Skip navigation

Tag Archives: DEMOCRATS

Obama Biden Watch – Volume 1 Issue 1 – January 2009

In This Issue:

  • Obama’s Inaugural Address Falls Flat?
  • Change We Can Believe In? Looks Like the Usual Suspects!
  • Obama’s First Actions Not Making America Safer
  • Geithner’s Tax Problems
  • Obama-Blagojevich Report Contradicts Public Record
  • Political Panetta at CIA?
  • Pelosi’s Power Grab
  • Bill Richardson Out As Commerce Secretary
  • Citizens United Productions Presents: Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny Documentary
  • Final Thoughts from Citizens United President David N. