Fireworks In Phoenix….3-2-1-

The Democrat Governor, Janet  Napolitano has figured out a way to stop illegal immigrant busting sheriff Joe Arpaio:

Much of the money for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s immigration-enforcement efforts lately has poured out of a special pool of state money.

But New Times has learned that Governor Janet Napolitano’s turning off the spigot.

In what appears to be a prelude to a major fight between Napolitano and Arpaio, the governor issued an executive order last week to develop a new task force–headed up by the state Department of Public Safety–to find and arrest tens of thousands of felons with outstanding warrants.

And, according to a letter from DPS Director Roger Vanderpool to Arpaio outlining the new effort, the task force will be funded with the money that Arpaio isn’t getting anymore.

I think we’ll be hearing more about this fairly soon.

Reverend Hagee Apologizes To Catholics

Whoop-de-doo.

I never saw this story as McCain’s own lunatic Pastor counterpart to Obama’s lunatic Pastor Reverend Wright.

But the nutroots did.

To their addled minds, a goofy, anti-Catholic preacher with a large following who endorses a candidate is the same as…nay, worse than a malicious, racist, Marxist with a large following (that actually includes the candidate) endorsing said candidate.

Yes, Reverend Hagee has had some bizarre things to say about Catholics. Most Catholics are aware that there are fundamentalists out there who consider the Catholic church “The whore of Babylon” and whatnot. Such people are annoying, but not dangerous. And although it’s impossible to know how much hate is preached from the pulpit in these churches, one can easily imagine that some unfortunate anti-Catholic rhetoric peppers some of the sermons. But one can not easily imagine them rising to the level of Reverend Wright’s shocking hate-speech.

That said, there is also the obvious difference between accepting an endorsement from a questionable Pastor (while repudiating his anti-Catholic pronouncements), and being closely associated with a problematic Pastor, (in fact, having him on your campaign’s ’spiritual advisory’ committee), and being an active member of his congregation for 15+ years. Then, (finally!) throwing him under the bus only after he embarrasses you in public.

See?…there’s a minor difference there.

Still, I looked into the Reverend Hagee story, myself about a month ago, (out of curiosity) and found this story in Catholic Online, by Deal Hudson, some of which I’ll share with you, here:

A few days ago I met with Hagee and his wife, Diana, in New York City for a three-hour conversation.

The meeting came at the suggestion of a mutual friend who was concerned both for Hagee’s reputation and the relations between Evangelicals and Catholics. My friend, a national religious leader himself, told me, “John Hagee is my friend, and he is a good man. Also, it would be a pity if a wedge was driven between conservative Catholics and Evangelicals on the eve of the 2008 election.”

-snip-

Since I had been critical of Hagee myself, I thought it reasonable that I sit down with him and discuss the anti-Catholicism charge. As a young man I was also an Evangelical from Texas, and I knew I could find some common ground with him — and maybe find out more about what appeared to be an open-and-shut case. (I called Donohue to tell him that a meeting had been proposed, and Bill said he appreciated my letting him know.)

Next, I contacted Hagee. He seemed genuinely hurt that he was being seen by the nation as anti-Catholic. He said, “Deal, how can people think I am anti-Catholic when my wife is an ex-Catholic, and a third of my congregation are former Catholics?” I bit my tongue. We really needed to talk; there were some things about Catholics he truly didn’t understand.

When we met later, I told Hagee about “biting my tongue,” and he looked surprised. I explained that Catholics don’t like being reminded of all those who have left the Church. As he started to nod in agreement, his wife Diana said, “He’s right, John.” She would repeat that sentence several times during our long conversation, and each time her husband would acquiesce in agreement.

You’ll want to read the rest of this edifying story. Because when you hear someone come out with a big apology, and there are political stakes on the line… it’s very easy to be, well….dubious of the sincerity. Yet when Hagee says:

“Out of a desire to advance greater unity among Catholics and Evangelicals in promoting the common good, I want to express my deep regret for any comments that Catholics have found hurtful. After engaging in constructive dialogue with Catholic friends and leaders, I now have an improved understanding of the Catholic Church, its relation to the Jewish faith, and the history of anti-Catholicism.”

I tend to believe him, after having read that article.

And, again, a compare and contrast is in order. What did Reverend Wright do when his teachings came under fire? Did he apologize, engage in constructive dialog with those who were criticizing him, or take any of it back?

Oh, HELL no. He just reiterated his words more forcefully.

Anyway, Bill Donahue of the Catholic League has accepted Reverend Hagee’s apology, saying:

“The tone of Hagee’s letter is sincere. He wants reconciliation and he has achieved it. Indeed, the Catholic League welcomes his apology. What Hagee has done takes courage and quite frankly I never expected him to demonstrate such sensitivity to our concerns. But he has done just that. Now Catholics, along with Jews, can work with Pastor Hagee in making interfaith relations stronger than ever. Whatever problems we had before are now history. This case is closed.”

Got that nutroots?

CASE CLOSED.

PS: The Obama/Wright Case?

NOT CLOSED!

