Take action now:

The Non-Partisan Case Against Barack Obama

You don't have to be a conservative or a Republican to be opposed to Barack Obama. Here are some of the reasons that almost anyone should oppose him:

1. PERSONALITY CULT
As a host of Youtube videos, comments on blogs, chants at rallies, and even tattoos show, Obama clearly has a growing personality cult. About the only policy positions some of those supporters could name would be "hope" and "change". Most of his supporters find little fault with him and are willing to believe in him whole-heartedly. In the U.S., we should be supporting ideas, not blindly following Great Leaders. Such movements are extremely dangerous in all cases, including when the Great Leader eventually is shown to be a mere mortal. Who knows how his supporters will react should he finally be shown to be an empty suit.

2. SMART, BUT UNTESTED
Obama is indeed smart. However, a good part of his reputation is due to his speaking skills and the fact that he's only very rarely been challenged. He's frequently said things that, were someone around to engage him in dialogue, would reveal that he hasn't thought things through in much depth. However, the media has completely given him a pass. During the last debate he was momentarily flustered after he was called on his past associations and on about the only occasion when he was pressed by the media he did not respond too well. He clearly has a narcissistic personality, and that personality type is prone to breaking down when challenged in the right fashion. America's enemies will attempt to take advantage of that.

3. HIS INDOCTRINATION PLAN FOR PRE-TEENS
No, really. Right on their website, the Obama campaign is specifically reaching out to pre-teens, and he wants to use those kids 12 and under to get votes. That plan is like something from Red China or the Soviet Union.

4. PART OF THE CHICAGO MACHINE
While Obama wasn't originally part of the Machine, he is now. Electing him will bring Machine politics to our national government. It won't be as bad as, for instance, electing Mayor Daley (either one) to be president, but there's no way that someone who's part of the Machine and who has advisors and supporters linked to the Machine will not give them something.

5. DIRTY CAMPAIGNING
Obama himself has largely kept his hands clean, while his surrogates have done the dirty work. Nothing McCain or Palin have said or done comes remotely close to the dirty campaigning that Obama's surrogates and supporters - including those in the media - have done. An Obama win would validate all of the tactics that Obama's supporters have engaged in.

6. SUPPORTING QUESTIONABLE PEOPLE WITH QUESTIONABLE LINKS
The person Obama supported to be Illinois Treasurer had little experience and a questionable background. Such links go beyond Obama's links with radicals.

7. VALIDATION OF INCREDIBLE MEDIA BIAS
In this election, the mainstream media has become little more than an arm of the Obama campaign. The smallest infraction by McCain is blown out of proportion and Sarah Palin is taken to task for failing to state things in the most exact and legalistic terms. At the same time, Obama is allowed to make false statements and propose plans that have hugely obvious flaws. The press has served as both the source for and amplifier of outrageous smears, especially those targeted at Palin. They've also failed to ask Obama tough questions at the same time as engaging in ambush journalism against Palin. They've even taken quotes out of context. An Obama win would completely validate and reward the media's coverage. An Obama defeat would also be a crushing, humiliating defeat to the mainstream media.

8. RACE CARD
Obama himself has played the race card; as he said, he's not like all the presidents on the dollar bills. But, his surrogates and supporters have taken it to a new level, with one of them even claiming that "socialist" was a code-word for "black". The supposed "post-racial candidate" is in many ways simply a slicker version of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

9. NEARLY ONE-PARTY CONTROL
If Obama wins, the Congress will be Democratic, the mainstream media will continue lying and covering up for Obama as they have been doing, and Obama's past associates will still be around. And, millions of people at various levels within various public agencies will be more or less controlled by Obama through their unions: teachers, office workers, low-level bureaucrats, etc. While extreme Democratic Party hacks will certainly have no problem with something approaching one party rule, everyone else should be deeply concerned. Those who are extremely partisan should also note that any failures will clearly be the responsibility of the Democrats.

10. THE PERMANENT GOVERNMENT
Just as George Bush has done, Obama will stock the permanent government - the faceless mid-level bureaucrats, Assistant Undersecretaries, etc. - with his cronies. Some of those will come from the Chicago Machine.

