Hillary Wins Four Pinnochios from the Washington Post.

Remember Al Gore inventing the internet? John Kerry claiming he was some kind of sharpshooting Rambo? Bill Clinton saying he wandered the streets of Harlem, worrying about the troubles of black folk? Obama saying he never heard Wright's racist comments, in twenty years of sermons?

Then there were Hillary's claims of being named for Sir Edmond Hillary, only later to learn he was not yet famous, and had yet to scale Everest or be knighted when she was born.

Hillary does it again. You have to see this to believe it.

This is shorter, and more fun.

I think I'm going to like this fact checker site....

When Will Obama Drop the "Vague Generalities"?

Why is Barry Obama's campaign rhetoric so vague?

In seventh grade we used a Social Studies text that talked about the problem of "vague generalities." Politicians love to tickle your ears and avoid the details. But none so much as the-lawyer-formerly-known-as-"Barry" Obama.

I read an article today in which an Obama defender actually argued that his campaign is vague because he's waiting to hear from the people about what kind of "change" they want most. Wrong.

His campaign is vague because he is running as another utopian messiah, promising every buzzword of 60s-Marxist radicalism: "Change," "Hope," "A New America," "We Are the Change We Seek," "Power to the People," "Equality of Opportunity," "Equality of Condition," "Free to Be Me," "Unity," "Hope You Can Believe In," and on and on it goes.

Such a candidate must remain vague as long as possible; once he becomes real, and takes unpopular positions, he will be unable to represent everyone, to be the "I'm Every Woman"--(and Man)--candidate.

Such a candidate, once elected, will find his efforts to bring about utopia through the law thwarted. Utopias are always thwarted. And the thwarters are never tolerated. Marx believed in a Utopia. So did Stalin. Ditto Chairman Mao and Pol Pot.

Insist on concete language from the Messiah of the Secular Humanist Party. The vague promises he offers at present are at best illusory, at worst, grist for the mill that grinds up human lives.

Obama's rhetoric is dangerous.

...Not to mention is lack of discernment in choosing advisors and mentors. And then there's his honesty. Oh, and the fact that he claims to speak for both whites and blacks, because after all, he is one. (Two?)

Obama and Black Nationalism

Investor's Business Daily does it again.

White House challengers such as Clinton think Obama's childhood brushes with Islam will make Americans nervous. But it's his adult conversion to black nationalism and socialism that makes this otherwise attractive minority candidate unfortunately so unattractive.

Read more.

Reagan on Obama

Michael Reagan on Obama's race speech: It was brilliant oratory, but....

Nobody expected him to declare Wright anathema and cast him into the outer darkness where there is weeping and wailing and the gnashing of teeth -- one simply doesn't do to that sort of thing to a longtime friend, benefactor and mentor even if he has been shown to have slipped the rails time after time.

What was not expected was Barack H. Obama's use of a litany of America's past racist offenses to justify not only Wright's blatant hatred of white America but his suggestion that it was a sentiment shared by most African Americans. And that is simply not true.

Nor was it true, as Obama charged, that the Reagan coalition was created out of white resentment for affirmative action or forced busing. He charged that "anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime. talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse
racism."

Poppycock! These are not only outright falsehoods, but echoes of what Obama learned at the feet of Jeremiah Wright and now preaches as his own beliefs. He learned his lessons well. When he suggested that my father's coalition was based on anger over affirmative action and welfare he was peddling blatant falsehood as egregious in its falsity as Wright's charge that whites created AIDS to wipe out the black population.

And These Are the Kinds of Men Obama Chooses for His Advisors?

David Horowitz sees the end of the Obamanon phenomenon:

Barack Obama said that he could not disown his white-hating, Jew-hating, America-hating Pastor Jeremiah Wright because that would be the same as disowning the black community. Imagine a white politician saying he couldn't disown David Duke because that would be disowning the white community, and you will understand how utterly Obama has unmasked himself and why he now will never be a unifying candidate that all Americans can trust. This is the end of the Obama phenomenon....

Jeremiah Wright is a prophet of bigotry and hate. Barack Obama is a presidential candidate who will not repudiate bigotry if it comes in a black skin.

Mikhail Gorbachev a Christian?

Remember the 20th Century's most important revolution? The sea-change accomplished without a single shot fired?

What President Reagan suspected long ago, has finally been confirmed: the last head of the USSR, the man God used (whether Gorby liked it or not) to topple the brutal, atheist empire and bring freedom and light to millions, may have been a believer all along.


The Lord works in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform.

Barack Obama and David Duke

I wonder if David Duke took his daughters to the meetings?

Just curious.

Obama Denounces . . . DON IMUS?!

Obama says Don Imus was wrong.

He mentions his daughters---that somehow they could be hurt by Imus.

What about the damage Obama has done by dragging them to the Church of Holy Hatred for twenty years? And how can Obama admire a man whose every sermon blasts the race of Obama's mother? I thought you weren't supposed to let people insult your mother?

And if I am 100% guilty for the sins of my ancestors, doesn't that make B. Hussein Obama at least 50% guilty of those same sins?

Watch this.

Kudos to David Mamet

Here's an article that will bless your soul. (But beware the language.)

