Sep 25, 2008
Not So Basic Economics: Free Markets & Civil Society
Are you confused about the current fiancial crisis in the United States? If so, take a short course in econimics now free, with the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, and figure out where you stand when it comes to government intervention in our markets.
To take the short course simply click here.
Sep 22, 2008
Iran, Nuclear Bombs, and Madmen
By CAROLINE GLICK
Iran is just a heartbeat away from the A-bomb.Last Friday the Daily Telegraph reported Teheran has surreptitiously removed a sufficient amount of uranium from its nuclear production facility in Isfahan to produce six nuclear bombs. Given Iran's already acknowledged uranium enrichment capabilities, the Telegraph's report indicates that the Islamic Republic is now in the late stages of assembling nuclear bombs.
It would be a simple matter for Iran to assemble those bombs without anyone noticing. US spy satellites recently discovered what the US believes are covert nuclear facilities in Iran. The mullocracy has not disclosed these sites to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, which is charged with inspecting Iran's nuclear sites.
As to the IAEA, this week it presented its latest report on Teheran's nuclear program to its board members in Vienna. The IAEA's report claimed that Iran has taken steps to enable its Shihab-3 ballistic missiles to carry nuclear warheads. With their range of 1,300 kilometers, Shihab-3 missiles are capable of reaching Israel and other countries throughout the region.
In support of its swiftly progressing nuclear program, Iran has escalated both its conventional military and terroristic adventurism. It has also ratcheted up its diplomatic assault on the US. This week, Teheran conducted a countrywide air defense exercise. Gen. Khatim al-Anbiaa, the commander of Iran's Air Defense Corps, explained that the exercise was aimed at defending against both electronic jamming systems and actual bombing strikes.
Also this week, Yahya Rahim Safavi, the former commander of the Revolutionary Guards Corps and current senior adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for security affairs, announced that Iran has shifted responsibility for naval warfare on the Persian Gulf from its regular naval forces to its more fanatical Revolutionary Guards. The Iranian navy will now be deployed only in the Gulf of Oman and along the Caspian Sea.
The deployment of the Guards along the Persian Gulf means that the force will be responsible for naval operations in the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of global oil shipments travel. Issuing Iran's most explicit threat to US naval forces in the area and global oil shipments to date, Safavi declared, "The entire Strait of Hormuz is under the tight control of the Iranian security forces, which are ready to defend Iran against any threat."
To finish the article click here.
Iran is just a heartbeat away from the A-bomb.Last Friday the Daily Telegraph reported Teheran has surreptitiously removed a sufficient amount of uranium from its nuclear production facility in Isfahan to produce six nuclear bombs. Given Iran's already acknowledged uranium enrichment capabilities, the Telegraph's report indicates that the Islamic Republic is now in the late stages of assembling nuclear bombs.
It would be a simple matter for Iran to assemble those bombs without anyone noticing. US spy satellites recently discovered what the US believes are covert nuclear facilities in Iran. The mullocracy has not disclosed these sites to the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, which is charged with inspecting Iran's nuclear sites.
As to the IAEA, this week it presented its latest report on Teheran's nuclear program to its board members in Vienna. The IAEA's report claimed that Iran has taken steps to enable its Shihab-3 ballistic missiles to carry nuclear warheads. With their range of 1,300 kilometers, Shihab-3 missiles are capable of reaching Israel and other countries throughout the region.
In support of its swiftly progressing nuclear program, Iran has escalated both its conventional military and terroristic adventurism. It has also ratcheted up its diplomatic assault on the US. This week, Teheran conducted a countrywide air defense exercise. Gen. Khatim al-Anbiaa, the commander of Iran's Air Defense Corps, explained that the exercise was aimed at defending against both electronic jamming systems and actual bombing strikes.
Also this week, Yahya Rahim Safavi, the former commander of the Revolutionary Guards Corps and current senior adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for security affairs, announced that Iran has shifted responsibility for naval warfare on the Persian Gulf from its regular naval forces to its more fanatical Revolutionary Guards. The Iranian navy will now be deployed only in the Gulf of Oman and along the Caspian Sea.
The deployment of the Guards along the Persian Gulf means that the force will be responsible for naval operations in the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of global oil shipments travel. Issuing Iran's most explicit threat to US naval forces in the area and global oil shipments to date, Safavi declared, "The entire Strait of Hormuz is under the tight control of the Iranian security forces, which are ready to defend Iran against any threat."
To finish the article click here.
