and yet inexplicably, none of it seems to penetrate the minds of those entranced with Obama.
So again, the question: Why, despite a mountain of evidence utterly proving his profound unworthiness to be president, do so many millions of Americans worship Barack Obama? Let’s take a closer look.
God continues to reveal Himself through archaeology.
JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Archaeologists in Israel said on Thursday they had unearthed the oldest Hebrew text ever found, while excavating a fortress city overlooking a valley where the Bible says David slew Goliath.
Experts have not yet been able to decipher fully the five lines of text written in black ink on a shard of pottery dug up at a five-acre (two-hectare) archaeological site called Elah Fortress, or Khirbet Qeiyafa.
The Bible says David, later to become the famed Jewish king, killed Goliath, a Philistine warrior, in a battle in the Valley of Elah, now the site of wineries and an Israeli satellite station.
Archaeologists at Hebrew University said carbon dating of artifacts found at the fortress site, about 20 km (12 miles) southwest of Jerusalem, indicate the Hebrew inscription was written some 3,000 years ago, predating the Dead Sea Scrolls by 1,000 years.
They have been able to make out some of its words, including “judge,” “slave” and “king.”
Yosef Garfinkel, the lead archaeologist at the site, said the findings could shed significant light on the period of King David’s rule over the Israelites.
“The chronology and geography of Khirbet Qeiyafa create a unique meeting point between the mythology, history, historiography and archaeology of King David,” Garfinkel said.
In East Asia, South America, and Africa third world despots run kleptocracies and routinely use government to harass, bully, and intimidate their opponents. It is a standard Marxist practice of Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, Karimov of Uzbekistan and their ilk. Should the American public elect Barack Obama President, we are already getting a glimpse of what his administration would be like.
In Missouri, Democrat party officials who also serve as prosecutors and sheriffs have threatened to arrest and try any person who “misrepresents” Barack Obama. Thus far there have been no arrests or prosecutions relating to people innocently mentioning an email that suggested Obama is a closet Muslim. Thus far.
In Ohio, Joe Wurzelbacher a/k/a Joe the Plumber happened to be standing in his front yard one morning when Barack Obama decided on an impromptu photo op. There in the plumber’s yard the fairy tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” sprang to life. Barack Obama told Joe the Obama administration would “spread the wealth around.” Like the child pointing out the emperor’s nakedness, Joe pointed out Obama’s socialism and it clicked with people.
Naturally, Joe had to be destroyed. The Ohio press is reporting Democrat officials improperly accessed government data about Joe the Plumber in order to smear him on behalf of the Obama campaign. (Thankfully, because the rule of law still exists in Ohio, the person who improperly searched government data may, according to reports yesterday, be prosecuted.) But Joe’s DMV records were looked at, his tax records were looked at, and his child support records were looked at. None of the looking was legal, but it did not matter. Joe became a threat that had to be destroyed.
Also in Ohio, student reporters for a collegiate news service are getting harassed by Barack Obama’s legal team. The reporters discovered wholesale voter fraud in Ohio, documented it, and reported it. Next thing they knew. Barack Obama’s lawyers decided to threaten them and suggested the students would have their voter registrations questioned if they did not stop.
You’ve seem them pushing weight loss, kitchen utensils and OxyClean. Last night, you may have see the latest infomercial; this one peddling a candidate for President of the United States of America.
Obama used some of his illegal campaign contributions and bought himself an infomercial.
The infomercial was full of typical Obama things, people who foolishly took out sub-prime adjustable mortgages and are whining about their payments, people who feel flooded in bills (that would be all of us – welcome to life), people who want free education and people who want, want and want.
Not only was it an infomercial selling a candidate for president, it was an infomercial selling socialism and entitlement.
WASHINGTON — In a campaign ad aired at a cost of millions, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama promised a rescue plan for the middle class in tough times Wednesday night as he reached for victory in his 21-month quest for the presidency.
“I will not be a perfect president,” Obama said in the commercial. “But I can promise you this — I will always tell you what I think and where I stand.”
Aides described the unusual ad as a final summation of Obama’s campaign. They put the total cost at roughly $4 million, enough to show it simultaneously on CBS, NBC and Fox. It also was running on BET, Univision, MSNBC and TV One.