Obama’s Rules

Well, Rich Lowery’s piece, Obama’s Rules, is being commented on all over the net today, so I thought I’d weigh in. First, here are the rules as spelled out by Rich:

He can’t be called a “liberal” (“the same names and labels they pin on everyone,” as Obama puts it); his toughness on the war on terror can’t be questioned (“attempts to play on our fears”); his extreme positions on social issues can’t be exposed (“the same efforts to distract us from the issues that affect our lives” and “turn us against each other”); and his Chicago background too is off-limits (“pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy”). Besides that, it should be a freewheeling and spirited campaign.

Democrats always want cultural issues not to matter because they are on the least-popular side of many of them, and want patriotic symbols like the Pledge of Allegiance and flag pins to be irrelevant when they can’t manage to nominate presidential candidates who wholeheartedly embrace them (which shouldn’t be that difficult). As for “fear” and “division,” they are vaporous pejoratives that can be applied to any warning of negative consequences of a given policy or any political position that doesn’t command 100 percent assent. In his North Carolina speech, Obama said the Iraq war “has not made us safer,” and that McCain’s ideas are “out of touch” with “American values.” How fearfully divisive.

Any deviations from these rules will be attacked as distractions, racism, or fear mongering.

Needless to say (I hope)…Nice Deb will not be deterred. I will continue to carry on as I have, pointing out every objectionable thing I discover about the man.

And I will unhelpfully laugh at his gaffes, too.

Sadly, I can see McCain obediently and enthusiastically following Obama’s rules, but is it too much to hope that the RNC demur?

Change You Can Believe In

Obama, fall ‘07:

“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.

“Instead,” Obama added rather grandiosely, “I’m going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.”

Obama, Spring ‘08:

Pennsylvania:

West Virginia:

Barack Obama sported a flag lapel pin and talked up patriotism Monday as he campaigned in blue-collar West Virginia. He also shot a solid game of pool.

So what changed?

Obama, Wright, Hamas, Hezbollah, And Voo Doo!

So I’ve been reading up on that Obama campaign adviser who threw himself under the bus, recently. He was becoming a “distraction” because of his ties to Hamas.

Robert Malley, an employee of the International Crisis Group, said he served as an “informal” Middle East adviser to Obama. He told NBC News this past weekend he decided to step down after the Times of London inquired about whether he had contacts with Hamas.

Turns out his support for Hamas was well known, and ongoing:

Malley has penned numerous opinion articles, many of them co-written with a former adviser to the late Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, petitioning for dialogue with Hamas and blasting Israel for numerous policies he says harm the Palestinian cause.

In February 2006, after Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament and amid a U.S. and Israeli attempt to isolate the Hamas-run Palestinian Authority, Malley wrote an op-ed for the Baltimore Sun advocating international aid to the terror group’s newly formed government.

In numerous other op-eds, Malley advocates a policy of engagement with Hamas.

Hamas is responsible for scores of deadly shootings, suicide bombings and rocket attacks aimed at Jewish civilian population centers. The past few weeks alone, Hamas militants took credit for firing more than 200 rockets into Israel.

Hamas’ official charter calls for the murder of Jews and destruction of Israel.

Naturally it’s totally unfair to surmise that having Robert Malley, as Obama’s Middle East adviser in any way reflects Obama’s views. Why would anybody think that?

Well, (this is just a distraction, and all), but It should be remembered that Obama’s church, TUCC published a “Hamas Terror Manifesto” in its church newsletter, The Trumpet.

It also published an insane article by a Palestinian activist about how Israel was an “apartheid” regime with claims that the Jewish state worked on an “ethnic bomb” that kills “blacks and Arabs.”

It turns out that TUCC also has a soft spot for Hezbollah. Who would have thunk it?

Again in the church newsletter, The Trumpet:

U.S. Must Stop Middle East Violence

The escalating Middle East violence and the continued bombing of Lebanon and Gaza is threatening regional stability. Though appeals have gone out from the religious community for the United States and other world leaders to intervene diplomatically, as of Wednesday when the TUCC bulletin is published, the U.S. refuses to call for a cease-fire. Instead, the U.S. is increasing arms shipments to Israel and Congress has passed resolutions declaring unconditional support for Israel’s devastating military campaigns.

More at Sweetness and Light, who have apparently been pouring over past Trumpet newsletters to find such gems as Reverend Wright’s impassioned plea for tolerance of practitioners of Santeria, (otherwise known as Voo Doo!), and a quaint little poem written for the five year anniversary of 9/11.

Apparently, Obama is one of those people who doesn’t read the church newsletter. Or maybe he just skimmed through it quickly, to see when the next prayer meeting would be. ‘Cause Obama’s just a praying fool!

UPDATE:

Well, here’s an interesting turn of events. In The Atlantic, today Obama tells us that Israel is a “constant wound… a constant sore…” that “infects foreign policy”.

Asked if he was “flummoxed” by Hamas’ endorsement, he answers:

I wasn’t flummoxed. I think what is going on there is the same reason why there are some suspicions of me in the Jewish community. Look, we don’t do nuance well in politics and especially don’t do it well on Middle East policy. We look at things as black and white, and not gray. It’s conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, “This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein, and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he’s not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush,” and that’s something they’re hopeful about. I think that’s a perfectly legitimate perception as long as they’re not confused about my unyielding support for Israel’s security.

