Republicans should be getting ready to explain how a more conservative ideology benefits ordinary americans, ESPECIALLY in Michigan and Ohio

Barney Frank et al are going to ensure no automobile industry can survive in America. They are going to do it by 'caring' for the workers. They are going to do it by 'helping' the unions, or should I say, by undertaking all actions compulsory to indemnify union support for democrats.

It doesn't matter.

In the 90's health costs for US vehicles represented 50% of labor.
By 2000 they were the same as labor.
Now they are twice labor.
And a major part of this is the benefits for RETIRED WORKERS WHO HAVE NOT REACHED MEDICARE AGE. Isn't that nice for them?

Nothing can overcome such a competitive disadvantage to Honda, Toyota, Nissan AND the next wave of Hyundai, et al. This is not just price we are talking about. This is moneys for R&D. Moneys for retooling assembly line robots. Safety for vehicles.
Unions are at the absolute center of this disaster, but they spin about the middle like twin stars with auto management.

Barney Frank has alluded to too much "union busting" today. In fact the head of the UAW has said the unions have done all they are going to do.

What's going on, is unions busting the entire industry.

Unless the power of a judge to compel rational behavior is achieved through Chapter 11, or some other mechanism like that, we will see the decay into a dead star of the autmobile industry in america.

The fault will lie with unions, management and the democratic party, and if gets a second term, he may be the one who sees it's death.

The republicans need to explain to the american people, especially if Chambliss and or Coleman lose, how this death CANNOT be avoided if the USA writes a check to the auto industry (in fact who will come along next and go before the courts to get aid as an industry or company ..Xerox anyone? ... seeking in effect equal protection under the law). They need to carefully connect how capital and the laws of nature dictate certain behaviors, and that the free market with safeguards is far and away the most liberal and flexible solution to the problems we face.

Those answers should be generated from AEI, Hoover and Cato. Today
They should be understandable and repeatable by the folks who appeared yesterday in HOWOBAMAGOTELECTED.COM
And every republican should get lined up in 4 part harmony to promulgate the truth.

Which is:
Only the auto industry can save itself.
It can be done only if the auto workers are prepared to match the competitive pressures of worldwide labor, and under new management.
That is the law of nature and no congress, and no president can repeal it.

Rahm Reaction + Red Sex/Blue Sex + California Careening

Huffington Post Page | change.gov | About | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

Lieberman redux SOURCE

Barack's Brain Trust SOURCE

Georgia's cluster bomb still pose a threat. We are not all Georgians. SOURCE

Rahm Emmanuel and's "Base" SOURCE

What is most galling about an Alternet piece by Stephen Zunes, sourced above, is its confrontational title:

Is Obama Screwing His Base with Rahm Emanuel Selection?

Obama's base is presumably not progressives alone, but skinheads, drunks, blabbermouths, the obese, the disabled, the gay, the across-the-board challenged, the conservative, the aesthetes and those who simply want to be left alone.

Even if one argues that base means the ones who voted for you, I strongly doubt it was made up of progressives alone.

The 90-plus percent of African-Americans who voted for Barack, the massive increase in Latinos who voted for him, even those of us who sweat and strained for months are hardly all true-blue progressives, whatever that might mean.

My understanding is that Rahm and Barack are friends. That counts for something. Zunes argues that Emmanuel will be virtually coequal with Barack in the power and decision department. When is the last time people blamed manifold Bush errors on Andy Card?

My assumption is also that Barack knows full well what he is doing and he is happy to include people he respects who have talents he needs. And confident in his own ability to hold to his principles as he seeks pragmatic solutions to thorny problems.

Of those in his intimate circle, I would also think the most powerful would be the one Barack calls Ax. And bothers at all hours

Besides:

What Obama may be best at is taking what is progressive and making it something that is understandable to all, or most, Americans. This is a process we should get used to and respect.

Zunes concludes his piece with a caveat, which conveys its somewhat proprietary attitude.

However, this does not necessarily mean that Obama as president will pursue nothing better than a Clintonesque center-right agenda. Someone with Obama's intelligence, knowledge and leadership qualities need not be unduly restricted by the influence of his chief of staff as less able presidents have. At the same time, this shocking appointment of Emanuel is illustrative of the need for the progressive base that brought him to power to not celebrate too long and to refocus our energies into pushing hard to ensure that the change Obama promised is something we really can believe in.

Red Sex, Blue Sex and California Careening

Red Sex, Blue Sex SOURCE

In a long and interesting New Yorker article, ht to C&L, Margaret Talbot examines the proclivity of evangelical teens to outstrip their more liberal counterparts when it comes to having early sex. I will not seek to characterize the piece but recommend you read Red Sex, Blue Sex whole.

Why would I bracket consideration of this article with the entire trauma that is rocking California, threatening even the validity of marriages among gays that have already taken place?

For a simple reason which will get to the heart of my odd but, I believe, salient take on religion generally, a take derived in part from the fact that I do have reasonably extensive acquaintance with religion, Protestantism, theology and Biblical issues. The heart of my take is that religion is exactly what Jesus came to abolish and that the religion of churches is a cruel descent into disfunctionality.

My understanding is articulated in Beyond Creed which is available as a book, a Kindle Book and may be approached free in an introduction and podcasts here.

The idea that marriage, which is a somewhat subjective religious custom with a complex history, should be linked to human laws is silly. Neither gay nor heterosexual unions should be more than civil agreements.

Marriages, if we have them at all, should be the province of religious institutions. They should refuse to confuse marriage with the civil contract. They should stop being shills for the state.

Freeing marriage from the conversation about civil unions would clear up confusion and advance cause of reason. But do not fear. Reason never prevails when religion, a bastion of dogma, creed and unprovable metaphysical subjectivity, is at work.

When someone says marriage should be between a man and a woman, that is a religious, not a legal statement. It is as true as saying that you should be circumcised. Or that you should attend church on Sundays. It should have no relationship to law or the state.

Another aspect of this is the way that children are short-changed.

This brings me to the sex-at-a-young-age issue.

I am in favor of reversable vasectomies for males pending their interest in becoming fathers, at which point I would institute a kid license, a vastly more important thing than a marriage license.

I know this is a stupid idea because no one would ever seriously consider it, but it underlines the moral imperative to give first place to children and their welfare, the reason we have such things as UNICEF and a timeless Declaration of the Rights of the Child.

We are happily moving toward a secularism that can begin to place religion where it belongs and make the state more than a war machine and keeper of prisons.

The folk who harp on religion in the public square have rarely taken seriously the institutions they were educated to serve. I believe Barack's faith initiatives will issue in a new vitality for religious structures by clarifying the fact that the best stance of religion in the public square is one of modesty and anonymity. Letting deeds speak louder than words and tamping down the desire to tie law and religion in a mutually strangling knot.

