Sunday, September 28, 2008

Change America Can Really Do Without!


Democrats are noted for some real catchy slogans during campaigns. In 1960, John Kennedy ran under “A time for greatness.” By 1964, his successor, Lyndon Johnson used “All the way with LBJ.” In 1976 Jimmy Carter used, “A Leader, For a Change.” What a canard that one proved to be.

In 1984 we heard “America Needs a Change” from the failed candidacy of Walter Mondale. By 1992 Bill Clinton won with “Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow” followed by another win with “Building a bridge to the 21st century” in 1996.

Nancy Pelosi ran under “A New Direction for America” in 2006 and as we all know, former community agitator turned first term Senator, Barack Hussein Obama is running with another variant of the Democrats constant drone for “change” with “Change We Can Believe In.”

If B HO’s “change” is anything like the “New Direction” we were promised when Democrats swept both Houses of Congress in 2006, we really don’t need any more of that. As we all know, since Democrats took control of the House and Senate, America has made a sharp turn for the worse almost everywhere except the Iraq Theater of the War on Terror. Even that has been threatened with failure time and time again by political maneuvering of Democrats as the give us “change.”

Since Democrats took us in this “New Direction,” we have seen consumer confidence plummet, gasoline prices rise dramatically, unemployment begin rising and the stock market begin a downward spiral that has us on the brink of financial ruin. We have also seen the approval rating of Congress plummet to historical lows.

In spite of years of Democrats whining, “don’t challenge our patriotism,” Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi recently labeled Republicans as unpatriotic for their not bowing to Democrats demands on the financial bail out.

Listening to B HO in his speeches, whenever he brings up his “change,” can we not see that it is really little more than the same we have been brought since 2006? In fact, his “change” appears to be even further away from American ideals than even Pelosi’s crowd took us.

Obama has now grabbed ALL credit for the proposed Wall Street “bail out” agreement, granting credit to none but himself.

I must wonder, if, as many think, this “bail out” ends up causing more harm to middle America, will Obama, either as President or Senator, accept all blame for the failure and plunging us into a deep recession or depression? Somehow, I doubt he would do that.

Of late he has been saying that “several” are to blame for this fiasco, but when he lists those he blames, I don’t hear a single Democrat name mentioned, although their fingerprints are all over this mess.

Is this an example of the “change” or a return to the Clinton era “the buck never got here” attitude?

For some time now, expressions of free political speech have moved decidedly venomous, especially towards President Bush. He isn’t the first to receive this treatment, but the portrayals and rants against him have been the nastiest I have seen in my 60 years. Even a movie depicting the assassination of President Bush was defended and only drew tacit denunciation, at best. Effigies of President Bush have been hung, burned or otherwise desecrated with little or no outcry.

Yet, recently, an effigy of Barack Obama was found hanging from a tree and we hear of “sadness” and “outrage” over it. Police are investigating the act and have notified the Secret Service, even though they admit, “it's not clear yet whether the act was a crime.”

If it is “political free expression” to ‘burn our flag” or “denigrate President Bush,” why does a single act of hanging Obama in effigy merit a Police investigation? Shouldn’t it also be “free political expression?”

It would appear “ending free expression” may be one of those “changes” Obama says he will bring.

This is supported by the cabal of attorneys the Obama campaign has unleashed to threaten television stations that air ads against Obama that they deem “lies,” even though the very liberal New York Times reveals that B HO’s campaign is airing several ads of his own that even they see as “dubious.”

Can we ignore Obama’s call for supporters to “get in their face” of ones who aren’t supporting him and argue” them into submission? Is this an example of the tone of “civility and unity” he promises to bring to Washington D.C. and the nation?

There is something eerily familiar and unsettling in hearing of Camp Obama and the Obama Youth Movement. I seem to recall in history not too long ago of another charismatic leader that exploited the youth of his country and plunged the world into the bloodiest war in modern history.

Little attention has been paid to B HO’s long time connection to ACORN, a group claiming “non-partisan status,” yet promotes only Democrats and has been continually tied to voter fraud and remains receiving taxpayers money to help operate.

ACORN, contrary to what many believe, is not a helpful quiet community group, but grew out of more radical socialist anti-capitalist movements of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

Obama himself proved to be a quick study and effective user in the style advocated by noted Chicago leftist agitator, Saul Alinsky, who gave a very revealing interview with Playboy Magazine, shortly before his death in June 1972.

