Friday, March 28, 2008

What's in a Name?

Bob Dylan's song – “The times they are a-changin’” is nowhere more actual than in today's Europe.

In 2006, the London Telegraph published this article: “Mohammed overtakes George in list of most popular names”. The famous British say “By George” is changing rapidly to “Ya’ Muhammad”.

The Telegraph went on to say that “Mohammed, and its most common alternative spelling Muhammad, are now more popular babies' names in England and Wales than George, reflecting the diverse ethnic mix of the population.” However, Muhammad (in its multitude of spellings) was only the 22nd in the list of most popular boys' names. Names such as Jack, Thomas and Joshua still prevailed.

Fast forward to 2007, the BBC and the London Times proclaim: “Muhammad is No 2 in boy's names”. The Times: “Muhammad is now second only to Jack as the most popular name for baby boys in Britain and is likely to rise to No 1 by next year. The name, if all 14 different spellings are included, was shared by 5,991 newborn boys last year, beating Thomas into third place, followed by Joshua and Oliver.”

Europe, the way we know it, is about to disappear and that is a mathematical fact. Even the intellectually dishonest BBC is saying that: “Islam is widely considered Europe's fastest growing religion, with immigration and above average birth rates leading to a rapid increase in the Muslim population.”

The cold facts: it is estimated that in 30 years, there will be close to 65 Million Muslims in Europe, not including Turkey. (equal to France’s population today!). If the present trends of population continue (European negative population growth, coupled with high Muslim birth rates and out of control immigration), by the end of the century, Muslims will be majority in Europe. There is no arguing with this!

Selfish Europeans are dying out and as Christianity falters, Islam is robust, assertive, and ambitious. As Europeans under-reproduce at advanced ages, Muslims do so in large numbers while young. “When that happens, grand cathedrals will appear as vestiges of a prior civilization — at least until a Saudi style regime transforms them into mosques or a Taliban-like regime blows them up. The great national cultures — Italian, French, English, and others — will likely wither, replaced by a new transnational Muslim identity that merges North African, Turkish, subcontinental, and other elements.” (Daniel Pipes).

This prediction is hardly new. In 1968, the British politician Enoch Powell gave his famed "rivers of blood" speech in which he warned that in allowing excessive immigration, the United Kingdom was "heaping up its own funeral pyre."

Europe has simultaneously reached unprecedented heights of prosperity and peacefulness and shown a unique inability to sustain itself. Is it inevitable that the most brilliantly successful society also will be the first in danger of collapse due to a lack of cultural confidence and offspring? Ironically, creating a hugely desirable place to live would seem also to be a recipe for suicide.” (demographer Wolfgang Lutz)

As most of Europe joins in recognizing the newest Muslim majority state - Kosovo, people from Scandinavia to the Balkans fail to see that they are gradually but surely digging their own cultural grave.

Bye, bye Europe…..

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Hillary and Elena

There once was a vile, horrible woman called Elena Ceausescu. She was married to a dictator, called Nicolae Ceausescu and they lived in a far, far away little country, hidden in the Eastern corner of Europe. Together, the Ceausescus lived a happy life oppressing their subjects and thinking of themselves as King and Queen. Although feared by the people, they were often ridiculed by them in countless jokes and stories, while a "vast right wing conspiracy" was constantly exposing them for what they really were (albeit broadcasting on "Free Europe" from the safety of Germany).
Their incompetent reign did not last happily ever after and came down to a violent end 30 long years after their ascendancy to the throne. THE END! (well, not really, since other incompetent knights fought for the throne which has been passed from a thief to another ever since, but that's another story for another night).

Why am I telling you this story (don't tell it to your kids at night; it may cause them long nightmares)? Watching the news today and hearing about yet another lie from the by now, pathological liar, Hillary Clinton, I realized that she has so much in common with Elena Ceausescu and decided to check the similarities. Lets see:

- Both Elena and Hillary think that they're smarter than their husbands and while Hillary is far more educated and smarter than Elena ever was, their ambitions had no limits.
- Both are ruthless when it comes to dealing with dissent. Elena preferred to destroy her opposition physically; Hillary would love to do that, be she cannot (living in a free country is a bitch...). Instead, she 's a character murderer.
- Both Elena and Hillary are despised by the majority of the population and ridiculed in countless jokes and satire.
- Both Elena and Hillary have a deep sense of entitlement. Presidency is owed to them and any one coming in their way must be crushed.
- Both lie through their teeth to a degree that they can't distinguish any longer between illusion and reality.
- Both would like to think that they've done so much "for the people" but both have a tough time when they have to actually point at some of their record (one thought she was an "eminent" chemistry scientist and the other would like you to believe that she brought peace to Norther Ireland -both ridiculous claims, of course!)
- Both are power hungry to the extreme and both made fortunes in less than honest ways: one by appropriating a country, the other by conducting questionable deals and pandering to special interests (again, the limitations of living in a free country, damn it!).

