It’s been too long since my last post.  Obama won the election, signifying the absolute failure of our pathetic education system and our willingness to be led and fed.   He’s been in office for nearly a quarter term, and it has been a complete disaster.  His track record for appointments is indicative of the dilemma with the presidential election, i.e.   Which unqualified person(s) should be running the country?  Does anyone investigate these people?  Where’s the background check?  What is the qualification process?   Does anyone care anymore?

 I’ve been working on ideas for a book.  I don’t know if I’ll ever find the time to write it, but it will be about family, freedom and faith; the three things I hold most dear.  I think that will be the title.  Family, Freedom and Faith:  Concepts that used to define America.   I feel obligated to exercise my freedom of speech while I still can legally.  I’ve been noticing more attacks on these concepts and hopefully I will able to make people aware of them.  Sometimes these attacks are subtle, sometimes they aren’t.  Often they are disguised as humor, like the Wonderful Pistachios Levi Johnston commercial where they say “now Levi Johnston does it with protection”.  This is a distasteful attack on both family and faith, disguised as humor.  With the recent FTC decision to start policing blogs the government has again trampled on the freedoms of the people.  The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  That obviously includes unconstitutional agencies created by Congress as well.  Apparently, the Obama administration feels like they can attack free speech as well with the need to criticize Fox News.   Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director told CNN over the weekend,  “Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party” . . .  “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent.”  Apparently the Obama administration thinks it shouldn’t be criticized, and that Fox News doesn’t have the right to free speech.


WASHINGTON, Oct 15, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ — The following is an excerpt from an editorial from New York Post, and is being released today by the Republican National Committee:

An unscripted moment with an Ohio plumber produced a startling confession from Barack Obama Sunday: The Democrat’s “middle-class tax cut” is in fact a scheme to “spread the wealth around.”

Obama dropped the mask long enough to tell the truth to Toledo plumber Joe Wurzelbacher — who had asked the Democratic nominee why he wanted to jack up his taxes just for “fulfilling the American dream.”

“I’m getting ready to buy a company that makes $250,000 to $280,000 a year,” Wurzelbacher had told Obama. “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?”

“It’s not that I want to punish your success,” Obama replied. “I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success, too … When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

At last! The truth outs!

Obama’s plan isn’t about sinking hooks into Wall Street CEOs and other fat cats, as he usually says. Fact is, there’s not enough of them to raise the cash necessary to finance his other grand plans.

No, to do that, he’ll have to go after ambitious working-class guys like Wurzelbacher — who’s been a plumber for 15 years and is looking to better himself and his family while just maybe creating a few jobs.

The American Dream?

Wurzelbacher personifies it — but Barack Obama seems determined to tax it to death and be done with it, period.

That’s been the case all along, of course. What’s different is that the Democrat finally said so. …

Who is Barack Obama? We cannot know for certain what kind of President he will be. However, we can predict what kind of man he is by looking at his past associations, actions, and involvements. He’s been involved with some fairly unsavory characters over the years. He has admitted substance abuse, in his own book “Dreams from My Father”, where he states “Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it.” He would reveal these facts on in his book, but not on his Bar application. He also didn’t admit to a 17 year lapse in paying 15 outstanding parking tickets.  He didn’t bother to pay the tickets until the newspaper pointed out that a presidential candidate ought to pay his legal debts and not just ignore them. These were old tickets, but they speak to his character, he racked up 17 parking tickets in two years while attending Harvard Law. So apparently, at Harvard Law, Obama didn’t learn about obeying the law, but rather how to break the law and avoid it for nearly two decades.  Is this the future president of the United States of America?  What kind of message does that send to our youth, to our citizens, to our enemies?  You can be President of the United States of America without having to obey the law.  You can do illegal drugs, and ignore the law, your debts, and lie on your Bar application.  We have to hold the President to higher standards than the average citizen.  This is to be our leader, not our drinking buddy.

Bill Ayers – former Weather Underground member, and unrepentant terrorist bomber, was one of Obama’s earliest political supporters. They have participated in several forums at the University of Chicago together. They also served on the Board of Directors of the Woods Fund, a far left organization. The Weather Underground Organization was an American radical left organization founded in 1969 by leaders and members who split from the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). The group organized a riot in Chicago in 1969 and bombed buildings in the 1970s.

In the months before Ayers’ memoir was published on September 10, 2001, the author gave numerous interviews with newspaper and magazine writers in which he defended his overall history of radical words and actions. Some of the resulting articles were written just before the September 11 terrorist attacks and appeared immediately after, including one often-noted article in The New York Times, and another in the Chicago Tribune. Numerous observations were made in the media comparing the statements Ayers was making about his own past just as a dramatic new terrorist incident shocked the public.

Much of the controversy about Ayers during the decade since the year 2000 stems from an interview he gave to the New York Times on the occasion of the memoir’s publication. The reporter quoted him as saying “I don’t regret setting bombs” and “I feel we didn’t do enough”, and, when asked if he would “do it all again” as saying “I don’t want to discount the possibility.” Ayers has not denied the quotes.

