Obama is not capable of saving the country, in spite of his hundreds of advisers. You still have to pick which advisers you will listen to.
Or, does he listen to his friends in HAMAS?
Everyone seems willing to forget it was the Clinton administration and the liberals who supported him who said everyone should be able to afford a house, even if they couldn't. I believe everyone should have a roof over their head too, but not necessarily at the expense of everyone else when that person can't afford the mortgage but takes it anyway because the government is willing to overlook the obvious, whether they can afford it or not. There is something to personal responsibility and while I remember that as a virtue of my youth and my own life I don't see where it has been applied to a changing culture which now believes they are entitled to everything everyone else has even if they don't work for it.
I think it is pretty clear by now that Obama's rhetoric won the audience but not the debate. Obama continued his practice of saying whatever the audience wanted to hear, even when it meant flipping his position which he does so many times it becomes impossible to know what he is for or against.
After the debate you could see the confidence returning to Obama. It was obvious today when he spoke to crowds and the audience are just as worked up as any I've ever seen. Just as worked up as they were in Germany when Hitler told the crowds that he was going to solve all their problems.
I will rage on, as the good poem by Dylan says. This is not the end; it is the beginning of our troubles. Obama can't solve the problems we face and he will in my view make them much worse and I'm still convinced he has secret intentions which an ordinarily paranoid America in their fervor for a Messianic figure to lead them is blind to the truth. Obama will not disclose his past. His secret agenda will reveal itself in little changes and I suggest it will happen without those of you who support Obama even realizing what is happening to you - and unfortunately the rest of us too.
Sure he won the town-hall meet with those who like Obamas message, which he can't afford and we can't afford and completely disregards a virtue that has always been a bulwark for America, like personal responsibility.
Sure, McCain is physically damaged but Obama is living a lie, but he was convincing enough to for those who really want to believe in spite of his background and associations - to sell his snake oil to the majority of Americans who will vote for him.
The media is in the tank for Obama. If not the network, at least the spinmesters on those networks.
Chris Matthews who was demoted for being so imbalance-d in favor of Obama and against not just Hillary Clinton but also McCain was at least right when he said the debate was not a game changer for Senator McCain. He said Senator Obama's tenor and appearance was better. Well, what you expect when you use that yardstick. Obama was not tortured and in a Vietnamese prison for almost 6 years. I saw Obama with that smirking smile of his, while Matthews saw it as a smile that seemed to "disarm, even when attacks are ferocious. McCain's smile has a slightly menacing quality which makes you wonder what he's thinking." That is about what we could expect Matthews to say. He uses his subtle manner (sometimes not to subtle) to describe his disdain for John McCain and his admiration for Obama which makes his leg tingle.
Rachel Maddow from Air America and now often seen on MSNBC said "Obama was not looking for a fight, and Sen. McCain was. Both candidates were confident, but McCain seemed edgy, even taking on the moderator Tom Brokaw, and once interjecting while Obama was speaking. It left me with the sense that McCain was swinging and missing." I really dislike this lady. I don't have anything against lesbians but many of them seem to have this need to make up for the discrimination they sense even when not there to attack white men.
Then she takes her turn to take her shot at McCain with, "He may also regret talking about "joking with an old veteran-friend" when he sang "Bomb, bomb Iran," because his campaign later adopted the same Beach Boys song, "Barbara Ann" as a campaign theme song. So if he meant it as a joke, he has a weird way of showing it."
The economy is in a bad way. Sure and it requires collective sacrifices. There was none mentioned by Obama because he is an opportunist who will say anything to win the election and then do anything to destroy America. There won't be good times with his prescription. AND there will not be a safe America.
Nobody has mentioned yet the millions of dollars; I mean millions which have been given to the Obama campaign from foreign sources who he refuses to identify, but which have been identified as terrorists. Don't believe it? Pull your head out of the sane and see who receives more money from lobbyists, McCain or Obama. Obama does. See who is receiving contributions from HAMAS. Obama is.
For some of you this may be old news. It needs to be repeated over and over again until somebody in the mainstream media grows a backbone and follows up.
