Thursday, October 30, 2008

What/Who IS Barack Hussein Obama?

Barack Obama is a rhetoretician, but seldom is truth his currency. He plays bait and switch, misdirection, trickery, sleight of hand, if you will.

Asked by Pastor Rick Warren ‘when BABIES get human rights‘--that‘s Constitutional Rights--Obama switched the focus to conception issues. Why? Because he has a history of using summary removal of Constitutional rights from newborns as his means to protect abortion rights in Illinois.

Barack Obama is more than willing to cancel Constitutionally defined Human rights in order to protect what the Democrat Party has used as their empowerment scheme, for decades.

In the following clip from the Saddleback Church interview, Pastor Warren didn‘t ask about a fetus--the pre-born baby--or about issues of ‘when a conceptus becomes a human being‘, he asked when a baby--an already born, alive human entity--gets human rights:

Notice how Barack Obama answers first that it is above his pay grade, trying to divert the focus to an issue which continues to confound debate. That’s sleight of hand, trickery, obfuscation. Why? … Because while he was in the Illinois legislature, Barack Obama didn’t consider it above his pay grade to cancel the Constitutional Rights of newborn, alive babies as his means to protect abortion ’rights’!

Pastor Warren asked Obama a question which would have exposed a darkness at the heart of the man, had Obama answered truthfully. So Barack Obama played bait and switch, deceived the audience, lied. He does this regularly, but the sycophantic leftist media never calls him on his lies.

Obama twisted the focus of Warren’s question, as a way to avoid exposing his Constitution-cancelling past performance. Killing born alive infants is okay in Barack Obama‘s twisted mind, so long as it protects abortion on demand! But he knows that would be a major turn-off for average Americans, so he lies.

On the other hand, Barack Obama made noises about being his brother’s keeper, and quoted scripture (from Matthew, which he may never have actually read for himself) regarding ‘doing to the least of these’. Had Barack Obama ever actually read the Gospel according to Matthew, he would know that Jesus considers children also as ‘the least of these‘.

Alive, born and separated from their mother‘s body children are the least among us. Obama had no problem with cancelling the rights of these alive children, as his means to protect the rites of abortion and thus empower his political capital among pro-choice Democrats.

Deceit is so deeply ingrained with Barack Obama, one is left pondering from whence comes such deception? How can a man claim to care about the least among us, yet purposely cancel the Constitutional Rights, the Human Rights of struggling-to-breathe newborn children?

If I’m not mistaken, abortion ‘rights’ are about killing the alive unborn. But Obama protected the killing of alive just born children completely separated from the mother’s body, under the guise of protecting abortion rights.

Are we to conclude that killing the newborn is an abortion right?

If that were the only issue, the task of comprehending what is this man would be more simple. But there is so much more, as the Obama army’s character assassination of persons like Joe the Plumber prove.

Actually, the loud and clear message is more sinister from the Obama goons: ‘Do not question what Obama does or says. If Barack uses murdering of newborns as a means to protect abortion rights, he must not be questioned for it.’ Any evil is allowed, so long as it serves to sustain abortion on demand, even if the issue is not abortion but the legalization of killing newborns, the legalization of infanticide!

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

This Is A Right Catchy Piece Of Work

Here's an eight minute, very brilliant presentation from a Christian brother. ... Family is gonna make Heaven such an interesting place, meeting all these family members you didn't get to meet while on Earth! And he's young and black and I'm old and white! Enjoy ... I sure am proud of my family In Christ.

Obama Constitution&Abortion

Barack Obama sought to cancel the Constitutional Human Rights of born alive infants as Obama's means to 'protect' Roe v Wade and empower his political capital.

As a Constitutional law professor, we may be certain he knew what he was working to do when he opposed the born alive infant protection legislations. The form of killing alive children--that Obama protected--is called induced labor abortion. It is a method of forcing premature birth then killing the struggling completely born infant by neglecting medical attention, so the struggling child eventually suffocates. That is infanticide/murder via purposed neglect. ...

And America's media is protecting this kind of man, so he may become our elected president without vetting? THAT is the fourth estate turning into the fifth column enemy of the people.

Please watch the following and forward the net address to all on your e-mail lists. Time is growing very short for our values:

Monday, October 27, 2008

The Supreme Court Is Not Radical Enough For Obama

During a 2001 radio call in session, the following remarks were recorded of Barack Obama answering questions on the socialist/Marxist perspective he desires for the nation and how the Courts haven't been radical enough to meet his desires. [Here is the Youtube address to listen to Obama on the radio program: ] The transcript of the audio is below, as part of a Bill Whittle essay that is included:

Barack Obama, in 2001:

You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights
movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded
was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would
now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and
order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court
never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more
basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.

And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize
the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the
essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the
Constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted
it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative
liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal
government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or
the state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the
civil-rights movement was because the civil-rights movement became so
court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the
political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to
put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about
redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.

A caller then helpfully asks: “The gentleman made the point that the Warren
Court wasn’t terribly radical. My question is (with economic changes)… my
question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work, economically, and
is that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to change place?”

Obama replies:

You know, I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive
change through the courts
. The institution just isn’t structured that way.
[snip] You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues, you
know, in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially
is administrative and takes a lot of time. You know, the court is just not very
good at it, and politically, it’s just very hard to legitimize opinions from the
court in that regard.

So I think that, although you can craft theoretical justifications for it,
legally, you know, I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a
rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.”


There is nothing vague or ambiguous about this. Nothing.

From the top: “…The Supreme Court never entered into the issues of
redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and
economic justice in this society. And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think
people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.”

If the second highlighted phrase had been there without the first, Obama’s
defenders would have bent over backwards trying to spin the meaning of
“political and economic justice.” We all know what political and economic
justice means, because Barack Obama has already made it crystal clear a second
earlier: It means redistribution of wealth. Not the creation of wealth and
certainly not the creation of opportunity, but simply taking money from the
successful and hard-working and distributing it to those whom the government
decides “deserve” it.

This redistribution of wealth, he states, “essentially is administrative and
takes a lot of time.” It is an administrative task. Not suitable for the courts.
More suitable for the chief executive.

Now that’s just garden-variety socialism, which apparently is not a big deal
to may voters. So I would appeal to any American who claims to love the
Constitution and to revere the Founding Fathers… I will not only appeal to you,
I will beg you, as one American citizen to another, to consider this next
statement with as much care as you can possibly bring to bear: “And uh, to that
extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it
wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that
were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — at least as it’s been
interpreted, and [the] Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that
generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [it] says what
the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you,
but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do
on your behalf.

The United States of America — five percent of the world’s population — leads
the world economically, militarily, scientifically, and culturally — and by a
spectacular margin. Any one of these achievements, taken alone, would be cause
for enormous pride. To dominate as we do in all four arenas has no historical
precedent. That we have achieved so much in so many areas is due — due entirely
— to the structure of our society as outlined in the Constitution of the United

The entire purpose of the Constitution was to limit government. That
limitation of powers is what has unlocked in America the vast human potential
available in any population.