I am sure this raises more questions than it answers. I will revisit these issues from time to time.

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.


Source

A Pre-Packaged Bankruptcy For GM (GM)? Begging For A UAW Strike

Bloomberg is reporting thatthe new administration may push for a pre-packed bankruptcy for GM (GM).

"President-Elect???s transition team is exploring a swift, prepackaged bankruptcy for automakers as a possible solution to the industry???s financial crisis, according to a person familiar with the matter."

I"n a prepackaged bankruptcy, an automaker would go into court with financing in hand after reaching agreement with lenders, workers and suppliers on what each would give up and on the business plan to be followed. The process might take six to 12 months, compared with two to five years if the automakers followed an ordinary Chapter 11 proceeding."

Since the UAW could have a great deal to lose from this, watch for a massive strike if the government tries to get it through. It will be the only leverage the union will have.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Source

Barack Obama's Arizona Operation Rocks

Huff | About | Nov. 4 | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

Gallup contraction causes me concern. It says we need a response to the redistributionist argument -- yes it is smoke and mirrors, but there is still room to directly refute GOP distortions. I assume Barack's half hour TV program tomorrow will widen things. Even though I still favor my own wildly optimistic map at the bottom of the page, I take as the moral that every last vote needs to be cast to ensure the victory we have sought these many, many months. My only other counsel is that Barack should smile more.Yesterday's closing argument was excellent, but SOMBER.

A McCain Chappaquiddick? SOURCE

PUMA like sentiments on Tina Brown's Daily Beast. SOURCE

Veteran pollster says we will have a landslide (political earthquake) come 4 Nov. SOURCE

Obama's Safety -- Connecting The Dots SOURCE + AP ACCOUNT

Congressman Wolf has a tried and true method of suppressing questioners in Virginia. Hit them with canes and pin them to the wall. Text and video. Times are tough all over. SOURCE Donate to his opponent, Judy Feder. SOURCE Race a tossup. SOURCE

WINGNUTS are trying to turn an abstruse conservative legal point that made in a 2000 radio interview into a cause celebre, an eleventh hour stratagem that will fail. I can see the Chicago adsmiths at work already and expect a 30 second riposte to be grinding the fading Drudge-Limbaugh crowd into the outer reaches of Reductio Ad Absurdum Land. Look for it today or tomorrow.

But Sunstein argued that in the context of a long, legalistic interview, the words referred to the narrower forms of redistribution -- education, legal filing fees, legal representation, and other issues -- that had been discussed in the case Obama cited and in discussions around it.

A University of Chicago law professor who appeared on the 2001 WBEZ program with Obama, and who also supports him, Dennis Hutchinson, described the interview as "not a bombshell."

"He's saying you don't achieve stable social change through judicial activism," Hutchinson said. As for 'redistribution of wealth,' "that's what a progressive tax system does," he said. SOURCE

Much more, from a conservative legal perspective, here: SOURCE

In Florida, some McCain paid volunteers are actually for Obama. SOURCE

Battleground Cheat Sheet SOURCE

's Arizona Operation RocksLate news: Arizonans who will not vote for McCain and why. SOURCE

A revealing glimpse into the sad reality for John McCain in his home state. The main reason the state's conservatives do not like him is the Lou Dobbs reason. McCain's position on immigration is sane. This accounts partially for the lackluster campaign McCain is running around the state.

In happy contrast, the Obama effort in Arizona is hopping.

The contrast is striking. The McCain campaign office is devoid of people, but its walls are lined with stacks of unsold yard signs. Meanwhile, the Obama office is filled with volunteers, but signs fly out of the door almost as fast as they arrive. Obama's Phoenix office was able to fill their waiting list for yard signs and had some leftover stock. Cieslak says, though, that the signs are a high-demand item. They are selling them for $8 on a "first come, first serve basis," and they expect them to be gone by the time this article is published.

This pattern is true throughout the state. Although Tucson is a blue dot in a sea of Arizona red, we expected the McCain office to be full of home state volunteers working for Arizona's favorite son, but the McCain office in Tucson has also been empty.

The Tucson Democratic office, on the other hand, is filled with bustling volunteers chatting on the phone with voters, inputting data, making coffee and snacks in the kitchen area, and organizing campaign literature in the back of the office. The phone rings non-stop. Because the office is located on a busy corner, there is also a constant stream of walk-in visitors purchasing campaign materials or volunteering for the campaign. SOURCE

And It's Close in Arizona SOURCE

AZ: McCain 44, Obama 40 (Myers/Grove-D-10/23-24)

Myers Research (D) and Grove Insight (D) for Project New West
10/23-25/08, 600 likely voters, MoE +/- 4

Arizona
McCain 44, Obama 40, Nader 3, Barr 2

Next:

AZ: McCain 44, Obama 42 (Zimmerman & Associates)

Zimmerman & Associates
Survey dates and sample size unknown.

The Arizona Daily Star reports today:

A statewide poll taken by Tucson-based Democratic pollsters Carol and Pete Zimmerman two weeks out from the election suggests McCain's lead over Obama falls within the margin of error: 43.5 percent to 41.5 percent, with 10 percent of likely Arizona voters undecided.

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.



obama
Source

How Sean Hannity Lost The Election for the GOP

Huffington Post Page | About | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

The Nightmare is Over

At 8:03 PM Eastern, I am calling this for Barack on the strength of his wins in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania and the possibility that Barack will take Indiana.

Exit Polls and State By State Close To Real Time SOURCE + SOURCE

HT TPM

States MIGHT Win -- Slightly less optimistic than my map at the bottom of the page, but still over 400 EVs. Bold entries are confirmed or highiy likely. Italicized entries mean the original designation was wrong. A bolded AND italicized entry means it is subject to change. The asterisked * states are Barack's.

Alabama 9
Alaska 3
Arizona 10
Arkansas 6
* California 55
* Colorado 9
* Connecticut 7
* Delaware 3
* D.C. 3
*Florida 27
*Georgia 15
* Hawaii 4
Idaho 4
* Illinois 21
*Indiana 11
* Iowa 7
* Kansas 6
Kentucky 8
Louisiana 9
* Maine 4
* Maryland 10
* Massachusetts 12
* Michigan 17
* Minnesota 10
* Mississippi 6
* Missouri 11
*Montana 3
Nebraska 5
* Nevada 5
* New Hampshire 4
* New Jersey 15
* New Mexico 5
* New York 31
* North Carolina 15
North Dakota 3
* Ohio 20
Oklahoma 7
* Oregon 7
* Pennsylvania 21
* Rhode Island 4
South Carolina 8
South Dakota 3
Tennessee 11
Texas 34
Utah 5
* Vermont 3
* Virginia 13
* Washington 11
West Virginia 5
* Wisconsin 10
Wyoming 3

CNN interactive political junkie page SOURCE

How Sean Hannity Lost The Election for the GOP

Comment on this by visiting Huffington Post.