In 2007 a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission identified millions of dollars contributed to the Obama campaign from two Palestinian brothers in the HAMAS controlled Gaza Strip. The amount that was collected from them was $29,521.54. There may have been more, much more, because contributions are small in an attempt to keep them under the radar.
These donations are a violation of federal election laws. There are specific prohibitions against accepting more than $2,300 from individuals in a single election. But violations of the law aside, there is the problem of who the contributions came from and why Obama has this kind of support in the first place. In the second place, what is promised for those contributions and we all know there have been many others including even this one, there being other contributions not accounted for because they fell under the amount which is considered acceptable besides the fact, also illegal, that they were foreign contributions. Is there any doubt what is intended just by the nature of these gifts?
In addition to all of the above, what about Barack Obama campaigns donation forms which are online and permit foreign contributions, which are problematic in their own right. Is Barack Obama a foreign agent? An agent of a foreign government or organization? The appearance of impropriety are so obvious that only those totally oblivious to reality can let it pass.
Pamela at Atlas Shrugs was the first to expose these donations in 2007 to the Obama campaign from Monir Edwan and Hosam Edwan which totaled $29,521.54. The Edwans listed their street as "Tal Esaltan" and their address as Rafah, Georgia. There is no Rafah, Ga. Pamela correctly linked the donation to Rafah in the Gaza Strip which is HAMAS controlled. The link is obvious. This is a HAMAS donation. And there should be an obvious assumption too that Obama is beholden, if not also a member of HAMAS or other terrorists.
There is more. The donations are listed in FEC fillings and were also listed at filing sites, Donor and Campaign Money.
The contributions break down into 20 donations from Monir of from $717 to $2017.50 in October to November 2007. Those contributions totaled: $24,321.41. His brother made seven donations from $508.63 to $1725.96, which totaling $5,200.13, during October, 2007. Those were the obvious ones; they were found without too much trouble - but what about all the other donations which have not been denoted yet? Obama continues to refuse to provide detailed information - not just about his contributions, but there is no record; NONE of his school transcripts, any list of friends from school, grades and any thesis he may have written EVERY and nothing apparently was ever written by him for the Harvard Law Review. How does anyone become an editor of a prestigious law review and not write even one article? It is too strange and incredible.
As for those two brothers who made the almost 30 million contributions, it can be assumed with certainty that there were more and from others. YET, the media still refuses to back up these investigations or even do their own. It is left to individual bloggers and people like Pamela at Atlas Shrugs to get at the truth. You have to ask, "who else is in bed with Obama?" (besides Larry Sinclair, that is?)
The extent of American myopia and willingness to be scammed is incredible. Obama isn't talking. It is a secret. How do you hide half of $426.9 million dollars in contributions?
"More than half of the whopping $426.9 million Barack Obama has raised has come from small donors whose names the Obama campaign won't disclose." (Ken Timmerman - [Sept 29, 2008] Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign - http://www.newsmax.com)
"And questions have arisen about millions more in foreign donations the Obama campaign has received that apparently have not been vetted as legitimate." (ibid)
Obama raised twice the money McCain raised. It is deja vue. It happened with Hillary. AND he spends 4 and 5 times as much. And he spins these lies which liberals and young people and even others are too detached or too hopeful to not want to believe him. It is spin. It is all a lie. Obama is a liar.
It is no wonder Obama has been able to spend more. He changed his position on public funds and half of millions of dollars are coming to him from organizations like HAMAS. Is this the man you want to be your president?
Are any of you that foolish?
"Unlike the McCain campaign, which has made its complete donor database available online, the Obama campaign has not identified donors for nearly half the amount he has raised, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). [NewsMax]
How does Obama do it? His campaign bundles money. I have written about this before. The money is kept at a minimum where federal law does not require the campaigns to identify donors. He should anyway. McCain does, but it is obvious why Obama won't identify his donors. Not when most of them are subversive and members of U.S. declared terrorist organizations.