Barack Obama sees that limiting of government not as a lynchpin but rather as
a fatal flaw: “…One of the, I think, the tragedies of the Civil Rights
movement was because the Civil Rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I
think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community
organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual
coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in
some ways we still suffer from that.”

There is no room for wiggle or misunderstanding here. This is not edited
copy. There is nothing out of context; for the entire thing is context — the
context of what Barack Obama believes. You and I do not have to guess at what he
believes or try to interpret what he believes. He says what he believes.

We have, in our storied history, elected Democrats and Republicans, liberals
and conservatives and moderates. We have fought, and will continue to fight,
pitched battles about how best to govern this nation. But we have never, ever in
our 232-year history, elected a president who so completely and openly opposed
the idea of limited government, the absolute cornerstone of makes the United
States of America unique and exceptional.

If this does not frighten you — regardless of your political affiliation —
then you deserve what this man will deliver with both houses of Congress, a
filibuster-proof Senate, and, to quote Senator Obama again, “a righteous wind at
our backs.”

That a man so clear in his understanding of the Constitution, and so
opposed to the basic tenets it provides against tyranny and the abuse of power,
can run for president of the United States is shameful enough.

We’re just getting started.


Mercifully shorter than the first, and simply this: I happen to know the
person who found this audio. It is an individual person, with no more resources
than a desire to know everything that he or she can about who might be the next
president of the United States and the most powerful man in the world.

I know that this person does not have teams of highly paid professionals,
does not work out of a corner office in a skyscraper in New York, does not have
access to all of the subtle and hidden conduits of information … who possesses
no network television stations, owns no satellite time, does not receive
billions in advertising dollars, and has a staff of exactly one.

I do not blame Barack Obama for believing in wealth distribution. That’s his
right as an American. I do blame him for lying about what he believes. But his
entire life has been applying for the next job at the expense of the current
one. He’s at the end of the line now.

I do, however, blame the press for allowing an individual citizen to do the
work that they employ standing armies of so-called professionals for. I know
they are capable of this kind of investigative journalism: It only took them a
day or two to damage Sarah Palin with wild accusations about her baby’s
paternity and less time than that to destroy a man who happened to be playing
ball when the Messiah decided to roll up looking for a few more votes on the way
to the inevitable coronation.

We no longer have an independent, fair, investigative press. That is
abundantly clear to everyone — even the press. It is just another of the facts
that they refuse to report, because it does not suit them.

Remember this, America: The press did not break this story. A single citizen,
on the Internet did.

There is a special hell for you “journalists” out there, a hell made
specifically for you narcissists and elitists who think you have the right to
determine which information is passed on to the electorate and which is not.

That hell — your own personal hell — is a fiery lake of irrelevance, blinding
clouds of obscurity, and burning, everlasting scorn.

You’ve earned it.


This discovery will hurt Obama much more than Joe the Plumber.

What will be left of my friend, and my friend’s family, I wonder, when the
press is finished with them?

— Bill Whittle lives in Los Angeles and is an on-air commentator for You can find him online at

Friday, October 24, 2008

Television Reveals Our Deepest Nature, Sometimes

The CSI episode (CBS show, Crime Scene Investigation) which aired Thursday evening, October 23, was, as is common, about a serial killer. The killer picked random victims, drugged them to unconsciousness, and killed them in restrained poses, so when rigor mortis sets in (stiffening of the muscles with oxygen deprivation and paralysis of muscle cells) these people are posed in what the killer perceives as ‘artful sculpting’.

Toward the end of the episode, the CSI team discovers the killer has abducted a little boy whom he plans as the last in a series of ‘sculptings’. The frantic criminal investigators locate a warehouse where they believe the killings have taken place and rush to find the little boy. As the child is pulled free from the straps and restraints, unconscious, CPR is started when the boy is carried from the killing chamber. The audience is left in suspense, momentarily: will the team be too late to save this child; will CPR revive this child?

I watched the end of that episode with tears in my old eyes, pleading in my mind for the little one to breathe. The tears were because I was thinking of how a viewing audience can be manipulated to cheer for that little boy to recover from the carbon monoxide and breathe, yet Barack Obama worked hard in the Illinois legislature to protect killing born alive infants —completely separated from the mother’s body— via forced suffocation of preemie babies left unattended to die alone. And it makes me cry that too many of my fellow Americans are going to vote for this ghoul from Illinois who used the suffocation murder of born alive children as a means to empower himself politically.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Why Some Democrats Are Looking To Vote McCain

During a recent discussion of just how dangerous for America is Barack Obama, someone asked: "I want to know where is Hillary. How come she hasn't derailed this runaway train."

Funny they should ask; Hillary was also an admirer of Saul Alinsky methodology, as shown with her thesis uncovered nearly a decade ago and written about in Barbara K. Olson’s Hell To Pay. Hillary Clinton is campaigning for the little Marxist squirrel. What one ought to ask is, 'What has the Marxist Obama promised to Hillary so that she is helping him ascend to ultimate power?'

One of the interesting little secrets of this election is that PUMAs have discovered Hillary has evolved in her Alinskyeque perspective, moving from a pure Marxist to pragmatic socialist. [PUMAs are the Hillary voters from the primaries who have rejected the mantra of democrat party unity in order to get Barack Obama elected, instead contemplating a vote for McCain/Palin. We’ll look at why, momentarily.]

Marxism, relating to Capitalism, is revolution oriented, systematically tear-it-all-down oriented, destructive. Socialism, related to Capitalism, is change oriented--the very faux mantra of the actually Marxist destroyers as they are swept into power by the poor astonished fools who will be slaughtered in the aftermath.

‘Change’ is the actual campaign mantra used by Raila Odinga, the Marxist Kenyan advised by Barack Obama in the 2006-2007 election cycle in Kenya. The deception of using ‘change’ instead of ‘revolution’ is meant to hook the inattentive, the hopeful, the useful idiots. Odinga tried revolution in the eighties and was jailed for it. So he switched to the less obvious ‘change’ mantra, but still Kenyans rejected his deceit. It was violence and murder Odinga was more than willing to use which finally got him a position of power sharing.

Change does not immediately destroy, it gradually redirects, whereas the objective of Marxists like William Ayers and Rev. Cone--mentor to Rev Wright--is to destroy the existing society and install a different society. Barack Obama is closely connected to William Ayers, despite the lies David Axelrod has tried to float to deceive voters.

Barack Obama is pretending to be a socialist but not saying it outright, for obvious reasons. He has foisted ‘change’ at the heart of his objectives, as his means to deceive his way to empowerment. He used the same deceitful technique while protecting infanticide in Illinois, in order to empower himself with pro-choice voters; the truth on Obama was he worked to protect abortion through protecting the heinous killing method know as induced labor/induced delivery abortion ... and even the radical pro-choice like Boxer, Harkin, and Clinton could not be that extreme and voted to pass the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which Obama repeatedly opposed.

