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.

When It’s Okay To Say, “Oh SHIT!!!”

Related:

Beware of Impostors

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.

Official Obama Blogger: Hardcore Marxist

No that is not hyperbole. Meet Sam Graham-Felsen, official Obama blogger, and writer for The Nation, and The Socialist Viewpoint.

The Socialist Viewpoint? Sounds kind of left-wing, doesn’t it? Let’s visit the ‘About Us’ page and find out more:

The Socialist Workers Organization was formed to advance the revolutionary Marxist political program in the United States. Our members are long time active participants in the socialist and labor movements. We agree with Karl Marx that society is divided into social classes whose interests are irreconcilable.

The capitalist ruling class of the United States exercises a virtual dictatorship not only over American society, but also over the entire world. This capitalist class rule is the basic cause of the poverty, wars, and the degradation of the natural environment.

We advocate workers’ power to solve the pressing problems that plague our society—homelessness, hunger, AIDS, the lack of health care for those who can’t afford it, the poor quality and lack of resources for public education and other public institutions, and the destruction of the environment.

We believe that people have the human right to freedom, justice, and sharing of all the resources available for the makings of a good life. This means the right to jobs, decent housing, food and health care, and every aspect of education, clean water, air, and earth.

Workers power is the answer!

Working people are the overwhelming majority of the population and the ruling capitalist class is only a handful. They hold a monopoly over the media and the institutions of culture that create “public opinion”—the printed and electronic mass media, as well as all public and private educational institutions. In the final analysis, however, capitalists rule by military and police force and violence.

To break the stranglehold of the capitalist minority over all of society, workers need their own political institutions. Workers and their unions need to break definitively with Democrats, Republicans, and other capitalist parties, all of which are dedicated to preserving and advancing the capitalist system of social, economic and political injustice.

Socialism, the ownership and democratic control of the means of production by the working class, and the removal of profit from the system of production, is the aim of Socialist Viewpoint, which reflects the political views of the Socialist Workers Organization. Socialism is the prerequisite for the next stage in human development that will end class oppression and exploitation for all time.

The Common Ills has much more on Graham-Felsen (what’s with the 2-part name? He’s a dude!).

What more do people need to know about Obama? Have the super-delegates figured out that he’s unelectable yet? Should we just hush up about all this and save it for later… I mean…MY GOSH!

Hat tip: Moonbattery

Update:

Oh wow, why does this not surprise me:

Real or hoax? I can’t decide.

The Communist Party USA definitely seems to like him.

ISNA: Not Supporting McCain

Well, that’s just a hunch.

The Islamic Society of North America, (recently named an “Unindicted Co-conspirator” for a the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas) is in a snit over McCain’s use of the word, “Islamic” when describing Islamic terrorists.

I don’t get it. Do they prefer “islamofascist”?

The Washington Times reports:

A coalition of American Muslim groups is demanding that Sen. John McCain stop using the adjective “Islamic” to describe terrorists and extremist enemies of the United States.

Muneer Fareed, who heads the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), told The Washington Times that his group is beginning a campaign to persuade Mr. McCain to rephrase his descriptions of the enemy.

“We’ve tried to contact his office, contact his spokesperson to have them rethink word usage that is more acceptable to the Muslim community,” Mr. Fareed said. “If it’s not our intent to paint everyone with the same brush, then certainly we should think seriously about just characterizing them as criminals, because that is what they are.”

So….every time there’s a terrorist act in the name of Islam, we’re supposed to just say, “Criminals did it?”

Excuse my French, but are they shitting me?

An aide to Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee who is counting on his pro-Iraq war stance to attract conservative voters, said the senator from Arizona will not drop the word.

Thank you, Maverick.

The two remaining Democrats in the presidential field, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, generally shun such word usage.

No surprise there; what do you expect from Dhimmicrats?

I honestly don’t understand the line of thinking, here:

Mr. Fareed, who is ISNA’s secretary-general, said such usages are wrong.

“I think this is just criminality, fair and square. We should just call them criminals. You want to call them terrorist criminals, fine,” he said. “But adding the word ‘Muslim’ or ‘Islamic’ certainly doesn’t help our cause as Americans. It’s counterproductive. It paints an entire community of believers, 1.2 billion in total, in a very negative way. And certainly that’s not something that we want to do.”

Well, I’m sorry, the truth hurts. How about reforming your religion so it stops inspiring so many of its adherents into killing infidels. That would do more to improve people’s perception of Islam, then these campaigns of intimidation designed to chill free speech.

Steven Emerson, who directs the Investigative Project on Terrorism, recently wrote that the silence of ISNA and other Muslim groups after Hamas killed eight Israeli students “shows their unwillingness to condemn the terrorist act and its glorification.”

Michael Ledeen, a terrorism analyst at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, backed Mr. McCain’s definition of the enemy. “Islamic terrorism is purely descriptive,” he said. “It doesn’t group the enemy under the Islamic brush stroke because there are plenty of terrorists and extremists who are not Islamic. So it’s just a way of specifying who they are.”