A liberal Democrat,David Blankenhorn, backs Proposition 8
By David Blankenhorn
I'm a liberal Democrat. And I do not favor same-sex marriage. Do those positions sound contradictory? To me, they fit together.Many seem to believe that marriage is simply a private love relationship between two people. They accept this view, in part, because Americans have increasingly emphasized and come to value the intimate, emotional side of marriage, and in part because almost all opinion leaders today, from journalists to judges, strongly embrace this position. That's certainly the idea that underpinned the California Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage.
But I spent a year studying the history and anthropology of marriage, and I've come to a different conclusion.Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children. In this sense, marriage is a gift that society bestows on its next generation. Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple.
Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other. These days, because of the gay marriage debate, one can be sent to bed without supper for saying such things. But until very recently, almost no one denied this core fact about marriage.
Summing up the cross-cultural evidence, the anthropologist Helen Fisher in 1992 put it simply: "People wed primarily to reproduce." The philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell, certainly no friend of conventional sexual morality, was only repeating the obvious a few decades earlier when he concluded that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution."Marriage is society's most pro-child institution.
In 2002 -- just moments before it became highly unfashionable to say so -- a team of researchers from Child Trends, a nonpartisan research center, reported that "family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other. For these reasons, children have the right, insofar as society can make it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world. The foundational human rights document in the world today regarding children, the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically guarantees children this right. The last time I checked, liberals like me were supposed to be in favor of internationally recognized human rights, particularly concerning children, who are typically society's most voiceless and vulnerable group. Or have I now said something I shouldn't? Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him. Every single one. Moreover, losing that right will not be a consequence of something that at least most of us view as tragic, such as a marriage that didn't last, or an unexpected pregnancy where the father-to-be has no intention of sticking around. On the contrary, in the case of same-sex marriage and the children of those unions, it will be explained to everyone, including the children, that something wonderful has happened.
For me, what we are encouraged or permitted to say, or not say, to one another about what our society owes its children is crucially important in the debate over initiatives like California's Proposition 8, which would reinstate marriage's customary man-woman form. Do you think that every child deserves his mother and father, with adoption available for those children whose natural parents cannot care for them? Do you suspect that fathers and mothers are different from one another? Do you imagine that biological ties matter to children? How many parents per child is best? Do you think that "two" is a better answer than one, three, four or whatever? If you do, be careful. In making the case for same-sex marriage, more than a few grown-ups will be quite willing to question your integrity and goodwill. Children, of course, are rarely consulted.
By David Blankenhorn
But I spent a year studying the history and anthropology of marriage, and I've come to a different conclusion.Marriage as a human institution is constantly evolving, and many of its features vary across groups and cultures. But there is one constant. In all societies, marriage shapes the rights and obligations of parenthood. Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children. In this sense, marriage is a gift that society bestows on its next generation. Marriage (and only marriage) unites the three core dimensions of parenthood -- biological, social and legal -- into one pro-child form: the married couple.
Marriage says to a child: The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you. Marriage says to society as a whole: For every child born, there is a recognized mother and a father, accountable to the child and to each other. These days, because of the gay marriage debate, one can be sent to bed without supper for saying such things. But until very recently, almost no one denied this core fact about marriage.
Summing up the cross-cultural evidence, the anthropologist Helen Fisher in 1992 put it simply: "People wed primarily to reproduce." The philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell, certainly no friend of conventional sexual morality, was only repeating the obvious a few decades earlier when he concluded that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution."Marriage is society's most pro-child institution.
In 2002 -- just moments before it became highly unfashionable to say so -- a team of researchers from Child Trends, a nonpartisan research center, reported that "family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." All our scholarly instruments seem to agree: For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other. For these reasons, children have the right, insofar as society can make it possible, to know and to be cared for by the two parents who brought them into this world. The foundational human rights document in the world today regarding children, the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically guarantees children this right. The last time I checked, liberals like me were supposed to be in favor of internationally recognized human rights, particularly concerning children, who are typically society's most voiceless and vulnerable group. Or have I now said something I shouldn't? Every child being raised by gay or lesbian couples will be denied his birthright to both parents who made him. Every single one. Moreover, losing that right will not be a consequence of something that at least most of us view as tragic, such as a marriage that didn't last, or an unexpected pregnancy where the father-to-be has no intention of sticking around. On the contrary, in the case of same-sex marriage and the children of those unions, it will be explained to everyone, including the children, that something wonderful has happened.