Let‘s be clear: Barack Obama is associate of Rev. Wright of Black Liberation Theology, and William Ayers, co-founder of the Weather Underground terrorists bombers. Both of these radical men, Barack’s chosen associates, aimed to destroy the America they saw. Ayers evolved into 'change' oriented socialist only because he could not in the seventies succeed in destroying America.

Should Americans trust that Barack Obama will--as an associate of Rev. Wright and William Ayers--stick to 'change' style socialism if and when he attains ultimate power in America? … Does anyone believe Ayers would not resort to his original objectives when his man Barack holds the keys to destroying the America Ayers still hates? Apparently, men like Colin Powell cannot reason that far, making Colin Powell a useful idiot!

The PUMAs have seen the evolution of Hillary from stealth Marxist like Obama, to socialist. It is striking to realize that people like Colin Powell have been fooled to believe Obama is a socialist they can work with, whereas PUMAs have seen the actual Marxist behind the deceit that Obama and his squad of deceivers in media spew. Powell is a useful idiot; PUMAs are pragmatic socialist. In PUMA calculus, McCain still leads to socialism, whereas Barack Obama leads to quick destruction of the Republic. PUMAs may be right about John McCain, but I don’t think so. I welcome their votes though, for we have love of this Republic in common.

I have nothing in common with William Ayers or hate spewing Rev. Wright, and these are men Barack Obama has chosen to be his associates. They are but two of the many, many radical associates Obama values. Ever heard of Franklin Raines?

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Thank God For Sam Wurzelbacher, America’s Plumber

This past week, video surfaced of Barack Obama telling a common workingman with an entrepreneurial dream ‘it isn’t so much that I want to penalize your success‘, but that Obama wants to ‘spread the wealth around’ by over taxing the small business engine which drives job creation in America. I was amazed at the sudden glimpse into the basics of Barack Hussein Obama. We were getting an astonishing look at the philosophy of leftist Democrats. But we were actually seeing only the tip of a titanic ‘iceberg’ that is Barack Hussein Obama.

Subsequent video of Barack Obama speaking about Joe the Plumber revealed something much more sinister than was revealed in the third debate with John McCain. At first hearing, I was struck by how Obama’s disdain for Joe may hint of racism. Did the smirk with which Obama intoned ‘John McCain says he’s working for a plumber’ have a racist tinge to it, of a college trained Blackman condescending toward a white plumber?

In fact, Obama’s smirking condescension went well beyond racism, revealing the attitude Barack Hussein Obama and the entire leadership of the Democrat party have toward common man America. It isn’t racism, it’s Marxist elitism.

Had Joe The Plumber been a Blackman, I doubt that Barack Hussein Obama’s responses would have been different in substance. Obama accidentally revealed what Democrats try hard to prevent being known about them: they do seek to ‘spread the wealth around’. Unfortunately, their schemes to spread something around always end up spreading around the failure and poverty generated from Johnson’s Great Society of welfare. But back to Barack Hussein Obama …

If Joe Wurzelbacher had been a Blackman asking the very same question, according to previous performances before black audiences Obama would have altered his speech patterns and given a studied imitation of Blackman as he stealthily denigrated a common man’s dream of buying the business and expanding it, expanding the employee number, and expanding wealth.

The answer to Joe’s query would have varied only in delivery, not in substance: Barack Hussein Obama is a Marxist in his basic belief system. In fact, the entire Democrat Party swings their bats from that side of the government plate, as evidenced by their Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ponzi scheme to fund mortgages using vacuous credit scams which enriched Democrat friends while saddling middle class and lower income families with unmanageable debt, now creating a five trillion dollar debt load on America‘s future taxpayers.

The little secret at the heart of Marxist philosophy is, there has to be an elite gang at the top of society, somewhere, deciding what your dreams and future will look like in their elitist condescension. The disdain Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden, and the teams’ talking heads in the sycophantic media have shown toward Joe Wurzelbacher is very revealing.

These damned Marxism elitists don’t like common man America because guys like Joe Wurzelbacher don‘t want government to be their nanny, they want the chance to have success by their own toiling entrepreneurial drive! It is the character of We The People among all races and ethnic backgrounds that we only want the chance to have our hard work pay off for us and our families. That has no racial boundaries, as my neighbor down the street proves so eloquently, but such independence is anathema to the Marxist way of governance!

The campaign to destroy Joe Wurzelbacher is not based on race or ethnic background, it’s founded in an elitist fear of men like Joe who do not buy the nanny state philosophy.

You can see Marxist condescension flash on the face of these elitists when they mock Joe among sycophantic followers, disdaining Joe The Plumber for daring to question their Marxist messiah.

Obama screwed up and revealed the hidden agenda at the heart of Democrat power lust. His media sycophancy must act quickly to destroy this threat to their carefully crafted lie that is ‘Uniter Squirrel‘, Barack Hussein Obama. It‘s a pity once great men like Colin Powell are so taken in by the crafty sham and are tucked away with the rest of the ACORNs.

The little army of elitist media are quick to assassinate anyone who nicks their little godman, Barack. The little Marxist squirrel could not hide his utter disdain for Joe The Plumber‘s independent spirit. Watch the despicable expression which oozes across the face of Obama when he addresses McCain‘s assertion that he fights for Joe The Plumbers of America: . Folks, that‘s Obama as despicable, and very revealing!

Spread the wealth around is the heart of Marxist philosophy, and it always ends up spreading poverty around, as Cuba and the failed Soviet Union so aptly show. ’Spreading something around’ is the goal Barack Hussein Obama and his party worshippers have for America. Maybe this time Marxist utopia will be reached through the bloody hands of a man who sought to protect infanticide so the left’s precious Roe v Wade would not be eroded. Barack Hussein Obama’s scheme might work and I might be wrong now, but I don’t think so …

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Is This Election America's Last Chance To Reject Real Evil?

This last debate is vital to the future of our nation, and in a very real way, this election is crucial for the survival of millions of future Americans who will be in grave danger if Barack Obama is elected and does what he has promised with regard to Abortion.

While in the Illinois legislature, Barack Obama worked hard to protect a type of abortion that forces babies to be born alive very prematurely (between 16 and 24 weeks of gestational age) then they are left to die, alone, struggling to try and breathe, without medical attention. Such children are alive, not as survivors of an abortion attempt but as the intentional means to kill them using their fragile condition to murder them via neglect so they eventually suffocate.

When a man's soul is so dark that he describes addressing the wrongness of that evil as above his pay grade--as Barack Obama did during the Saddleback Church interview--if America does not reject such a leader, America become liable for the evil rising in her midst. Barack Obama has promised to sign as one of his first acts in the presidency a bill to sweep aside ALL abortion laws in America, including and especially the laws passed to address this evil way of killing fragile little babies ... which killing method he worked to protect while an Illinois Senator.