You can see it all in retrospect. Sean Hannity and his cohorts at FOX saturated the world with Wright and drove the Wright Issue into the ground. And now the desperate Rev. Wright swiftboating that saturated the media yesterday sinks like a stone. We tune it out like ads we know backwards and forwards. They have no traction. It is old stuff.

Better yet, if Hannity had not played Wright so pervasively, Barack might not have been forced to deliver the most important message on race since I Have A Dream.

Yes, in the world of what might have been , it is likely that Sean Hannity set the precise stage that brought down the entire GOP this time around, including some pretty good Republican candidates. You can blame it all on Sean.

Analysis:

The first thing Sean did was an atrocious job of reporting. A good reporter does not edit tape with the malicious obviousness that Sean displayed. It became clear that Wright had been viciously reduced to a stupid soundbite or two, entirely out of context. Decent Republicans joined everyone else in holding their noses.

The second thing Hannity did, which he repeated in his equally ineffective Ayers vendetta, was to try to convert the electorate by dismal and incessant repetition. He literally took over FOX, followed by a culpable MSM which simply went along. Hannity sullied any residual claim to integrity that Rupert Murdoch might wish to salvage.

His repetition became absurd, guaranteeing that the current resurrection of the Wright soundbites would fall on deaf and jaded ears.

Criminally deficient reporting and intolerable repetition led to the third and most serious result -- tearing an already vulnerable GOP in two,

I am writing this before the votes come in, save for heavy Obama wins in two small New Hampshire towns.

If I am right, the landslide I have seen coming for months (see the map at the base of the page at http://stephencrosehome.blogspot.com ) will carry Barack beyond 400 EVs.

Why? In substantial part, all the Republicans who were totally turned off by the antics of Hannity regarding Wright and then Ayers, will not have voted for McCain-Palin.

The very idea that people who once were happy to respect Ike and Goldwater and even the McCain of 2000 wanted to be in lockstep behind the warped thinking of Hannity, should have raised a red flag.

Miniscule thought would have revealed that Hannity was and is a GOP buster of the first order, a person no self-respecting Republican would want to claim or follow.

Consider this:

McCain first tried the Bush 2004 approach in the primaries, went broke and proved himself a horrendous administrator.

He fired his most faithful friends and fought on solo.

The only way he won at all was to do what he was best at -- win the votes of moderate Republicans and Independents and non-Obama Democrats -- the very people revolted and embarrassed by Sean Hannity.

But McCain was muddle-headed in his primary victory. He assumed he had to have the support of what has been called the Republican BASE. This was the stupidest assumption of all. The only way McCain could have won was by appreciating the similarity between himself and Barack. By kicking the Hannity BASE in the teeth.

By redefining the base just as Barack redefined the Democratic base as a 50 state constituency. The election could have come down to a civil and humorous McCain versus the Barack we know.

McCain killed himself the second time by going right back to the Hannity-Bush Tree of Knowledge and eating a big apple all on his own.

The result was his schizoid campaign, successive proofs of his own failed leadership capacities.

The end came when Schmidt prevailed on him to suspend the campaign and play Mighty Mouse in Washington. The execution of this was so inept that the American public decided that it was time to get cozy with Barack and that has been the story of the campaign ever since.

It all goes back to Hannity. He created the environment that McCain simply accepted when he could have OPPPOSED it and cut the ground out from under the Obama critique. He could have basically told the Hannity core to buzz off.

Now there are the almost comical Wright ads put out by a Republican PAC with the word Trust in its name. How delicious. How pathetic. How apposite.

Sean Hannity destroyed the proper use of Rev. Wright. He made it so redundant that it became totally ineffective.

I have always been a person who could have been more valuable to the Republicans than the Democrats because I understand how to beat Democrats. Barack has been the consummate politician for whom I cast my vote this very morning. I am deeply and emotionally tied to his candidacy.

But I cannot help observing how Sean Hannity single-handedly became the primary operative in losing of the election for the GOP in 2008.

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.


Source

"I told you so" just doesn't seem to be pleasing

IHT:

Iran said to have enough nuclear fuel for one weapon

Iran has now produced roughly enough nuclear material to make, with added purification, a single atom bomb, according to nuclear experts analyzing the latest report from global atomic inspectors.

The figures detailing Iran's progress were contained in a routine update on Wednesday from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has been conducting inspections of the country's main nuclear plant at Natanz. The report concluded that as of early this month, Iran had made 630 kilograms, or about 1,390 pounds, of low-enriched uranium.

Several experts said that was enough for a bomb, but they cautioned that the milestone was mostly symbolic, because Iran would have to take additional steps. Not only would it have to breach its international agreements and kick out the inspectors, but it would also have to further purify the fuel and put it into a warhead design -- a technical advance that Western experts are unsure Iran has yet achieved.

"They clearly have enough material for a bomb," said Richard Garwin, a top nuclear physicist who helped invent the hydrogen bomb and has advised Washington for decades. "They know how to do the enrichment. Whether they know how to design a bomb, well, that's another matter."

BLAH YADDA..this blog has been waring for SEVERAL YEARS, that in 1944 it took the USA 10 months, with that level of technology to produce a weapon SO RELIABLE it required NO TESTING to use on Hiroshima (the Alamagordo test in July 1945 was a plutonium device). Yet even now when a "top nuclear physicist" says, well they have enough uranium for a weapon, STILL morons try to comfort themselves with,,well they have the U-235 but not a weapon?

How OSTRICH LIKE are we willign to be about all this?

Where will this end?

What will it take?

Even so, for President-elect, the report underscores the magnitude of the problem that he will inherit Jan. 20: an Iranian nuclear program that has not only solved many technical problems of uranium enrichment, but that can also now credibly claim to possess enough material to make a weapon if negotiations with Europe and the United States break down.

American intelligence agencies have said Iran could make a bomb between 2009 and 2015. A national intelligence estimate made public late last year concluded that around the end of 2003, after long effort, Iran had halted work on an actual weapon. But enriching uranium, and obtaining enough material to build a weapon, is considered the most difficult part of the process.

Siegfried Hecker of Stanford University and a former director of the Los Alamos weapons laboratory said the growing size of the Iranian stockpile "underscored that they are marching down the path to developing the nuclear weapons option."

Remember ...Pakistan created a STOCKPILE of U-235 weapons in the 90's and only felt the need to reveal that stockpile, and test a wespon AFTER INDIA DID SO?

The only question remaining is whether Iran can be deterred from first use.
I am tired of hearing that Iran with a bomb is UNACCEPTABLE.

Our moronic leaders HAVE ACCEPTED IT.

Will Israel?

I hope not.

