The day’s top political news:
FOX-TV CHICAGO ORDERED NOT TO RUN ANTI-OLYMPICS STORY
A local TV station that reported on Chicagoans NOT wanting the Olympics has been told NOT to run the report again, insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT!
The Chicago Olympic Committee told FOX Chicago that its broadcast "would harm Chicago's chances" to be awarded the games. The station's news director ordered staff to hold fire after the report aired once last Thursday morning, claims a source.
Obama and wife Michelle are reported preparing to make personal appeals to Olympic officials on behalf of Chicago. How dare real news operations report dissent. It’s another “Obama Moment”.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashocc.htm
Support for Obama’s Health Care Plan Hits New Low
Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats…down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% are opposed to the plan.
Senior citizens are less supportive of the plan than younger voters … just 33% of seniors favor the plan while 59% are opposed. The intensity gap among seniors is significant. Only 16% of the over-65 crowd Strongly Favors the legislation while 46% are Strongly Opposed. Really bad news for AARP which supports the Obama plan.
Liberal Democrats seek health-care access for illegals
Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access.
The Democrats, trying to stiffen their party's spines on the contentious issue, say it's unfair to bar illegal immigrants from paying their own way in a government-sponsored exchange.
Obviously Obama and House Democrats owe Congressman Wilson a heart-felt apology. Obama DID lie when he claimed his health care scheme would not fund illegal aliens.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/28/liberals-seek-health-care-access-for-illegals/
Opinion:
Obama wants children in school longer
Obama has taken another sharp turn away from closely held values of normal America. He know wants to prolong the school year. This, of course, will have an effect of destroying the American practice of using the summer months as prime family time.
Summer is a time of family vacations. A time in which many families go off to destinations at the beach or in the mountains. It’s an important time for bonding for most American families.
My own family operated that way. My father was a college professor, so after taking University of Georgia forestry students to a nine week camp during which they tramped the woods surveying property lines and determining the timber values, we headed off some where like to the beach, or to visit relatives in New Mexico.
They were great times I treasures still.
Most American families have similar experiences. But Obama did not.
Obama was denied a normal family life. His mother developed a disdain and hatred for this country – especially for American men. She found comfort with men of backgrounds – a former Mau Mau terror member from Kenya, then an Indonesian man.
Obama was thus trundled around without the sort of anchor most of us enjoy and treasure. There had to be problems with feelings of security and stability. Obama just doesn’t view many things the same way most of us do.
There’s nothing wrong with that, of course, unless that experience – or lack thereof – leads to actions that impose such misconceptions on others. Obama’s longer school year does precisely that.
I admit I may not fully understand or appreciate the details of Obama’s early life. I have no opportunity to make other judgments. Obama’s handlers have worked overtime and spent huge sums in legal fees, to prevent his having to come clean on details of his early life.
We DO know young Obama’s mentor in Hawaii was a Frank Marshall Davis – an avowed member of the Communist Party – dispatched to Hawaii by his party with orders to recruit members and create a Communist cell on our 50th State. Hardly an experience most Americans faced – and we all pray Frank Marshall Davis was a miserable failure in carrying out his mission from The Party.
Obama’s young life is more that of a South Asian youngster than of any normal American. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, by any means. However, it does rob Obama of viable insight, knowledge, and appreciation for customs and observances of most American families.
So Obama doesn’t appreciate what his longer school year may do to further erode American families. He should be able to calculate the damage such an edict would do to small businesses – especially those of the travel and hospitality industry.
Since I now reside in Panama City, Florida, I have a particular appreciation for the resort industry and the economic impact vacationers bring. We even profit from Canadians who flood areas such as this in search of real health care and medical attention their own system refuses to provide them at home.
You know – the same sort of health care system Obama is working day and night to impose on American families.
Once again, he fails to understand the negative impact his version of health care will have on American families and our futures.
Buddy
The day’s top blogs:
1.
http://washingtontimes.com/staff/washington-times/
Transparency! No, you can't read the legislation!:
EDITORIAL: No, you can't read the legislation
Democrats try to sneak through unexamined health bills
At the president's pleasure
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Democrats don't want lawmakers to know what's in health care legislation before Congress votes on it. President Obama and Democratic leaders apparently recognize their chances of ramming through a vote are hurt if members of Congress actually have a chance to read the bills.