For me, what we are encouraged or permitted to say, or not say, to one another about what our society owes its children is crucially important in the debate over initiatives like California's Proposition 8, which would reinstate marriage's customary man-woman form. Do you think that every child deserves his mother and father, with adoption available for those children whose natural parents cannot care for them? Do you suspect that fathers and mothers are different from one another? Do you imagine that biological ties matter to children? How many parents per child is best? Do you think that "two" is a better answer than one, three, four or whatever? If you do, be careful. In making the case for same-sex marriage, more than a few grown-ups will be quite willing to question your integrity and goodwill. Children, of course, are rarely consulted.
By David Blankenhorn
Sep 15, 2008
What is Wrong with Joe Biden?
One of Sen. Biden's most enduring qualities is his tendency to say things he wishes he hadn't. Since being picked as Barack Obama's VP, he's referred to his running mate as "Barack America," referred to a future administration as a "Biden administration" and who last week at a rally shouted out to Missouri State Sen. Chuck Graham, "Chuck, stand up, let people see you." (Sen. Graham is confined to a wheelchair.)
But while Biden's reputation for being a one-man verbal wrecking crew is well-known, yesterday's supposed gaffe may not have been. While in Nashua, N.H., Biden told the crowd, "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States. … Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me." It seems as though the question must be asked, "What is wrong with Joe Biden?"
But while Biden's reputation for being a one-man verbal wrecking crew is well-known, yesterday's supposed gaffe may not have been. While in Nashua, N.H., Biden told the crowd, "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States. … Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me." It seems as though the question must be asked, "What is wrong with Joe Biden?"
Sep 10, 2008
A perfect example of why California needs Prop 8
According to a WorldNetDaily article, "Brides" and "grooms" are no longer allowed to marry in the State of California. That privilege is only extended to individuals who allow themselves to be called "Party A" and "Party B" on marriage licenses.
Pastor Doug Bird of Abundant Life Fellowship in Roseville, Calif., was alarmed to find the state now rejects the traditional terms after he officiated his first marriage ceremony last week following the California Supreme Court decision to overturn Proposition 22.
The couple had written the words "bride" and "groom" next to "Party A" and "Party B" because they wanted to be legally recognized as husband and wife.
However, the Placer County marriage license was denied.
"I received back the license and a letter from the Placer County Clerk/Recorder stating that the license 'does not comply with California State registration laws,'" Bird said in a statement from the Pacific Justice Institute.
It was an "unacceptable alteration," the County Recorder's Office claimed the State Office of Vital Records determined.
"What's next?" Bird wrote in a Sept. 4 letter. "Will the State of California force [ministers] to use the terms "Party A" and "Party B" in the ceremony itself?"
In a 4-3 decision, California's high court declared that legal definitions of marriage as a union between a man and a woman were unconstitutional. Since the ruling, the generic designations have been added to legal documents.
Pacific Justice Institute President Brad Dacus said voters must change the state constitution by voting on the marriage amendment in November if they wish to preserve the traditional meaning of marriage.
"Unless Proposition 8 is passed, heterosexual couples will be forced to wed out of the state if they wish to be officially identified as bride and groom or husband and wife." He said in a statement. "This is a major slap in the face for traditional marriage."
Want to sound off? Use the contact information below to voice your opinion.
Jim McCauley, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters
2954 Richardson DriveAuburn, CA 95603
Recordings - (530) 886-5600Clerk - (530) 886-5610
Fax: (530) 886-5687E-mail: clerk@placer.ca.gov
Pastor Doug Bird of Abundant Life Fellowship in Roseville, Calif., was alarmed to find the state now rejects the traditional terms after he officiated his first marriage ceremony last week following the California Supreme Court decision to overturn Proposition 22.
The couple had written the words "bride" and "groom" next to "Party A" and "Party B" because they wanted to be legally recognized as husband and wife.
However, the Placer County marriage license was denied.
"I received back the license and a letter from the Placer County Clerk/Recorder stating that the license 'does not comply with California State registration laws,'" Bird said in a statement from the Pacific Justice Institute.
It was an "unacceptable alteration," the County Recorder's Office claimed the State Office of Vital Records determined.
"What's next?" Bird wrote in a Sept. 4 letter. "Will the State of California force [ministers] to use the terms "Party A" and "Party B" in the ceremony itself?"
In a 4-3 decision, California's high court declared that legal definitions of marriage as a union between a man and a woman were unconstitutional. Since the ruling, the generic designations have been added to legal documents.