DO IT NOW

TODAY

Al Giordano Says He Won't Link Here or Read My Posts

Huffington Post Page | My Books | Bonhoeffer's Ghost | The Way of Abba

Chris Matthews and his acolytes do not think Obama can control Clinton as SoS. This is a simple smear. And a failure to comprehend Obama. All the people who don't get it have little capacity to discern.

I had forgotten how sane the Daily Howler is and I've added it to my list of regularly-consulted sources. SOURCE

Apropos of the Howler piece noted above, this from MediaMatters is a reminder that the press is no friend to issue-oriented Democrats. It does not explain why but the inference must be its ownership and the salaries it pays out to its talking heads. Sort of like Murdoch and Roger Ailes. SOURCE

Reconstructing -- HC goes to Chicago, clearly invited. SoS is discussed. B is clearly open to this. HC and he discuss the vetting. Vet on! says B. That is why HC smiled when asked. Media swarm. Idiot commentary. Ink spilled. Paper wasted. Meanwhile B takes care of business. Upshot -- vetting OK she accepts. End of story. Or -- vetting done, she does not accept. End of story. Difference. NONE save in the minds of the agitated.

Chicago -- a cautionary tale. SOURCE

The Fix provides a completely reasonable explanation for all the leaking. Growing pains and a lot of vetting going on. No big deal. SOURCE

Tapping in to the anger of women regarding Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin SOURCE

Detroit Bailout on Ice ... for now. SOURCE

Al Giordano Says He Won't Link Here or Read My Posts

Graciousness is not among the expected features of blogging. And words of scorn and rejection do hurt. With that in mind, I offer the following exchange from yesterday with a link to the post I was discussing. A prelude to shaking dust from my feet.

The Importance of Having Eric Holder's Back

My initial response:

Transposition:

Al writes above

I am utterly unconcerned about Holder's past positions as US Attorney or elsewhere regarding mandatory sentencing, marijuana policy and the rest. In fact, I think his past missteps on these matters will make it more possible for progressive changes to be made regarding drug policies on various fronts. He will provide cover for them.

First, because those stances will help him gain Senate confirmation in ways that an on-the-record anti-prohibitionist would not be able to do. Second, because Obama has been quite clear about changes he would make to certain law enforcement policies regarding the drug war.

Why not apply the same logic to Hillary? What's good for the goose would apply if it wasn't so sexist.

I must say I am enjoying this.

Al's response:

@Stephen Rose

Stephen Rose - You've written me a number of times asking me to add your blog to the sidebar here as some kind of tit for tat or logrolling because you link to mine.

But your comment above and the shameless suggestion of "sexism" here give two examples of why I neither link to it nor find it interesting to read, and generally skip over your submissions when I run across them at HuffPo.

I don't think you have a clue as to the details of the work of the Secretary of State and how it differs from that of Attorney General. That's fine: I don't have a clue as to how, say, the Health and Human Services Department operates because it is outside of my areas of great interest. But I'm certainly not going to pretend to know about it or opine as if I do.

Nor are you a careful reader: The main thrust of my argument about Clinton as one mentioned for Secretary of State have been:

A. that the media circus surrounding all-things-Clinton - whether her fault or not (and she is both victim of it and enabler of it) - are anathema to the functioning of diplomacy and the discretion it requires.

B. that she's a serial mismanager of organizations and bureaucracies and,

C. there are daily tasks necessary at State to protect human rights across the globe that the White House can't possibly micromanage or even keep track of. Senator Clinton has never at any point in her career showed any consistent interest or passion regarding human rights, has used the issue selectively to demonize some governments for other reasons while covering up for such violations in Colombia and elsewhere. She is hostile to human rights and the doctrine of human rights begun with Jimmy Carter will continue to wither under her watch.

In none of my arguments have I cited her Iraq war vote or voting record, or what clients she might have represented.

The qualities needed to run State are very different than those needed to run Justice. If you can't see that and therefore want to insist that the same filter ought to be applied to both posts, I can only conclude you don't know how they work or really what is at stake in either.

My response:

Wow

Al Writes:

"But your comment above and the shameless suggestion of "sexism" here give two examples of why I neither link to it nor find it interesting to read, and generally skip over your submissions when I run across them at HuffPo."

My suggestion of sexism was aimed at me not you. It would NOT have been sexist to apply your logic regarding Holder to Clinton. I hope that's clear. It would have been consistent.

I am not in a very good neighborhood to safely deal with the rejecting part of your note. Suffice to say that I do have a very good audience of folk who read the Obama Blog and value what I say.

At least you appear to have liked my song.That assuages things a bit.

Battle Hymn of -- Lyrics SOURCE

Clinton Transposition: The following is what went through my head when I transposed Al's post in my mind.

I am utterly unconcerned about Clinton's past positions ... In fact, I think her past missteps on these matters will make it more possible for progressive changes to be made regarding foreign policy on various fronts. She will provide cover for Barack.

First, because her stances will help her gain Senate approvals ... Second, because Obama has been quite clear about changes he would make ...

Al has a background similar to mine in some ways -- with a 20 year time differential. Saul Alinsky once proposed that I write his biography, after I did the definitive article "Saul Alinsky and His Critics" on his work with Chicago Churches. I was a theological Yippie in Chicago in 1968. Al later worked with Abbie Hoffman. I was and remain a journalist-activist. That's what Al is. Our years in New England at points overlapped.

I have recently been critical of Al's language about "ownership" of Obama's forthcoming Presidency. I probably helped set up this final exchange with comments posted on a thread about Abner Mikba. SOURCE At that point, Al said there was "no problem".

Now there is. And for me the appropriate mantra is to shake the dust from my feet and move on.

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Links to this site are most appreciated.

YESTERDAY: Plouffe Heads The DNC -- That's Best Way Forward



obama
Hillary Clinton
Al Giordano
Source

John McCain's Incoherence --Weapon or Nemesis?

Huff | About | Nov. 4 | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

Bush is trying to suppress the vote in Ohio and nobody is paying any attention. SOURCE

Finally Barack Addresses An Issue That Should Be on Every Voter's Mind



Never have squiggles so delighted me. Look at the Gallup widget at the base of the page. You will see that Barack squiggled up and McCain squiggled down. While everyone else is saying this contest is close and so forth, I say that Barack is winning while the MSM bloviates.

How TV Performed Election Night 2000 -- HT 538 SOURCE

ABC rolls up sleeves and takes prevaricating Palin to school SOURCE

Shortcut to the truth:



From what I've seen so far, The Beast's $18 million launch is already waterlogged. I predict they'll soon do over their lackluster (and intermittently unusable) home page. SOURCE

Zen Obama snapshots. SOURCE

A careful analysis of the McCain medical plan SOURCE

On the face of it, "means-testing" Medicare sounds so reasonable. By contrast, reforming Medicare to raise quality and contain costs would be a tough job. As I've discussed in the past, if done right, Medicare reform could serve as a model for national health care reform that included a public sector plan open to everyone. This is just what conservatives fear.