On Wednesday, Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee killed a Republican amendment to Chairman Max Baucus' health care proposal that would require a three-day waiting period between when the bill is completed and a committee vote could be held. This short waiting period would allow panel members time to examine the actual legislative language and full cost of the Baucus bill before voting on it. This is important for a tax-heavy bill that - when combined with other existing legislation - could nationalize as much as 10 percent of the U.S. economy.
(NOTE: The audacity of Republicans demanding they be allowed time to read bills on which they are asked to vote by Democrats who control things on Capitol Hll!!!. Rushing bills through has become an Obama tactic – avoiding due analysis and understanding of what liberals are attempting to impose. They know the Democrat legislation cannot stand the light of day. Nuff said.)
House Republicans have introduced a measure that would require the final version of all nonemergency legislation to be posted online 72 hours prior to any floor vote. This would be a valuable reform, but few Democrats will have the courage to buck House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and provide the support needed to ensure members actually have the chance to know what they are voting on. Mrs. Pelosi promised a 48-hour waiting period before a vote on the $787 billion stimulus package but didn't deliver. We wouldn't be surprised to see similar shenanigans this time around.
When major legislation is completed, it is the result of negotiations that can be years in the making, with many last-minute changes. Hundreds of pages can get jammed into bills in the middle of the night with only a few staffers knowing what's in them. Having a few days to digest the information should be mandatory.
The president and the Democratic majority in Congress have put their prestige on the line with the government health care proposals. Back in 2004, then-Sen. Barack Obama complained about the federal budget and the Patriot Act not being read before passage. That's an inconvenient truth for the president now that he is in charge and his party can benefit from laws being passed unseen.
2.
http://townhall.com/columnists/CarolineGlick/2009/09/21/our_irredeemable_international_system?page=full
Our Irredeemable International System-- The UN
Caroline Glick
Our international institutions are irredeemably corrupted. From the United Nations to the International Criminal Court and their affiliate and subordinate bodies, these institutions are rotten at their core.
It isn't that they don't function. They function just fine. The problem is that through their regular functioning, they advance goals antithetical to those they were established to achieve.
Instead of promoting global security, human rights, freedom and international peace, they facilitate war and aggression, human suffering and tyranny.
(NOTE: The UN record – when not conducted with US and allied troops to control things – has often become a part of the problem – not a solution. In fact, UN actions have a record that should generate massive outrage – especially from our own media. Need I explain how our “mainstream” media has chosen to become corrupted and ignore fact and truth?”
The UN General Assembly is now convening its 64th session. As they do every year, heads of state from across the globe are descending on the Big Apple to participate in the proceedings. As they convene, their agenda will demonstrate the failings of the UN. On the one hand, they will consider the UN Human Rights Council's latest broadside against Israel, which comes this week in the form of the UNHRC's 575-page report of its probe of Israel's behavior in its military campaign against the Hamas terror regime in Gaza this past December and January.
On the other hand, they will not give the slightest consideration to the fact that Iran is about to become a nuclear power, in contempt of its international obligations, and so is poised to become the gravest threat to international security in the past 25 years. Moreover, they will pay no attention to the fact that as it sprints toward the nuclear finishing line, the Iranian regime is engaged in a systematic and brutal repression of its political opponents, who since the stolen June 12 presidential election have been clamoring for freedom and democracy.
Both in its treatment of Israel and in its treatment of the Iranian regime, the UN demonstrates that its practices are an inversion of its stated mission.
Despite its leaders' and supporters' repeated claims to the contrary, the UN stands shoulder to shoulder with tyrants and aggressors against democrats and democracies seeking to advance the causes of freedom, human rights and international security.
MANY ISRAELIS reacted angrily to the UNHRC's probe of Israel's prosecution of Operation Cast Lead, claiming that its final report presents Israel - a liberal democracy - as the moral equivalent of Hamas - an illegal terrorist organization dedicated to the commission of genocide against Israelis.
Yet in their anger, they missed the real problem with the report.
As Prof. Avi Bell from Bar Ilan University law school notes, Richard Goldstone's report does not present Israel and Hamas as moral equivalents. Rather, it presents Israel as terrorist and Hamas as a legitimate government.
The Goldstone Report does not accept as fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization and that consequently, in accordance with binding UN Security Council resolutions, all UN member states are required to work to disband it and give no quarter to its members and supporters. Instead it treats Hamas - which is charter-bound to a policy of genocide against Jews and rose to power through a campaign of murder and intimidation - as the legitimate governing authority in Gaza, which, the report's authors irrationally claim, is simultaneously governed by an Israeli occupation four years after Israel withdrew its civilians and military forces from the area. In the UNHRC's parallel universe, Hamas is the only lawful actor in town. Israel - and the Palestinian Authority under Fatah - are guilty of illegally persecuting Hamas by arresting its members.