11. SOME SUPPORTERS HAVE FASCISTIC TENDENCIES
It used to be that liberals would oppose corrupt foreign governments "losing" a reporter's paperwork in order to shut them up. Now, see the response from some of those in Obama's netroots base to such a case. While some at those sites no doubt oppose such things, very few of them spoke out against it. Some of the people highlighted at the previous link would have been right at home in East Germany. [UPDATE: the important point here is that those netroots supporters would gain political power should Obama win. While every candidate has questionable supporters, in McCain's case he isn't going to invite them to the White House. The same can't be said about, say, Kos if Obama wins.]

12. ASSOCIATIONS WITH RADICALS
In 'Dreams from My Father', Obama said, "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully... The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.". That's continued until very recently, with a long line of associations with radicals, extremists, and those on the far-left. Most politicians would not associate with largely unrepentant terrorists, racists, and the like. And, in fact, Obama has thrown several of his past friends and affiliates under the bus, but only after his association with them became an issue. Just as one might expect that a politician who spends their days going to Chamber of Commerce events has some sympathy with the positions of the Chamber of Commerce, Obama clearly has sympathies with the positions of the radicals with whom he's been associated. In fact, it's difficult to find many past Obama associates who are completely mainstream.

13. CRITICISM WILL NOT BE TOLERATED
The case of Joe the Plumber should be shocking to anyone who supports the U.S. Constitution. Someone dared to ask Obama a question and was later mentioned several times during a debate. Obama's supporters and surrogates responded by leaking private information on him and by trying to drive him out of work. The Obama campaign was probably involved in that, and at the least they did absolutely nothing to stop it. Those are the types of activities more commonly found in authoritarian societies. If Obama is president expect similar situations and perhaps even worse. [UPDATE: the possibility that the Obama campaign was involved in hampering JTP's work prospects is based in part on things like "Plumbers union rips McCain on 'Joe the Plumber'" (link), where the Obama-endorsing 'United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry' pointed out in a statement that JTP did not have a plumber's license, something that he might not need.]

14. THE FIRST AMENDMENT
Barack Obama is a clear threat to the First Amendment. Some Democratic leaders support the Fairness Doctrine and the like; for instance, the Center for American Progress supports more government control over radio station ownership. And, Obama himself has said that "hate" has no place on the airwaves. However, the "hate" part was a reference to Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh, both of whom he's also smeared. Whether Obama personally pushes it or not, the Democrats will attempt to pass some sort of bill having an impact on what you can hear on the radio and perhaps on the TV as well. Petitioning the government is also a key part of the First Amendment; as described above, Joe the Plumber was almost driven out of work after asking Obama a question.

15. THE GREAT UNKNOWN
There's been controversy over Obama's eligibility to be president, with some thinking he could be a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia. There's a very good chance that he is indeed a U.S. citizen, but he has not proved it despite what you might have heard from "fact checkers". He could have easily prevented all the speculation by releasing his original birth certificate and other information to, for instance, an impartial judge. Yet, he did not. And, he even refuses to release something as simple as his college applications. Even the New York Times has noted that Obama isn't telling the truth about his years at Columbia University ("Obama's Account of New York Years Often Differs From What Others Say", link). His failure to release even the most basic background information isn't just a stunt designed to tie up his opponents; it's clear that there's something that he does not want to reveal. His opponents will only fight harder to discover potentially embarrassing information if he's elected. If something damning is found it will have a dramatic impact not just on his administration but also on the Democratic Party and all of those public figures who supported him.

16. CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS
The head of Obama's transition team and some of his advisors come from one of the lowest-wattage think tanks around, the Center for American Progress. They also support illegal immigration; per them, a "progressive" precept is opposition to xenophobia, and in their case that's manifested by supporting illegal activity. One of their senior fellows is part of the Mexican government's extended network. They also run the blog ThinkProgress, a juvenile site that specializes in gaffes, mockery, enforcing political correctness, and the like. That blog also refers to mainstream rightwing talk radio as "hate radio".

17. IMMIGRATION
Both Obama and McCain support illegal and massive immigration, both would allow it to continue, both are panderers, and both would push amnesty ("comprehensive immigration reform"). McCain might try to push it earlier in his administration than Obama would, since his goals are less sweeping and he'd have less to do. However, Obama has shown himself even worse than McCain, such as by uttering 'reconquista'-style comments, thanking an open borders extremist for his work, and the like. The American public blocked amnesty once, and it can be blocked again.