It would be so much easier, they say, to just raise co-pays on more affluent seniors--until finally Medicare becomes a model for nothing. At that point, those who oppose "Medicare for All" can breathe a sigh of relief.

Christian Science Monitor will lead way to total collapse of paper newspapers IMO. I hope they all go on Kindle. :) SOURCE

Drudge on the way down. Can Limbaugh be far behind? (Say I am dreaming, I don't mind.) SOURCE + ANCILLARY

Here's hoping Pew is right. SOURCE

Barack's 30 Minutes of Prime Time -- A Preview SOURCE

A First Hand Look at Early Voting in Florida SOURCE

John McCain's Incoherence --Weapon or Nemesis? SOURCE

Merely because John McCain is nonsensical and incoherent, this should be no reason for complacency. Here is a clear, coherent articulation of the Obama tax results for the middle class. Click to enlarge.


Every rational being who has followed the campaign knows that Obama is not into taxing the middle class. But does that stop McCain? It energizes him. Find a lie to tell about Obama and coherence be damned. Fold it into a passionate, incoherent stump speech and the applause evokes one of those sickly smiles.

For McCain incoherence may be a weapon. If he can depend on dumbing down of both media and public, he just might find a way.

For those of us who see as a clear and persuasive choice, we need to make incoherence McCain's nemesis.

We need to make incoherence into an advantage for the Obama Campaign.

How?

By lifting McCain's incoherence to the skies. By suggesting that incoherence describes the likely behavior of a President John McCain.

What is incoherence?

Incoherence is a lack of clarity, cconsistency, cohesion and organization. Incoherence is, in McCain, unintelligible nonsense, distortion and outright lying. Coherence is logical progression, hanging together, one thing following another. Incoherence is an absence of logic, a falling apart, no progression at all.

Incoherence is NOT want we want in the White House. Not because incoherence is necessarily a bad weapon in a conflict, but because, in a John McCain, it is merely one of the methods by which his real ineffectiveness is manifested.

McCain the incoherent will also be McCain the ineffective, whose commitment to freeze spending and enact a series of incoherent policies will muddy up government for another four years, while the nation goes down the tubes.

We have no further time for this.

Next Tuesday we can relegate incoherence to the elite environs of Sedona and wherever else McCain wishes to reside. Just as long as it is not 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Here are a few scattered indications of agreement regarding the incoherence of John McCain. Most see it as a nemesis. Let us hope the American people do as well.

McCain's Incoherence on Global Warming SOURCE

McCain's support for nuclear subsidies contradicts his claim that he opposes all subsidies.

It's also politically incoherent. McCain's support for doing something on global warming was his best bet for making the claim that he is not like President Bush. Now he risks throwing that away.

Incoherence & Irrelevance SOURCE

As McCain continues to fade into incoherence and irrelevance, the last hope is that he'll come up with some new game-changing stunt to match his initial pick of Palin or his ill-fated campaign "suspension." Until Thursday night, more than a few Republicans were fantasizing that his final Hail Mary pass would be to ditch Palin so she can "spend more time" with her ever-growing family. But the debate reminded Republicans once again that it's Palin, not McCain, who is their last hope for victory.

McCain's Incoherence SOURCE

If you really think about it, McCain seems to be saying: the "cause greater than yourself" that calls us all to service is "you."

Of course, McCain hopes that we don't think about it. We might be reminded of Obama's warning that in the Republican "ownership society" we are all on our own.

Built on fraudulent premises, McCain's speech is not like a cup cake without sprinkles or a pie without ice cream.

It's like sugar coating on a poison pill.

The Utter Incoherence of McCain's Messages SOURCE

The McCain camp's recent question "Who is?" is apt, oddly, because the McCain campaign could never decide for itself what the answer was. [...] The indiscipline of the message has been a direct reflection of McCain himself — a man whose scatterbrained approach to the world was in full effect last night. He needed a cannon, a single, powerful sustained assault on Obama. Instead, he fired birdshot haphazardly, hitting himself in the foot as often as he stung his opponent.

McCain campaign notable mostly for its incoherence SOURCE

McCain makes much of wanting to get rid of congressional earmarks; everybody wants to get rid of earmarks, except the one that benefits my community or my industry. He proposes an across-the-board spending freeze -- during a recession? -- and then, in the next breath, proposes new spending. He overestimates the voters' tolerance for incoherence.

Joe Klein on McCain's Incoherence SOURCE

It seems to me McCain has to make a choice: reformer or deregulator. Reform means the restoration of a serious, activist regulatory presence--in other words, more government. Deregulation means more of what we're seeing this week on Wall Street, the excesses that occur when government steps away from its responsibility as referee and guarantor of a fair playing field.

As in recent weeks, McCain has made a bet on the stupidity of the American people--he thinks he can have it both ways. The drift away from him in the polls may be a sign that the public says he can't.

Althouse footnote SOURCE

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.



obama
Source

The abortion president

November 19, 2008
Nat Hentoff

During a July 17, 2007, speech before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, then Sen pledged: "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." That is a bizarre way "to bring us together," another goal of his as president. When Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., reintroduced the FOCA in 2007, her press release triumphantly explained that this draconian definition of "Freedom of Choice" would mean:

"Women would have the absolute right to choose whether to continue or terminate their pregnancies before fetal viability, and that right would be protected by this legislation. The Freedom of Choice Act also supersedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman's right to choose."

With regard to "fetal viability" – the ability to survive on his or her own – the ardent supporters of FOCA slide over the language in the surviving 2007 version of FOCA bill that, as Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee points out: "Contains no objective criteria for 'viability,' but rather, requires that the judgment regarding 'viability' be left entirely in the hands of 'the attending physician.'"

Guess who that would be? The abortionist! the rest



How did Obama get elected? Find out here...

Website: HowObamaGotElected.com.
Source

Why Barack Obama Will Not Be Another LBJ

Huffington Post Page | change.gov | About | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

The change.gov link at the top of this page signifies better than anything the competent preparation of the Obama movement. Or the Obama Presidency to be. The job of a good leader is to be a few steps ahead. And the site's presence is a rousing confirmation that we are in good hands. Reciprocal, yes. But competent and ahead-of-the-curve, double yes.

List of Barack's economic transition team SOURCE

Boren mentioned as a Cabinet possibility. SOURCE

If the no-drama mantra is operative, Rahm will be a more controlled operative than noted in the RS article below and Larry Summers, who has been revealed to me to be more than simply a loose cannon, call his behavior erratic and you get the idea, will not become Treasury chief (the no-retread rule would also apply). There are better choices for Treasury and the no-drama rule needs to survive a few tests to establish Barack's administrative creds from the gitgo. End of pontification.