I am convinced that The Lord can reveal to the world the spirit that is within Barack Obama and that the spirit within him is twisted and evil. What frightens me is the real possibility that even when God reveals that twisted spirit, too many Americans will still embrace him despite the recognition of his evil intentions.

Intentionally killing premature children via neglect is pure wickedness. To work hard to protect that wickedness is service to evil. So, my fervent prayer this evening is that The Lord will by some divine means pull back the veil hiding the real person that is Barack Obama, for the world to witness it tonight. May the Lord have mercy upon America and at least reveal the nature of Barack Obama so that we the people have a last chance to turn from wickedness and turn to Our Savior and His Spirit of Life.

Monday, October 13, 2008

No Change, Despite Whom Is Elected … Really?

Some are pleading that regardless of which man gets elected--McCain or Obama--things will not change, business will go on as usual. That might encourage some to opt out of the election process, but it is astonishingly naive.

First, observations on the clinton eight years from such voices are flawed, possibly poisoned by democrat party talking point lies claiming clinton era federal tax revenue surpluses. There has not been a surplus since the Democrats funneled all tax revenues (even FICA social security taxes collected) into a 'general fund' from which Democrats and Republicans have over spent, creating an ongoing national debt of federal 'bills' ... federal bonds issued as a means to borrow to pay for Congressional and Presidential spending sprees.

Clinton changed the Bond funding mechanism from long-term notes to short term notes which have higher interest yields for purchasers like the Chicoms and Saudis but which cost taxpayers more and have to be rolled over much more often, at changing interest rates. So there hasn't been a real surplus since the Democrats quietly tapped the tax receipts mounting up in the Social Security trust fund which were meant to be accruing until drawn upon by retiring workers in the distant future. Now, social security is paid by current tax revenues instead of from a 'surplus' ... there are no ‘surpluses due to Clinton‘, because there are trillions in IOUs, even accumulated in the clinton years, where once there were accumulating and set aside revenues collected under FICA taxation in pay checks.

Second, if Barack Obama was even close to as dedicated an American as bill 'sinkEmperor' clinton, the electorate could sail along regardless of a McCain or Obama win. That things will not be business as usual is clearly reflected in the sell-offs occurring in the stock markets; investors don't see a future for profit under a Marxist wannabe like a Castro or a Chavez, and that is in reality what Obama is, a Marxist. Polls being touted by the biased media are panicking investors, adding to the Democrat's desired destruction of the economy as a means to empower the Democrat party in this election year.

Barack Obama is nothing like bill clinton: Barack Obama is a racist politician, and in his own words from one of his 'autobiographies', learned early in life to hide his hatred and distrust for white people. By his own admission, Obama is a deceiver on race and has learned the methodology very well, judging by the many dupes who believe he would be 'good for race relations in America.'

Barack Obama is not a nice man, despite what the comity obsessed McCain says at Townhall events.

Barack Obama, while an Illinois Senator, worked hard to protect and keep legal a particularly nasty way of killing alive unborn children. The abortion method is called induced labor abortion, where an alive but very premature child is forced to be born prematurely then left to struggle and die unattended, alone, suffocating to death, slowly.

Barack Obama was recruited--while still in college--by William Ayers, a domestic (home-grown) terrorist bomber who has not changed his aims for America. Ayers just shifted his bombing to aim at the minds of children during their impressionable years. Ayers wants to change America, but what he envisions isn't a free Republic. One can be assured that Obama fits somewhere in Ayers‘ plan for America else Ayers would not have recruited him so early.

Obama's political career was launched from William Ayers' living room in Chicago, not by a black lady politician, but by Ayers and co., as explained by the black lady the lying David Axelrod campaign has tried to say used Ayers' living room to launch Obama. The black lady was invited to attend Ayers' launching of Obama's political career. Protecting abortion and lying through Obama teeth are not signs of a nice man.

Obama used taxpayer funds to fly down to Kenya, to politically empower one Raila Odinga, thug and convicted bloody revolutionary whose army of machete wielding hackers murdered Christian women and children when Odinga failed to win the election in Kenya.

Obama continued to promote Odinga after it was exposed that Odinga signed an agreement with the Muslim leadership in Africa that he would institute Sharia law if he were elected. And after the slaughtering and burning began, post election, Obama continued to try and get a power sharing position for Odinga in Kenya, remaining in constant contact with the murderous thug Odinga until the duly elected president of Kenya was pressured via churches torched and Christians murdered, and by the US State Dept Obama petitioned and pleaded with, to appoint Odinga to a newly fabricated job of 'Minister'.

Barack Obama has used and continues to use the race card, digging to revive racial unrest, trying to intimidate voters into either voting for him as a black man or staying out of the political struggle so as to not obstruct his rise to power. No wonder Jesse Jackson wanted to clip Obama's 'acorns'! Obama's racist surrogates are increasing the racist pressure every week! They have the media telling folks that if you don‘t vote for Obama, you‘re racist. Such a unifying message, that, join Obama or be stamped a racist!

Barack Obama is closely connected--as a past trainer and lawyer for ACORN--to a hired army of treacherous enemies working to cancel legitimate votes. Called ACORN, this pernicious army creates false voter registrations to be use to cancel the honest votes of real citizens, by using fabricated names on voter registration rolls, names of cartoon characters, the Dallas Cowboys football team, and names of dead people and under-aged children. ACORN is under indictment in several states and it is likely that at least a few of the organizers now sending the vote fraud army out in battleground states were trained by Obama, years ago.

Obama was instrumental as a lawyer on the ACORN case suing CitiBank to increase very bad mortgage loans to people unable to handle the mortgages. This suing under the guise of the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) from the Carter years, given Justice Department muscle under the clinton signature in 1999 and prosecuted by clinton's secretary Cuomo, is at the heart of the current financial meltdown! The failures of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are directly connected to the strong-arm methodology of ACORN activism taught by Barack Obama in his alliance with ACORN.

And oh yes, and Obama's campaign has paid this election $800,000 to ACORN for their assistance, even as Barack Obama lies saying he is not aligned with ACORN! Obama was also the second highest recipient of Fannie Mae lobbying cash with only three years in the Senate (more than $150,000), yet Obama decries lobbyists!

Barack Obama aligned himself with Rev Wright and the very hate-filled radical black liberation theology ... for twenty years, even taking his precious daughters to absorb the hate in that church! But when Wright and the hate-filled rhetoric were exposed, Barack Obama pretended to dissociate himself from Wright and the rhetoric.

If Barack Obama is elected president, the nation will not continue along in business as usual. The intimidation campaign exploiting Democrat law enforcement folks, by the Axelrod operatives in Missouri, shows that!