I'm sure that I could think of more examples, but I think you get the point. Now, to be fair, I certainly don't wish upon Hillary the same end that befell on Elena. I just hope that she will get the response that she deserves from the American people: GO AWAY!....oh,.....and take Slick Willie with you. As if being Senator is not punishment enough to the good people of NY....

Obama - Wrong for America, Dangerous for Israel

RJC Calls on Sen. Obama to Remove Key Advisor

Washington,D.C. (March 25, 2008) -- The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) today called on Sen. Barack Obama to remove Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak as his military advisor and national campaign co-chairman.

"By choosing to have a military advisor and national campaign co-chairman like General McPeak, serious questions and doubts are once again being raised about Senator Obama's positions and judgment on Middle East issues," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks.

In a 2003 interview with the Oregonian, Gen. McPeak resorted to old stereotypes and unfortunate language by blaming the lack of progress with the Israeli-Palestinian peace process
on the undue political influence of American Jewry. The problem, said McPeak is "New York City. Miami. We have a large vote -- vote, here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it."

"Rather than putting the blame where it belongs -- on the Palestinian leadership and their continued reliance on terror, General McPeak finds it more convenient to blame American Jewry and their perceived influence," said Brooks. "This is the same dangerous and disturbing
canard being promoted by the likes of Jimmy Carter and authors Mearsheimer and Walt in their book, The Israel Lobby."

In addition, Gen. McPeak has a long history of criticizing Israel for not returning to the 1967 borders or returning the Golan Heights to Syria, as he wrote in Foreign Affairs in April 1976.

"Senator Obama continues to surround himself with advisors holding troubling and
disturbing anti-Israel bias. General McPeak's views are alarming. We call on Senator Obama to immediately remove General McPeak from his campaign leadership role and as a key advisor," said Brooks.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Israeli Left's dangerous delusion

Two recent polls find a vast majority of Palestinians supporting terror attacks.

A recent Palestinian Authority poll shows that 84 percent of Palestinians approve of the massacre at Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva in Jerusalem, where eight students were gunned down and ten wounded. The poll, carried out by Ramallah-based pollster Khalil Shikaki from the "Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research ", interviewed 1,270. Another interesting, but hardly surprising find was that 64 percent of Palestinians support the rocket attacks on Israeli cities and towns such as Sderot and Ashkelon launched from Hamas-controlled Gaza. Those who oppose the attacks don’t do so on moral grounds, but rather strategic considerations.

In February of last year, a Near East Consulting (NEC) poll found that 75 percent of Palestinians do not think that Israel has a right to exist.

The Left is known for not being particularly keen of cold cut facts and in-your-face data; its main line of "reasoning" has more to do with wishful thinking and "feelings" than with reality. As destructive as this can be anywhere else, in Israel, the Left infatuation with "moderate" Palestinian leaders has a very dangerous aspect which can jeopardize the very existence of the Jewish state. Nowhere else in the world is the Left illusion more dangerous to become a nation's delusion than in the State of Israel at this very moment.

Since its rebirth, 60 years ago, the modern Jewish state had to fight for its very survival, often against overwhelming odds. Faced with physical genocide, most Israeli political factions shared a common view of the perils facing the tiny state: the need for a strong military, the undivided Jerusalem as Israel's eternal capital, the need for defensible borders, rejection of the so-called "right to return" and always keeping an open hand out for Peace with the Arab world.

Reminiscent of other "anti-war", intellectually dishonest and often morally bankrupt Leftists movement from other corners of the world, the Israeli Left has been influencing policy for the past 10-15 years. But if in places such as W Europe, S America or even USA, the Left influence has resulted mostly in quasi-socialist economic blunders, cowardice in face of Islamic terrorism and a general degradation of morals and religious values, in Israel, the Left ideological blindness has resulted in scores of innocent Israelis (Jews and Arabs) murdered, maimed, terrorized and frightened. The fallacies of the Israeli Left get people killed!

The Left mantra is "support the moderates". Their blind, mindless infatuation with "moderates" makes them overlook the intensive culture of hate perpetrated by the media and education establishment in the Palestinian Authority headed by the "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas. The Israeli Left and media also overlook telling people that Abu Mazen is also a Holcaust denier and would not renounce the "right of return", but again, who cares about (inconvenient) facts?