McCain's K St. greed mongers SOURCE

4 Senate Cliffhangers SOURCE + Oregon called for Merkley SOURCE

Basic Rahm ht Andrew Sullivan, etc. SOURCE

Transition setup day 2 SOURCE + SOURCE + Chicago-DC twists & turns SOURCE + A Google entry SOURCE

Palin denouement VIDEO & text SOURCE

Why Will Not Be Another LBJ

Oddly, no one has thought to compare the situations of and LBJ, but there are similarities. And, happily, redemptive differences.

If Barack succeeds, as I believe he will, it will be because he was NOT a replica of LBJ.

Simply stated, Barack will have the same capacity as Lyndon Johnson to achieve a major domestic legislative agenda, but only if he eschews the hubristic and unnecessary need to prove himself on an impossible battlefield. Only if Afghanistan does not become our new Vietnam.

During the LBJ era, I ranked Johnson very low, despite his legislative achievements. Time has chastened me. Passage of the voting and civil rights acts was monumental,

But LBJ was destroyed due to his nefarious LIE to the American people -- his "no wider war" lie. I voted for him. He exploded the war. And as RFK understood, Vietnam became an albatross, threatening a real war on poverty.

Vietnam poisoned the political atmosphere for decades to come.

Johnson did not need to turn Vietnam into an earthly hell. He wrongly believed he needed a Vietnam escalation to beat Goldwater. So with consummate hypocrisy he played the peacemaker while turbo-charging the actual war. To the loss of 50,000 military and uncounted civilians and opposition soldiers.

His Gulf of Tonkin lies were monumental.

Why then might I wish to name him next to Barack?

Because the wild card in Barack's deck is the T card. The terrorism card. Which translates into the Afghanistan card. Which translates into the Great Game card. Which is eerily like the Vietnam Card LBJ played so unnecessarily and fatefully.

Reading about the Great Game, the 19th century effort to dominate the space between Russia and India, is highly entertaining. If you have a taste for the denouement of colonial ambitions. If you like to see serial repetition of humiliations similar to the defeat Lytton Strachey deliciously described in his essay on the besting of General Gordon by the Mahdi in Khartoum.

Despite the passage of years, the conditions that made Afghanistan impossible to dominate in the 19th century have not changed. One reason Switzerland is neutral is because fighting a real war there is fatuous. It's the geography, stupid.

In Afghanistan, there is also the resilience of a proud people who have no desire to be ruled by armies bearing British, Russian, US or NATO insignias.

Afghanistan and the war on terror is the albatross that threatens to stoop the Obama shoulders and create a wedge between him and his pacific constituency.

The retort to this line of thinking is that Obama is smart, too smart to be hoodwinked, to coin a phrase.

Ah, but the machinery of temptation and doom is in place. That apple on that tree of knowledge of good and evil.

We are stumbling toward a continuation of the Great Game. The rag tag, ambient operations that we have mounted so far are about to be replaced by a more concerted effort, undertaken by a government -- that would be us -- that has none of the prosperity of the 1960s, that is in fact reeling from the weight of debt that could very well push us off the list of reliable borrowers.

But Barack can escape the fate of LBJ.

We the people will save him. Check the polls. Check the election just completed.

We know that Afghanistan is a sinkhole in terms of any military commitment. We will not hold a saving caution against Obama.

We will forgive most happily if the war on terror is translated from a military trap into a POLICE ACTION, which is what many sane observers believe it should have been from the start.

In the spirit of Ronald Reagan, we the people say, Mr. Obama, don't climb that wall. Don't get on the idiot testosterone track that brought LBJ down.

Mr Obama, your achilles heel has names like Taliban, Bin Laden and Afghanistan. Give these a wider berth than you have done to date. Practice the same patience that has served the enemy so well. See if they do not die on the vine.

Military NO Police YES.

Big apple, big trouble.

Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.


Source

Abbas plaatst advertentie in Israëlische kranten

 

Onlangs zei president Abbas in het Arabisch:

 

"The path of the shahids (martyrs)," like Jihad al-Wazir of Fatah, George Habash the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, whom Abbas described as "a martyr of the Palestinian people," is a path "aimed at upholding the Palestinian nationalist and sovereign resolutions," Abbas said.

 

The goals of our people are "self-determination, (Right of) Return and freedom," Abbas indicated.

 

"We rejected Israeli proposals that stipulated making concessions including on Jerusalem and the refugees," he said.
"We either get all six points - Jerusalem, settlements, borders, refugees, water and security - or nothing at all," Abbas said.

 

Nu steekt Abbas de hand uit naar Israel voor vrede. Vanwaar deze plotselinge verandering? Welke woorden en actie vertegenwoordigen de ware ideeen van Abbas?

 

Achmed Tibi, Knessetlid voor de Verenigde Arabische Lijst, zegt:

 

"We hope that it will open debate among the Israeli public," he said. The ad, he said, was also aimed at US President-elect who he believed, in spite of recent press denials, had viewed the plan positively when he met with Abbas during his visit here last summer. He added that the initiative had more flexibility with respect to refugees than most people were aware of.

 

Met dat laatste is Abbas het dan blijkbaar niet eens, of hij is zich daar ook niet van bewust.

Het klinkt allemaal mooi, maar de kern van de zaak wordt zo wel verdoezeld:

 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Wednesday, "Palestinians have consistently refused to acknowledge that Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and should be recognized as such, even as they are claiming the future state of Palestine as their national state. There is a problem there that needs to be sorted out."

 

Als de Palestijnen daarmee beginnen, zijn ze al halfweg op weg naar vrede. Dure advertenties en andere blabla kunnen dan achterwege blijven.

RP
---------- 

The Jerusalem Post
Nov 19, 2008 12:49 | Updated Nov 20, 2008 18:14

 

Abbas reaches out to Israeli public
By TOVAH LAZAROFF
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1226404777196&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

 

 

In an unprecedented move, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has taken the cause of peace directly to the Israeli public by taking out an advertisement, to be published Thursday in four Israeli dailies, promoting the 2002 Arab League's Peace Initiative.

"Fifty-seven Arab and Muslim countries will forge diplomatic ties and normal relations with Israel in exchange for a full peace agreement and an end to the occupation," reads the ad, which Arab sources said would appear in Haaretz, Yediot Aharonot, Ma'ariv and Yisrael Hayom.

It reprints the text of the Arab initiative and is framed by flags of Arab and Muslim countries. The League's initiative calls for a full withdrawal to the 1967 borders, including from the Golan and parts of Jerusalem. It also references United Nations resolutions that allow for a return of Palestinian refugees into Israel.