Barack Obama's mantra is change. Marxist revolution is founded upon that mantra and Barack Obama is a Marxist who has written about his admiration for Saul Alinsky and Alinsky's mayhem methodology for radicals ... that is the community organizing methodology Barack Obama taught at ACORN and which has been used in voter registration fabrications and for intimidating bankers and banks. No wonder Barack Obama called for his supporters to 'get in your neighbor's face' ... he taught such Alinsky intimidation tactics in ACORN community organizer training classes!

When the Democrat party rejected Hillary Clinton for their nominee, the die was set to have either radical change which will end the Republic as we know it, or for the Republic to slide along under a McCain administration with a Democrat controlled House and Senate obstructing a Republican at every turn for four years. Frankly, the latter is the only chance We The People now have for survival, because it is a sure thing that a Marxist will not hear a single conservative voice once Barack Obama is in power, by any means, even intimidation.

Trying to claim this election is no big deal is a sneaky methodology to get undecided voters to opt out of the political process unless they join the radicals!

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Barack Obama, Nice Man?

Comity artist, John McCain, told a nice little lady at one of his townhall meetings standing up to state she was afraid of Obama becoming president that, ’Senator Obama is a nice family man, a good man whom McCain would not be afraid of to be president.’ Sorry, that’s just stupidity, not comity.

Barack ’ACORN’ Obama is not a nice man, he’s a nightmare for the Republic.

Barack Obama is not a nice family man, he‘s a proven liar. A nice man doesn't work legislatively to protect infanticide in Illinois. A nice man doesn't train and fund an army committing vote fraud treason to disenfranchise honest votes of We The People. A nice man doesn't wag the race card, manipulating black people in an effort to intimidate folks into shutting up and getting out of his way while he strong-arms via intimidation on his way toward the presidency, surfing layers of lies and outright deception for which the media gives him cover.

A real man doesn‘t lie. A whining self-appointed little godman lies.

Barack Obama is a liar, lying about his connections with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, lying about his place of birth, lying about his defense of infanticide, lying about his alliance with the criminal enterprise ACORN gang, and lying about his campaigning for a murderous thug in Kenya.

Barack Obama is a liar in motion, changing his tune at every turn when a campaign proposal doesn‘t produce the expected acceptance of the previous lie he‘s uttered. Ask Hillary Clinton‘s supporters just how maddening is the ever changing contradictory set of proposals from ‘nice’ mister Obama!

Barack Hussein Obama is not a nice man. Hell, he's not even a man: he whines behind carefully crafted deceptions and lying minions, only surfacing to whine another 'change' in his principles--changed because the earlier lies weren't doing what he expected so he 'changes' the claimed values he espouses. This man will say anything, change anything, and do anything, to claw his way to power, and he and his lying minions have proven they will herd black voters into his service making automatons out of children and teens.

Even the Clintons are campaigning for this vile man! Look at what the Democrat Party and democrat drone voters have become ...

If I had a mic at a John McCain townhall meeting, I would state that Barack Obama is not a nice man, because a nice family man does not work to keep infanticide protected as a way to kill little ones in Illinois. A nice man does not recruit, train, fund, and send into our communities an army for treasonous vote fraud. A nice man doesn't fly to Kenya on taxpayer dollars to campaign for a murderous thug, and continue to support such a thug when he signs an agreement to institute Sharia Law if elected. A nice man doesn't lie his way through primaries and toward the presidency using race baiting as a tool to try and silence any opposition. A nice man doesn't exploit black people to be his willing racial dupes while he's protecting the slaughter of black babies. A nice man? Not Barack Obama! And he's the 'best' the Democrat Party could stand up to run for power?

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Guilt By Association? Absadamnlutely!

Is there such a thing as guilt? Is there such a thing as finding out just how guilty someone is of wrong doing by associating that person to organizations and people who are proven guilty of wrong doing? Oh yeah!

If a bank is robbed and the perps caught, and one of the perps merely drove to and from the crime scene, is the driver guilty of the crime by association involvement in the crime? Absolutely.

Just for the sake of exploring guilt by association, let’s presume for a moment that the driver makes a claim that he/she didn’t know what the robbers were up to and did not share in the monies from the robbery, though he/she lives in the same residence and eats the same food and shares the same heating and cooling and … well, you get the picture, the driver of the getaway car claims to not be a bank robber because none of the monies from the robbery were handed to him/her.

Further, let’s presume a judge agrees to exclude the driver from prosecution on the grounds of no money passing into his or her hands directly from the robbers. Two of the robbers plead no contest, are sentenced by the judge and sent to prison, and in three years they are released on parole and return to the residence the driver of the getaway car has maintained.

The little gang of three rob another bank and sure enough the driver of the first getaway car is driving the second getaway car. The little gang is caught. Do you suppose the pattern of being the driver for this little gang of robbers would register against the driver of the getaway cars for these robberies? I dare say even the original judge would make the guilt by association connection.

The Barack Hussein Obama campaign staff and the candidate’s wife, Michelle Obama, are trying to sweep away Barack Hussein Obama’s guilt by claiming the accusations of Obama’s associations with people and organizations guilty of wrong doings is not a measure of him, that he is admittedly an associate of these people and organizations but is not to be associated with their activities. The Obama campaign platoon expects the American people to disregard the numerous connections to the robbers, er, I mean the people and organizations. That‘s very unwise, even dangerous for the Republic.

When one looks at Barack Hussein Obama’s past and present associations to people and organizations, a very disturbing pattern emerges, a pattern of associations and involvement which tend to define a man in agreement, having a past of working with some very dangerous people and organizations. These associations amount to alliances purposely maintained!

We are presently seeking to tie Barack Obama to a fetal tissue/tissue harvesting company connected to Illinois abortion clinics. Why? Because if Mister Obama has received campaign monies from this human-tissue harvesting business then he is implicated by association and further by alliance with the evil practice of forcing premature births and the killing of these preemies by neglecting any medical treatment for them, then harvesting their body parts. The abortion facility made/makes available to the tissue harvester staff the still warm remains of these little ones murdered in this fashion, an abortion method Barack Hussein Obama worked hard to protect while he was an Illinois legislator.

During a time when abortion clinics in Illinois were allowing the tissue harvesting from just aborted children using the killing method known as induced labor abortion, Obama’s guilt would be ‘by association’. Of course, he has never killed any newborn that I know of, and I would not seek to show that. But he will be guilty by association if and when the campaign contribution connection is proven.

Too radical a connection you might say? … Well, let’s point to a few other associations. Senator Obama is intimately tied to one William ‘Bill’ Ayers, founder of the Weathermen Underground domestic terrorist organization which was an offshoot of the SDS terrorist organization proved to have killed and maimed Americans using sniper fire and bombings in not so distant decades. The SDS is also connected to the Black Panthers. Disregarding the absurd plea by Barack Hussein Obama and his wife Michelle that he didn’t know Bill Ayers was connected to these domestic terrorist activities prior to Obama becoming closely involved with Ayers, what establishes Obama’s guilt by association? His purposed alliance with Ayers!