Oh ho ho ho!!!

Isn’t that basically what John McCain said about Hamas’ endorsement of Obama:

“It’s indicative of how some of our enemies view America. And I guarantee you, they’re not going to endorse me.”

Except when McCain says it, he’s accused of being a man losing his bearings. And when Obama says it, it’s somehow a positive thing.

The American Thinker:

No one is right or wrong, it’s all “gray” and he’s just the guy to let everyone know. What is jaw-dropping, however, is his assumption that Hamas might be impressed with his “worldly” outlook. That’s what Hamas has been searching for: someone who is worldly. And notice the evasion he employs (”talks with people”) to escape stating the obvious: they are thrilled he’s offered direct talks with their sponsor and Holocaust denier Ahmejinidad.

The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave

So it seems that finally, the Democrat primary race is winding down, with Obama the presumptive nominee. Obama is shifting his focus to McCain, as Hillary battles on, seemingly unaware that the powers that be have already counted her out. But of course she does realize that she’s down for the count. The question on everyone’s mind is…’Why does she continue to campaign?’

One explanation is that she’s in it now for 2012, which of course benefits McCain. The other….scarier explanation is that she is gunning for a high profile spot in Obama’s cabinet; possibly his VP pick. This of course would be a nightmare scenario for Republicans because it would unite two Democrat constituencies that were previously at odds with each other. This of course is the smartest and most obvious move, but one that insiders are saying Obama will resist because of his dislike for Hillary.

One thing to keep in mind, though, is that according to Bill Clinton, Hillary and McCain are “close”. Remember this story from January?:

“She and John McCain are very close,” Clinton said. “They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they’re afraid they’d put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other.”

Sens. McCain and Clinton last met publicly at an ABC debate earlier January, when presidential candidates of both parties shared the same stage. The two were seen exchanging pleasantries, and a Clinton side said she told the Arizona senator he’d done a “good job” staging a comeback in New Hampshire. He asked that she say hello to Bill Clinton for him.

I don’t think she has any warm feelings for Obama. Still, I tend to agree with Charles Krauthammer who predicts that this is what is coming:

There’s only one remaining chapter in this fascinating spectacle. Negotiating the terms of Hillary’s surrender. After which we will have six months of watching her enthusiastically stumping for Obama, denying with utter conviction GOP charges that he is the out of touch, latte-sipping elitist she warned Democrats against so urgently in the last, late leg of her doomed campaign.

At any rate, she’s making Democratic leaders nervous because she’s forcing Obama to spend his precious time and money on his primary fight against her, instead of the general election fight against McCain. She’s also been hitting him where it hurts with her “late leg of her doomed campaign” urgent warnings to the superdelegates: He’s not as electable as she is.

Meanwhile, on the McCain front, a couple of positive developments:

1. He seems to have a kick-ass top adviser in Mark Salter, who continues to impress.

2. Rush Limbaugh seems to be coming around.

Now if only we can get Ann Coulter on board.

A Patriotic Lapel Pin Even Obama Would Love

Check it out over at Suitably Flip.

The reason I haven’t said anything about this latest gaffe of Obama’s is because everybody knows these slips of the tongue on the campaign trail happen to all politicians at one time or another.

A couple of thoughts, though, first the most obvious one: If McCain had said this, it would have been covered exhaustively in newspapers all across the country; it would have been evidence of him being an old man “losing his bearings”, and it would haunt him relentlessly all the way to election day. Obama says it, and of course he receives howls and cat-calls from the right-wing blogosphere, but it doesn’t receive a great amount of attention from the MSM. Because it’s just evidence of a man fatigued from too many days on the campaign trail. Which is what it is….but wouldn’t be if McCain had said it.

Second…where did he even get the 57 number? What the heck? At first I thought, “Maybe he means 57 cities?” But surely he’s been to more cities than that. I mean….???

UPDATE:

Possible answers:

1. Liberal commenters from all across the internets are saying “he was clearly joking”.

2. Hmmmmm.

3. (Most likely): He meant 47 states. He has one left + Alaska & Hawaii that he “wasn’t allowed to go to.” That’s all 50.

Not a joke, just a misstatement.

Thanks Geoff.

UPDATE:

Weird Coincidence!

Guess how many FBI officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty, last year?

That’s right.

Obama Possible VP Pick Banned From communion By Archbishop

Yep, that would be Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, who’s high on Obama’s list of VP picks. Her pro-choice stance prompted Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, KS to write to her in August of last year, to ask that she please refrain from taking communion until she repudiates her support for abortion rights. Sebelius didn’t, and the Archbishop has apparently heard about it.

He said it prompted him to write her again, asking her to respect his request and “not require from me any additional pastoral actions.”

The Archbishop …also criticized her recent veto of a bill imposing new restrictions on abortion providers. He called upon the governor, who is Catholic, to take the “necessary steps for amendment of her life.”

Yeesh…I’d be mortified.

“The spiritually lethal message, communicated by our governor, as well as many other high-profile Catholics in public life, has been in effect: ’The church’s teaching on abortion is optional!’” Naumann wrote in a column published Friday in The Leaven, the archdiocese’s newspaper.