Republican John McCain derided the event as a “gauzy, feel-good commercial,” paid for with broken promises.
Across 30 minutes, the commercial blended views of Obama speaking in a setting that resembled the Oval Office, at the Democratic National Convention and elsewhere as well as scenes of Americans discussing their economic and health care troubles, and testimonials to the Democratic presidential candidate by politicians and business executives.
This is more of Obama’s socialist agenda. I see this move as a serious attack against our freedoms and our privacy. He promises to fund this force equally with our military. The question has been raised: just what does he intend to do with this “national security force”? Would he command it? Who would it answer to?
This is really scary stuff folks!! I’m not trying to an alarmist here, but please wake up and see what we stand to loose if this guy is elected!!
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” [Obama] said. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”
More shady dealings from Obama. He isn’t even in office yet and he’s already giving Bill Clinton a run for his money.
Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.
Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.
The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.
In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for Obama’s accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted conservative bloggers to further test Obama’s finance vetting by giving money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore and cannot be traced to a donor.
The problem with such cards, campaign finance lawyers said, is that they make it impossible to tell whether foreign nationals, donors who have exceeded the limits, government contractors or others who are barred from giving to a federal campaign are making contributions.
“They have opened the floodgates to all this money coming in,” said Sean Cairncross, chief counsel to the Republican National Committee. “I think they’ve made the determination that whatever money they have to refund on the back end doesn’t outweigh the benefit of taking all this money upfront.”
The Obama campaign has shattered presidential fundraising records, in part by capitalizing on the ease of online giving. Of the $150 million the senator from Illinois raised in September, nearly $100 million came in over the Internet.
Lawyers for the Obama operation said yesterday that their “extensive back-end review” has carefully scrubbed contributions to prevent illegal money from entering the operation’s war chest. “I’m pretty sure if I took my error rate and matched it against any other campaign or comparable nonprofit, you’d find we’re doing very well,” said Robert Bauer, a lawyer for the campaign. “I have not seen the McCain compliance staff ascending to heaven on a cloud.”
The Obama team’s disclosures came in response to questions from The Washington Post about the case of Mary T. Biskup, a retired insurance manager from Manchester, Mo., who turned up on Obama’s FEC reports as having donated $174,800 to the campaign. Contributors are limited to giving $2,300 for the general election.
Biskup, who had scores of Obama contributions attributed to her, said in an interview that she never donated to the candidate. “That’s an error,” she said. Moreover, she added, her credit card was never billed for the donations, meaning someone appropriated her name and made the contributions with another card.
When asked whether the campaign takes steps to verify whether a donor’s name matches the name on the credit card used to make a payment, Obama’s campaign replied in an e-mail: “Name-matching is not a standard check conducted or made available in the credit card processing industry. We believe Visa and MasterCard do not even have the ability to do this.
“Instead, the campaign does a rigorous comprehensive analysis of online contributions on the back end of the transaction to determine whether a contribution is legitimate.”
I know I keep going on about media bias, but this trend is getting ridiculous. Earlier I compared our mainstream press to press “found in third world ‘banana republics'”. In other words, although our is not controlled specifically by the government, as those under despot control are, they have truly become the political tool of the left and might as well be government controlled propaganda machines.
How did we reach this point?
In a just released study, “A Study in Character Assassination: How the TV Networks Have Portrayed Sarah Palin as Dunce or Demon,” CMI analysts found that ABC, CBS and NBC are airing 18 negative stories for every one positive story on Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential candidate.
Is it any wonder that polls revealed a 17 percent increase in Palin’s unfavorability ratings in just one month?
After examining the TV news coverage of Palin from September 29 to October 12, CMI found that ABC, NBC and CBS news shows ran 69 stories about Palin. 2 stories were positive, 37 were negative and 30 were neutral. The 2 positive stories were a two-part interview with Palin’s parents on the CBS Early Show. Not one of the major network evening news programs – ABC’s World News, NBC’s Nightly News, and CBS’s Evening News – ran a single positive story about Palin.
ABC was hardest on Palin, as 60 percent of its stories on Palin were negative. NBC came in second, as 54 percent of its stories were negative. CBS also ran 54 percent negative stories, but also ran the only two positive stories (8 percent).