A magazine picture is circulating from around the time of the 911 Islamic terrorist attacks which shows Bill Ayers standing defiantly upon a crushed American flag in an ally in Chicago, smirking for the camera. That picture establishes the current attitude of a man who confessed to domestic bombings but was let-off by the FBI because of ‘improper collection of evidence’.

Is Ayers guilty? Morally, yes, even if not found guilty in a court he never had to stand before! And that’s the key, folks, Bill Ayers exhibit’s a pernicious moral perspective we the people do reject, whether coming from Islamic murderers or domestic murderers. And Barack Hussein Obama is intimately tied (that's an alliance) to William ‘Bill’ Ayers, as Sean Hannity famously puts it ‘an unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber.’

Is that all, Obama just associated to a particularly heinous way of killing alive prematurely born children and associate in good standing with a domestic terrorist? Well, no. Barack Hussein Obama is a member of the Luo tribe through his Kenyan father, the same tribe to which Raila Odinga is a member, the same tribe which killed hundreds of fellow Kenyans and burned hundreds of Christian Churches in Kenya after Odinga failed to win the recent election in Kenya, failed to win even though this Odinga thug signed an agreement with Muslim leaders to seek establishment of Sharia law for Kenya if he won.

Barack Hussein Obama used taxpayer funds to travel to Kenya and campaign for this bloody thug, even after the document of agreement with the Muslim leaders was made public! Soon, deeper ties will surface showing Obama in almost daily contact with Odinga during the election, after the election during the murderous riots, and even after Odinga extorted a position of power from the elected Kenyan government in order to end the orchestrated rioting of Odinga’s goons.

Then there are the deep connections to ACORN, both the voter registration branch and the mortgage assistance branch of ACORN. Obama trained voter registration recruits--perhaps some of Obama’s trainees are now team directors of criminals inflating rolls of fraudulent voters in the ‘battleground ‘states--and was involved as lawyer in a major suit aimed at forcing a pivital lending institution into issuing bad risk mortgages to people unable to meet traditional lending parameters and who have subsequently swelled the ranks of mortgage defaults now imperiling our nation’s financial life. The threat of such lawsuits quickly whipped lenders into line, making them issuers of very bad mortgage loans funneled over to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which are now amounting to trillions of dollars in federal debt. Obama as an ACORN activist and as a United States Senator is deeply associated with the voter fraud and financial crisis our nation faces, right now.

Guilt by association? … With even the smallest application of common sense, one is left to conclude that Barack Hussein Obama is guilty of a moral perspective which is very much contrary to that held by we the people who are paying attention to the associations. Barack Obam is closely associated to domestic terrorists, to heinous abortion methodology which commoditized the little ones, to a bloody-handed Kenyan politician, to an organization guilty of voter fraud on a massive multi-state level, and to the financial crisis our nation faces.

Here’s one final anecdotal note. The David Axelrod team hired to fabricate an acceptable image for Barack Hussein Obama has known about these connections, has considered these associations from the very start of their association with Barack Obama. It is instructive to see the layers of lies they have used to try and misdirect Americans away from the guilt by association. When David Axelrod was first asked about Barack Obama’s association to Bill Ayers, Axelrod tried to squelch further investigation by dismissing any connection as ‘perhaps they ran into each other at school functions since their children attend the same schools.’ To tell such a gross lie so quickly belies a mind already primed to lie and deceive in order to try and prevent very real Obama guilt by association. Subsequent spin from the Axelrod team has been layered to appear reasonable while still being nothing but misdirection deception.

If the media in America were not now an active fifth column seeking to aid a despicable friend of terrorists and murderers, the real associations in all their gory details would have eliminated Barack Hussein Obama’s political star months ago. Obama is guilty, by deep and abiding associations with enemies of America, enemies of Life. God have mercy upon America if we elect such a guilty man to be the most powerful man in the world. It will be we the people at fault if this very flawed man reaches ultimate power.

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Both Parties Offer Change, Voters Have To Choose The Future Path

I wonder how many can remember James Carvile looking at the TV camera with an almost demonic expression of contempt, spewing “It’s the economy, stupid”? Well, this election it is about the economy, again. But it is a democrat enterprise which has nearly aborted the economy of America … and if our economy is aborted, so is our power and reach around the world, particularly against oil funded terrorists.

When the topic of the economy is discussed at conservative websites like, there is always a voice waiting to interject ‘Yeah, the Republican administration did this to our economy and it’s time for change.’ Well, that’s not exactly truthful, though Republican pork-barrel spending has increased our long-range national debt, the democrats actually own the fundamental reason for the current financial crisis and all the ramifications thereof … like jobs lost as economy slides into deep recession, and the subsequent hits to the economy the loss of household income cause.

At the foundation of the financial crisis is the democrat secular socialist plan for America, a plan so close to socialism that it may as well be called exactly that. It may sound warm and loving to say all Americans should have a house of their own, but in a free market such ownership in the ‘middle class’ must come with work and savings, income dedicated to a home provided by honorable labor. If the homes are ‘donated’ by coercion, it isn’t a free market, it’s wealth redistribution.

Wealth redistribution under coercion in the mortgage markets is exactly what occurred on a monstrous scale, blossomed into crisis by democrat cash cow institutions called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac … law suits were used to coerce lending institutions to extend sub-prime mortgages to people who had not saved for such a home and who could not afford to pay for such homes unless the cost of everything else in their budget stayed the same or declined to free up income for house payments.

Why did ACORN’s housing operation bring lawsuits, how could suits to force bad loans have any credence? … Democrat originated legislation, hooked to the political correctness mantra of ‘discrimination’ accomplished it. It’s time to shove political correctness down the throat of any con artist trying to use it, at this juncture, but that’s grist for another, later stone.

The Democrat party has arranged for their economic philosophy to infuse its poison in the broadest sense, undermining the Republic at the very basis of our freedom, mutating the tissues of capitalism. The method Democrats have used is hardly ‘compassionate‘ toward the very minorities they used to accomplish the undermining! … It‘s not compassionate or caring to hook families with house payments that are beyond the income of the household, yet that is precisely what the Democrat plan for redistribution has done. It does have one Democrat benefit however, it amplifies class warfare. And Obama is all about exploiting class warfare.