The Archbishop’s full column is right here.

This is significant given that Obama is desperately trying to make inroads with Catholic Democratic voters, who have been voting in larger numbers for Hillary. Sebilius *might* be a smart choice for him.

Bush managed to win the Catholic vote in 2004 against Catholic Kerry largely because of Kerry’s liberal stance on abortion. But now, four years of an unpopular war later; a war that most Catholics oppose…who knows? Concern about the war shouldn’t cancel out concern about abortion if serious Catholics do their homework, but alas, many of them don’t.

Hillary Clinton: Crazy, Pscho Ex-Girlfriend, Or Crazy Like A Fox?

The MSM is saying it’s ovah for Hillary, and Democrats are trying to quietly signal to her to throw in the towel. But Hillary’s having none of it. In fact she’s pressing on with visits to three states, today. And she even sent a formal letter to Obama trying to “shame” him into allowing the Florida and Michigan votes to count, and seat their delegations at the Democrat convention, (which may not end up helping her enough to matter, when all is said and done).

So what’s going on in that pretty little head of hers?

MadAtoms suggests the crazy ex-girlfriend scenario:

Despite all the math counting her out, Hillary Clinton fervently remains in the race to become the Democratic nominee for president in 2008. She has become the Democratic Party’s psycho ex-girlfriend, and she’s not going away without a restraining order.

It’s 2:31 AM. The Democratic Party is sleeping peacefully when it hears its phone buzz on the night stand. It rolls over and sees “Hillary” on the caller ID. It pauses briefly, considering pushing “END” and not dealing with this shit tonight. The thought is appealing but the Democratic Party knows that if it doesn’t take this call, another one is only minutes away.

DEMS: …Hello?

Hillary: Hey baby.

DEMS: C’mon Hillary. Enough with this.

Hillary: Don’t you get it? You NEED me.

DEMS: No, I don’t. It was fun while it lasted but I’m with Barack now. I made my choice, it’s done.

Funny stuff…go read the whole thing.

Martin at MVRWC just says she’s teh crazy.

BUT.

All joking aside, there might be a method to her madness. Dick Morris has an interesting theory:

OK, so Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is staying in the presidential race despite losing among elected delegates, facing a slimming lead among superdelegates, losing the popular vote and behind by 2-to-1 in the number of states carried. She slogs on, hoping against hope for a sudden turnaround in the race.

Apart from the psychological reasons for her stubbornness, is there a more subtle political calculation going on?

Is she continuing her race so as to have a platform from which to continue to bash Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the hopes of so damaging him that he can’t win the general election? Is she doing this to keep her options alive for the 2012 presidential race?

Hmmmm. That means she could be the Republicans’ best friend right now. Because she’s just gonna keep knee-capping him all the way to the convention. Here’s why:

If Obama is elected this year, he will seek reelection in 2012 and Hillary would have to face taking on an incumbent in a primary in her own party if she wanted to run, a daunting task. But if McCain wins, the nomination in 2012 will be open. And it might be worth having. McCain will be 76 years old and the Republican Party will have been in power for 12 years. Not since FDR and Truman has a party lasted that long in power. When the Republicans tried to do so, in 1980 and 1992, they fell flat on their face.

Hillary is using white, blue-collar fears of Barack Obama to try to stop him from getting nominated or elected.

She is playing on his “elitism” by hammering him on blue-collar issues and is mincing no words in painting him as a stranger to blue-collar white America.

Hillary is attracting the votes of cops, firefighters, construction workers, union members. Are they in love with Hillary? They can’t stand her. But they are terrified of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers and the various influences to which Obama seems to be subject. By playing on those fears, Hillary is undermining Obama’s ability to get elected.

Go Hillary! Woot!

Hat tip: Janette of All To Thunder for the Pscho Ex-girlfriend link.

UPDATE:

Francis W. Porretto concurs with Dick Morris.

The Exaggerations, Lies, Distortions, and Flip-Flops Of Barack Obama

Check out this excerpt from Obama’s North Carolina victory speech:

The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states, blue collar and white collar, white, black, brown, young, old, rich, poor … this is the race we expect, no matter whether it’s myself or Senator Clinton who is the nominee. The question then is not what kind of campaign they will run; it’s what kind of campaign we will run.

It’s what we will do to make this year different. You see, I didn’t get into this race thinking that I could avoid this kind of politics, but I am running for president because this is the time to end it.

We will end it — we will end it this time not because I’m perfect. I think we know at this phase of the campaign that I am not.

We will end it not by duplicating the same tactics and the same strategies as the other side, because that will lead us down the same path of polarization and of gridlock.

We will end it by telling the truth.

We will end it by telling the truth forcefully, repeatedly, confidently, and by trusting that the American people will embrace the need for change, even if it’s coming from an imperfect messenger, because that’s how we’ve — that’s — because that’s how we’ve always changed this country, not from the top down, but from the bottom up, when you, the American people, decide that the stakes are too high and the challenges are too great.

That’s right. Barack Obama fancies himself to be the truth-telling candidate. And anyone who says otherwise will (of course) be accused of racism, and “playing on our fears”.