CMI found that the networks promoted three major narratives about Palin:
1. Palin is an unqualified dunce. Networks established this narrative through their decisions to re-air clips of actress Tina Fey’s impersonation of Palin and the most embarrassing clips from Palin’s interviews with CBS’ Katie Couric. Overall, 21 network stories attempted to portray Palin as out-of-her-league in her vice-presidential bid. Eleven clips of Fey’s impersonation were replayed over the course of two weeks, and 14 clips of the Couric interviews were re-aired.
2. Conservatives are rejecting Palin. Nine stories emphasized attacks levied at Palin by conservative columnists. However, the networks failed to mention the support Palin has by popular conservative pundits Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin.
3. Palin is McCain’s attack dog. Fourteen network segments demonized Palin for criticizing Barack Obama. No story analyzed in the study featured parts of her speeches that did not focus on the Obama-Biden campaign.
Sarah Palin’s nomination changed the presidential race, creating a real threat to the media’s preferred candidate, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. ABC, NBC and CBS have rallied to Obama’s defense by working hard to bring Palin down.
We blogged about possible illegal searches of “Joe the Plumber’s” private data after the last presidential debate. Michelle Malkin has a followup.
Just in: The Toledo Police Department confirms that one of its records clerks has been charged with performing an unlawful search of Joe The Plumber’s records.
That makes two Ohio government employees identified in the snooping case. (Obama donor Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, approved a separate search. More are being investigated.)
Toledo Police have confirmed that a TPD records clerk is accused of performing an illegal search of information related to ‘Joe the Plumber.’
Julie McConnell, has been charged with Gross Misconduct for allegedly making an improper inquiry into a state database in search of information pertaining to Samuel Wurzelbacher on Oct. 16.
Wurzelbacher came under the spotlight after being spoken about during the final presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain.
The inquiry into Wurzelbacher’s record is a violation of department and state policy governing the use of the Law Enforcement Automated Data System. The clerk is under fire for making the inquiry for a non-law enforcement purpose.
McConnell was hired by the Toledo Police Department in April 1995 and assigned to the Investigative Services Bureau.
A quick search of campaign donor records doesn’t turn up McConnell’s name.
Maggie Thurber wants to know: Who was McConnell digging up the information for?
Update: Here’s your answer, Maggie.
The Toledo PD clerk was reportedly doing a favor for a reporter who wanted Wurzelbacher’s address.
More: Joe may sue.
Go for it, Joe.
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has this to say:
As we reported Friday, shortly after the third presidential debate Ohio government computers were used to look up personal information on “Joe the Plumber.”
Today, one of the people involved in checking the state child support system to try to dig up some dirt has been outed: Inspector general investigating access to Joe the Plumber’s personal information.
Ohio’s inspector general is investigating why a state agency director approved checking the state child-support computer system for information on “Joe the Plumber.”
Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, confirmed today that she OK’d the check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher following the Oct. 15 presidential debate.
She said there were no political reasons for the check on the sudden presidential campaign fixture though the Support Enforcement Tracking System.
Amid questions from the media and others about “Joe the Plumber,” Jones-Kelley said she approved a check to determine if he was current on any ordered child-support payments. Such information was not and cannot be publicly shared, she said. It is unclear if Wurzelbacher is involved in a child-support case. Reports state that he lives alone with a 13-year-old son.
“Our practice is when someone is thrust quickly into the public spotlight, we often take a look” at them, Jones-Kelley said, citing a case where a lottery winner was found to owe past-due child support. “Our practice is to basically look at what is coming our way.”
And if you believe that, maybe I can convince you the moon landings were faked.
This is a little glimpse into a very dark future, in which the power of the government is used against private citizens who dare to criticize the anointed One.
The liberal press refuses to tell the truth about Obama and will not release any information that could cast him in a negative light. Our press is no better than that found in third world “banana republics”.
They are Obama activist, the same as if they were on his election worker payroll.
The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and ’80s.
According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a “friend and frequent dinner companion” of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO.
Click here to read the original LA Times story: ‘Palestinians See a Friend in Barack Obama.’
In the article — based on the videotape obtained by the Times — Wallsten said Obama addressed an audience during a 2003 farewell dinner for Khalidi, who was Obama’s colleague at the University of Chicago, before his departure for Columbia University in New York. Obama said his many talks with Khalidi and his wife Mona stood as “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases.”