Of ISNA’s criticism, Mr. Ledeen said, “They’re just silly. What a silly thing to say. I talk of Marxist extremists and nationalist extremists. They just don’t want people to say there are Islamic terrorists, which there are. Too bad.”

Some info on the ISNA from Discover The Networks:

According to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, ISNA “is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation”; “convenes annual conferences where Islamist militants have been given a platform to incite violence and promote hatred” (for instance, al Qaeda supporter and PLO official Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi was invited to speak at an ISNA conference); has held fundraisers for terrorists (after Hamas leader Mousa Marzook was arrested and eventually deported in 1997, ISNA raised money for his defense); has condemned the U.S. government’s post-9/11 seizure of Hamas’ and Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s financial assets; and publishes a bi-monthly magazine, Islamic Horizons, that “often champions militant Islamist doctrine.”

Sooo, if the ISNA isn’t supporting McCain, I wonder who they do support?

Hint.

Hat tip: The Astute Bloggers

Gop Meanies Gonna ‘Swiftboat’ Obama

Some Democrat emo-brainiac is all worried that Obama may possibly get ‘Swiftboated’ by the Republicans because of his connections with The Weather Underground, and other lefties:

Rick Sloan says he doesn’t want to see the Democrats get “Swift Boated” again this time. So the communications director for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers has sent a couple of dozen friends — union leaders and Democratic activists, mainly — an urgent plea to pay attention to Sen. Barack Obama’s connections with the 1960s anti-war group, the Weather Underground, and other leftist thinkers.

Democrats “can’t be an ostrich on this” with their heads buried in the sand, Sloan said in an interview.

Gee, fella….ya think???

Since “Swiftboat” means roughly, “Telling the truth about a Democrat”, it’s greatly feared and reviled by the left. And they’re not going to take it sitting down, either.

They’ve already got some hardcore, war room ninjas on the job of counter-swiftboating operations, and so far have come up with this devastating revelation about the McCain campaign…*GASP* (Make sure you’re sitting down for this!): RECIPEGATE!!11!

When will these McCarthyist tactics cease?

UPDATE:

More swiftboating:

Apparently McCain’s also got a temper…..ooooh-wee! That one’s gonna leave a mark.

Beware Of Imposters

Hat tip: My Hubby

UPDATE (April 15):

I hate it when I have to explain a joke, but judging from the comments, some people are taking this the wrong way.

Most of you get this. Those of you who don’t, please refer to Thomas Sowell.

Oprah’s Popularity Sliding

And it seems to be coinciding with her support for Obama.

Coincidence?

Much hay was made nearly a year ago when Oprah Winfrey announced that she would support — and campaign for — Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama. Her effect in boosting support for Obama in early primary and caucus states like Iowa (which he won), New Hampshire (which he lost) and even South Carolina (which he won) is debatable.

Much less attention has been put on the effect the endorsement has had on Oprah’s own popularity. “The Oprah Winfrey Show”, launched in 1986, is currently the longest running daytime t.v.show. Within 10 years she was enjoying a 78% favorable rating in an American Political Culture Survey. At one point she was second only to Mother Teresa in a ‘most respected and admired’ poll.

I never understood her appeal, myself. But I’ve never been a daytime t.v. watcher.

And then, seemingly out of nowhere, Oprah announced on CNN’s “Larry King Live” on May 1, 2007, that she would officially endorse her longtime friend Barack Obama for the presidency — the first time she had ever thrown her support behind a political candidate.

Almost instantly, Oprah’s popularity in America plummeted. An August 2007 CBS News poll showed only 61 percent of Americans were favorably disposed to her — a considerable drop of 13 percentage points from a similar survey conducted just seven months prior.

Then she decided to start stumping for him.

To woo voters in crucial primaries, Oprah made appearances in Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire in early December 2007.

But by the time Fox News/Opinion Dynamics asked Americans about their attitudes toward Oprah in a survey conducted about 10 days later, Dec. 18-19, Oprah’s favorability ratings had dropped even further — to 55 percent — the lowest level of favorability ever registered for Oprah in opinion surveys. Oprah’s negatives also spiked, with one in three respondents (33 percent) reporting unfavorable impressions of her.

Also not helping Oprah is her increasingly open and embarrassing embracement of a flaky New Age type spirituality:

Apparently, after Oprah left the Trinity United Church of Christ, she began practicing another unorthodox brand of ‘Christianity’. She is now involved with the dissemination of a self study program of spiritual psychotherapy, described by some as a New Age Christianity. A quick check of Snopes confirms our worst fears: Oprah is knee deep in the New Age goo goo.

No doubt, this is causing her to bleed Christian viewers.

Back to The Politico:

The results of a March 26, 2008, AOL Television popularity poll of television hosts reveal Americans may now embrace Ellen DeGeneres over Oprah by a wide margin. Forty-six percent of the 1.35 million people who participated in the poll said the daytime talk show host that “made their day” was Ellen, compared with only 19 percent who chose Oprah. Nearly half (47 percent) said they would rather dine with Ellen, compared with 14 percent who preferred Oprah.

I find that shocking…and delightful.

Hat tip: Lucianne

McCain/Fred?