Hamas, which is working to establish a terrorist Islamic theocracy in Gaza, is not seen as systematically violating human rights and freedom. Israel is. Since it downplayed the 12,000 rockets, mortars and missiles that Hamas and its terror affiliates in Gaza have shelled southern Israel with during the eight years preceding Operation Cast Lead, the Goldstone Commission was unable to understand the overwhelming popularity the operation enjoyed among the Israeli public. Consequently, their report attributed that public support to Israel's abrogation of the civil liberties of the operation's opponents.
In contrast, the Goldstone Report downplays the importance of Hamas's systematic persecution of women, Christians and its political opponents.
And so it goes. For 575 pages, rather than promote the cause of human rights as one would expect from the UN's Human Rights Council, the Goldstone Report promotes a fiction of Israeli criminality and Hamas victimization. That is, it promotes the cause of human rights abusers against human rights defenders.
Many Israelis have expressed disgust with Goldstone, a South African Jew who purports to "love Israel."
This is a reasonable reaction, for Goldstone indeed disgraced himself by leading this commission. But the fact is that the report would have drawn the same conclusions based on the same lies regardless of who led the commission. By its very nature, the UNHRC is incapable of doing anything else.
Like the UN itself, it is a body dominated by dictatorships and supported by leftist elites who love them. Its political agenda, of supporting dictatorships on the one hand and attacking Israel on the other, is indistinguishable from that of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
THEN THERE is Iran. Before he flies to New York for his annual visit, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad intends to finish off his political opponents back home.
Friday is Jerusalem Day in Iran. Jerusalem Day is the day the regime organizes mass demonstrations throughout the country calling for Israel's destruction. The regime's democratic opponents, who since the stolen June 12 election have been doggedly maintaining their protests against Ahmadinejad, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the police state they run, are planning to use the day to stage renewed protests.
Aware of their intention, Khamenei warned that anyone demonstrating for anything other than Israel's destruction will be severely punished. Reports abound of the regime's plan to use the day to arrest opposition leaders Mir Hossain Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi, who both ran against Ahmadinejad in June.
Friday would be a good day to arrest them. After all, now that the US has agreed to hold negotiations with Ahmadinejad's representatives next month about whatever Iran would like to discuss, the Americans have lost any residual leverage they still held over Iran. Today it is Ahmadinejad, not the US or the UN Security Council, who sets the agendas and conditions for meetings. And Ahmadinejad can be certain that in light of this, no one will utter a peep if on the eve of his trip to America, he arrests or even murders his chief political opponents.
In the weeks following the election, before the regime began its crackdown and arrested, killed, tortured and raped thousands of its opponents, many of the demonstrators held signs demanding to know where the UN was.
Why, they wished to know, was no one at the UN supporting them in their demands for democracy and human rights? Why was there no international community standing at their side as they sought to bring down the most dangerous regime on earth - a regime that has made genocide a strategic goal and is steadily working to acquire the means to commit genocide through nuclear war even as it murders its own people?
And that's the thing of it. The same UN that appoints a new commission to criminalize Israel seemingly on a weekly basis, has been a major facilitator of Iran's nuclear weapons program.
First, for three years, from 2003 until 2005, the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency ignored mountains of evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and refused to refer the issue to the Security Council. Then, after the IAEA finally referred the issue to it, the Security Council failed to pass anything but the mildest of sanctions against Iran. Worse than doing nothing to prevent Teheran from acquiring nuclear weapons, these Security Council sanctions actually facilitated the Iranian program. While passing ineffective sanctions, the council gave the appearance of addressing the issue and so made it impossible for individual states to convince other states to adopt harsher, and perhaps more effective measures - like for instance cutting off trade with Iran or divesting from companies that trade with Iran - outside the Security Council.
DUE TO the UN's unvarnished belligerence toward it, in recent years a consensus has formed in Israel that there is nothing to be gained from cooperating with this openly and dangerously hostile body.
Reflecting this consensus, Israel's leaders, from former prime minister Ehud Olmert to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to President Shimon Peres, are united in their condemnation of the Goldstone Report.
For a time during president George W. Bush's first term in office, the US also recognized that the UN and the UN-based international system is irredeemably corrupt. Bush and his senior advisers spoke of the need to build international coalitions of willing governments to advance the causes of international security, human rights and freedom that the UN and its affiliated bodies are inherently incapable of advancing.