NOT surprisingly, the MAJORITY of Obama donors never break the $200 threshold so he doesn't have to identify them. I think you can see why that is a bad law. And those contributions that come under the $200 even though aggregated per person at higher amount don't get listed, according to Bob Biersack who is a spokesman for the FEC. Those amounts don't appear anywhere. There is no way to account for them which is exactly what Obama wants. It is a scam and we are being scammed.
"The FEC breakdown of the Obama campaign has identified a staggering $222.7 million as coming from contributions of $200 or less. Only $39.6 million of that amount comes from donors the Obama campaign has identified." (NewsMax)
"Under campaign finance laws, an individual can donate $2,300 to a candidate for federal office in both the primary and general election, for a total of $4,600. If a donor has topped the limit in the primary, the campaign can redesignate the contribution to the general election on its books." (NewsMax)
What would you think if Obama received 1,000 separate contributions from a Mr Good Will - all or most of of them for only $25.? By the way, Good Will is from Austin, Texas and lists his employer as "Loving" and he listed his profession as "You". Another contributor was Mr Doodad and the donations totaled 786 contributions. There are plenty more like this. These are not unusual in the Obama campaign. Is there any doubt what these are?
"The FEC has compiled a separate database of potentially questionable overseas donations that contains more than 11,500 contributions totaling $33.8 million. More than 520 listed their state as IR, which the FEC often uses as an abbreviation for "information requested." Another 63 listed it as UK, the United Kingdom." (NewsMax)
And many came in as identified from Addis Ababa, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Fallujah, etc. Some came in from North Korea and some from the Islamic Republic of Iran. These are not intentionally being lax. This is fraud and Obama continues to fund his campaign with money from terrorists.
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs (October 7, 2008) wrote:
"Half a million dollars had been donated from overseas by unidentified people "not employed" ... Digging deeper, all sorts of very bizarre activity jumped at us. Dr and JJ continued to break it down and pull data from various sources. We found Rebecca Kurth contributed $3,137.38 to the Obama Campaign in 112 donations, including 34 separate donations recorded in one day, How about this gibberish donor on the 30th of April in 2008. A donor named Hbkjb, jkbkj City: Jkbjnj Works for: Kuman Bank (doesn't exist) Occupation: Balanon Jalalan Amount: $1,077.23 or the donor Doodad, The # of transactions = 1,044 The $ contributed = $10,780.00"
"This Doodad character works for FDGFDGF and occupation is DFGFDG The more questions we answered the more questions we discovered. Thousands of Obama's foreign donations ended in cents. The "cents" did not make sense. And we compared McCain donation documents to Obama's. McCain's records are nothing like Obama's. McCain's are so clean. No cents, all even dollar amounts. But Obama's contained thousands of strange, odd amounts -- evidence of foreign contributors, since Americans living overseas would almost uniformly be able to contribute dollars. Still no media." (Pamela Geller)
"Julia Gorin told me a funny story two months ago. Her husband's co-worker wanted to see what would happen if he tried giving a contribution to the Obama campaign via a credit card. He used his Macy's card. The system accepted it. He tried the same with McCain's campaign, and the transaction wouldn't go through. Now, obviously, down the line, the Obama transaction would fail as well, but it goes to the point that there is no safety system in place -- it'll just accept any and all money, which helps explain how his campaign raised so much more money than everyone else's." (Geller)
"Despite the evidence of dirty campaign donations, crickets chirped in news-rooms across the country. The moment my Gaza story started to get some chatter on talk radio, the left and their supplicant handmaidens in the media sprang into action and created a McCain illegal campaign contribution "scandal." The Washington Post published an inaccurate allegation and then retracted not a day later, at the risk of looking stupid. They are jeopardizing the little credibility that they have left." (Geller)
Obama's contributions are the LARGEST pool of UNIDENTIFIED MONEY to ever come into a U.S. election. So much for the McCain-Feingold campaign election reforms. Obama has subverted the process. The only question you should ask yourself is why would anyone do that? And the answer should be as obvious as the nose on your face.
Hank Roth
###
Excerpts provided here are pursuant to the Fair
Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes per
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
Copyright Law.
Today is Saturday March 13, 2010