Well, I don’t care. I’m pretty thick skinned. Let’s just examine how truthful this man is:

♦Obama claims the Kennedy family payed for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a student scholarship to meet his Kansan mother.

Status - NOT TRUE:

Contrary to Obama’s claims in speeches in January at American University and in Selma last year, the Kennedy family did not provide the funding for a September 1959 airlift of 81 Kenyan students to the United States that included Obama’s father. According to historical records and interviews with participants, the Kennedys were first approached for support for the program nearly a year later, in July 1960. The family responded with a $100,000 donation, most of which went to pay for a second airlift in September 1960.

♦Obama claims that a detailed questionaire filled out in his name, in 1996, with responses reflecting ultra liberal views on everything from gun control to abortion, was filled out by an aide, and doesn’t reflect his views.

Status: LIE

… a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it. And it found that Obama — the day after sitting for the interview — filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.

♦Obama sites photo of black man bleaching his skin in Dreams From My Father. Claims said photo gave him the feeling of an “Ambush Attack”

Status - NOT TRUE: No such photo appears to exist.

♦Obama states in January 2008 debate: “I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer.

Status: Flip-flop or LIE: Barack at AFL-CIO conference in June 2003: “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage.

♦Obama in 2004: Doesn’t see himself running for President in 2008: “If I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket…I would essentially have to start now…before having served a day in the Senate. Now there might be some people who would have no problem doing that, but ah…I’m not one of them“.

He said two years ago that he would “absolutely” serve out his Senate term, which ends in 2011, and that the idea of him running for president this cycle was “silly” and hype “that’s been a little overblown”.

In an appearance on Meet the Press with Tim Russert, January 22nd, 2006:

Russert: “When we talked back in November of ‘04 after your election, I said, ‘There’s been enormous speculation about your political future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States senator from Illinois?’”

Obama: “I will serve out my full six-year term. You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed.”

Russert: “So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?”

Obama: “I will not.”

Status: Gross flip-flop or LIE. Obviously.

♦In July ‘07 Barack Obama tells a group of reporters in Boston that the United States has an “absolute obligation” to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success: “The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster,” he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. “It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective.”

Status - Flip-flop or LIE: Obama Campaign pledge 9/07: Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq.

♦Obama tells this stirring tale to a Selma audience: He had been conceived by his parents, Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham, because they had been inspired by the fervor following the “Bloody Sunday” voting rights demonstration that was commemorated March 4.

Status - Bad Info or LIE: Obama was born in 1961, and the Selma march occurred four years later, in 1965.

♦On January 24, 2008, the Obama campaign released a statement, saying, “To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Status: NOT TRUE:

The Associated Press reports that “documents showed he enrolled as a Muslim” while at a Catholic school during first through third grades. …the Chicago Tribune confirms that Obama was “listed as a Muslim on the registration form for the Catholic school.” A blogger who goes by “An American Expat in Southeast Asia” found that “Barack Hussein Obama was registered under the name ‘Barry Soetoro’ serial number 203 and entered the Franciscan Asisi Primary School on 1 January 1968 and sat in class 1B. … Barry’s religion was listed as Islam.”

…the Toronto Star visited the Jakarta public school Obama attended and found that “Three of his teachers have said he was enrolled as a Muslim.”

♦Obama told the Sun-Times his “best estimate” was that Rezko raised “between $50,000 and $60,000″ during Obama’s political career.

Status: Very sloppy fact-checking, or LIE: Obama has collected at least $168,308 from Rezko and his circle. Additionally, Obama also has taken in an unknown amount of money from people who attended fund-raising events hosted by Rezko since the mid-1990s.

♦During a nationally televised debate last fall, Obama hesitantly raised his hand and joined with most of his Democrat rivals to declare that he opposed decriminalizing marijuana. (first video).

Status: Stupid gaffe, or LIE:

But as a candidate for the U.S. Senate four years ago, Mr. Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use or possession, according to a videotape of a little noticed debate that was obtained by The Washington Times.

“I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws,” Mr. Obama told an audience during a debate at Northwestern University in 2004. “But I’m not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana.” (second video).

♦ Obama promised to use public funding in the general election if the Republican candidate would do so also.

Status: Welcher:

Well, McCain has agreed to it, but now Obama wants to back out of the deal. After all, when he made the promise, he didn’t have a chance of raising more than the public’s $85 million stipend. But now that he can raise $300 million, well, what’s a little untruth between the waited-for one and his people? Yes, he can.

♦Obama’s campaign claims he meant every word he said about overturning the free-trade treaty, and that no one had contacted the Canadian diplomatic corps to reassure them that it was mere demagoguery.

Status: LIE:

CTV responded today by naming names — and suddenly the Obama campaign has grown quiet.

CTV didn’t stop there. They also announced that their sources, at “the highest levels of the Canadian government”, reconfirmed the story to CTV. One of their primary sources provided a timeline of the discussion to CTV. Contrary to some reports, CTV has not retreated at all from this story.

Jim Geraghty notes:

I realize Obama’s campaign can still claim that one of his advisers went rogue in contacting the Canadians about his NAFTA rhetoric, but to me, this is game, set and match to CTV. … If Goolsbee had not talked to officials in the consulate, it seems likely that his answer would have been, “No, I didn’t talk to them.”