Pacific Justice Institute President Brad Dacus said voters must change the state constitution by voting on the marriage amendment in November if they wish to preserve the traditional meaning of marriage.
"Unless Proposition 8 is passed, heterosexual couples will be forced to wed out of the state if they wish to be officially identified as bride and groom or husband and wife." He said in a statement. "This is a major slap in the face for traditional marriage."
Want to sound off? Use the contact information below to voice your opinion.
Jim McCauley, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters
2954 Richardson DriveAuburn, CA 95603
Recordings - (530) 886-5600Clerk - (530) 886-5610
Fax: (530) 886-5687E-mail: clerk@placer.ca.gov
Sep 9, 2008
Apply for the 2008-09 ISI Honors Program Now!
The ISI Honors Program is a highly selective year-long mentoring fellowship for fifty of the nation’s most promising undergraduates. Honors Fellows are assigned an Academic Mentor who guides them through reading projects, and advises on intellectual questions and career options. Fellows explore the West’s intellectual tradition at a week-long, all-expenses-paid summer conference, at weekend colloquia, and through an online listserve.
Fellows receive an array of ISI publications, including American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia and Modern Age, and are notified of employment, fellowship, and internship opportunities.
To learn how to become an ISI Honors Fellow now click here.
Sep 8, 2008
McCain and Palin Surge Into the Lead
The USAToday/Gallup poll shows McCain ahead 54 percent to 44 percent among likely voters and 50 percent to 46 percent among registered voters. This poll arbitrarily excludes a certain percentage of LVs from the category of RVs depending on their response to a series of questions. In practice, its LV results have been far more volatile than other polls. But for that reason, it is one of the better measures we have for voter enthusiasm and therefore, perhaps, for turnout. During most of this year, Democrats have been more enthusiastic than Republicans. This poll suggests that the Sarah Palin/John McCain convention has narrowed or eliminated the enthusiasm gap.
Just about every poll released today shows a McCain surge. The Rasmussen track shows McCain up 48 percent to 47 percent, compared with 48 to 48 yesterday. The Gallup track shows McCain ahead 49 to 44, up from 48 to 45 yesterday. The Diageo/Hotline track showed a 44-to-44 tie, compared with a 6 percent lead for Obama in its most recent report. We haven't seen much in the way of state results yet, except that Anchorage-based Ivan Moore, who polls for Democrats but has worked for Republicans in the past, shows McCain-Palin way ahead, 54 percent to 35 percent, in Alaska, where his previous poll showed Obama trailing McCain by only 2.5 percent. "Obama had a real shot to score an upset in Alaska," the Britain-born Moore writes, "but that opportunity is categorically gone."
Bottom line: Obama was a little ahead going into the conventions. McCain is a little ahead coming out of the conventions. On to the debates!
By Michael Barone
Just about every poll released today shows a McCain surge. The Rasmussen track shows McCain up 48 percent to 47 percent, compared with 48 to 48 yesterday. The Gallup track shows McCain ahead 49 to 44, up from 48 to 45 yesterday. The Diageo/Hotline track showed a 44-to-44 tie, compared with a 6 percent lead for Obama in its most recent report. We haven't seen much in the way of state results yet, except that Anchorage-based Ivan Moore, who polls for Democrats but has worked for Republicans in the past, shows McCain-Palin way ahead, 54 percent to 35 percent, in Alaska, where his previous poll showed Obama trailing McCain by only 2.5 percent. "Obama had a real shot to score an upset in Alaska," the Britain-born Moore writes, "but that opportunity is categorically gone."
Bottom line: Obama was a little ahead going into the conventions. McCain is a little ahead coming out of the conventions. On to the debates!
By Michael Barone
Sep 7, 2008
Ryan Sorba takes on "Young Turk" talk show host, Cenk Uygur!
This week, during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota, Young Conservatives of California state chair, Ryan Sorba stunned online talk show host Cenk Uygur in a debate which centered around the nature of the pro-sodomy movement in America.
It began when Ryan Sorba handed the book Barack Obama: The Audacity of Deceit to "Young Turk" talk show host Cenk Uygur. Uygur told Ryan to sit down and have some fun on the radio. Little did Uygur know Ryan Sorba was the only one about to have fun! In fact, by the time the interview had ended Uygar was spouting near obscenities and Ryan was smiling and shaking hands with former California governor Pete Wilson!
Click here to watch the intense interview unfold.