Here is a simple explanation of how the current economic crisis was generated over decades. The idea of mortgages for just below middle class workers was floated in the Carter administration. Legislation allowed the formation of government sponsored funding to purchase and guarantee mortgages which were to be made to wage earners just under the traditional optimal income-to-payment ratios. Limits were set for these government backed funding agencies and the race began, slowly at first, because for the mortgages to be funded they had to first be written by a neighborhood lending institution, then bundled with other more sound mortgages, and sold to larger banking entities who were then encouraged to place these bundles with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

So long as the very close to marginal procedures were maintained, and some local restraint maintained at the start of the lending process, the idea was working, though squeezing the larger banking entities thus tying up some capital in this ‘investment in the working class’ --a sound byte phrase for ‘giving a hand up, to bring more into the middle class‘, a popular modern socialist concept based not on earning a hand up but on being given, as in donated by the ‘richer people in the nation’ under the direction of a political ruling class.

Where the system of marginal mortgages broke down was not that hard to engineer. It appears that the Democrats purposely engineered the failure, planning for it to come under a Republican administration, by blocking the Bush administration and Republican authored congressional regulation of Freddie and Fannie … Democrat congressional operatives (Frank, Waters, Watts, Meeks, Dodd, Schumer, Reid, etc) now at the heart of passing the trillion dollar bailout were the very ones blocking regulatory oversight during the Republican majority (majority but not control of; remember that point, it’s crucial to the lie at the heart of the current Democrat presidential campaign ads against McCain/Palin).

Legislation is written in the House and must pass through the Senate before going to the president for passage into law. The Senate can be stonewalled (filibustered) if there is not a sixty-one vote number out of the 100 senator count to force a bill through … democrats threatened filibuster every one of the sixteen times the Republican administration or Republican majority House and Senate tried to write regulatory change at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Republicans tried to regulate, to stop the socialist bleeding, but Democrats blocked the efforts every time.

The Democrats had reasons to block tightened oversight. Their Democrat operatives at Fannie and Freddie (Johnson, Raines, Gorelick, etc.) were illegally cooking accounting books at Freddie and Fannie, to funnel to themselves hundreds of millions in bonuses, special loans to Democrat legislators, and campaign cash to legislators--with the lion’s share to top Democrat legislators named Dodd and Obama--for achieving funding goals the government sponsored entities funding the risky mortgages had not actually reached. This exponentially increased the risk of collapse on the under collateralized properties lending institutions were being sued into extending mortgages for, beyond the house-buying ratio restraints!

[Here’s an aside to this essay, a morsel of clarifying information: The price of housing in California is a prime example of inflation run amok due to greed and poor income-to-payment ratios. Just as previous bubbles cause inflation across the spectrum of the economy, inflation of housing costs seeps into every aspect of the California economy, bringing that state to the brink of financial collapse, unless the Federal Treasury bails them out, also! The housing bubble was getting too large too fast, inflated in large measure by mortgage backing that was far from safe lending ratios.

We will see in the coming days many diversionary tactics, to try and disconnect the Democrats from the economic crisis their societal engineering has brought about. Don’t be fooled by Democrat spin machines and falsehoods from the Obama campaign. The economic crisis is the result of Democrat economic philosophy, which is socialist and wholly founded in wealth redistribution based on class warfare, not merit of individual accomplishment.

A simple way of describing one difference in socialism and communism is related to redistribution: in socialism, some are allowed to accumulate wealth, but the central authority forces most of the wealth to be collected and redistributed, whereas in communism, all is collected by the central authority and distributed … in communism, it isn’t redistribution because there are no wealthy from whom to take it.]

Democrats are socialist at heart, and they’ve engineered our financial system to function that way in the area of mortgage backed securities now reaching into the trillions of dollars at risk of collapse. If the Democrats take control of the Presidency and retain the House and Senate, the slide into socialism will accelerate, becoming a plummet from which the Republic may never, and in fact could never recover … the very survival of this Republic depends upon changing the current leadership and the current direction of the engine which drives America.

Both candidates for president this cycle offer change. We may be discern quite easily which way change will go under an Obama administration because Barack Obama actually was one of the ACORN lawyers in an extortion lawsuit threatening action against a lender who questioned the risky mortgages. Coerced, the lender buckled under to ACORN demands. Obama, as an extreme liberal in the Democrat party, will take the extreme direction of Democrat philosophy, socialist philosophy of wealth redistribution. A significant number of voters don‘t see a problem with that, sadly.

We may also discern which way reform under a McCain administration will go, since the only capitalist way out of the current engineered financial crisis is to work our way out by opening up the use of our natural resources … and probably our greatest natural resource is the genius of our economic system of capitalism and the abilities to bring to market technologies we can sell to the world as we become energy independent.

Remind yourself that Governor Sarah Palin has been involved in building a natural gas pipeline, to bring vital resource to bear on the energy problem, while Democrats have--because of special interests they depend upon for empowerment--blocked all measures which could lead to energy independence, except the most ‘green’ of all options, which frankly cannot fuel the massive economic engine of our nation, but can cripple the Republic if forced upon the nation--just as risky mortgage business has been forced upon the nation’s lending institutions via Democrat legislation.

The Republican ticket will bring reform to a stagnant economic system because the McCain/Palin ticket plans to work our way out of the economic crisis and energy crisis through wise development of resources, not further credit mismanagement. The trillion dollar credit rescue may have been necessary in the short run, to stave off massive recession and the resulting massive job losses, but in the long run, socialist engineering like the Democrats use will only kill the freedom of America.

We already see where Democrat opposition to using OUR natural resources gets us. Dependence upon foreign energy sources is a recipe for world socialism, but it is also a recipe for disaster, leading to energy wars. You would think Democrats could see this, since they imagined America went to overthrow Saddam Hussein only for Iraqi oil.

It is as if Democrats see what their socialist philosophies will achieve yet they cannot see they are causing the result they claim to abhor! Massive ballooning debt is the ally of Democrat future socialism for America. McCain/Palin planned energy independence is the workout solution to our current economic crisis and the energy crisis stretching out before US.

Friday, October 3, 2008

There is power behind Barack Obama's campaign

There is not a doubt in my old head that demonic powers are loose in our land, that satanic brilliance is at work on Barack Obama's behalf. How can I be so sure? ... Mesmerized crowds are not enough to be sure, but Obama's past behaviors tell us what we need to know.

While in the Illinois legislature, while a member and then chairman of the judicial review committee, Barack Obama worked to block bills which would have extended medical treatment to alive children forced by an abortionist to be born prematurely. When asked about this past work, Barack Obama's campaign--and even he specifically--tried to characterize these efforts as 'seeking to protect Roe v Wade'. [That was the Supreme Court decision allowing abortion in all fifty states, which, when coupled with the soon issued Doe v Bolton ruling, swept away any states' authority to limit abortion killing.]

Why is Barack Obama's effort to protect killing by forced premature birth then neglect of the struggling child so important in understanding the man? ... Because what Obama was seeking to do was protect a particulary demonic way abortionists were killing alive children. And it was a growing national disgrace, as evidenced by the United States Congress eventually passing a bill to stop it!

The forced premature birth then killing by neglect method of terminating pregnancy was becoming popular, particularly in abortuaries where a fetal tissue harvester was working to 'collect' tissues for research programs!