Is that really what we want to leave for our children and grandchildren?

Obama does promise “change,” but if we desire to remain a free people responsible for ourselves, it is “change that America do without!”

8 comments:

Rhubarb said...

The kitchen sink strategy does not work. Hillary Clinton learned this lesson. Now you must learn.

Lew Waters said...

Do pray tell, rhubbie, how do you intend to teach me?

Son, I have faced off people like Obama most of my life. It is you that has a hard lesson to learn, should he succeed in his quest for more power.

Communism isn't that grand, son.

allee said...

Thank you, Lew. Amazing. The other day I was called "stupid" for comparing Obama to that other charismatic leader, but I guess all of us are just "stupid" who choose not to follow the herd mentality. In some ways, I hope he does win, so these fools get a taste of what they wished for, and then we can get back on track rebuilding what's left of America. He won't be getting my measly vote, though.

Lew Waters said...

Allee, the similarities are so close it is frightening.

Now, we have the resurgence of that other leaders Youth Group, the Jugend. Only this time, they are in blue shirts, not brown.

Compare, Sing for Change Obama to BUND DEUTSCHER MÄDEL IN DER HITLER-JUGEND (1930-1945) or Our Hitler is our Lord.

Then ask yourself, why are the 4 students who hung an effigy of Obama facing long-term suspension and community service at George Fox University, but hanging effigies of Bush draws praise?

Students face long-term suspension, community service

Is political free speech gone now, except for the Bush hating Democrats?

History repeats itself again, only this time, the "Jews" are American Conservatives.

allee said...

I'd like to qualify your last one, Lew. The Jews are the American Citizens, regardless of political affiliation. The goal is to bring us all to our knees, no matter which beliefs system we subscribe to.

I have long said a revolution will occur in this country - I just never expected it to be within my lifetime. It will be a painful and bloody revolution and the American Revolution and all other great American wars will pale in comparison.

Lew Waters said...

Allee, what I meant by American Conservatives are the new "Jews," is that Hitler used the Jews in Germany as the target to stir up the rest of the populace.

We are the target of the left and are bing used to stir up contentions amongst the rest of the country who aren't paying attention to what is happening. Our religion isn't important nor is our race, just that we are conservatives.

Hitler used the Jews and blamed them for every ill on Depression era Germany, much like the Democrats are using conservatives and President Bush today.

Doesn't matter what it is, we are to blame, according to Democrats.

allee said...

I love ya either way, Lew! LOL

Gary Fouse said...

ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, is the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, working together for social justice and stronger communities."

This statement appears on the home page of ACORN to describe their mission. The organization, which was founded in the early 1970s, consists of some 350,000 families and is located in approximately 100 cities in the US, Canada, Dominican Republic and Peru (Take Back America 2007 website). Under the leadership of its president, Maude Hurd, this group is involved in numerous activities including amnesty for illegal aliens and attacking Walmart. More importantly, however, they are involved in housing issues, voter registration, and advocating for sub-prime mortgage loans to low-income home buyers.

Maude Hurd is a long-time community advocate for the poor. She has been active in recent years negotiating with banks to re-invest in low-income communities and to provide loans to first-time home buyers.

In reality, ACORN is pretty much an arm of the Democratic Party-especially when it comes to voter registration. That portion of their activity has led to numerous accusations in many states of fraudulent voter registration-a charge ACORN denies. In addition, ACORN has, over the years, been linked to radical left political ideology.

This is what Michelle Malkin has to say about ACORN:

"This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers - you and me - and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance, some of which have been implicated in perpetuating illegal immigration and encouraging voter fraud. A new whistleblower report from the Consumer Rights League documents how Chicago-based ACORN has commingled public tax dollars with political projects."

And there is this:

"In recent months alone, the chief organizer of ACORN was forced to resign over the cover-up of a $1 million embezzlement scandal involving his brother. As internal whistleblower documents recently revealed, ACORN and its offshoots may have reaped substantial financial gains by misusing taxpayer dollars for political ends and by attacking lending corporations for the same so-called "predatory" lending practices ACORN regularly engages in. In 2008 alone, ACORN's voter registration activities have spawned investigations in almost a dozen states, sometimes involving tens of thousands of invalid or fraudulent registrations."