When disastrously weak and incompetent governments such as Ehud Barak's and the current one headed by Olmert take the path of the Left, men, women and children die. They die in the streets, in their homes, riding the bus or having lunch in a restaurant. No amount of after-the-fact, internationally condemned Israeli reaction will bring those innocent people back.

When is a mistake more than a mistake and becomes a CRIME? When a mistake gets people killed. And when a CRIMINAL mistake becomes a matter of policy and is repeated over and over, than the political establishment which perpetuates it is accomplice with the murderers.

Real Democracy demands accountability. There is none now in Israel. The Olmert government shares guilt for the victims of the "second" Lebanon war, the Qasam rockets and the massacre at Merkaz Ha'Rav because of its incompetence, blindness and politics that have made all these possible.

The Left and far-Left, on the other hand, is accomplice in the murders because of its intentional refuse to see the facts, thus giving the murderers its tacit acquiescence.

Every (free) country deserve the government it has. Nowhere is this more accurate than in Israel. But people should not have to pay with their lives for the demented delusions of a clique of pompous, self-important, holier-than-thou, morally bankrupt pinheads. Unlike most places in the world, in Israel, the Left has blood on its hands.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Obama's apologetical speech

For all the hype surrounding Obama's supposed transcendent understanding of race relations in America, his speech yesterday exposed him for being an apologetic for black racism and hate mongering and not an accountable leader.

Flip-flopping on whether he was present in church at the time crazy Jeremiah's anti-American, anti-Israel, racist rants, Obama finally had to admit that he indeed was there when "controversial" and "occasionally fierce" critics were spewed by an enraged lunatic from the pulpit.

The fact that he did not promptly leave the place upon hearing Wright's poisonous nonsense is either because of poor judgement or acceptance of what was said (or both). In either case, this is not a man who should be entrusted with the highest office in the land. He's proven that he is not the "Great Unifier" his cohorts of groupies would like to portray. He cannot be a President for all Americans when his mentor and spiritual "adviser" is a racist and a promoter of "black liberation theology".

Michelle Malkin eloquently summarized Obama's speech: "Instead of accountability, we got excuses. Instead of disavowal of demagoguery, we got whacked with the moral equivalence card. Instead of rejecting the Blame America mantra of left-wing black nationalism, we
got more Blame Whitey. Same old, same old."

In his quest to distort the truth so it will fit his perception of reality, Obama dares to draw a parallel between the despicable, foul-mouthed pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ, and "your pastor, priest or rabbi". Without knowing you, me or the vast majority of Americans, he states that you too have been appalled at times by statements made by your clergy....How dare he? What gives him the right to assume that just because his pastor spews invectives at his country - for 20 years - so is your priest or rabbi? Left unanswered, the shamelessness knows no boundaries.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Obama and his racist anti-Semitic supporters

These are excerpts from a very insightful article wrote by Ronal Kessler on March 16th, 2008 and published on It provides information about Obama's real relationship with haters such as Farrakhan and Wright and exposes the Illinois Senator's hypocrisy and attempts to deceite the American public:

The Obama campaign has told members of the press that Senator Obama was not in church on the day cited, July 22, because he had a speech he gave in Miami at 1:30 PM. Our writer, Jim Davis, says he attended several services at Senator Obama's church during the month of July, including July 22. (...) Mr. Davis stands by his story that during one of the services he attended during the month of July, Senator Obama was present and sat through the sermon given by Rev. Wright as described in the story. (...) Mr. Davis' story was first published on Newsmax on August 9, 2007. Shortly before publication, Mr. Davis contacted the press office of Sen. Obama several times for comment about the Senator's attendance and Rev. Wright's comments during his sermon. The Senator's office declined to comment.

Contrary to Senator Barack Obama’s claim that he never heard his pastor Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. preach hatred of America, Obama was in the pews last July 22 when the minister blamed the “white arrogance” of America’s Caucasian majority for the world’s suffering, especially the oppression of blacks.
Senator Obama has sought to separate himself from his pastor’s incendiary remarks, issuing a statement Friday rejecting them as “inflammatory and appalling” but failing to renounce Wright himself for his venomous and paranoid denunciations of America.
In his press release, Obama claimed, “The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity [United Church of Christ] or heard him utter in private conversation.”

(...) If Obama’s claims are true that he was completely unaware that Wright’s trademark preaching style at the Trinity United Church of Christ has targeted “white” America and Israel, he would have been one of the few people in Chicago to be so uninformed. Wright’s reputation for spewing hate is well known.