What was Obama doing paling around with an unreconstructed radical who spent 10 years on the run from the FBI and whose views on America or so out of the mainstream as to make him a pariah even among liberals. He must have found something attractive about Ayers to continue what was described by a friend of both men as a “friendship.” He may disavow the tactics used by Ayers but how about his ideology?

Reverend Jeremiah Wright – Supporter of Farrakhan, Anti-American, anti-Semitic, racist believer in Black Liberation Theology. Wright had been Obama’s pastor, inspiration, intimate family friend, and confidante, for 23 years. Inspiring Obama’s books he was Obama’s spiritual leader. Wright is a window into how Obama sees the world; otherwise he wouldn’t go to Wright’s church.

Trinity United Church of Christ, Chicago is the one church frequently cited by James Cone as the best example of a church formally founded on the vision of Black liberation theology. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright was introduced to black liberation theology at University of Chicago’s Divinity School. Wright would cite the works of James Cone and Dwight Hopkins who are considered the leading theologians of this system of belief, although now there are many scholars who have contributed a great deal to the field. Wright built up Trinity United Church of Christ with a vision statement based on the theology laid out by James Cone. Asked in an interview which church most embodied his message, Cone replied “I would point to that church (Trinity) first.

James Cone first addressed this theology after Malcolm X’s proclamation in the 1950’s against Christianity as “a white man’s religion”. Later, Cone indicated that Malcolm X was “not far wrong” in stating:

“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”

Liberation theology, as it has expressed itself in the African-American community, seeks to find a way to make the gospel relevant to black people who must struggle daily under the alleged burden of white oppression.

Theologians such as theology scholar Dr. Robert A. Morley take a dim view of black theology. Morley’s paper “The Goals of Black Liberal Theology” is one widely quoted paper citing specific criticisms of black theology.

He states that black theology turns religion into sociology, and Jesus into a black Marxist rebel. While making statements against whites and Asians, it promotes a poor self-image among blacks, and describes the black man as a helpless victim of forces and people beyond his control. Black theology calls for political liberation instead of spiritual salvation.

Fundamentally, it is not Bible-based, Christ-honoring theology from this critical viewpoint. Anthony Bradley of the Christian Post interprets that the language of “economic parity” and references to “mal-distribution” as nothing more than channeling the views of Karl Marx.

He believes James Cone and Cornel West have worked to incorporate Marxist thought into the black church, forming an ethical framework predicated on a system of oppressor class versus a victim much like Marxism.

Stanley Kurtz of the National Review criticizes black liberation theology, saying, “A scarcely concealed, Marxist-inspired indictment of American capitalism pervades contemporary ‘black-liberation theology’…The black intellectual’s goal, says Cone, is to “aid in the destruction of America as he knows it.” Such destruction requires both black anger and white guilt. The black-power theologian’s goal is to tell the story of American oppression so powerfully and precisely that white men will “tremble, curse, and go mad, because they will be drenched with the filth of their evil.”

Mohammar Khaddafi financed Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga’s run for president of Kenya. Obama campaigned for Odinga. Odinga lost the election, so the Muslims in Kenya went out and killed about a thousand Christians, because the Sharia law promised for Kenya by Odinga didn’t happen.

Tony Rezko — a Syrian immigrant, political fundraiser, restaurateur, real estate developer in Chicago, Illinois convicted on several counts of fraud and bribery in 2008; this scam artist and crook was also a fund-raiser for Obama. Rezko was one of Barack Obama’s first major financial contributors. In exchange for the money Rezko donated to the Obama senate campaign, Obama would “drop by” to shake hands with potential investors to Rezko’s business plans. After becoming a major contributor to Rod Blagojevich’s successful gubernatorial election, Rezko assisted Blagojevich in setting up the state’s first Democratic administration in 20 years. Rezko was able to have business associates appointed onto several state boards. Rezko and several others were indicted on federal charges in October 2006, for using their connections to the state boards to demand kickbacks from businesses that wanted to do business with the state. While the others plead guilty to the charges, Rezko pled not guilty and was found guilty of 16 of the 24 charges filed against him.

In 1990, Obama took a job with law firm Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which primarily worked civil rights cases, but also represented Rezmar (Rezko’s company) and helped the company get more than $43 million in government funding and whose former senior partner, Allison S. Davis, later went into business with Rezko and, in 2003, was appointed to Illinois State Board of Investment by Governor Blagojevich at Rezko’s request. On July 31, 1995 the first ever political contributions to Obama were $300 from a lawyer, a $5,000 loan from a car dealer, and $2,000 from two food companies owned by Rezko. Starting in 2003, Rezko was one of the people on Obama’s U.S. Senate campaign finance committee, which raised more than $14 million. Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama, which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with seed money for his U.S. Senate race. Obama has since identified over $250,000 in campaign contributions to various Obama campaigns as coming from Rezko or close associates, and has claimed to have donated almost two thirds of that amount to charity.