Although this policy received public support at home, it provoked fierce opposition among the US foreign policy elites in Washington and in the media and among their allies on the political Left.
Due to their criticism, by his second term in office, Bush agreed to give the UN a leading role in dictating US foreign policy. He subordinated American policy to the Security Council on the issue of Iran's nuclear weapons program and cooperated with the UN as it advanced its openly anti-Israel agenda, even increasing US funding of such anti-Israel groups as UNRWA.
Bush's eventual surrender to the establishment set the course for what under President Barack Obama has become a cornerstone of US foreign policy.
Unlike Bush, Obama has enthusiastically embraced the notion that the UN should by rights have a leading role in international affairs. He has also accepted the UN's basic notion that in the interest of world peace, the US and its democratic allies should bow to the desires of despots and dictators.
So it is that this week he abandoned US allies Poland and the Czech Republic in his bid to appease Russia. So it is that his administration has sided with ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya, who, with the support of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, sought to undermine Honduran democracy against Honduras's lawful government and democratic defenders. So it is that the administration has sided with the genocidal mullahs in Teheran over their democratic opponents. So it is that the administration has adopted the view that Israel is to blame for the absence of peace in the Middle East and embraced as legitimate political actors Palestinian terror groups that refuse to accept Israel's right to exist.
Until Obama came along, Israel could afford not to make too much of the fact that its enemies control the UN-led system of international institutions, because it could trust that the US would use its Security Council veto to prevent these forces from causing it any real harm.
This is no longer the case. With the Obama administration fully on board the UN agenda, Israel and other threatened democracies like Honduras, Poland, the Czech Republic, South Korea and Japan will have to loudly proclaim the UN-based international system's inherent moral, political and legal corruption and seek ways to undermine and weaken its power.
3.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/09/andersen_book_blows_ayers_cove.html
Andersen Book Blows Ayers' Cover on 'Dreams' (updated)
Jack Cashill
In his new book, "Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage," Best-selling celebrity journalist, Christopher Andersen, has blown a huge hole in the Obama genius myth without intending to do so.
Relying on inside sources, quite possibly Michelle Obama herself, Andersen describes how Dreams came to be published -- just as I had envisioned it in my articles on the authorship of Dreams. With the deadline pressing, Michelle recommended that Barack seek advice from "his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers."
(NOTE: Of course, Obama claimed during the campaign that Ayers was only “some guy in the neighborhood”. Actually, Ayers is a committed terrorist who hasn’t the slightest regret for what he did. There’s no wonder Obama sees nothing wrong with terrorism per se – his own father was a member of the Mau Mau terror group back in Kenya – a terror movement that slaughtered at least 3,000 people.)
To flesh out his family history, Obama had taped interviews with various family members. Andersen writes, "These oral histories, along with a partial manuscript and a truckload of notes, were given to Ayers." Andersen quotes a Hyde Park neighbor, "Everyone knew they were friends and that they worked on various projects together. It was no secret. Why would it be? People liked them both."
Andersen continues, "In the end, Ayers's contribution to Barack's Dreams From My Father would be significant--so much so that the book's language, oddly specific references, literary devices, and themes would bear a jarring similarity to Ayers's own writing."
More to come!
"We DO know young Obama’s mentor in Hawaii was a Frank Marshall Davis – an avowed member of the Communist Party – dispatched to Hawaii by his party with orders to recruit members and create a Communist cell on our 50th State."
How do we "know" this? Speculation is not knowledge. Obama denies Davis was his mentor. Davis was a closet CPUSA member, not an "avowed" member.
Although Obama's book indicates "Frank" was a family friend who offered him advice on racial issues, Obama wrote that Davis "fell short" and his views were "incurable." Obama did not even visit Davis for three years before going to college. Obama's book, itself, proves that Obama did not consider Davis to be a "wise and trusted counselor," which is the definition of "mentor." By what creative definition can Davis be considered his "mentor"?
Do you have any primary source evidence that he was "dispatched to Hawaii by his party with orders to recruit members and create a Communist cell on our 50th State"? Do you have evidence (not speculation) to support these other claims?
BTW: As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I am researching political disinformation. I am familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory's misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat this century.
This disinformation fits the pattern epitomized by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. Relying on unsubstantiated claims of mentorship to implicate Obama makes no more sense than relying on Curveball's unsubstantiated claims of mobile weapons labs to implicate Iraq.