In his sermon (...), Wright tore into America, referring to the “United States of White America” and lacing his sermon with expletives as Obama listened. Hearing Wright’s attacks on his own country, Obama had the opportunity to walk out, but Davis said the senator sat in his pew and nodded in agreement.
Addressing the Iraq war, Wright thundered, “Young African-American men” were “dying for nothing.” The “illegal war,” he shouted, was “based on Bush’s lies” and is being “fought for oil money.”

Obama’s most famous celebrity backer, Oprah Winfrey began attending Wright’s church in 1984. (...) She soon found herself a target of Wright, who excoriated her for having broken with “traditional faith.”

The Reverend Wright’s anti-white theology that Senator Obama expressed surprise over is evident on the church’s website. The site says the congregation subscribes to what it calls the Black Value System, which is described as a disavowal of “our racist competitive society” and the pursuit of “middle-classness.”

Senator Obama now is attempting to minimize his long and close relationship with the controversial minister.
On Friday, John McCain’s campaign distributed a Wall Street Journal op-ed “Obama and the Minister” written under my byline based on my reporting for Newsmax going back to early January of this year.
The op-ed included details of a sermon Wright gave at Howard University blaming America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs, shamelessly supporting Israel, and creating a racist society that would never elect a black man as president.

(...) Obama’s campaign quickly responded to the Wall Street Journal op-ed, posting a statement on the Huffington Post. In his statement, Obama acknowledged that some of Wright’s statements have been “inflammatory and appalling.”

(...) Obama went on to claim that he first learned about Wright’s controversial statements when he began his presidential campaign. But this assertion conflicts with the fact that just before Obama’s nationally televised campaign kickoff rally on Feb. 10, 2007, the candidate disinvited Wright from giving the public invocation.
At the time, Wright explained: “When [Obama’s] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli” to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, “a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.”

(...) Apparently Obama never foresaw Wright’s sermons making national television or becoming a sensation on YouTube. But lending graphic detail to the saga, ABC News and other networks began running a 2003 sermon in which Wright said, “The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible, for killing innocent people ... God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”

Obama has described Wright as a sounding board and mentor. Wright is one of the first people Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Obama consulted Wright before deciding to run for president. The title of Obama’s bestseller “The Audacity of Hope” comes from one of Wright’s sermons. Obama’s “Yes We Can!” slogan is one of Wright’s exhortations.

Apologists for Wright have said that what he says is normal in black churches, and many blacks claim such preaching cannot be understood by whites.
(...) But Juan Williams, a Fox News commentator and author of “Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America,” tells Newsmax that Wright’s sermons reflect “the victim mindset that is so self-defeating in the black community and one that is played on by weak black leadership that chooses to have black people identified as victims rather than inspiring them as people who have overcome. In posing as victims, they say the most prejudiced and vicious things, not only about whites but about America. They call it theology. In fact, it’s nothing but bigotry.”

In failing to condemn Wright himself and claiming that he was unaware of the preacher’s hate-filled speech, Obama is continuing a longstanding pattern.
Obama often refers to Wright as being "like an old uncle, who sometimes says things I don't agree with

(...) Like Wright, Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews (calling Judaism a “gutter religion”), whites, and America. He has called whites “blue-eyed devils” and the “anti-Christ.” He has described Jews as “bloodsuckers” who control the government, the media, and some black organizations.
After the Newsmax story, Obama issued a statement purportedly addressing the issue.
"I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan," Obama said.
Again, Obama was careful not to condemn Farrakhan himself or Wright who had spoken adoringly of Farrakhan and put their church behind the award to the controversial Nation of Islam leader.

(...) Having gotten away with sidestepping Wright’s adoring comments about Farrakhan, Obama told Jewish leaders flatly in Cleveland on Jan. 24 that the award was because of Farrakhan’s work with ex-offenders. To date, no news outlet has pointed out that Obama’s claim is false.

Obama went on to explain away Wright’s anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state’s support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his claim that the award to Farrakhan was made because of his work with ex-offenders, Obama made that up. Wright’s statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way.

(...) Having considered Wright a friend and mentor for two decades, Obama now often mentions that his pastor recently retired. Wright suggested to the New York Times last year that he and Obama might have to do something of a distancing act in the run up to the election.
"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright was quoted by The New York Times. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said, ‘Yeah, that might have to happen.'"

As Obama is trying more and more to apply tactics and maneuvres best known as Clintonesque in nature, his false image of "a uniter, not a divider" is starting to give way to his true face. It's an ugly and scary face, much like the ones of Farrakhan and Wright. The American people should see him for what he truely is and reject him and his message of "change".

Thursday, March 13, 2008

McCain visits Israel, Hillary exposed

On March 18th, John McCain will visit Israel. He will be accompanied by Senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham. Matt Brooks of the Republican Jewish Coalition said the trip was "an incredibly important gesture on Senator McCain's part. It reflects his understanding of how important the issue of Israel's security is for him to take the time out in the middle of a
campaign to show his support and solidarity."

I think that I voice the opinion of many others when I say that a McCain-Lieberman ticket would be a great option. When the Democrats seem so excited about a woman and/or a black man as their Presidential nominees, having Lieberman on the VP slot would go a long way.

For starters, it will sway the Jewish vote away from the Democrats (especially if Obama wins the nomination). There have already been reports that should Obama beat Hillary in the Democratic race, there will be a strong move of the Jewish vote to the Republican side. More and more Jews start to realize that the Democratic Party is not as stanch a supporter of Israel as it ones was. Certainly Obama's link to a racist anti-Semite pastor (whom he knows for 20 years!) and his endorsement by the most invective and disgusting American racist, are no reasons to vote Democratic in November.

Second, Lieberman is well liked and admired in his home state of Connecticut, one of the bluest states in the nation. Could Connecticut be in play? I strongly believe that with Lieberman on the GOP ticket, Florida will fall solidly into the Republican camp.

Third, Lieberman brings strong credentials of tough on national security and the war on terror.

Forth, Lieberman was elected in 2006 as an Independent after losing the Democratic primary for re-election in Connecticut to a far left Ned Lamont, which got the support of the Party nomenclature. There is no lost love between Lieberman and the Democrats and the Liberals won't have much to attack the man who, in 2000 was the first Jewish vice presidential candidate and ran with their beloved Al Gore.

I know that Lieberman has repeatedly insisted he is not interested in the Republican vice presidential nomination, despite his endorsement of McCain and persistent campaigning for him.
But photos of McCain in Jerusalem with Lieberman are bound to be a major piece of his outreach to Jewish voters.

On the pinhead category (borrowing a note from the Great Bill O'Reilly), here's Hillary Clinton bragging that her "extensive" foreign policy experience makes her best prepared to meet national security challenges on "Day One".

"You know," she said, "helping to support the peace process in Northern Ireland, negotiating to open borders so that (Kosovar) refugees fleeing ethnic cleansing would be safe, going to Beijing and standing up for women's rights as human rights and so much else.">>

But it turns out Hillary exaggerated her list of foreign policy accomplishments, which is really quite pathetic considering how meager they already are.

First, she never played a key role in brokering peace in Northern Ireland, according to former first minister David Trimble, who said she had no direct role in the talks.

Second, Hillary did travel to Macedonia in May 1999, and she did visit refugee camps near the Kosovo border. However, no one knows how she helped the Kosovar refugees when Macedonia reopened its border to them before her visit.

And finally, when she was in Beijing, she carried no official portfolio while speaking on women's rights there.

Hillary did not attend any National Security Council meetings, never sat in the Situation Room during crises, never read in on presidential security briefings and she was not part of the Cabinet.

She did, however, take campaign checks from Chinese bagmen for the People's Liberation Army.

Hillary couldn't even answer MSNBC host Tim Russert's question about Russian President Putin's hand-picked successor:

Russert: Who will it be? Do you know his name?

Hillary: Medved —

Russert: Medvedev.

Hillary: Medvedeva — whatever —

Russert: Yes.

Hillary: Yes. (Giggle.)

Whatever? She runs adds trying to convince us that she is ready "On Day One" and will pick up that telephone at 3:00 AM but can't even say who the President of Russia is? What a fake, phony fraud she is....

One of Obama's foreign policy advisers, Susan Rice, said it best when she confessed that neither he nor Hillary would be ready to pick up the White House red phone at 3 a.m.

If the Democrats win in November

A lot has been said about the Bush tax cuts. The Democrats and their Liberal cohorts depicted the tax cuts in terms of "class warfare" (tax cuts for the rich, corporate welfare, etc.).

The factual truth is that the Bush tax cuts have provided relief to most American families, of all income levels and kept our economy going strong through years of war spending, natural disasters and rising oil prices.

On Thursday, the Senate voted 52-47 to reject a move by Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., to extend Bush's tax cuts for middle- and higher-income taxpayers. John McCain, Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting, voted for the full roster of Bush tax cuts. Rivals Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both voted against them.

The developments came as the Senate began a full day of votes on a $3 trillion Democratic budget blueprint for 2009. The nonbinding plan promises generous increases for many domestic programs, but achieves those goals only by assuming major tax increases when Bush's tax cuts expire. Obama and Clinton both promise to reverse Bush's tax cuts, but the Democratic budget they'll be voting for would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more. Socialism is expensive and if you didn't know that, just ask the Europeans.

"The biggest issue in this campaign is going to be your taxes," Bush said Wednesday night at a GOP fundraiser. "I think the biggest issue in this campaign is which side of the political divide is going to let you keep your money, and which side is going to raise your taxes."

Under the Democratic plans (in the Senate and Congress), tax rates would increase by 3 percentage points for each of the 25 percent, 28 percent and 33 percent brackets. At present, the 25 percent bracket begins at $31,850 for individuals and $63,700 for married couples. The 35 percent bracket on incomes over $349,700 would jump to 39.6 percent. The Democratic plans would provide generous, greater-than-inflation increases for domestic agency budgets.

All those who want to pay more in taxes raise your hands....Now get out of here!

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Tell me who your friends are.... part 2

I started this blog by asking "Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are" and listed some of Barack Hussein Obama's friends. First on the list, the pastor of his church, a foul-mouth racist - Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.
Many of Obama's apologists tried to cry "guilt by association" and distance the Illinois Senator from his long time friend. But I guess Wright didn't get that memo, because he barked from the pulpit the following:

"Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person."

The title of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," was taken from a sermon by Wright.
Obama issued the usual lip-service of distancing himself from the pastor, but last week, while campaigning in Ohio he said this:

Jeremiah Wright ... has said some things that are considered controversial because he's considered that part of his social gospel."

Wright preaches a racist Afrocentric theology that interprets the Bible through shared suffering of African Americans. His sermons often address themes of perceived "white supremacy" and "black repression". Obama's campaign may try to paint Wright as a legitimate black leader, but once his remarks were widely publicized last year, Obama backed out of plans for his pastor to speak at his Feb. 10 presidential announcement. He was probably afraid to have his friend say something like this:

"(...) Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.

We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional killers. ... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. ... We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. ... We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means.

(...) And! God! Has got! To be sick! Of this shit!"

Saturday, March 8, 2008

Qaddafi is right

I didn't think that I'll ever say this, but Muammar al-Qaddafi, the Dictator of Libya, is right. Then again, even a broken a clock is right twice a day.

"I've seen that in America, a candidate who wants people to vote for him keeps talking about change," Qaddafi said earlier this week in a televised address on Libyan TV, an obvious reference to Barack Obama.

"They all keep saying 'change, change,' " he continued, adding Hillary Clinton to his reference. "They want to change America and its current political system. They want to make a change in their lives. They say their system is a failure, that their government is a failure, and that their elections are a failure."

He then lost it, rumbling about how all the world should adopt the "Libyan model" of a "Republic for the Masses", etc., etc., idea which appeals more to the average European leftist than to the Arab street.

Qaddafi's lunacy notwithstanding, one must admit that he has a point and sees the emptiness of the Democrats' message. Now if he can also advise them on matters of Foreign Policy, I think the Liberals have a "winner" this coming November....

Friday, March 7, 2008

The Left is "Sicko"

The "hero" of the NY Times best seller book "Big Fat Stupid White Man", i.e. Michael Moore, appeared before an audience (of dopes) at the University of Michigan in 2003 and declared the following:

"There is no terrorist threat! Yes, there have been horrific acts of terrorism, and yes, there will be acts of terrorism again. But that does not mean that there is some massive terrorist threat."

The audience applauded this icon of Liberalism (a multi-millionaire who send his kid to private school and characterized by his co-workers as "money-obsessed") and took his so-called conclusions at face value. But what is the real value of Mr. Moore's "expert" conclusions?

Unbeknown to the "Big Fat Stupid" Moore and without much fanfare, America's terror fighters are thwarting dozens of homegrown plots aimed at domestic targets. Here's a list of them (since September 11, 2001):

• December 2001:Richard Reid, British citizen attempted to ignite shoe bomb on flight from Paris to Miami.

• May 2002: Jose Padilla, American citizen accused of seeking "dirty bomb," convicted of conspiracy.

• September 2002: American citizens of Yemeni origin convicted of supporting Al Qaeda. Five of six were from Lackawanna, N.Y.

• May 2003: Iyman Faris, American citizen charged with trying to topple the Brooklyn Bridge.