♦Obama: I didn’t hear (reverend Wright’s) inflammatory sermons.

Status: BULL

♦Barack Obama, May 2008: he never sought Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s counsel on political issues.

Status: LIE:

Obama January 2007: “What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice,” Obama said. “He’s much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I’m not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that’s involved in national politics.”

Also:

Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

♦Obama continues to claim that McCain favors 100 more years of US troops fighting in Iraq:

Status: Gross distortion:

What McCain actually said:

QUESTIONER: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years –

McCAIN: Maybe a hundred.

QUESTIONER: Is that — is that –

McCAIN: We’ve been in South Korea — we’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That’d be fine with me as long as Americans –

QUESTIONER: So that’s your policy?

McCAIN: — As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, then it’s fine with me. I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, and equipping and motivating people every single day.

♦Hotair reports:

The Barack Obama campaign responded to the pictures of Obama political and community associate William Ayers stomping on the American flag, first published in 2001 in Chicago Magazine. In a statement reported on Fox & Friends this morning, Team Obama deplores Ayers’ actions but rejects any connection between Ayers and Obama:

Status: Doesn’t add up!

That distance might be hard to maintain. First, the profile in the magazine wasn’t exactly a low-profile article in an obscure publication. Ayers had just published a memoir of his days as a fugitive for domestic terrorism in the Weather Underground, and both the book and the publicity gained national attention, especially after 9/11. Obama continued to work with Ayers after this, appearing on public panels with Ayers into 2002.

If Team Obama wants to disassociate itself from Ayers in this manner, it should recheck its website. Obama still defends William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn as part of Chicago’s “mainstream”. Does Obama think that stomping on a flag in an alley to celebrate a memoir of domestic terrorism represents the mainstream of political thought?

Important Source: The Obama File, Freedoms Enemies

To be continued….

MORE:

Obama said in his North Carolina victory speech:

The other side can label and name-call all they want, but I trust the American people to recognize that it is not surrender to end the war in Iraq so that we can rebuild our military and go after Al Qaida’s leaders.I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.

Status: NOT QUITE:

Ed Morrissey:

I’m particularly bemused by the references to FDR and Truman. Both men ended up having to conduct massive wars that outlasted their presidencies, and in FDR’s case in no small measure because Western nations insisted on talk rather than action. While we maintained diplomatic contact with Germany and Japan until Pearl Harbor, FDR did not meet with Hitler and Tojo. And that diplomatic contact didn’t stop war from coming; indeed, it make it much worse than it otherwise would have been, at least in Europe, had the US, UK, and France had taken the appropriate steps to disarm Hitler when he started his Versailles Treaty violations.

Truman met with Joseph Stalin during and after World War II, but that didn’t stop the Soviets from blockading West Berlin or ringing down an iron curtain across eastern Europe, enslaving those nations for almost 50 years. If Potsdam and Yalta are Obama’s idea of successful foreign policy, then he obviously hasn’t studied 20th century history. Talking with implacable tyrants leads to appeasement, which leads to either war or more implacability of the tyranny in question.

UPDATE (May 10):

Obama says he’s been to 57 states during a campaign stop.

Status: GAFFE.

Reds Who Support Obama

Well, it looks like the Obama campaign is steamrolling ahead, with the whole Reverend Wright affair just a minor bump in the road, as far as Democrats are concerned.

So this is as good a time as any to present my companion piece to Radicals, Terrorists, and Tyrants of the World Root for Obama. This time, I thought we’d take a look at all of the known communists/Socialists/Marxists who have supported, endorsed, or influenced Obama. Some communists can be found on the Radicals, Terrorists, and Tyrants list, as well, because let’s face it, radicals and tyrants tend to be commies, (Fidel Castro for instance), but in the interest of keeping this post down to a manageable size, I’m going to try to avoid duplications.

What some might call, “guilt by association” I call Obama’s ‘calling card’.

So without further ado, Obama’s Litany of Shame part deux (not in any certain order):

Frank Marshall Davis:

The Frank, Obama mentions in Dreams From My Father; Obama’s Communist mentor.

Accuracy In Media:

The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS) reprinted the 1953 and 1954 Reports of the Commission on Subversive Activities of the Territory of Hawaii, which refer to Davis as “an identified member of the Communist Party” who was affiliated with a number of Communist fronts and circulated “inflammatory racial propaganda.” Davis also wrote columns for the Honolulu Record, a Communist paper, featuring “unrelenting and unmitigated complaints of racial discrimination in the United States.” Davis was labeled “a bitter opponent of capitalism” and “staunch defender” of communists and communist sympathizers.

Here’s a charming example of his poetry:

“Remember this, you wise guys
Your tales about Jesus of Nazareth are no-go with me
I’ve got a dozen Christs in Dixie all bloody and black…”

His ode to the “Red Army” contains this line:

“Smash on, victory-eating Red Army,”

This is the guy who spent many hours advising and reading poetry to a young Barack Obama.

Sam Graham-Felsen

Obama’s official blogger, and contributor to The Socialist Viewpoint.