Abbas felt that ordinary Israelis don't know enough about the Arab offer and wanted to approach them directly, said Abbas aide Saeb Erekat. "Not enough has been done to promote it," he said.

Erekat said it was the first time a Palestinian leader had tried to reach Israelis directly in such a fashion.

The move comes on the eve of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's final visit to Washington on Sunday and less than two weeks after Abbas stood at a Quartet meeting and pledged his support for the Annapolis process.

It also comes at the same time the Foreign Ministry has admitted that refugees remain a sticking point with the Palestinians.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Wednesday, "Palestinians have consistently refused to acknowledge that Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and should be recognized as such, even as they are claiming the future state of Palestine as their national state. There is a problem there that needs to be sorted out."

Of the decision by the PA to place ads in the Israeli press, Palmor said it was curious that the Palestinians would choose to make use of a democratic tool that they have denied to their own people.

"It is a gesture that could never be reciprocated. Can you imagine the Palestinians allowing the Israeli government to do this?" he asked.

"This puts in a new and more intensive light the question of the asymmetry of freedom in the Middle East," he said.

MK Ahmed Tibi (UAL), who helped the PA with the ad, said that the move was not an attempt by Abbas to replace Annapolis. Both tracks could happen at once, he said. The Arab League plan was larger than Annapolis, because it offered Israel peace with all its neighbors, he said.

"We hope that it will open debate among the Israeli public," he said. The ad, he said, was also aimed at US President-elect who he believed, in spite of recent press denials, had viewed the plan positively when he met with Abbas during his visit here last summer. He added that the initiative had more flexibility with respect to refugees than most people were aware of.

Israel has looked favorably at the Saudi plan, an earlier version of the Arab League's 2002 initiative, which calls for a just solution to the refugee problem. But it has balked at accepting the Arab League's initiative as a basis for negotiations largely because of the refugee issue.

In the last year, as part of the Annapolis process, Israel and the Palestinians have pledged to address all core issues including refugees as part of the pursuit of a final status agreement.

In speaking about this process in front of American Jewish leaders who had gathered in Jerusalem for the final day of the United Jewish Communities General Assembly, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni admitted that the issue of refugees remained a sticking point in the pursuit of peace.

Acceptance of Palestinian refugees into Israel undermined the essential nature of a two-state solution which Israel had sought, Livni said.

The problem was not just with the Palestinians but with the larger international community which still struggled to recognize the significance of Israel as a Jewish state, Livni said.

In some parts of the world, especially in Europe, there is a "delegitimization of the state of Israel as a Jewish state." The idea that Israel is a Jewish state "is not obvious anymore," she said.

Livni said when she speaks with international leaders and asks that they recognize Israel as a Jewish state, "there are those who are willing to say so, including [US] President [George] Bush in the United Nations General Assembly. There are those who are not willing to say so."

Israel and the Jewish Diaspora community had to work together to help the rest of the world recognize the significance of Israel as a Jewish state, Livni said.

The world was ready to defend the right of Israel to exist, and had included it in its demands that Hamas must meet to gain international recognition, she noted. But the Quartet needed to add two more words: they must accept the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state.

In speaking of a two-state solution, Livni held up two of her fingers for emphasis and wiggled them as she spoke.

This is not just about democracy and independence, she said. The goal is the creation of "two nation-states, in which Israel is the Jewish state and the other [is a Palestinian] state, is the full answer to the aspirations of the Palestinians. It means that no refugees are coming to Israel," she added.

Source

‘Catholics Weep Over Barack Obama’s Words,’ Laments Cardinal in Address to Catholic University of America

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14390

CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY, NOV. 20, 2008

Rome - CNA has exclusively obtained the full-text of Cardinal James Francis Stanford’s lecture delivered at the last week in which the prelate examined President-elect Obama’s loyalty to pro-abortion organizations and described his promises as cause for Catholics to weep tears of betrayal.

The full text of this lecture titled, “Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II: Being True in Body and Soul,” can be found in our Documents section or at the link: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=780

Commenting on the results of the recent presidential election, Cardinal Stafford said in his speech that on Election Day “America suffered a cultural earthquake.” He went on to note that though Obama and Senator Joe Biden clearly stated their “anti-life agenda” prior to the election, Americans were too excited at the prospect of electing a Black President. Now that he has been chosen, the cardinal predicted, “I foresee the next several years as being among the most divisive in our nation’s history.”

Cardinal Stafford went on to recall Obama’s promises regarding abortion issues. He mentioned July 17, 2007 when the Senator told supporters from Planned Parenthood that “We are not only going to win this election but also we are going to transform this nation...The first thing I will do as President is to sign The Freedom of Choice Act…I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law...On this issue I will not yield.”

“Catholics weep over’s words,” the cardinal lamented. “We weep over the violence concealed behind his rhetoric and that of Joseph Biden and what appears to be that of the majority of the incoming Congress.”

The cardinal’s address was hosted by the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Washington D.C.

Source

Obama Camp Denies Pre-Packaged Chapter 11 Plan For Detroit

So much for the Bloomberg report that the new administration would set up a pre-packaged bankruptcy for GM (GM) and perhaps other car companies.

According toReuters, President-elect's transition team is not exploring a prepackaged bankruptcy plan for U.S. automakers, officials from Obama's team said on Friday.

Douglas A. McIntyre

Source

U. S. Supreme Court to Review Barack's Citizenship

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81484

...Case challenging his name on ballot set for 'conference' . . . If four of the nine justices vote to hear the case in full, oral argument may be scheduled.

By Bob Unruh, WorldNetDaily, November 20, 2008

A case that challenges President-elect's name on the 2008 election ballot citing questions over his citizenship has been scheduled for a "conference" at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Conferences are private meetings of the justices at which they review cases and decide which ones to accept for formal review. This case is set for a conference Dec. 5, just 10 days before the Electoral College is scheduled to meet to make formal the election of Obama as the nation's next president.

The Supreme Court's website listed the date for the case brought by Leo C. Donofrio against Nina Wells, the secretary of state in New Jersey, over not only Obama's name on the 2008 election ballot but those of two others, Sen. John McCain and Roger Calero.

The case, unsuccessful at the state level, had been submitted to Justice David Souter, who rejected it. The case then was resubmitted to Justice Clarence Thomas. The next line on the court's docket says: "DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008."

If four of the nine justices vote to hear the case in full, oral argument may be scheduled.

The action questions whether any of the three candidates is qualified under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural-born citizen."

According to America's Right blogger Jeff Schreiber, there also was a development in a second case presented to the Supreme Court on the same issue.

His report said the Federal Election Commission now has waived its right to respond to a complaint brought by attorney Philip Berg.