It began when Ryan Sorba handed the book Barack Obama: The Audacity of Deceit to "Young Turk" talk show host Cenk Uygur. Uygur told Ryan to sit down and have some fun on the radio. Little did Uygur know Ryan Sorba was the only one about to have fun! In fact, by the time the interview had ended Uygar was spouting near obscenities and Ryan was smiling and shaking hands with former California governor Pete Wilson!
Click here to watch the intense interview unfold.
It was trial by fire recently for seven Leadership Institute trainees in Washington, D.C.
The Washington, DC-based Leadership Institute (LI) is a conservative organization that trains and places conservatives in leadership positions on college campuses and in the media. As part of the Institute's field representative program, seven trainees were sent to Washington, DC's Dupont Circle to gather signatures for a petition in support of traditional marriage. The training exercise allowed the representatives to practice "running a membership table" and to "engage interested passers-by."
Dupont Circle is known for having a sizable liberal and homosexual population. Barry Broussard of Mississippi, one of the trainees, notes the numerous angry reactions and foul gestures they received. However, he also said they "drew a lot of encouragement from people just driving by and giving us the 'thumbs-up.'"
Another trainee, Daniel Cervera, said the hateful responses did not upset him. However, he was pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm of those grateful for their presence.
Ian Ivey, director of communications for LI, says they were able to gather 88 signatures.
"One of the things that surprised us the most about this exercise in Dupont Circle was that a group of people came down from the tenth floor of a nearby building – they came out basically...in favor of traditional marriage as well," Ivey explains. "So our group there actually attracted quite a bit of attention both from leftists who were irritated by their presence, but also from conservatives who came up and said, 'Boy, are we glad to see you here. It is so refreshing to see someone standing up for traditional values.'"
The petition drive, according to Ivey, was a way to give the trainees hands-on experience before they are sent to college campuses to train students to organize their own conservative groups.
Dupont Circle is known for having a sizable liberal and homosexual population. Barry Broussard of Mississippi, one of the trainees, notes the numerous angry reactions and foul gestures they received. However, he also said they "drew a lot of encouragement from people just driving by and giving us the 'thumbs-up.'"
Another trainee, Daniel Cervera, said the hateful responses did not upset him. However, he was pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm of those grateful for their presence.
Ian Ivey, director of communications for LI, says they were able to gather 88 signatures.
"One of the things that surprised us the most about this exercise in Dupont Circle was that a group of people came down from the tenth floor of a nearby building – they came out basically...in favor of traditional marriage as well," Ivey explains. "So our group there actually attracted quite a bit of attention both from leftists who were irritated by their presence, but also from conservatives who came up and said, 'Boy, are we glad to see you here. It is so refreshing to see someone standing up for traditional values.'"
The petition drive, according to Ivey, was a way to give the trainees hands-on experience before they are sent to college campuses to train students to organize their own conservative groups.
Sep 5, 2008
The Poison of Barack Hussein Obama Jr.
I have been deeply disappointed to hear even friends of mine mention that simply because Barack Hussein Obama Jr. is clean cut and speaks well that he would make a good U.S. President. But when asked about what Obama stands for, most who lend him credence can give no answer. Apparently, for far too many, all it takes to qualify for the presidency are public speaking skills, never mind accomplishments or experience. And while we are on the subject of accomplishments, let me list a few personal, social, fiscal, and foreign policy measures that Barack Hussein Obama Jr. backs.
Socially, Barack Obama voted against filtering pornography on elementary school library computers, he voted for "sex education" for kindergarten children, and in 2001, Barack Hussein Obama voted "present" on a bill to keep pornographic book stores, video stores, and strip clubs from setting up within 1,000 feet of schools and churches. For some reason, the man apparently has no problem with ramming perversion in the face of school children and church goers.
In addition to his practical perversion, Barack Obama has voted against bills prohibiting the tax funding of abortions twice. Apparently, he wants you to pay for the murder of innocent children. In 2001, Barack Obama voted "present" on a bill which would notify parents when their minor children seek an abortion. In 2003, as chairman of the Senate Committee to which the Alive Infants Protection Act was sent, Barack Hussein Obama prevented it from even getting a hearing. All that BAIPA stated, by the way, was that live-born babies are guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection under law as all other human beings, whether or not they are wanted. Essentially, Barack Hussein Obama voted to allow newborns to be killed by women who just don't feel like signing papers so that their living babies can be adopted. Apparently, Barack Hussein Obama's wife, Michelle, is even worse. In February 2004, she sent out a fundraising letter, which actually stated her concern over the rise of conservatism in the Country, and that partial-birth abortion was a legitimate medical procedure that should be protected. Barack Hussein Obama also voted against a cloning ban in 2000 and touts the fact that he is an advocate of so-called "homosexual marriages."