The American Thinker had this to say about Graham-Felsen:

Sam Graham-Felsen, hired to run Obama’s blog, writes about Noam Chomsky in a Marxist publication that openly calls for revolution against the American government. This is a Presidential candidate’s choice to run the on-line portion of his campaign. That speaks volumes of his character and worldview. Contradicting what he says in public, Obama is surrounding himself with poeple who never seem to learn that their absurd ideologies end in misery and ruin.

Tim Wheeler:

Wheeler is a member of the CPUSA National Board and has been a mainstay of the party’s Baltimore Club since the early ’70s.

From 1991 to 2003 Tim Wheeler served as editor of the party paper People’s Weekly World. Currently he is the PWW’s national political correspondent.

He’s also an active member of Obama’s campaign in Baltimore, MD. Here’s his Obama ‘08 website.

The blog, New Zeal reports:

He is on the campaign trail with Senator Obama, blogging as he goes.

Wheeler canvassed for his idol in the recent South Carolina primary.

Tim Wheeler was in Obama’s campaign HQ as the primary results came in;

The Obama people are over the moon. I was at a precinct some four or five miles outside of Columbia, mainly a rural area. And it was a steady stream of voters all day. Overwhelmingly African American voters. There was a feeling of victory in the air.

I’m at the Obama headquarters and you can hear the cheering all over. It’s really very exciting.

Here he is swooning over Obama’s ‘more perfect union’ speech in People’s Weekly World.

His Dad

Presto Pundit on Dreams From My Father:

…Barack Obama organized his life on the ideals given to him by his Kenyan father. Obama tells us, “All of my life, I carried a single image of my father, one that I .. tried to take as my own.” (p. 220) And what was that image? It was “the father of my dreams, the man in my mother’s stories, full of high-blown ideals ..” (p. 27 What is more, Obama tells us that, “It was into my father’s image .. that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself.” And also that, “I did feel that there was something to prove .. to my father” in his efforts at political organizing. (p. 230)

So what are those ideals, given to the young Obama by his Communist father?

PrestoPundit has found a 1965 paper written by Obama’s father, in which he advocates:

— 100% taxation

— communal farms / the elimination of private farming

— the nationalization of businesses owned by “Europeans” and “Asians”.

— “active” measures to bring about a classless society

Socialists For Obama

This blog is for those interested in learning how can we change this country from the current capitalist unfair system, into a real socialist, democratic system for all. This capitalist system of Bush and his cronies only benefit the upper classes. USA needs a 21st Century Socialist, Democratic and Participative system for the workers and people of this country, without fascism, without wars, but with peace, equality, socialism and love.

Marxists, Socialists, Communists For Obama

Their Obama ‘08 page is still up:

Democratic Socialists of America

Obama has been associated with this group since his days as a Chicago “community organizer”. In 1996 he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the DSA for his IL state senate seat.

Communist Party USA:

Barack Obama’s campaign has so far generated the most excitement, attracted the most votes, most volunteers and the most money. We think the basic reason for this is that his campaign has the clearest message of unity and progressive change, while having a real possibility for victory in November.

Bernie Sanders:

Here’s Obama campaigning for openly Socialist, Bernie Sanders in 2006:

Accuracy in Media:

Interestingly, Sanders, who won his seat in 2006, called Obama “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” even though Obama had only been in the body for about two years. In 2007, the National Journal said that Obama had established himself as “the most liberal Senator.” More liberal than Sanders? That is quite a feat. Does this make Obama a socialist, too?

Yes grasshopper, I believe it does.

Reverend Wright (before he was thrown under the bus):

A firm practitioner of the Marxist Black Liberation Theology:

REV. BOB SCHENCK, NATIONAL CLERGY COUNCIL: Reverend Wright is absolutely committed to what he calls “black liberation theology.” Well, “liberation theology” has its roots in Latin American liberation theology.

And if you ask the average Christian leader in this country, it is way, way outside the mainstream of Christian belief, and, in fact, it’s based in Marxism. At the core of his theology is really an anti-Christian understanding of God, and as part of a long history of individuals who actually advocate using violence in overthrowing those they perceive to be oppressing them, even acts of murder have been defended by followers of liberation theology. That’s very, very dangerous.

Michelle Obama:

She wants your pie.

Some more commies for Obama listed in my Radicals, Terrorists, and Tyrants post:

William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn

Fidel Castro

Daniel Ortega

Progressives For Obama

FARC

UPDATE:

See Dubya says to add:

Hugo Chavez:

Bill Richardson who visited Venezuela last week, in essence delivered Hugo’s endorsement, according to Ed Morrissey.

I also had him on my list of radicals, tyrants, and terrorists supporting Obama, but….on pretty weak grounds, frankly. But I just knew he preferred Obama. I knew it!

No big surprise, there.

Hi Michelle Malkin Readers! I hope I get the Malkin award for this!

UPDATE II:

I forgot to mention Saul Alinsky, the radical Marxist whose teachings so influenced Obama:

(Community organizer) Galluzzo shared with me the manual he uses to train new organizers, which is little different from the version he used to train Obama in the ’80s. It is filled with workshops and chapter headings on understanding power: “power analysis,” “elements of a power organization,” “the path to power.” Galluzzo told me that many new trainees have an aversion to Alinsky’s gritty approach because they come to organizing as idealists rather than realists. But Galluzzo’s manual instructs them to get over these hang-ups. “We are not virtuous by not wanting power,” it says. “We are really cowards for not wanting power,” because “power is good” and “powerlessness is evil.”