Khalidi is currently the Edward Said professor of Arab Studies at Columbia. A pro-Palestinian activist, he has been a fierce critic of American foreign policy and of Israel, which he has accused of establishing an “apartheid system” of government. The PLO advocate helped facilitate negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the early ’90s, but he has denied he was ever an employee of the group, contradicting accounts in the New York Times and Washington Times.
The LA Times told FOXNews.com that it won’t reveal how it obtained the tape of Khalidi’s farewell party, nor will the newspaper release it. Spokeswoman Nancy Sullivan said the paper is not interested in revisiting the story. “As far as we’re concerned, the story speaks for itself,” she said.
Obama is certainly a socialist. He may also be a closet communist.
Barack Obama laughs off charges of socialism. Joe Biden scoffs at references to Marxism. Both men shrug off accusations of liberalism.
But Obama himself acknowledges that he was drawn to socialists and even Marxists as a college student. He continued to associate with Marxists later in life, even choosing to launch his political career in the living room of a self-described Marxist, William Ayers, in 1995, when Obama was 34.
Obama’s affinity for Marxists began when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles.
“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully,” the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, “Dreams From My Father.” “The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.”
Obama’s interest in leftist politics continued after he transferred to Columbia University in New York. He lived on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, venturing to the East Village for what he called “the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union.”
After graduating from Columbia in 1983, Obama spent a year working for a consulting firm and then went to work for what he described as “a Ralph Nader offshoot” in Harlem.
“In search of some inspiration, I went to hear Kwame Toure, formerly Stokely Carmichael of Black Panther fame, speak at Columbia,” Obama wrote in “Dreams,” which he published in 1995. “At the entrance to the auditorium, two women, one black, one Asian, were selling Marxist literature.”
Obama supporters point out that plenty of Americans flirt with radical ideologies in college, only to join the political mainstream later in life. But Obama, who made a point of noting how “carefully” he chose his friends in college, also chose to launch his political career in the Chicago living room of Ayers, a domestic terrorist who in 2002 proclaimed: “I am a Marxist.”
Also present at that meeting was Ayers’ wife, fellow terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, who once gave a speech extolling socialism, communism and “Marxism-Leninism.”
Obama has been widely criticized for choosing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an anti-American firebrand, as his pastor. Wright is a purveyor of black liberation theology, which analysts say is based in part on Marxist ideas.
Few political observers go so far as to accuse Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, of being a Marxist. But Republican John McCain has been accusing Obama of espousing socialism ever since the Democrat told an Ohio plumber named Joe earlier this month that he wanted to “spread the wealth around.”
Obama’s running mate, Biden, recently contradicted his boss, saying: “He is not spreading the wealth around.” The remark came as Biden was answering a question from a TV anchor who asked: “How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?”
“Are you joking? Is this a joke? Or is that a real question?” an incredulous Biden shot back. “It’s a ridiculous comparison.”
But the debate intensified Monday with the surfacing of a 2001 radio interview in which Obama lamented the Supreme Court’s inability to enact “redistribution of wealth” — a key tenet of socialism. On Tuesday, McCain said Obama aspires to become “Redistributionist-in-Chief.”
Obama has managed to cultivate the image of a political moderate in spite of his consistently liberal voting record. In 2006, he published a second memoir, “The Audacity of Hope,” that leaves little doubt about his adherence to the left.
“The arguments of liberals are more often grounded in reason and fact,” Obama wrote in “Audacity.” “Much of what I absorbed from the sixties was filtered through my mother, who to the end of her life would proudly proclaim herself an unreconstructed liberal.”
National Journal magazine ranked Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. The publication is far from conservative, employing such journalists as Linda Douglass, who resigned in May to become Obama’s traveling press secretary.
Prepared to be taxed…
John McCain accused his Democratic rivals on Tuesday of steadily downgrading their definition of the middle class in an effort to hit more voters with tax increases.
“We can’t let that happen,” the Republican presidential nominee told a Pennsylvania audience.
Barack Obama has consistently said that families making less than $250,000 a year will not see a tax increase under his administration. He also says those making under $200,000 will see a tax cut.
But Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, told a Scranton, Pa., TV station on Monday that Obama’s tax break “should go to middle class people — people making under $150,000 a year.”
