October 26, 2008

HOPE ON Project, Day 7: Let’s Never Find Out Part 7 — ‘Trust’

HOPEONlogo.jpgNote: This is the seventh of what will be 13 daily posts on why Barack Obama is a dangerous, objectionable, and objectively unfit candidate to be president of the United States (while many of the other candidates are not).

Previous PostsPart 1 (Obama “Part of the Problem” on Fan and Fred); Part 2 (“Energy”); Part 3 (“Punished”); Part 4 (“Number One”); Part 5 (“Earmarks”); Part 6 (‘The Chicken Button’ and the Chicken Who Pushed It).

The daily videos involved are from NeverFindOut.org, a project of Let Freedom Ring (donation link is here).

This post is part of the HOPE ON Project (Help Ohio Prevent Electing Obama Now).

Today’s SOB Alliance author is Mark at Weapons of Mass Discussion.


Video (direct YouTube link):



MAN: Senator Obama, how can we trust you? In 1995, you partnered with a man named William Ayers on a hundred million dollar education project. Sounds good, right?

Except William Ayers is a known terrorist who bombed the Pentagon and then said he didn’t do enough. You say William Ayers was “just a guy in your neighborhood”, but the Wall Street Journal tells us that you and William Ayers worked together as a team! And they must be right, because when you decided to run for the Senate, you announced your candidacy at his house! A known terrorist!

Senator Obama, we live in a world where terrorists wish to destroy us. How can we, with a clear conscience, elect a President with such close, documented ties to a terrorist? Senator Obama, how can we trust you?

ANNOUNCER: What happens when we elect the colleague of a terrorist to the White House? Please, America, let’s never find out.


Commentary by Mark at Weapons of Mass Discussion:

HOPE-ON: Who Can You Trust? Obama and Ayers, or the Facts? (key excerpts)

This video raises a key question. How can we trust a candidate whose story has changed so much in the last few months? First, Ayers was “just a guy in my neighborhood:

Then Obama’s campaign said that, their kids go to school together.

But, Ayers’ kids are nearly Obama’s age….and Obama’s kids are in grade school…how does that work exactly? But then it got deeper….People dared to do some digging around:

….. The Woods Fund financed the hiring of Obama in 1985 by the Developing Communities Project.
….. Obama’s DCP supported radical school reform project together with Bill Ayers.
….. Obama and Dohrn worked for elite law firm Sidley and Austin.
….. Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn host Obama’s state senate kick-off in their Hyde Park home.
….. Bill Ayers long time comrade Mike Klonsky blogs for Obama.

So, now the narrative has shifted to, well, he was just a guy I knew, to our kids go to school….to, well, I was 8 years old when he did his stuff…to, well, I thought he was repentant and reformed….to….?

Well, let’s look first at who Bill Ayers is and What he believes.

William Ayers is a communist. But don’t take my word for it. He said so himself:

And not some nicey-nice peace-and-love kind of communist. Through his group the Weather Underground, Ayers was planning to “seize power” in a violent communist takeover of the United States. Read more about Ayers manifesto here. It is chilling.

So what did Ayers and the Weathermen do? (See this 1969-1974 timeline, which includes over two dozen bombings, the Days of Rage Riot, and the Brinks Robbery that killed two police officers and on Brink’s guard — Ed.)

….. 1981 “Guilty as hel*. Free as a bird. America is a great country,” Ayers said when interviewed by David Horowitz.

September 11, 2001 — “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” Ayers is quoted in a NYT article.

Gosh, that last line happened after Barack Obama was associated with Ayers and worked with him. Are we to believe that Barack Obama never read the New York Times?

And we have this audio where Ayers talks about being unrepentant…in April 2002:

(Key quote: “I am as much an anarchist as I am a Marxist.” — Ed.)

So What Have We Learned?

Obama has changed his narrative several times. However, he still likes to say there was really no relationship. However:

  • Both worked in the same building,
  • both worked on the same boards,
  • Obama’s wife had a luncheon for Bill Ayers where Obama was a panelist,
  • Obama reviewed Ayers’ book,
  • Obama launched his career in Ayers’ living room,

This all seems a bit hard to swallow.

Obama…if he can’t be honest about his friends, how can we trust him?



Additional BizzyBlog Commentary:

The key question from the Never Find Out vid –

How can we, with a clear conscience, elect a President with such close, documented ties to a terrorist?

Answer: We can’t.


Additional Resource: Zombietime — “William Ayers’ forgotten communist manifesto: Prairie Fire”

Key Quote — “Ayers was not simply protesting “against” the Vietnam War. Firstly, he wasn’t against war in principle, he was agitating for the victory of the communist forces in Vietnam. In other words: He wasn’t against the war, he was against our side in the war.”

The POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Congress: Most Profligate of All During the Bush Administration

NOTE: This column originally appeared at Pajamas Media on Friday.


The POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Congress: Most Profligate of All During the Bush Administration

There’s a reason the media, as shown here, glossed over the most basic elements of the full fiscal-year results for Uncle Sam when they were released last week: Spending spiraled out of control more than any other single year during the Bush Administration.

And guess who’s in charge? Is it a coincidence that the 2007-2008 fiscal year represents the first year for which the Pelosi-Obama-Reid (POR) Congress had full budget-passing responsibility? I think not. But the folks in charge of delivering the news don’t want us to get any crazy ideas while the attempted coronation of Barack Obama is in full swing.