The other fundamental lesson Obama was taught is Alinsky’s maxim that self-interest is the only principle around which to organize people. (Galluzzo’s manual goes so far as to advise trainees in block letters: “get rid of do-gooders in your church and your organization.”) Obama was a fan of Alinsky’s realistic streak. “The key to creating successful organizations was making sure people’s self-interest was met,” he told me, “and not just basing it on pie-in-the-sky idealism. So there were some basic principles that remained powerful then, and in fact I still believe in.”

Baldilocks and DianeJ say I need to add Raila Amolo Odinga:

He has a son named Fidel Castro, which is enough for me. Also:

Wikipedia:

According his website, Raila lists himself as a social democrat,^[19] thus distancing himself from his late father, who was openly socialist. His party, the LDP, is affiliated to the Liberal International.

The Conservative Voice:

“–Also, Raila Odinga was educated in communist E. Germany, and his father Oginga Odinga led the communist opposition during the Cold War.

“–Raila Odinga’s official presidential website is similar to Barack Obama’s, and Odinga’s main campaign message and slogan is: CHANGE. Vote for Change. Agent of Change. Look at his website: http://www.raila07.com/

Welcome Ace of Spades morons!, as well as (more respectable) DoublePlusUndead, Moonbattery, My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, Baldilocks, DianeJ’s Weblog, and Chris Baker readers!

Obama Says “Wright Was Never My Political Council”

Bestest photoshop evah! ^^^ (She SAID we could use it).

Fox News reports:

Barack Obama said Sunday he never sought Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s counsel on political issues and would “absolutely not” seek his advice on policy if he gets to the White House.

The Democratic presidential candidate said his retiring pastor built a wonderful church that “lived out the social gospel,” but ultimately Wright’s comments about the United States “over the last several months and over the last several years … are contrary to what I stand for and who I am.”

Well huh! I’m scratching my head here, because I distinctly recall him saying in January 2007:

Obama says that rather than advising him on strategy, Wright helps keep his priorities straight and his moral compass calibrated.

“What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice,” Obama said. “He’s much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I’m not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that’s involved in national politics.”

Now….when Obama says “not his day-to-day political advice”, he doesn’t mean he doesn’t get “day to day political advice” from reverend Wright. He just means it’s just not what he values most about his relationship with his pastor.

But his statement does strongly suggest some “day to day political advice”.

Now perhaps Obama didn’t/doesn’t consider Wright a political councilor because he never sought his advice, and the good reverend just offered it in an unsolicited manner….. “Day-to-day”.

Obama just never told him to can it because he’s such a nice guy, and all.

Maybe. Maybe not.

Just sayin’

UPDATE:

Alice H. reminds me of this well known example of Obama/Wright political consultation:

(From the WSJ):

The title of Mr. Obama’s bestseller “The Audacity of Hope” comes from one of Wright’s sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

You know what? I’ll quit playing “gotcha” when he quits lying.

David Blaine On Oprah

I was tipped off to this while reading the Politico piece about how Oprah hasn’t been out stumping for Obama since Feb. (I never watch Oprah). Oprah’s people say it’s because of her busy schedule, although there is some speculation that it has more to do with her falling popularity since her star studded fundraiser for Obama last fall, and her campaign appearances on his behalf. I wrote a post about her sliding popularity in early April.

The Politico:

Indeed, since Super Tuesday on Feb. 5, Oprah has been absent from Obama’s side. Her people say other projects have kept her too busy to hit the hustings for the candidate. His people say they’d love to have her but don’t need her help in attracting crowds anymore.

Obama doesn’t need her help attracting large crowds. He does that well enough on his own. But she could help him attract a more diverse crowd, and maybe help erase some of the discomfort many people have regarding Obama’s problematic associations. A lot of women trust Oprah. But that’s neither here nor there.

This throw-away line caught my attention:

Either way, people expecting to see her on the stump any time soon may have to hold their breath longer than David Blaine did this week on her namesake talk show.

Youtube star David Blaine was on her show?

I thought David Blaine was a fake magician… a comedian spoofing real magicians. That’s the impression I get from watching his youtube videos.

But this definitely wasn’t fake:

Dude!

Al Franken’s Senatorial Campaign On The Skids

Thanks to an intrepid Minnesota Republican blogger:

Senate candidate Al Franken wants to talk about jobs, health care and global warming. Republican blogger Michael Brodkorb wants to talk about Franken’s failure to pay all his income taxes on time.

Guess what everyone is talking about?

From the kitchen table in his tranquil suburban neighborhood, Brodkorb for the last year has used his blog “Minnesota Democrats Exposed” to launch a furious political assault on Franken. He’s labeled the former comedian and liberal commentator a “mean-spirited and un-Minnesotan” candidate who’s running a “desperate and ridiculous” campaign.

“Un-Minnesotan” means “not nice”.</