McCain, who over the past few days has warned about the “dangerous” economic consequences of allowing a Democrat in the White House to work with a Democratic majority in Congress, said Tuesday that Biden was previewing Democratic tax policies to come.
“You getting an idea of what’s on their mind, huh? A little sneak peak,” McCain said, pointing to Biden’s comment. “It’s interesting how their definition of rich has a way of creeping down. At this rate, it won’t be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just $42,000 a year should get a tax increase.”
McCain has hammered Obama over his tax policies for the past couple weeks, attempting to make up ground against the Democratic nominee’s significant polling lead, nationally and in battleground states, with just one week to go until Election Day. The traditional Gallup daily tracking poll Tuesday, however, showed Obama up just 2 points nationally, after leading by 5 points for the past two days.
I’m going to reiterate once again that there has yet to be even one example where archeology has disproved an account from the Bible.
WASHINGTON — The fictional King Solomon’s Mines held a treasure of gold and diamonds, but archaeologists say the real mines may have supplied the ancient king with copper.
Researchers led by Thomas Levy of the University of California, San Diego, and Mohammad Najjar of Jordan’s Friends of Archaeology, discovered a copper-production center in southern Jordan that dates to the 10th century B.C., the time of Solomon’s reign.
The discovery occurred at Khirbat en-Nahas, which means “ruins of copper” in Arabic.
Located south of the Dead Sea, the region was known in the Old Testament as Edom.
Research at the site in the 1970s and 1980s indicated that metalworking began there in the 7th century B.C., long after Solomon.
But Levy and Najjar dug deeper and were able to date materials such as seeds and sticks to the 10th century B.C.
“We can’t believe everything ancient writings tell us,” Levy said in a statement. “But this research represents a confluence between the archaeological and scientific data and the Bible.”
I woke up this morning to find an e-mail in my inbox from a deacon of my former church in Virginia, Eric K., the topic of today’s commentary.
Eric told me his wife had watched and recorded video of a WSLS TV interview of Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden when it first aired on the Roanoke Virginia NBC affiliate’s station during a 6 p.m. broadcast. In the midst of the speech, Eric indicated his wife heard Joe Biden say the Democratic party had adjusted to “the realities of a new world order.”
Eric, who I’m assuming wasn’t home at the time, went to the WSLS TV website and watched video posted there of WSLS TV anchor Jay Warren interviewing Biden. When the video reached the point where Biden had said the Democratic party had adjusted to the realities of a new world order, the video had obviously been re-filmed so Joe could change what he’d said to indicate that the Democratic party had adjusted to the realities of a new world situation.
Here’s where this story gets funny. If you go to their website right now, as soon as you see this blog entry please, you will note the following written in the transcript of the interview between Biden and Warren located below the video on the page linked above:
WARREN: “Many of the polls show that your ticket may be headed to victory in November and that the Democrats may pick up a larger number of seats in the House and perhaps win 10 seats for a filibuster proof Senate. Republicans are beginning to make the argument that that means Democratic dominance in Washington, unchecked power. Is that a good thing?”
BIDEN: “First of all, we’re no where near there. We have 8 days to go. This is the most important election in the public’s life. They are looking at these races very closely. I think this is going to be much closer than everyone thinks it is. Second, with regard to the Democratic Party, this is a new Democratic Party not the party of the 70s and 80s. This is a party that has adjusted to the realities of a new world order.” He went on to say, “I think there is going to be a collaborative effort to make the 21st century an American century.”
Leave a blog comment as evidence
Everyone who goes to the WSLS page linked above who sees the video and transcript, please leave a comment on the blog in agreement with the fact that the video shows Joe Biden saying the Democratic party has accepted the realities of a new world situation in contrast to what the transcript reveals, which is Joe Biden originally said the Democratic party has accepted the realities of a new world order.
Right now the media in all its forms, from mainstream outlets to local media stations like Roanoke Virginia’s WSLS TV 10, is doing everything possible to ensure that nothing harmful to the cause of Senator Obama’s White House bid is fed to the public. This is why I’m asking my readers to acknowledge what they see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears because, once WSLS realizes the transcript and the video don’t match, the transcript will be modified in all likelihood if not removed from the page altogether.