"There are a number of reasons why the respondents here would choose not to respond. First, because the court only grants between 70 and 120 of the 8,000 or so petitions it receives every year, perhaps they just liked their odds of Berg's petition getting denied. Second, because they have made arguments as to Berg's lack of standing several times at the district court level and beyond, perhaps they felt as though any arguments had already been made and were available on the record. Or, perhaps the waiver shows that the FEC and other respondents do not take seriously the allegations put forth by Berg, and did not wish to legitimize the claims with a response," the blogger speculated.

"Another thing which is not completely clear is whether the FEC is filing for itself or on behalf of all respondents," he added.

"If it were just the FEC filing the waiver, I must say that I'm surprised," Berg told America's Right. "I'm surprised because I think they should take the position that the Supreme Court should grant standing to us. I think they have a responsibility not only to Phil Berg, but to all citizens of this country, to put forth a sense of balance which otherwise doesn't seem to exist.

"However, if this was filed by the FEC on behalf of the DNC and too, it reeks of collusion," he said, noting that the attorney from the Solicitor General's office should be representing federal respondents and not the DNC or Obama.

But he noted that "questions surrounding this aspect of Obama's candidacy are seemingly beginning to see the light of day."

Just last week, WND reported on worries over a "constitutional crisis" that could be looming over the issue of Obama's citizenship.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others filed a court petition in California asking the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office.

The disputes all cite "natural-born citizen" requirement set by the U.S. Constitution.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi even traveled to Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The biggest question is why Obama, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, simply hasn't ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born. There have been other allegations that Obama actually was born in Kenya during a time when his father was a British subject.

The California action was filed by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation on behalf of Keyes, the presidential candidate of the American Independent Party, along with Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson, both California electors.

"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void, Petitioners, as well as other Americans, will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal," the action challenges.

An Obama spokesman interviewed by WND described such lawsuits as "garbage."

The popular vote Nov. 4 favored Obama over Sen. John McCain by several percentage points. But because of the distribution of the votes, Obama is projected to take the Electoral College vote, when it is held in December, by a 2-to-1 margin.

The California case states, "There is a reasonable and common expectation by the voters that to qualify for the ballot, the individuals running for office must meet minimum qualifications as outlined in the federal and state Constitutions and statutes, and that compliance with those minimum qualifications has been confirmed by the officials overseeing the election process," the complaint said, when in fact the only documentation currently required is a signed statement from the candidate attesting to those qualifications.

"Since [the secretary of state] has, as its core, the mission of certifying and establishing the validity of the election process, this writ seeks a Court Order barring SOS from certifying the California Electors until documentary proof that Senator Obama is a 'natural born' citizen of the United States of America is received by her," the document said.

"This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, and any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office.

The "certificate of live birth" posted by the Obama campaign cannot be viewed as authoritative, the case alleges.

"Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence," the document said. "The only way to know where Senator Obama was actually born is to view Senator Obama's original birth certificate from 1961 that shows the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him."

The case also raises the circumstances of Obama's time during his youth in Indonesia, where he was listed as having Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, raising the possibility of Obama's mother having given up his U.S. citizenship.

Any subsequent U.S. citizenship then, the case claims, would be "naturalized," not "natural-born."

WND has reported other challenges that have been raised in Ohio, Connecticut, Washington, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Hawaii.

TO VIEW HPYERLINKS, GO TO:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81484

Source

Barack Obama And The Righteous Wind

Huff | About | Nov. 4 | Sources | Kindle | Twitter

Dear Crystal City Bund -- Just In Case You Thought We Might Be Sleeping:



From a Cugel comment at 538: SOURCE

If you or someone has a problem with being blocked, challenged or disenfranchised you at the polls, or have a question about registration or voting rights, please urge them to call the hotline 1-866-ourvote and speak to a volunteer attorney or other trained volunteer who will explain, and try and help with information.

Huff's SNL omnibus. Lord, Lord. SOURCE

Remembering Studs Terkel. SOURCE

Chris Durbin, senator's daughter, dies. SOURCE

Palin's med records remain unreleased. SOURCE

Here is what the Republicans are now doing. Below the video, you will find links to a few pages here that were created at the time when this story had legs. This Republican ad now represents the final step in the shameful GOP effort, one which will merely alienate the moderate and decent Republicans and motivate Barack workers to add more and more votes to the coming landslide.

Getting Wright Right

Video: Context of FOX "God Damn" Soundbite

The "Chickens Roost" Sermon Uncut

FOX Virus Video

Pastor Wright on Who Writes History

Good Friday Sermon Excerpt -- Memorable

And The Righteous WindI doubt anyone remembers a Presidential candidate saying we have a rightous wind at our back, but these remarkable words are now part of Barack's closing stump speeches.

The phrase makes sense, given the Faustian drama we're in.

The McCain forces, believing wealth and success are divinely ordained to a small elect, circle their wagons as their one-time allies, anticipating the righteous wind, make little secret of retreat.

And we -- tired and believing -- listen for the tell-tale rumble. We are ready to resonate to it.

It is justice. And change. A dream long deferred. Utterly natural. Yes. And deserved.

We wish to forge a politics that reasons together and rights wrongs and achieves fairness for all.

A McCain campaign, mired in arm-waving, Wars-R-Us thinking, falls before this wind.

We have no right to universal rule. To permanent indebtedness. To endless inequity. To sanctioned abuse.

The righteous wind, when we can sense it, is renewable each day.

The Bible reminds us that it comforts. It is Beatitudinal. It can soothe grinding anxiety. It can clear debris. It makes the liberating exercise of responsibility and choice come alive.

Comfort is achieved by toppling the unjust and righting the wrong, from Guantanamo to the very bowels of our shattered justice system and our desecrated environment.

And, yes, the righteous wind unmuddies thought.

Good governance breaks tasks into doable acts. That is how Barack's mind works. How Colin Powell created loyalty at State.

Doable actions in a field cleared by a righteous wind.

Listen.

It is coming from the East. A West Wind. Yes. Heading toward you.

On Tuesday at dawn, a low rumble will waken Newfoundland.

Soon it will be be heard in the Keys. In Philadelphia. In the Virginias. Then over Asheville, Chattanooga, Birmingham. Past Selma and Meridian. Through Cincinnati and Toledo. Up past Wisconsin's lakes and down past Little Rock.

The righteous wind takes on musical cadences crossing the great river and coursing over plains toward Colorado, a jeweled barrier. Arriving there, it swirls through passes and dips down to the Four Corners, and up past Caspar, then Montana, all the way to Mount St. Helen's shadowed northern side.

Where suddenly it calms.

It wafts a kiss to California, to Alaska, to Hawaii, And says, Aloha.

Then the day is done.

But the righteous wind will resume tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow.

For as long as we can hear it, feel it, go with it.

It has been a long time for the times to be a'changin'.



Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose

Comments on this blog are closed. Please visit my Huffington Post menu and leave comments on posts presented there. Links to this site are most appreciated.


Source