18. BUSH'S SPP.GOV
Obama supports a Bush trade scheme called the Security and Prosperity Partnership (spp.gov). That highly secretive plan - conducted completely without Congressional oversight - has been called "NAFTA on steroids", and some think it's a precursor to a North American Union. One doesn't have to be a "conspiracy theorist" to think that a highly secretive Bush trade scheme could be much more than we're being told. Obama continued the secrecy surrounding the plan by speaking in code when he came out in support of it.

19. HABIT OF LYING
McCain and Palin have both made false and misleading statements. However, Obama has taken it to a new level by uttering obviously false statements that he's rarely been called on. See, for instance, the list here. His campaign has also silently modified his website as his lies were revealed and silently omitted part of a quote to make someone look bad. See also this ad which even Joe Klein eventually called him on. In one case he even admitted to having been deceptive.

To summarize: please do not vote for Barack Obama.

~~~~~ BONUS ~~~~~

20. VERY QUESTIONABLE FUNDING
Obama has received hundreds of millions in campaign contributions, and millions of that are questionable. Unlike McCain or Clinton, the Obama campaign didn't try to ensure that those donations were legal. Unlike McCain, they aren't publishing a list of the donors who've given amounts under $200. They've received hundreds of millions in such donations, and large amounts of money could have been funneled to them by foreign citizens or even foreign governments simply by making a large number of small donations. And, they intentionally disabled address verification. They may also have broken federal law.

~~~~~ UPDATES ~~~~~

* Regarding the personality cult, some supporters are now tattooing numbers having to do with tasks performed for the Obama campaign on their wrists: dailykos.com/story/2008/10/29/212558/98/530/646276

* The state of Hawaii says his birth certificate exists, but that raises more questions than it answers.

* Since this was written, Obama played the race card again, and the interesting thoughts of Obama advisor Charles Ogletree came to light.

Politics · Wed, 10/29/2008 - 15:45 · Importance: 19

Thu, 10/30/2008 - 06:23
eh

_Obama is indeed smart._ He has a kind of glib intelligence, wedded to opportunistic ambition. How deep the intelligence goes is hard to say. One clue might be his almost total lack of legislative accomplishments. He certainly is an intellectually callow and dishonest racial demagogue of the kind political correctness puts front and center, and I for one don't want to listen to (at least) four years of that crap.

Thu, 10/30/2008 - 15:25
John S. Bolton
jsbolton.blogspot.com

Thanks for putting this together. You're doing the job that the media Obama omerta-respecters are viciously failing to do. Reason will prevail; the truth on Obama will become transparent to the electorate. There are torrents of e-mails, blogs radio and phone messages adding to the old and slow word of mouth.

Thu, 10/30/2008 - 20:13
manypaths
www.drudge.com

The more I read this, the more I realize that you are an idiot. You need a mirror.

Thu, 10/30/2008 - 22:41
petty bourgeois

manypaths Nice use of ad hominem. You lose whatever agrument you were making. Now who is the idiot?

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 04:05
Independentconservativeliberal

I have always considered myself non-partisan although I generally lean to the conservative side. I must tell you that I favor many of Obama's idea's. That is not to say I don't see fault as well, but most of your points seem like a simple, angry attempt at character defamation, much like you have accused Obama of, and to be honest I find some of your comments personally insulting (exapmle:Personality cult). This is not the way you will sway my opinion. I think perhaps you should try confronting issues that people who do not already share your view care about such as healthcare, foreign policy, taxes etc. One last thing. If Joe the Plumber was almost ran out of work it was probably due to spending more time on the campaign trail than unstopping his customers toilets.