Although it is my understanding that Senator Obama has a lead in the polls in Virginia as a whole, in southwest Virginia the words ‘new world order’ raise red flags because there are still a lot of churches there that actually embrace the teaching of Bible prophecy. Thus, it would seem, from the outside looking in, WSLS TV 10 is doing its subtle part to ensure that Senator Obama’s campaign isn’t hurt by Joe Biden’s most recent slip of the tongue.
Hats off to my brother, Eric, and his wife for giving me a heads-up on this as it’s symbolic of the campaign of distorted information and political swerving we’ve seen both the media and Team Obama engage in throughout the election process this year. Not only that, it is demonstrative of the fact that what the Bible has told us is going to come – a globalized new world order – is becoming a more and more openly accepted ‘reality’ in the eyes of those in key positions of power, both in the United States and abroad. To that end, President Bush recently met with current EU and French president Nicolas Sarkozy and EU Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso at Camp David. The outcome of that meeting brought the prophesied new world order closer to being born. Clearly, as shown here, Senators Biden and Obama are going to continue our nation’s path toward participation in same. (See my previous commentary and video for further on that.)
Most students of Bible prophecy are now of the opinion that a new world order is coming no matter which political party is elected to the White House. That may well be the case but, if we’re to slow its advance even slightly, there is no hope of that in electing Senators Obama and Biden. They’ve openly accepted the realities of a new world order. You heard it here first so vote wisely, Church!
Keep looking up! Jesus Christ is Lord and He is coming soon!
Socialism is the phantastic younger brother of despotism, which it wants to inherit. Socialism wants to have the fullness of state force which before only existed in despotism. … However, it goes further than anything in the past because it aims at the formal destruction of the individual … who … can be used to improve communities by an expedient organ of government.
– Friedrich Nitzsche
Despotism is a form of government by a single authority, either an individual or tightly knit group, which rules with absolute political power. In its classical form, a despotism is a state where a single individual, the Despot, wields all the power and authority embodying the state and everyone else is a subsidiary person. This form of despotism was common in the first forms of statehood and civilization; the Pharaoh of Egypt is exemplary of the classical Despot.
The term now implies tyrannical rule. Despotism can mean absolutism (dominance through threat of punishment and violence) or dictatorship (a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator, not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society. Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.
A pro-family leader warns that the economic policies being promoted by Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama represent those of an “unapologetic socialist.”
Earlier this month, OneNewsNow noted the mainstream news media has chosen not to report on Barack Obama’s past membership in a socialist organization (related article). While running for the Illinois State Senate, Obama was a member of the Chicago “New Party,” which was established by the Democratic Socialists of America.
Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association, has written a new column for Christian Worldview Network titled “President Obama Will Be An Unapologetic Socialist.” Wildmon says Obama’s “spread the wealth” philosophy builds class warfare and is a play on jealousy and envy.
“The idea that you take from some people who earn money and then give it to people who have not earned that money, really Robin Hood if you will, is in itself…immoral,” he contends. “Twenty percent of the people pay 86 percent of the income tax in this country, so that’s enough. You should not compel people to pay more just because they earn more, than we have already in this country.”
Obama often promises he will cut taxes for 95 percent of American workers and their families, but his tax policy plan also raises taxes on income, capital gains, and dividends for families earning more than $250,000 a year. According to the plan, the revenue generated by these tax increases will be redistributed to lower and middle-income people through a refundable tax credit.
The majority of people have told the government time and time again they do not want amnesty for illegal aliens. If Obama is elected president and the congress and senate stay Democrat, you can kiss your wishes goodbye. They will pass amnesty for illegals, plain and simple.
Numbers USA president Roy Beck explains he does not want people to feel a sense of desperation, but at the same time he does not want anyone to feel complacent when it comes to the reality of the upcoming election. Beck contends both John McCain and Barack Obama will not hesitate to push amnesty if either is elected on November 4.
“We are going to have to mobilize, as grassroots people…against the establishment if we’re going to save this country, because believe me, we are talking about saving the country,” he says.\
“If they pass that amnesty, and they pass big increases in immigration, you’ve got 12-to-20 million illegal aliens who immediately are legal, and now they’re free to start bringing in all their relatives. We’re going to see another gigantic run on the border if an amnesty goes through. America, as we know it, won’t exist in ten years. So a lot is at stake.”