Here is how federal spending has grown during the past seven fiscal years (the analysis starts in fiscal 2002, since the final budget passed during the Clinton Administration covered the 2001 fiscal year; source data – 2007 and 2008; 2005 and 2006; 2003 and 2004, 2001 and 2002):


House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s rule during three Bush Administration congressional terms has been portrayed as overindulgent and heavy on pork-barrel spending. That characterization is mostly accurate, though there is some justification for increases that occurred during the earlier years.

Fiscal 2002 was certainly affected by post-9/11 Homeland Security-related responses. Whether you agree with the decisions to fight them, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were certainly key components of the increases that took place in 2002 and 2003. But after that, the excuses for spending growth are pretty thin. It is not without reason that many inclined to support George Bush over John Kerry in 2004 held their noses in the voting booth.

Fiscal 2005 and 2006 were particularly odious. The Hurricane Katrina response was a blank check that generated staggering waste. Pork-barrel spending went into overdrive, culminating with a “Republican” Senator, Ted Stevens, threatening to resign if he didn’t get his $200-plus million Bridge to Nowhere (Mr. Stevens and the Alaska GOP may learn in two weeks that resignation would have been a marvelous idea).

George Bush’s shared culpability for initating and/or acquiescing to all of this should, of course, not be ignored. Time after time the President had chances, and failed, to pull out his veto pen.

Ironically, the final budget passed under Hastert and Senate GOP Leader Bill Frist was relatively restrained. Spending rose barely more than inflation. But it was too little, too late, and voters in November 2006 decided that the Democrats couldn’t do any worse than the Republicans had.


Let’s look at how the POR triumvirate’s first full budget year panned out in comparison to Hastert & Co.’s final year:


The GOP Congress’s final-year discovery of spending control, coupled with a fourth consecutive year of robust growth in receipts driven by Bush’s supply-side tax cuts, narrowed the deficit by 35% in fiscal 2007. Further improvement seemed inevitable.

What a difference a year makes.

Pelosi, Obama, and Reid have been singing from the same tax-increasing, energy-obstructing, over-regulating hymnal since they took over in January 2007. The markets and the business community have taken notice, reining in employment, putting expansion plans on hold, and reducing tax receipt-generating economic activity.

On a seasonally adjusted basis, here is what job growth in the past five fiscal years ending September 30 has been:

Fiscal 2004 — 1.86 million
Fiscal 2005 — 2.48 million
Fiscal 2006 — 2.26 million
Fiscal 2007 — 1.31 million
Fiscal 2008 — minus 519,000

The case that this this is all George Bush’s fault is very thin. It is hardly a coincidence that the first quarter of negative economic growth in over 6 years took place during the first quarter of Pelosi-Obama-Reid’s first budget. Regardless, the bottom line is that federal receipts have flattened out, and appear destined to show year-over-year declines in the coming months.

Congress and the media kept telling us a slowdown was coming. Logically then, it should have reined in spending (and yes, George Bush should have brandished the veto pen more often). But the exact opposite has happened.

Blame it on the Surge in Iraq? Hardly. Yes, total military spending increased from $528 billion to $595 billion, but that $67 billion increase is barely a quarter of the total spending increase of $249 billion — and at least the Surge accomplished something.

Here are some of the departments that enjoyed double-digit spending increases: Department of Justice (13.6%), Department of Labor (24.2%), State Department (27.3%), Veterans Affairs (16.4%), Army Corps of Engineers (29.6%), Office of Personnel Management (10.2%), and NASA (12.4%). It appears that many of these agencies saw the POR triumvirate coming and decided it was time, literally, to party again like it was 1999.

Pelosi, Obama, and Reid all promise even more spending. The GOP Spend-o-meter on Obama alone has documented nearly $1.3 trillion in new spending promises (generally spread over roughly four years), and the list of seemingly endless bailouts grows.

Someone had better remind the next president, whoever he is, and the next Congress, whoever is in charge, that the federal treasury is not a bottomless ATM machine. I fear that serious consequences lie just around the corner.

Positivity: TV and royalty hail hero Connor

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 7:01 am

From Perthshire, UK:

Oct 17 2008

LOCAL hero Connor Newlands received the royal seal of approval this week after being presented with a gold Blue Peter badge by the Queen at Buckingham Palace.

Connor (12), a pupil at Crieff High School, received the award after saving his sister’s life in a dramatic rescue last summer.

Connor, his sisters Gemma (9) and Georgia (6), and dad Dale were cycling along the banks of the River Lednock when Gemma’s bike hit some large stones and she careered across the path and over the edge of the riverbank.

Realising his sister was no longer following behind, brave Connor looked over the riverbank and raced to her rescue as she was pinned to the bottom of the river. He held her head above water until help arrived.

Proud dad Dale said the family’s time at the Palace – part of an event to celebrate the 50th anniversary of ‘Blue Peter’ – was “absolutely phenomenal”.

He said: “Before we went down to London we told Connor that he was going to get to see the Queen and some Blue Peter presenters that he might know and some older ones.

“It wasn’t until one of the producers told him about how to act in front of her that he actually realised he was going to get to speak to her. He was very surprised.

“He took it in his stride though and she seemed really nice. She has a good sense of humour.

“We were wearing our kilts. They were the Black Watch tartan so she was interested in talking about that.

“She spoke to everybody who travelled down – Connor, Gemma and me – about what happened during the accident.

“It was an amazing day for all of us in London really.

“It was a long one, but it was phenomenal.” …..

Go here for the rest of the story.