Also, in 2005 Obama purchased a new home in the Kenwood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (which was $300,000 below the asking price but represented the highest offer on the property) on the same day that Rezko’s wife, Rita Rezko, purchased the adjoining empty lot from the same sellers for the full asking price. Obama acknowledged bringing his interest in the property to Rezko’s attention, but denied any coordination of offers. According to Obama, while the properties had originally been a single property, the previous owners decided to sell the land as two separate lots, but made it a condition of the sales that they be closed on the same date.

After it had been reported in 2006 that Rezko was under federal investigation for influence-peddling, Obama purchased a 10 foot (3.0 m) wide strip of Ms. Rezko’s property for $104,500, $60,000 above the assessed value. According to Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Mark Brown, “Rezko definitely did Obama a favor by selling him the 10-foot strip of land, making his own parcel less attractive for development.” Obama acknowledges that the exchange may have created the appearance of impropriety, and stated “I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.”

The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama’s new home was purchased. In April 2004, Auchi attended a party in his honor at the home of Rezko. Obama also attended the party and is alleged to have toasted Auchi, according to one guest.

On December 28, 2006, Ms. Rezko sold the property to a company owned by her husband’s former business attorney. That sale of $575,000, combined with the earlier $104,500 sale to the Obama’s, amounted to a net profit of $54,500 over her original purchase, less $14,000 for a fence along the property line and other expenses. In October 2007, the new owners put the still vacant land up for sale again, this time for $1.5 million.

In June 2007, the Sun-Times published a story about letters Obama had written in 1997 to city and state officials in support of a low-income senior citizen development project headed by Rezko and partner Allison Davis. The project received more than $14 million in taxpayer funds, including $885,000 in development fees for Rezko and Davis. Of Obama’s letters in support of the Cottage View Terrace apartments development, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, “This wasn’t done as a favor for anyone; it was done in the interests of the people in the community who have benefited from the project. I don’t know that anyone specifically asked him to write this letter nine years ago. There was a consensus in the community about the positive impact the project would make and Obama supported it because it was going to help people in his district.” Rezko’s attorney responded that “Mr. Rezko never spoke with, nor sought a letter from, Senator Obama in connection with that project.

In the South Carolina Democratic Party presidential debate on January 21, 2008, Senator Hillary Clinton said that Obama had represented Rezko, who she referred to as a slum landlord. Obama responded that he had never represented Rezko and had done only about five hours work, indirectly, for Rezko’s firm.

Dr. Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour, a key adviser to one of the world’s richest men, Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, may be the political godfather that sparked the existence of who Barrack Obama is today. A conspiracy that spans at least twenty years, which can be traced back when Obama was applying to Harvard Law. Khalid al-Mansour contacted Percy Sutton, former borough president of Manhattan and founder of Inner City Broadcasting, to write a letter in support of Obama’s application to Harvard Law School. Requesting of his friend “there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?” Sutton said he acted on his friend al-Mansour’s advice. “I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly,” Sutton told NY1. Sutton did not say why al-Mansour was helping Obama, how he discovered him, or from whom he was raising money on Obama’s behalf. The New York Times described how transformative his Harvard experience became for the young Obama: “He arrived there as an unknown, Afro-wearing community organizer who had spent years searching for his identity; by the time he left, he had his first national news media exposure, a book contract and a shot of confidence from running the most powerful legal journal in the country.” The details of Obama’s academic performance are well known: At Harvard, Obama rose to academic distinction becoming the editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduating magna cum laude. Less known are the reasons al-Mansour, an activist African-American Muslim, would be a key backer for a young man from Hawaii seeking to attend the most Ivy of the Ivy League law schools.

This brings me to my final questions. Can good come from evil? Is Obama fruit of the poisonous tree?

What the hell is wrong with the mainstream media? Does anyone believe Barack Obama? Barack Obama has voted with a majority of his democratic colleagues 96.0% of the time. They make a big deal about McCain voting with his party, 88.3% of the time. Obama is not for the change I believe in, he is for more of the same liberal spending and increased government and socialism. If elected, there would be change. A change for the worse . . . A change toward socialism. The media doesn’t care; they don’t expose his relationship with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). They don’t expose his record on abortion, Obama has not seen an abortion he didn’t like. He is ultra-liberal. He is pro-gay rights, weak on immigration, pro affirmative action, basically he’s for everything I’m against. Why do we need gay-rights laws? The laws of the land are for people. Sexual orientation should be irrelevant. When you give a section or subset extra rights, you make them special in the eyes of the law and in the opinion of the public. Take for example, “hate crimes” we already have criminal charges that protect people from “hate crimes” they have names like, assault, battery, manslaughter, homicide. Why is it worse to assault someone who is “gay” or “black” than it is to assault someone who is “white” or “straight.”

I’m appalled at the treatment they are giving to Sarah Palin, they never ask if Obama will be able to take care of the Presidency because he has two children. They are attacking her character? Obama has endorse an admitted racist preacher as his “spiritual leader” People stay in churches for 20 years because they agree with the philosophy that is being preached. There are hundreds of churches in Chicago. Obama is a liar, a fraud, and as immoral as they come. The mainstream media love him, and will not point this out.