Every day I think about the liberal worldview and how best to address it. I struggle to reduce conservatism and liberalism to their few and most fundamental principles (private property is sacrosanct, free markets = better and cheaper products, power corrupts and must be held in check, etc.).

Now here's a liberal who unwittingly seems to have worked out the same equations--and of course, he misplaced his liberalism along the way. He begins by stating his most obvious liberal beliefs: People are all basically good, but the world is corrupt, you can't trust the government, or business, or the military, everything is always wrong.

But in my life, a brief review revealed, everything was not always wrong, and neither was nor is always wrong in the community in which I live, or in my country. Further, it was not always wrong in previous communities in which I lived, and among the various and mobile classes of which I was at various times a part.

Click here to read more.

Prostitution a Victimless Crime?

Pontificating on Eliot Spitzer, Nora Ephron explained that prostitution is a victimless crime. She must be among those who consider it a willing exchange of goods and services between equally sophisticated parties, a negotiated arm's-length transaction, or perhaps the consummation of a "personal services contract."

This webpage has a good article and cites scientific research.

To believe prostitution has no victims, one must ignore these statistics published in Farley's Fact Sheet:

78 percent of 55 women who sought help from the Council for Prostitution Alternatives in 1991 reported being raped an average of 16 times a year by pimps, and were raped 33 times a year by johns.

62 percent reported having been raped in prostitution.

73 percent reported having experienced physical assault in prostitution.

72 percent were currently or formerly homeless.

92 percent stated that they wanted to escape prostitution immediately.

83 percent of prostitutes are victims of assault with a weapon.

75 percent of women in escort prostitution had attempted suicide.

67 percent meet diagnostic criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

In short, the victims of prostitution are mostly the prostitutes themselves. It just may be that they no longer have the ability left to "consent" to be a willing participant in their so-called victimless crime.

*I would push for one change: the buyers should always be prosecuted along with the sellers, regardless of the purpose the investigation.

*Alec Baldwin (OF ALL PEOPLE) agrees that prostitution should always be a crime.

Win in Ohio Buys Time for the Clinton War Machine

More than one person I know is complaining that you have to kill Jason when you get the chance, and put him in the woodchipper so he won't come back--but I am excited about Hillary's continued survival. (You go girl!)

Republicans have not picked a truly great candidate since 1980. But this year, they've somehow settled for the ultimate compromise. There's no way McCain can defeat Obama. Bush the Younger was well-liked by most Republicans, and had a way of rallying Hispanic voters. Yet he barely beat Gore (Gore!?) and Kerry. Bush could not have asked for opponents with less charisma, charm, and eloquence, yet he nearly lost.

McCain is not half the campaigner the inarticulate Bush proved to be.

The only hope for the GOP?

The Clinton War Machine.
She'll dig up something. She can't defeat BO, but she might be able to inflict a mortal wound. (If she can't do it, no one can!)

Now that You Are About to Elect My Husband--For the First Time in My Adult Life, I am Proud of My Country.

What excellent work from the great Michael Ramirez at Investor's Business Daily. He not only comes up with great satirical ideas--he is also a fantastic artist and colorist, with great use of line and shadow.

You can see more of his work here.

Obama Regrets Not Supporting Terry Schiavo's Husband

Remember Terry Schiavo's husband--the man who secured permission to kill his disabled wife and promptly cut off her feeding tube? This in spite of not only measurable brain activity, but smiles, "vocalizations," and other actions her parents took as indications not only of awareness but of conscious thought? Remember when a Republican Congress took a stand for life, arguing that starving Terry was wrong?

Mr. Obama has regrets. Regrets that he did not stand up for Terry? No. He's a liberal Democrat, an ALLEGED PROGRESSIVE, liberated from the shackles of religion, morality, and all vestiges of absolute truth.

Obama regrets that he did not take a stronger stand against his colleagues. He regrets his failure to stand up for the rights of the husband.

"When I first arrived in the Senate that first year, we had a situation surrounding Terri Schiavo. And I remember how we adjourned with a unanimous agreement that eventually allowed Congress to interject itself into that decisionmaking process of the families," he said. "It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped. And I think that was a mistake..."

The worst part of this may be that regrets tend to create determination: Obama is not likely to repeat his "error."

Read the article here.

**Incidentally, this issue, like Major League Baseball, healthcare, education, the arts, and a thousand other things was arguably never within the province of the U.S. Congress. Not being enumerated in the Constitution, most issues fall within the "Reserved Powers," and are rightly the business only of the individual States. Ha, ha, ha, ha! How cute, I know. How naive. Oh, that's classic. Try to restrain your hilarity. Oh, and of course, true to form, when convenient, Democrats will suddenly stand up and defend the Constitution:

But Democrats said Congress has no right to become involved in a sensitive family issue.

"We are members of Congress. We are not doctors. We are not medical experts. We are not bioethicists. We are members of Congress," said Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.

How often do you hear BIG GOVERNMENT Socialists ask to be kept out of people's private affairs? The latter quote is from a news article of 2005. BTW, doesn't the Schiavo case seem like just yesterday? Obama really is short on experience.