James Terry, Chief Public Advocate
Consumer Rights League
9-29-08

The above statement is in reference to Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN's founder, Wade Rathke. On July 9, 2008, the New York Times reported that in 2001, Dale was found to have embezzled just under 950,000 dollars from ACORN and affiliated organizations. The incident was covered up and not reported to law enforcement authorities. Wade Rathke told the Times that the incident was kept secret so as not "to put a weapon into the hands of conservatives" (who opposed ACORN's activities). The funds were returned, and both of the Rathke's have since left the organization.

Of course, with the bailout mess in progress, largely due to sub-prime loans made to individuals who could not afford to repay them, ACORN's name has surfaced in recent weeks since they have been an active lobby for such lending practices. ACORN's current position is that the financial scandal is due to "predatory lending practices".

In terms of voter registration, ACORN has been accused of engaging in fraudulent registration in several states. The Wall Street Journal reported on November 3, 2006 that in the week prior to the mid-term elections, four ACORN workers were indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms to the Kansas City Election Board. According to the article, other ACORN workers have been convicted in Wisconsin and Colorado for similar offenses, while investigations were on-going in Ohio, Tennessee and Pennsyvania, as well as on a national level by the Justice Department.

In addition, last July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State. In this case, seven ACORN workers submitted approximately 2,000 fraudulent voter registration forms. It was revealed that ACORN personnel had literally let their fingers do the walking through the white pages looking for names and submitted some imaginative names to boot, such as Leon Spinks. Three ACORN members pleaded guilty. A King County prosecutor termed it as, "an act of vandalism upon the voter rolls". ("The Acorn Obama Knows" by Michelle Malkin, which was posted on Real Clear Politics 6-25-08)

What is really astounding, given the organization's claim of being non-partisan-they claim to get no government funding and are not tax-exempt-is that ACORN's name arose in the draft version of the bailout bill.

"The draft bill includes a left-wing giveaway that would force taxpayers to bankroll a slush fund for a discredited ally of the Democratic Party," reads one leadership alert. "At issue is ACORN, an organization fraught with controversy for, among other scandals, its fraudulent voter registration activities on behalf of Democratic candidates. Rather than returning any profits made in the long-term from the economic rescue package, Democrats want to first reward their radical allies at ACORN for their (often illegal) help in getting Democrats elected to office." (CBS News website quoting Republican sources)

(In the face of Republican outrage over this provision, it was removed.)

It appears that ACORN's claims of receiving no government funding are a bit of a stretch. One of their subsidiaries, the ACORN Housing Corporation, has reportedly received $1.6 million from the Dept of Housing and Urban Development (Malkin). It also appears that their claims of non-partisanship are a joke, to put it mildly. Ms Hurd has been publicly quoted as saying,

"Obama is the candidate who "best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about".

The attempt by the Democrats at directing money to ACORN in the bailout bill puts the lie to the sanctimonious claims of people like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid that Republicans have inserted partisan politics into the crisis.

Finally, it might also be noted that much of Barack Obama's mysterious years as a community organizer in Chicago are tied to ACORN, with whom he worked and to whom he gave training classes during those years.

Stanley Kurtz, in National Review Online, has spelled out Obama's past relationship with ACORN. According to Kurtz's article, Obama was brought into a relationship with ACORN by Chicago community activist, Madeleine Talbot. Ms. Talbot was one of six people arrested on July 31, 1997, when about 200 ACORN protesters tried to storm a session of the Chicago City Council. She reportedly recruited Obama to provide training to ACORN leaders. This relationship with ACORN continued during Obama's years in the Illinois State Senate.

In addition, the New York Times reported on May 11, 2008 that while Obama served on the board of the Woods Foundation and the Joyce Foundation, he helped direct tens of millions of dollars to ACORN and other community organizations. (NYT article by Jo Becker and Christopher Drew dated May 11, 2008). It was on the Woods Foundation that Obama worked with former Weatherunderground radical William Ayres.

In summary, it is crucial that voters know about this organization, its questionable activities, and its historical relationship with Barack Obama before they go to the polls in November. Who knows how many bogus voter registrations have already been submitted in preparation for getting Obama elected?

The public should also ask itself why the Democratic Party was so intent on getting ACORN into the receiving line for government funding in connection with the (still-pending) bailout bill? It doesn't take a lot of imagination to connect the dots.

gary fouse
fousesquawk