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 06:04
In Good Company

What a crock. Palin isn't taken to task for failing to answer questions in the strictest and legalistic sense... she's just plain wrong. Telling third graders the VP is in charge of setting policy for the Senate? Her excuse was she was "talking down to their level". Excuse me, but what third grader doesn't understand "gets to vote to break a tie?" That is not only the truth, but it's more comprehensible to a third grader than "setting policy". And the question of Obama's citizenship is a NON QUESTION. What would happen if he did release the original birth certificate? He knows what would happen. "Obviously he wouldn't release this unless it were a fake!" The people who believe he's not a citizen with NO EVIDENCE believe it because it's what they want to believe and he knows better than to feed that. You want proof that Obama is a better man and a better candidate than John McCain? Here's proof. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. That's fact. It's part of his biography. It's never been denied. At the time of his birth, that zone was not considered U.S. soil and people born there were not considered U.S. citizens. That's a fact. Two years after his birth, a law was passed which said that people born there were natural born citizens for all intents and purposes, including office holding. After he was born. There was no provision in the law for retroactivity. This is all fact. Now, is anybody going to argue, 72 years later, that the framers of that law meant to exclude this one person who was born to a military family and has proudly served his country the right to run and possibly be elected to serve again in the highest office of the land? No. Because whatever the law says, its INTENTION is clear and no purpose would be served by trying to disqualify McCain on a technicality. Obama knows that a victory of this sort would not be a victory and a president who sought the presidency through these means would not be worthy of the name. Again, I'll say it: according to the word of law, a "strict construction" of the Constitution which lays out the rules for eligibility of the presidency, McCain IS NOT ELIGIBLE, but his opponent is too honorable to quibble over the matter. The courts, of course, would likely rule that the intent of the law was clear... but what a funny turn of events that would be if it took a "judicial advocate"legislating from the bench" to enshrine McCain's fitness for office? McCain, on the other hand, has outright admitted that he wants to be president simply because it is his ambition to be president. He said as much in his autobiography. He wants this in the worst possible way, and that includes allowing these ridiculous stories about Obama's "grandmother in Kenya swearing he was born there" (his actual Kenyan grandmother has been dead for some time, the woman in question is his father's new wife who wasn't in the scene when he was born.) These are all facts. They

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 06:05
In Good Company

These are all facts. They are all easily verifiable and have all been verified... but the conspiracy theory mind will not accept any truth which threatens its pet theory. Instead, the conspiracy grows all the time. Newspaper announcements? The newspapers are in on it! The family planted a fake announcement! But how did they know that he'd one day be in a position where it would matter whether he was natural born or naturalized (hint: it only matters for the president)? OH MY GOD HIS FAMILY MUST HAVE PLANNED A SEKRIT MUSLIN OVERTHROW OF THE WHITE HOUSE BEFORE HE WAS BORN!!!!!!!!!! What's more likely... that, or that he was born right where all the documents say he was?

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 06:11
In Good Company

Oh, and I'll add that I find the mention of a "cult of personality" insulting, just as I find McCain's insinuations that Obama is buying the election with dirty money insulting. "You know who else had big rallies? HITLER." Please. The fact that the man has a clear and consistent message ought to be enough to draw crowds when you look at the alternative, and the reason he has $600 million to spend is because he chose to allow We The People to vote with our wallets. That ought to be something the Republicans understand.

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 06:23
In Good Company

I've got to go to bed, but just on this one little page I could stay here all night. Obama takes things down from his website when it turns out they're not true? GASP! SHOCK! HORROR! I guess he should just keep on repeating them no matter what, like Palin and McCain does. Palin, who sat there and said "I'd like to thank the investigators for clearing me of any ethics violation or lawbreaking", when the report in fact said she had broken state ethics laws. If Obama wanted to campaign dirtily, he or his surrogates would be hammering McCain on the white supremacists who planned an anti-Obama murder spree, the disturbed woman who mutiliated her face, the sickos who shot a baby bear, stapled Obama signs to hits head, and dumped it off in front of a school. What do these actions have to do with the McCain campaign? As much as Obama has to do with his supposed "cousin" Odinga in Kenya... but all it would take is a whisper campaign to get people to draw lines between them. See, the human mind loves to find connections, even where none exists. It would be so easy. But Obama is above that, while McCain is not. McCain will hammer Obama for serving as faculty at the same institution as a Palestinian professor, never mind that a board he chaired gave that same professor a half a million dollar in grant money. Obama worked with the guy ('with' being a vague term), McCain actually FUNDED HIS WORK. And yet you, in your *cough*cough* non-partisan analysis, think Obama's judgment regarding his associations needs examination? Last I checked, Obama wasn't in charge of hiring other professors.