Hearings at which this demonic method of aborting alive babies was discussed focused upon two reasons for the move to abort using this infanticide methodology:

1) the not yet born but very much alive child is not killed in the pregnant female's body then extracted--hopefully getting all the parts--so the abortionists isn't sued for 'malpractice' (odd that, attaching mal to murderers and calling it 'practice');

2) by birthing the preemies at age 18 to 30 weeks then allowing them to struggle and die unattended, alone, the tissues of these just murdered children are more 'pristine for research' ... the methods to slaughter alive children in their mother's womb tend to scald, dismember, or poison the child in order to kill them in utero, and that 'degrades the fetal tissue'.

Think about Barack Obama's pleading when first asked about his work to block Born Alive Infant Protection bills: he stated in so many words that he felt allowing such personhood recognition of these prematurely delivered children would end abortion, then he corrected himself somewhat and stated that allowing these bills to be passed would severely weaken Roe v Wade and perhaps end a woman's right to choose!

What he told us with that pleading was: he is more than willing to defend infanticide--because that's precisely what this method of killing newborns is, infanticide, murder of newborns--as a means to empower himself politically! THAT is demonic. THAT is the overt face of evil in our midst!

Is Barack Obama the anti-christ? ... I would say no, he's not yet powerful enough nor has the world deteriorated sufficiently for him to be 'The' anti-christ. BUT his eager service to evil where it can empower him IS the active, working spirit of anti-christ.

Barack Obama is a very dangerous man and by some unseen influence his zeitgeist is numbing the rational attention of Americans able to vote him into ultimate power over America. Barack Obama's rise to prominence has demonic empowerment written all over it, and the hypnotic effect he has on otherwise rational people is a frightening evidence of the demonic empowerment of this man who is more than willing to protect killing newborn children as but another form of 'a woman's right to choose' ... choose murder of an alive child. [Now where have we read about such demonically inspired behavior, the sacrificing of alive children to a demonic spirit? ... Moloch ring any bells?]

Thursday, October 2, 2008

SCOTUS Nominations Are A Part Of This Election

In twenty years, under democrat control with two replacements on the Supreme Court and thus protection for Roe v Wade, America could slaughter another 20,000,000 of her alive unborn children. The time is NOW to stop this evil. ... Yes, evil!

The kerfuffle of Obama defending the killing of alive just born premature children who survive abortion attempt is being down played by careful misdirection. The truth of what Illinois Senator Obama was protecting is far more demonic.

In the news of late is one Gianna Jessen, in her thirties now, survivor of a saline scalding abortion hired by her mother in order to kill Gianna in her mother's womb then deliver her scalded and burned. Had the abortionist succeeded, the delivered corpse would have been 'less fit' for fetal tissue harvesting. But Gianna's case occurred at a time when the fetal tissue industry was off the radar, though we know it was around because fetal tissues were used in the development of vaccines in use then.

What Senator Obama was seeking to protect was the increasing in popularity form of killing the alive unborn via forced premature birth, then discarding the alive, struggling child to die unattended, alone, to produce more 'pristine' fetal tissues for harvesting by the then (in the nineties) billion dollar tissue industry. The thing Obama was protecting is so evil, it defies credulity. And yet, that method of killing the unborn was becoming a popular way to avoid killing the children in utero, and to delivering more usable fetal tissues for dissection and shipping.

That is the hideous truth of the evil Barack Obama was seeking to protect with his ardent Illinois Senate work to block born alive infant protection bills. As a constitutional law student, he knew the treatment of alive just born preemies didn't endanger Roe v Wade ... he was purposely protecting the killing-by-neglect of born alive infants!

In typical deceitful democrat style, Barack Obama offered as his excuse for this embrace of evil the tired mantra of protecting a woman's right to choose. And the current media fail miserably to call him on even that, much less expose the true depth of the evil he was seeking to protect.

Ask yourself, Catholic brethren, If Senator Barack Obama actually believed he was protecting a woman's right to choose, wasn't he in fact then trying to protect some right he perceived for women to kill alive, born children? Wasn't he in fact seeking to protect infanticide? Of course he was! That is the actual conclusion, but the sycophantic media will not draw public attention to it, so Catholic and Protestant Christians are misdirected and end up embracing a man so twisted that he would defend infanticide for his own political empowerment.

If evil was freshly painted, Barack Obama would have paint on the front and arms of his suit where he has embraced it, wittingly or unwittingly, only time will tell.

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Neglecting premature alive children so they struggle and die alone is an acceptable form of abortion, to Democrats. Didn’t you know?

During a recent discussion over the Barack Obama defense of abortion via forced premature birth then neglect of the alive struggling ‘fetus’ the following exasperated question arose:

"Who could POSSIBLY vote to allow a baby crying out for warmth, touch, food and love to lay on a cold slab and die from lack of ANY ATTENTION!"

The answer? … Any average voting democrat, that's who. Oh, to be sure, they use some form of magic thinking, to convince themselves they are remaining moral as they vote for the ACORN godman ... Like:

… 'the children wouldn't have lived anyway, so letting them die unattended is more merciful than putting out expensive efforts which will prolong the child's suffering' (I've had that one spittled at me recently in fact);

… or 'the mother has a right to reject the thing, it was her tissue mass' (I hoped that one was spittled at me a couple weeks ago more as a liberal‘s effort to make me angry; I don‘t want to believe a soul could be so cold and dead as that, but it was said).

Make no mistake, democrat voters rejecting the truth about Obama’s defense of evil are not rational and they've been trained and herded to remain irrational.

What is not told to We The People is that when Barack’ACORN’Obama was working so hard in Illinois to protect this method of killing alive children by forced premature birth and neglect until they struggle and die, unattended, alone ... that method for killing the alive unborn was becoming a popular way to terminate these children so that they would be more pristine sources for fetal tissue harvesting--a billion dollar industry servicing research programs at the nations medical research centers private and in colleges and universities.

More than a decade ago, a northeastern Senator in the United States Senate exposed the fetal tissue industry, and he was promptly unelected by the northeastern liberals (Bob Smith). Liberals don‘t want to hear the truth. Period.

Another rationalization for the growing popularity of killing by force premature birth and neglect was the rationalization that it reduced the risk to the pregnant female by not having to kill the alive child in utero. THAT truth is carefully avoided by your friendly democrat sycophantic media. That same media is selling We The People a dead-soul man with speaking talent and hundreds of millions of dollars behind him, a man who, because of his deep involvement with ACORN is squarely in the center of why our financial health is on life support.

The Democrat party has been empowering their political capital through defense and careful promotion of abortion, for decades, making them responsible for the slaughter of literally tens of millions of black children! And black democrat voters rationalize that evil and still blindly follow the democrat mantra.

Should we be surprised that Democrats now worship a man who championed a most heinous method for killing the alive unborn with profit attached to it?