When Does Murder Matter?

Are you crazy, ignorant of the facts, or just part of the socialist agenda? Are you telling me that character only matters sometimes? For over a year now I’ve known about Obama’s affiliations with the terrorist Bill Ayers. For months on end I’ve wanted to write about it, but just didn’t know how I wanted to approach it. My thoughts have been something like this:

There’s the hopeful-If everyone just knew that Obama had teamed up with a terrorist to raise funds, then not only would he not be elected, Obama would be run out of the country.

There’s the amazed-Did the democrats really just nominate someone that has no qualms about hanging with a member of the Weathermen gang? Who stole America while I was sleeping?

There’s the hopeful again-Maybe if The People imagined that Ayers had killed their loved one instead of someone else’s, they’d see the horror of it all. Maybe if they thought of their children growing up in a country where the President plots his own country’s destruction, The People would come to their senses.

There’s the angry-How dare you plan on voting for someone that’s a known terrorist-a real live murderer.  Are you kidding me?  And if you really are smart enough to believe Obama knew nothing about it when he allowed Ayers to stand at his political side, then you sure better hope Obama puts away the confidential papers when his playmates come over! Sounds like his judgment might be a little off. You think?

Then there’s right now. If I agreed with Obama on every single issue, this would still be a deal breaker for me. Obama is not trustworthy and I can’t imagine how he has proved to anyone he is. And this has nothing to do with McCain, Bush, Tom, Dick, or Harry-just Obama. The election is not about who is the better candidate, it is about who is the right person for the Presidency.

We are too willing to look the other way when we think it will benefit us. This is what is wrong with many of our people. Some are screaming that we should ignore the Obama/Ayers facts, and “focus on issues like the economy”. I would like this manipulated economy to swing my way too, but my principles are not for sell.  What is your price?

I highly recommend you view the film “The Weather Underground”. About 5 years ago, well before I had even heard of Obama, I rented this documentary. It was a real eye opener. Watch it and forget about the election until after you have viewed it in its entirety. Netflix subscribers can view it right now from their desktop.

 http://www.netflix.com/Search?v1=weather+underground

Propagandize Me Please!

Are you downing the propaganda? It's being dished out like cheap diner food and served anyway you like it. Propaganda entree' has been successful for the most part, but upon reports of some consumer dissatisfaction with the low quality food, the candidates have begun serving it with a side of issue fries. Much like the French fry, the issue fry is long, thin on substance, and heavy on the grease. The people love it! Their propaganda dishes are more popular than any candidate has ever served.

Not me though. I'm not interested in their entree'.

See, before I eat anything, I always examine the utensils and the plate for cleanliness. The utensils are easy enough to inspect, but what is the meal concealing? Are there "extras" on my plate? It could be anything: dirt, hair, socialism, a bug. I always look beneath the food, moving it around to see if there are any surprises. No meal, no matter how good it sound or looks, is worth getting sick over or for that matter losing self sovereignty over.

Bottom line is that candidates tell us what they think we want to hear. When vagaries about themselves don't work they move to issues, not being much more specific, but tempting us to down it whole. But what is behind the issue? Why do they choose one side of the issue over the other? The trick is finding out what is behind their position on the issues. The trick is in understanding that there are underlying "issues" to the issues. True intentions on specific issues can be better viewed through the lens of agenda. Agenda is what demonstrates the real direction we will go in-not just the direction they say they'll move us. The agenda will either be dirty or clean. Unfortunately, and hence the need for elections, what one American deems as clean, is dirty and contaminated to another.

Have you checked the plate in which your serving of propaganda rests? Don't be so sure you've looked well enough. I challenge you to look into the terms below and ponder their implications, both past and present. Ask yourself where our country has been and where it is headed. Ask yourself which terms you see reflected in the candidate's positions on the issues, especially the issues of the economy and environmentalism. Take note in the sometimes extremely subtle differences in meaning from one word to another. If you study the terms and look into some of the organizations that currently support these ideas, you may be surprised to find that they have more relevance to you and your world view than you would have ever imagined.

Socialism                              Communism                      Fascism

Lawsuit Filed Against Obama

 Philip Berg, a Democrat and legal professional, has filed suit against Senator Obama. The reason? Philip Berg claims that the presidential candidate is NOT a U.S. citizen. If that be true, then of course Senator Obama is NOT eligible to become president.

Before you stop reading because you believe the accusation to be ridiculous and only old news, be warned. A few weeks ago, I felt just the same way.

Now a few months ago, when rumors were swirling about Obama's non-citizenship, I dismissed them right away. Not because I believe anything Obama says, but because this man is running for the highest office in the land.He had to have filed his birth certificate with the FEC or some other government agency right? Wrong!

Some weeks ago my husband brought up the issue of Obama potenially being a foreigner. He was just hearing about the rumor. Sure that there were many more legitimate things we could accuse Obama of, I set out to quickly put this matter to rest.

Online I was able to find a copy of Obama's certificate or at least one that was labeled as such. Next I went to the FEC website and discovered that no candidate was required to present proof of citizenship to them-only myriads of financial information. Wanting to find the agency that Obama had presented proof too, I called the FEC. They informed me that it was up to the political parties to verify.

Say it ain't so. I mean, just last year I waited for hours to get another certified copy of my daughters birth certificate to present to her school. They were going to kick her out if I did not. Surely Obama had to have proved his citizenship! So, I went on to call party headquarters. The lady told me that the FEC was wrong. But only in that the candidates are NOT required to show them either. The lady at party headquarters told me that the only way to "see" is for a citizen to "challenge" the person in court. I nearly fainted and I do mean that.

After doing the math and finding that I should save my money for feeding the family instead of "challenging" the establishment, I decided I needed to vent. I called everyone I knew. The only ones who did not share in my horror were the ones that believed I must have gotten bad information. I then posted a PNN survey to see if others knew what I believed to be the best kept secret-you do not need to prove you are elibile to become the President of the United States-only to go to kindergarten. An overwhelming percent of respondents did not know this either.

Now, Philip Berg has had way out there theories before, but he's not the only one who has been making these claims. He's just the citizen who is now "challenging" Obama's citizenship. Some try to tie in the fact that Berg supported Hiliary and that Obama did not choose her as his vp running mate, therefore this was sour grapes. Berg claims the timing is due to his fear of Republicans bringing it up later and then the Democrats losing.  It sounds more plausible, not necessarily true-but plausable, that the timing has to do with the upcoming convention and a possible move by Hilary.

Regardless, I think it is the duty of everyone claiming to have an appreciation for the Constitution to pay attention to this one. If you are tempted to think that it is too far fetched to be plausible, may I remind you of Watergate, White Water, Iraq War, Vietnam War, etc. How many senators have been convicted, had to step down, etc... about lying? I do recall a former president and his many perceptions of the word "is". Just think how many pictures are altered on the PNN site alone. Would it really be so hard to do the same with a birth certificate?Did the campaign alter the Presidential Seal?

Do your duty and at least get informed about what is going on. As a citizen what do you think we should do? Is it really to much to ask for verifiable proof of citizenship?

There are many sites discussing this, but I found www.wnd.com to be pretty precise.

Obama Chooses Joe Biden

Obama has announced Senator Joe Biden to be his vice-presidential running mate. In the last 48 hours all of the talking heads had been predicting this choice. But does it make since?

White, old, and been in politics forever. Does this remind you a little of how Obama and his camp has been describing McCain? In addition, Biden is known for making off-the-cuff comments that get him into trouble.

To learn more about Senator Biden, you can visit his senate web site at http://biden.senate.gov/ .

The Candidates and Their Cheap Pick-Up Lines

Barak Baby, Maverick McCain, or Bob below the radar Barr-whose slogan do you wear?

With such clever slogans as, "Change you can believe in", "Ready from day one", and "Liberty for America" how is one ever to choose.

This is how they woo us? Really? I've heard better pick-up lines from local mayors.

What do these candidates really mean? What are they trying to tell us? Could we figure it out if we had never heard a thing about them or their records and in some cases their lack of record?

"Change You Can Believe In"

"Change" was a popular buzzword long before the 2008 Presidential candidates began their campaigns. Day after day we were inundated with the word. Accept change or lose your job. Change the way you communicate or be left behind. We've changed the way we do business. On and on we heard about change. We're still hearing about this infamous change. If change is so good, when will we be done? When will all of this change manifest itself as success?

Don't get me wrong. I personally love change. I also despise it. Change is good when it is an increase in salary. Change is bad when my increase in salary causes the Federal government to take more of my money via taxes. Change is good when my spouse gets a promotion. Change is bad when my spouse has to work 20 extra hours a week because gas is too expensive for his employees to show up to work every day. Change is good when it saves me time. Change is bad when my time was wasted. You get the idea.

It's time to file the word into the clich archive. Its overuse has rendered it impotent and hollow.

"Ready From Day One"

Normally the word "ready" has a  positive connotation. We want to be ready and we want others to be ready. We are ready and willing. But what is the other side of the coin? Iran is supposedly almost ready for nuclear war. The titanic was ready to sink right before it went under. So is it good to be ready to become the next President of the United States? Quite frankly, I'm ready to be president. I am quite prepared to follow the rules written in the constitution. Heck, I am willing to read over year's worth of White House meeting minutes if it means you'll hand me the presidency. Elect ready me and that'll be a real change for our country!

"Liberty for America"

My first inclination is to say we have a winner and that we finally have a word that reveals much more about one of our candidates.  But let's scrutinize a little further shall we?

If I substitute the word freedom for liberty, then I must ask "freedom from what or of what". According to Webster's dictionary, I could answer "from foreign influence". Ok, that is more specific than the other two buzzwords. But let's take it further. Is it total freedom from everything? It could be. Is this candidate going to do away with the rule of law? Is this candidate going to determine what he wants to be free from and therefore rule as such?

I want the freedom to earn a living and to keep all of those earnings. Others believe everyone is entitled to be free from poverty. I want to be free to keep my wages. You may want to be free to take from the rich and give to the poor. So whose freedom are we buying?

Do you find the campaign slogans meaningful? The come-on-lines the candidates are giving us are simply over used words that imply promises ringing hollow in content and missing any meaning. So the next time a candidate tells you he stands for change, stands for liberty or that he simply stands ready, remember that he has really told you nothing. Think twice before you tow the party line.

Republican Party Official Blocks Ballot Access

The Bob Barr campaign says that a Pennsylvania Republican Party official has filed a lawsuit to “knock Bob Barr off the ballot in the Keystone state”. Below is part of the email I received from the Barr campaign this morning:

You can tell we are gaining momentum when the Democrats and Republicans work so hard to keep Bob Barr out of the media and off the ballot.  Over the weekend, the Saddleback Church kept Bob out of their forum in California - in what is a clear violation of McCain/Feingold campaign finance laws.

Now, a Pennsylvania Republican Party official working on behalf of John McCain has filed a lawsuit to knock Bob Barr off the ballot in the Keystone state.  This action is deplorable and we need to make sure every American knows what is going on, as this is probably just the tip of the iceberg of what is to come next.<u>
</u>
This action is especially ironic.<u> </u>

Who said:

''We all know that the Berlin wall is down . . . People should be able to get
on the ballot in states . . .   Everybody knows that I am a legitimate candidate.
I should be on the ballot.'' 

That would be Senator John McCain who was the victim of similar shenanigans in 2000 when he was trying to get on the New York Republican Primary ballot.

Now, in a blatantly hypocritical move, he's using the same tactics to stop Pennsylvania voters from having the chance to cast a ballot for Bob Barr.

Of course, this action doesn't even acknowledge that for Bob Barr to get on the ballot required many more signatures than it took for McCain to get on the primary ballot, and to get on the ballot in November required McCain to turn in ZERO signatures.

I am outraged, and you should be, too.  This move is one you might expect of a dictator in North Korea, Libya, China or Iran . . . not Pennsylvania.  This is not what our founding fathers would have wanted and I'm afraid that if we are not victorious in this fight, the establishment powers in both parties will be emboldened to do even more to thwart our efforts.

Today, as McCain and Obama are spending millions each week on TV advertising, our party is now confronted with having to hire a lawyer in Pennsylvania to fight back.  While we knew to expect dirty tricks to be employed against us, a national legal battle to protect our positions on voter ballots in the states was never anticipated.

As I said earlier, this is proof that we have frightened that national political establishment.  They are now willing to take the low road.  By every unbiased measure, we are certain to win in court, but the expense is something that is not cheap.

It only costs John McCain a few dollars to file a complaint but will cost us much more to defend against.  They know this hurts us and that we will not be as effective in our future advertising.

Whether you like Bob Barr or not, you should find ballot blocking offensive. Shouldn’t everyone have equal access? Aren’t we limiting the potential of America by allowing the powers that be dictate who can make it on to the ballot?

Those of us who have not fought to change this process are just as responsible as the Pennsylvania Republican Party. Will your child ever be able to run for President?

http://paragon.pnn.com/7005-election-2-8

Obama Fan?

 The "celebrity" is back. Yesterday, John McCain's campaign released a new web video. This time it's called "Fan Club".

I am not a McCain supporter but I am one of those that considers Obama's celebrity status an important issue. It's an attention getter. Many people will vote for McCain this November because they consider him the lesser of two evils, while many will vote for Obama for the very reason McCain implies. Unfortunately too many presidents have been elected on the basis of perceived charm, looks, and ability to avoid campaign promise scrutiny.

 McCain's videos may prompt a small minority to ask themselves, "Why is it I am voting for Obama?" See the video and ask yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XonsU2B16_0

Did He Just Flip Again?

Obama now says he is in favor of tapping the US strategic petroleum reserves for up to 10% of the 700 million barrels of oil. During today’s campaign speech In Lansing, Michigan the presidential hopeful deviated from his July remarks in which he stated that he was against tapping into those reserves unless it was a real emergency. What’s the reason for the change of heart?

But Obama is not the only one trying on different policies as he goes. McCain too has a tendency to flip with the polls. While the two candidates can’t seem to decide what they stand for, one thing is for sure. Barak Obama being the left one, and John McCain being the right one (at least that's what he claims to be) are the Flip Flops of the year.

Too bad one-size fits all flip flops aren’t practical for getting you where you want to be.

Tit for Tat

Well, another lie has been exposed. Is anyone really shocked? While some bloggers have been quick to take issue with John McCain’s alleged lies concerning Obama’s tax increase record, we’re not hearing much about Obama’s most recent lapse in truth.

According to the Evening Standard, Barack Obama made a specific promise that he has yet to fulfill. During Obama’s 2006 visit to a small village in Kenya he stopped at the Senator Obama Kogelo Secondary School. Named for Obama in 2005, this school was built on land Obama’s paternal grandfather had donated. Very generous of grandfather Obama indeed, but dilapidated village school has not seen an Obama donation since. This would be fine if Senator Barak Obama had not committed to do otherwise.

Grandstanding before Kenyan students, teachers, and a select group of dignified guests, including the Kenyan Prime Minister, Obama promised to do his part to help the school. “I know you are working very hard and struggling to bring up this school, but I have said I will assist the school, and I will do so” said Obama. This was two years ago!

According to Yuanita Obiero the school principal, the US Senator has yet to make good on his commitment. Obiero claims that in 2006 school officials sent a nine page proposal requesting funds to make improvements to the school. One of the many improvements needed is running water.

As of this writing, there has been no evidence found that indicates Barak Obama still plans on keeping his word to the school.

Some will say Barak Obama lied.  Others will find excuses for his lapsed commitment to the school named for him. What do you think?

Does it matter to you that all indications are that Obama was caught in another lie? Is this untruth any worse than McCain’s recently reported untruth? A lie by any other name would still smell as foul.

I submit to you that it matters very much to my life and yours that the candidates are lying, regardless of what they lied about. Employers can terminate employees if they are caught lying on their resume’. Employers doing reference checks are not generally going to hire an employee if they find that the prospective applicant had a tendency not to follow-through on his previous job. Wouldn’t we hold the Presidency of the United States of America to a much higher standard?

Lies are told so often. There are no big or small lies, just blemishes on our character. Our Presidential candidates should be held accountable. That means when your favorite candidate is caught in a lie, you need to acknowledge it-not make excuses for it. Call your candidate out. If he responds with an appeal for forgiveness, let’s forgive. If a pattern develops then we need to rethink our support. I am afraid that as a society we expect to hear lies, therefore we tolerate them. What does this say about us?

Let’s shine light on the truth and the candidate can decide whether or not he’ll man up. Besides, if we hold them accountable for untruths, won’t they get the message and eventually stop?  If your candidate will lie about the “small” things, what makes you think he can carry through on the “big” things that matter to you?

It seems to me that Democrats and Republicans need to cease in these tit for tat accusations and clean their own house. Hold your man accountable.