Posted by: Kaleokualoha | September 28, 2009 at 04:45 PM
The only evidence that Davis was actually a member of the CPUSA comes from Professor Edgar Tidwell. Although “I'm hardly interested in proving my research to Kincaid or any of those whose work is a travesty to scholarship," University of Kansas Professor Edgar Tidwell, whom AIM's Cliff Kincaid cites as "an expert on the life and writings of Davis," dismisses misrepresentation of Davis's influence in one simple paragraph:
"Although my research indicates that Davis joined the CPUSA as a "closet member" during World War II, there is no evidence that he was a Stalinist, or even a Party member before WWII. Further, to those attempting to make the specious stand for the concrete, there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology. Frank Marshall Davis did NOT believe in overthrowing the USA. He was committed to what the nation professed to be. For him, communism was primarily an intellectual vehicle to achieve a political end-a possible tool for gaining the constitutional freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL Americans"
This misrepresentation of Frank as Obama's mentor was only the first deceptive step in building a house of cards against Obama. Then, by misrepresenting "Frank" as a virtual Dr. Frank-enstein who created a Marxist Obama, opponents may have thought they had a silver bullet. After all, who would bother to defend an obscure dead black poet? The Dead Poets Society?
It is indeed regrettable that so many honest people have been hoodwinked by a skillful disinformation campaign led by Kincaid's ironically named "Accuracy In Media" (AIM). Fraudulent memes, unwittingly propagated by well-intentioned bloggers, have spread throughout the blogosphere, which proves the effectiveness of viral disinformation campaigns. Even the title of Kincaid's initial attack, "Obama's Communist Mentor," is itself a masterful deception. Through the "fallacy of equivocation," it implies three enduring falsehoods:
- That Davis was an avowed or known communist who advocated collectivist principles. The evidence, however, indicates that Davis was a closet communist who never advocated communism.
- That Davis had a continuing mentorship with teenage Obama, "almost like a son." The evidence, however indicates that Davis was an occasionally visited family friend whom Obama did not even see for three years before college.
- That Davis taught communism to young Obama. The evidence, however, indicates that although Davis offered advice on racial issues, Obama did not even trust that advice.
(The "fallacy of equivocation" is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense, by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time. It occurs when an equivocal word or phrase makes an unsound argument appear sound.)
Through innuendo, half-truths and outright fabrication, Obama’s opponents have deliberately misrepresented a casual family friendship as sordid political indoctrination sessions or worse. In their fervor to malign Obama, they sought to transform the legacy of a relatively obscure leftist poet into a “Stalinist agent” who corrupted Obama’s values. Slander and libel were their tools of the trade, because truth was no obstacle. Destroying Davis’s reputation was collateral damage.
For example, another piece in AIM's web of lies is the post "Obama's Red Mentor Praised Red Army" (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-praised-red-army/). This is a double deception because it contains a half-truth built on the falsehood of mentorship. It is a half-truth because Cliff Kincaid neglects to mention that during WWII many Americans, including President Roosevelt, praised the Red Army. The Soviet Union was our ALLY (see http://books.google.com/books?id=kjDwCkg1HB8C&pg=PA120&lpg=PA120&dq=fdr+praise+red+army&source=bl&ots=ooSzuhMGDr&sig=1v2SJsWam4pjFWNqC0BuGduOIAY&hl=en&ei=ilksSpvUN5ayMJ2_5dsJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6). Praising your allies is the NORM for leaders during wartime!
(A half-truth comes in several forms, and is a deceptive statement that includes some element of truth. The purpose and or consequence of a half truth is to make something that is really only a belief appear to be knowledge, or a truthful statement to represent the whole truth, or possibly lead to a false conclusion.)
The AIM disinformation campaign consisted of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that "His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin" (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid's falsehoods is posted as "specific misrepresentation" at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX. I invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against his body of lies. If he had authentic evidence of Davis's radical influence, he would not need to fabricate such evidence.
Posted by: Kaleokualoha | September 28, 2009 at 05:43 PM
You may be interestede in this cordial exchange between myself and Max Friedman, Cliff Kincaid's researcher: http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/05/31/judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-singing-sensation-susan-boyle/#comment-13017.
Only the last group of comments pertain to this situation. Please note that Max agreed to follow through with Cliff Kincaid regarding the specific misrepresentation I had identified in June. Not a peep was heard from him since then.
Posted by: Kaleokualoha | September 28, 2009 at 05:50 PM