• June 2003: Eleven men from Alexandria, Va., trained for jihad against American soldiers, convicted of violating the Neutrality Act and conspiracy.

• August 2004: Dhiren Barot, Indian-born leader of terror cell plotted bombings on financial centers.

• August 2004: James Elshafay and Shahawar Matin Siraj sought to plant bomb at New York's Penn Station during the Republican National Convention.

• August 2004: Yassin Aref and Mohammed Hossain plotted to assassinate a Pakistani diplomat on American soil.

• June 2005: Umer Hayat and Hamid Hayat - Son convicted of attending terrorist training camp in Pakistan; father convicted of customs violation.

• August 2005: Kevin James, Levar Haley Washington, Gregory Vernon Patterson and Hammad Riaz Samana, Los Angeles homegrown terrorists who plotted to attack National Guard, LAX, two synagogues and Israeli consulate.

• December 2005: Michael Reynolds, plotted to blow up refinery in Wyoming, convicted of providing material support to terrorists.

• February 2006: Mohammad Zaki Amawi, Marwan Othman El-Hindi and Zand Wassim Mazloum accused of providing material support to terrorists, making bombs for use in Iraq.

• April 2006: Syed Haris Ahmed and Ehsanul Islam Sadequee videotaped the Capitol and World Bank for a terrorist organization.

• June 2006: Narseal Batiste, Patrick Abraham, Stanley Grant Phanor, Naudimar Herrera, Burson Augustin, Lyglenson Lemorin, and Rotschild Augstine accused of plotting to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago.

• July 2006: Assem Hammoud accused of plotting to hit New York City train tunnels.

• August 2006: Thwarted plot to explode ten airliners over the United States using explosive liquid.

• May 2007: Six men accused of plotting to attack Fort Dix Army base in New Jersey.

• June 2007: Four men accused of plotting to blow up fuel arteries underneath JFK Airport in New York.

And these are only the cases which have been made public so far....Remember, the terrorists have to be successful only once!

Michael Moore may have released his latest movie - "Sicko" - but the intended audience should be primarily his Liberal cohort on crazies....They really need some medical attention.

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Americans’ Most and Least Favored Nations

  • Gallup had conducted a "2008 World Affairs" survey, trying to find out which countries do Americans see favorably and which fare the worse in our perception.
    The dry statistical data shows that out of 22 countries, Canada, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan win favor with at least 80% of Americans, while Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, North Korea, and Iran are viewed favorably by no more than 20%. Israel receives a 71% favorable rating, ranking 5th on the top list.

    In itself, the poll shows that Israel is viewed favorably by most Americans, but that's not the whole picture.

As they say, "the Devil is in the details":

  • Israel (...) is viewed more favorably by Republicans than by Democrats.
  • Younger adults are also more likely than those 55 and older to have favorable views of France, Egypt, Mexico, Kenya, Venezuela, Cuba, the Palestinian Authority, North Korea, and Iran.

In other words, more Democrats are likely to view Israel unfavorably, while more of the young population is inclined to be apologetic towards pariahs such as Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, Castro's Cuba, Kim Jong Il's N. Korea and Hamas-dominated Palestinian Authority...Not too rosy a picture, is it?

The details of the poll confirm the trend in the Democratic Party, of distancing itself from its commitment to Israel. Note to Jewish voters: "Wake up! The Democratic Party is not your father's Democratic Party anymore." It's being influenced more and more by a hard left wing whose views on Israel and pro-Palestinian sympathies are starting to reflect through the Party's members.

On the young generation, the growing influence of vicious far-left propaganda is not only turning them into Bush-o-phobics, anti-Capitalist, pro-Anarchists, morally relativist pinheads. They are sympathising with the enemies of this country (Cuba, Venezuela) and the enemies of Western civilization (N. Korea, PA)! Harry Belafonte's and Hollywood dopes visiting and embracing Hugo Chavez are not lost on many misguided youngsters. About N. Korea they don't know much, but if the Bush Administration calls them a "terrorist nation", they surely need some support. And the Palestinians are, of course, oppressed by the US-backed Israeli war machine and it's only natural that they would strap bombs on themselves and blow themselves up in buses and pizza parlors...any one would do the same, wouldn't they? Yuk!....

Bob Grant, the legendary talk show host, had a say: "It's sick out there and it's getting sicker".

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Say NO! to Liberals

While our troops are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, Liberals are busy trying to defeat them here, at home. Unable to bring about a hasty retreat from Iraq, the lunatic Left wants to have them withdrawn from American cities and American college campuses.