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 20:46
Angster

1) This isn't a reason not to vote for someone. There was (and still is) a fanatic cult of personality surrounding Ronald Reagan. Are we to believe that he should not have been president? What's more, there are plenty of people out there, myself included that think Sen. Obama has good ideas. His plan for investing in America's ailing infrastructure as a way of stimulating the economy, for one. Additionally, if there's a personality cult to worry about it's the one surrounding Gov. Palin. The things that have been shouted and chanted at her rallies are far more dangerous. Talk about a lack of substance, she doesn't even understand the fundamentals of the Constitution, much less complex policy. 2) Obama's been tested every step of this campaign, for 21 months. He has run a clean, smooth, well-organized, focused national campaign. He has put forth complex and well-thought-out solutions to America's ailments. He has proven himself, not only on the stump, but also in his debates, where it seemed that Sen. McCain was the inexperienced one. He has more political experience than did Abraham Lincoln in 1860. And NEWSFLASH: Everyone who runs for president is egotistical and narcissitic. It may as well be in the Constitution. 3) Wow. Getting kids excited about American democracy. He should be blacklisted! 4) One could just as easily say that McCain is part of the Goldwater Machine in Arizona. You give no evidence that Obama will "bring machine politics to our national government," except a link where you note that his staff took over the national campaign. So what? Every president brings people from his local circles to serve in their administrations. It's not the end of democracy, nor is it unethical or illegal. 5) Elaborate, please. I see nothing dirty about Obama's campaign tactics. Give concrete examples that are over and above the things that McCain and Palin have said to misrepresent Obama's ideas, the race-baiting tactics they have used, the things that their supporters and surrogates have said. I'd love to hear it. The media, you should know, doesn't count as a surrogate. News outlets- GASP! -report news. And guess what? Obama is better news than McCain. Deal with it. 6) McCain has his own questionable links. Your one example, the Illinois Treasurer PALES in comparison to McCain's VP selection of Sarah Palin. What's more, McCain is good friends with noted anti-democracy stormtrooper G. Gordon Liddy, the lovely Marilyn Shannon (who praised the killings of doctors who performed abortions), and the U.S. Council of World Freedom, which funneled arms and money to terrorists-excuse me, freedom fighters-in latin America in the 1980s. 7) This is garbage. Again, the media reports facts. They all wonder if Obama can actually implement the ambitious plans he has, casting doubt on each one. The entire McCain campaign has been a disaster, from his VP pick to his overdramatic suspension during the

Fri, 10/31/2008 - 23:49
AWH

Wow ... I could only make it to #5 these are so stupid. This is an impossibly, cartoonishly dumb and counterfactual list. Obama's been the dirty campaigner? Yeah, right...

Sat, 11/01/2008 - 17:22
SMH

In order for an analysis to be non-partisan it must be based in fact, not opinion. You haven't provided adequate factual sources for any of your information and most of it is based on your personal opinion and the opinions of other conservatives. I'm all for lively debate but don't pretend you are unbiased or non-partisan when it is painfully clear that your list is agenda driven and not based in reality.

Sat, 11/01/2008 - 21:34
Spongekill

None of these are facts, these are all impassioned and opinionated accusations based on information that is either exaggerated or otherwise competely misrepresented. Everything you accuse Obama of doing in regards to spin and lying McCain is also just as guilty of, and you demonstrate many of these techniques yourself in this ridiculous attempt at political commentary. Please use your brain a little more before choosing to make yet another stupid web-based list of reasons that everyone should agree with your myopic, ignorant views.

Sun, 11/02/2008 - 02:25
T

I agree that there appears to be a lot of unverified information in this list of reasons not to vote for Obama. The Obama campaign was "probably" involved in leaking private information about Joe the Plumber? Why would one assume that? We don't know who the people are who are donating less than $200 to the Obama campaign, so they must be from foreign gov'ts? How does one arrive at that conclusion, exactly? Also, a lot of these reasons don't appear to be valid reasons not to vote for somebody. If you yourself admit that Obama is probably a U.S. citizen, then why is this a reason not to vote for him? Is Obama's statement that we should not express hateful comments about each other on TV REALLY a threat to our First Amendment rights, or is it just common decency? And what does the "RACE CARD" have to do with anything? I don't even understand the point that was supposed to be made with that particular section. Also, I don't find Obama's association with various radicals particularly troubling. If anything, it displays a unique ability to cooperate with people of all different belief systems to work towards a common good. I would argue that that is a positive trait in a presidential candidate. The opposite tactic of alienating and disrespecting those who disagree with you, I would argue, is not constructive and a negative quality in a candidate. Which brings me to the authors first point: Obama's personality. I agree with the author that a vote for a presidential candidate should never be made based on someone's personality alone. But I would also argue that a candidate's personality is still the #1 most important trait. The reason for this is two-fold. We do not know what challenges the next president will face, and we do not know what decisions he will have to make. But we can deduce from Obama's personality that whatever he decides will be reasonable, and it will be made with deference and respect to people on both sides of an issue. Also, keep in mind that the next president will be representing our image to the rest of the world. If WE like him, then leaders of other nations will like him too. The power that he has to influence leaders of other nations with his personality will likely work in our favor and should not be minimized. The only valid criticism I found of Obama in this article is the fact that he may increase the size of government and bureaucracy. That does seem likely. But it doesn't seem like something to get overly upset about. We have two political parties in this country for a reason. For balance. The Republicans have been in office for eight years. It seems more than fair to give the other side a go at it for a while. Any concerns that our country will get pushed towards Socialism and Marxism seem unwarranted. Bill Clinton was a Democrat. He was in office for eight years, and last time I checked, the U.S. was not a Socialist nation. In summary, I don't think we have anything to wor