As far as foreign policy in concerned, Barack Obama might as well be on the side of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. Obviously, Barack Obama's has a Muslim name. Less obviously, his father is a devout Muslim and has four wives in Africa. Obama's picture is currently displayed on the page BANNER of Project Islamic H.O.P.E. which follows the teachings of the "Holy Quran" and the example of "Prophet Muhammad." Project Islamic H.O.P.E. supports and follows the leadership of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, one of the world's foremost Islamic leaders. Hussein Obama's "Black Power Pastor Wright" supports Louis Farrakhan, and in 1984 traveled with him to visit the anti-semite Col. Muammar al-Gadaffi, an archenemy of Israel and America and a firm supporter of terror groups. Obama's own pastor has also been a severe critic of Israel. In his own pastors words: "The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism." (http://islamichope.org/) Barack Hussein Obama has also been quoted as saying, "nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people" and that "the lives of more than 3,000 soldiers killed in Iraq have been wasted."
In addition, Obama's Muslim and Marxist first cousin, Raila Odinga, has run for the presidency of Muslim Kenya and upon losing, in traditional Marxist form, rejected the results of the election and instead spurned wide-scale violence in protest. Barack Hussein Obama's father, grandfather, grandmother, four brothers, and sister are all Muslim. He has a Muslim name and attended Muslim school for two years. What's worse is that the Muslim world believes that he is still a Muslim parading as a Christian. They believe that this is acceptable because under Islamic law, a Muslim is morally justified in doing anything to destroy those who refuse to convert. And if Barack Hussein Obama really is a Christian, then he is up for the death penalty in half the Muslim world under Shariah Law for abandoning the Muslim religion.
Barack Hussein Obama is also a closet racist. In the period from high school in Hawaii, to Columbia University, and then to the streets of Chicago as a community organizer, Obama described his world thusly: "We were always playing on the white man's court -- by the white man's rules. If the principal, or the coach, or a teacher wanted to spit in your face, he could, because he had the power and you didn't. The only thing you could choose was withdrawal into a smaller and smaller coil of rage." Later in life, Barack Hussein Obama described the white race as "that ghostly figure that haunted black dreams." "That hate hadn't gone away," he wrote, blaming "white people — some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives." (http://www.examiner.com/a-536474~_Trapped_between_two_worlds_.html)
From here, Barack Hussein Obama went on to become an agitator and "leftist political organizer" for Mike Kruglick, who followed the radical communist organizer Saul Alinsky. And the agitator's job, according to Alinsky, "is first to bring folks to the 'realization' that they are indeed miserable, that their misery is the fault of unresponsive governments or greedy corporations, then help them to bond together to demand what they deserve, and to make such an almighty stink that the dastardly governments and corporations will see imminent 'self-interest' in granting whatever it is that will cause the harassment to cease." In these methods, euphemistically labeled "community organizing," Barack Hussein Obama had a four-year education, which he often says was the "best education he ever got anywhere." After reading this it should be no surprise that one of Barack Hussein Obama's key supporters is the anti-American, George Soros.
Another one of Barack Husseun Obama's key supporters is the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the nation's largest Hispanic Nazi-type organization. La Raza is Spanish for "the race," and although NCLR claims it means "community" on their website, La Raza supports legislation such as the "Civil Liberties Restoration Act," which would roll back policies adopted after Sept. 11 designed to protect national security. It also supports the "DREAM Act," which would mandate states to offer in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens -thus providing them with benefits that are not even available to U.S. citizens from other states. La Raza (The Race) also believes that the lower third of the United States still belongs to Mexico and that it is destined to be returned to Mexico someday.
In closing, although Barack Obama is polished on the surface, his stand on the defenseless seems cold to the core, his racist attitude shameful, his foreign policy is chilling and the number one front in the War on Terror in my view, has now shifted from the Middle East to "Election 2008," and we are on the front lines. Barack Hussein Obama Jr. has been voted the most liberal U.S. Senator. For this scarlet letter he has beaten out both Hillary Clinton who placed a meager 16th and Ted Kennedy himself. As the September air chills most of the nation, I am developing gooseflesh for more reasons than just the temperature.
By Ryan Sorba
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)