The city council of Berkeley, California has stooped to the lowest level recently when telling the United States Marine Corps Recruiters that they are 'uninvited and unwelcome intruders' in their city. They were actually trying to kick the U.S. Marines out of their city while giving special preferences to liberal protesters.

The fact that Liberals are hell-bent on seeing the US Military defeated (somewhere, anywhere, no matter by whom and at what cost) should not be a surprise to any fair minded person. But their hypocrisy really knows no limits.

Sign this petition today and tell Berkeley, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and their liberal cohorts that we've had enough of their assaults on our troops.

This is a disgrace and those lunatics from "Code Pink", the Berkeley City Council and others like them must be given a message. Liberals respect free speech if they agree with it. Otherwise, their tactics are not far away from those of Fascists and Communists: suppress (by all means) your opponent's right of free speech!

Raise awareness, don't remain silent and do not permit a small minority of demented far-left to speak in your name, because pretty soon, you'll have NO right to speak. Boycott Berkeley and speak up your mind!

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Sen. Obama's Middle East Policies Confusing and Inconsistent
Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks today called Sen. Barack Obama's most recent Middle East policy pronouncement confusing and inconsistent.While campaigning in Texas yesterday for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama said his willingness to meet with foes like Iran and Syria "does not include Hamas," reported Reuters.
"This most recent declaration by Senator Barack Obama demonstrates his fundamental lack of understanding of the dynamics of the Middle East. Iran and Syria have been designated by the United States as state-sponsors of terrorism; Hamas has been designated a terrorist organization. None recognize Israel's right to exist or its basic need for safe and secure borders," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks.
"To declare that he would meet with Iran and Syria, but not Hamas, is another clear example of Senator Obama's shaky grasp of Middle East realities. His proposed policies are not only confusing and inconsistent, but above all, they are naive and dangerous."

Monday, March 3, 2008

Madame Hillary's Impressive Resume of Achievements

Hillary Clinton has been telling America that she is the most qualified candidate for president based on her 'record,' which she says includes eight years in the White House as First Lady - or 'co-president' -and seven years in the Senate.

For those who forgot (or those who have no idea what that "experience" is), here's a reminder of what her record includes:

- As First Lady, Hillary assumed authority over Health Care Reform, a process that cost the taxpayers over $13 million. She couldn't even get it to a vote in a Congress controlled by her own party.

- Hillary assumed authority over selecting a female Attorney General. Her first two recommendations (Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood) were forced to withdraw their names from consideration, and then she chose Janet Reno. Janet Reno has since been described by Bill himself as 'my worst mistake.'

- Hillary recommended Lani Guanier for head of the Civil Rights Commission. When Guanier's radical views became known (namely her obsession with "Black Power" and affirmative action), her name had to be withdrawn.

- Hillary recommended her former law partners, Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy for positions in the Justice Department, White House staff, and the Treasury, respectively. Hubbell was later imprisoned, Foster committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

- Hillary also recommended a close friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of up to 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, both Hillary and her husband denied knowing him.

- In order to open 'slots' in the White House for her friends the Harry Thomasons (to whom millions of dollars in travel contracts could be awarded), Hillary had the entire staff of the White House Travel Office fired; they were reported to the FBI for 'gross mismanagement' and their reputations ruined. After a thirty-month investigation, only one, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime - mixing personal money with White House funds when he cashed checks. The jury acquitted him in less than two hours.

- She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. The chain reaction that followed: She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor, which led to MonicaLewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs, which led to.... settle with Paula Jones after all. The results of her "bright" advice: Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury and was impeached by the House

- Hillary wrote 'It Take s a Village,' demonstrating her Socialist viewpoint.

- Hillary decided to seek election to the Senate in a state she had never lived in. Her husband pardoned FALN terrorists in order to get Latino support and the New Square Hassidim to get Jewish support. Hillary also had Bill pardon her brother's clients, for a small fee, to get financial support.

- When Hillary left the White House, she had to return $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen.

- Hillary's husband further protected her by asking the National Archives to withhold from the public until 2012 many records of their time in the White House, including much of Hillary's correspondence and her calendars. (There are ongoing lawsuits to force the release of those records.)

- Hillary's one notable vote, supporting the plan to invade Iraq , she has since disavowed.

Quite a resume, isn't it? Sounds more like a mixture of Sopranos and Elena Ceausescu. It looks like the Liberals have quite a choice to make this Election time, between an empty suit supported by racists and Anti-Semites and Madame Sopranos on stereoids....I don't envy them.