Sun, 11/02/2008 - 04:07
mameawa

"11. SOME SUPPORTERS HAVE FASCISTIC TENDENCIES" Everyone who has followers have some with "fascistic tendencies," if that's the kind of phrase you like to apply to such behavior. This whole list is dumb but that is utterly moronic.

Sun, 11/02/2008 - 19:31
GM

Intellectually bankrupt. Intellectually dishonest. Just like McCain/Palin '08. Congratulations, Orange Line Special, you have achieved irrelevance.

Mon, 11/03/2008 - 03:37
Beverly

Scary to see how the lefties rage, rage against the light. Pointless to reason with them. Astounding how the Obots SWARM any website that dares to criticize their Dear Leader. 'Night, peeps.

Thu, 11/06/2008 - 23:18
Mary

I appreciated your list and pretty much had a field day with the comments that basically consisted of "yeah right" and "your list is dumb." Admirable effort, but don't expect these brainwashed "voters" to agree. The facts don't matter because he stands for CHANGE. Bravo on a brave attempt.

Wed, 11/12/2008 - 19:57
DG

"Astounding how the Obots SWARM any website that dares to criticize their Dear Leader." This is my favorite bit of illogic that the far right has been using: the "methinks thou dost protest too much" argument. What you're saying is that a defense against a false charge is perversely an acknowledgement of its truth, and the intensity of the defense is proportional to the certainty of the guilt. So by your logic, if I called you a child molester, and you punched me in the head, then you would certainly be a molester of dozens of children. Genius!

Tue, 12/09/2008 - 02:24
Crescent

My take is this, if you are part of the liberal left, you're probably very happy with Obama slated for office. But, if you are like the 80%of Americans that are moderate or conservative... You are not happy with Obama's ideas ...sharing the wealth ...Freedom of Choice Act which will explode the number of partial birth abortions ...Gun control of the type the Obama already has as part of his voting record ...a Special Security Force reporting to Obama, a clear violation of separation of powers ETC. Of course there are a lot of Obots posting around. Some are loyal and some are paid. You'll probably follow this up with your version of things and attack me like you attacked the writer of this article. But, your words are pretty empty. I agree with the writer - Obama is a threat to the United States. Never at the time when an incoming president planned for office have groups formed against him with names like "The Resistance." Why is that happening? Because a growing number of level headed Americans are hearing about his agenda. And, we don't like it. His AGENDA is the big thing that makes me question his citizenship. It is downright UN-American.

Fri, 12/12/2008 - 18:57
Johsua

What a crybaby listing of BS. Sean Hannity and Jerome Corsi would be proud.

Sat, 12/13/2008 - 12:29
Crescent

Oh, I forgot to mention, just signing a card to start unions. Since the union behaviour could lead to the nationalization of the big three, maybe this support of unions is Obama's plan to nationalize other industries as unions trash them? And, if you are for big gov & lots of control, you probably can't wait for them to do to other industry what they did to loans and home morgages. Oh joy.

Sat, 12/13/2008 - 13:56
Crescent

I just read through a bunch of the posts. What is amazing to me is the left labels these articles as irrelavant and then spend hours posting on them. That kind of activity proves that these articles are getting attention. Kudos for writing it! Lefties, keep it giving your 'special attention.' Lots of activity lets us know we are getting the notice that is needed. :-)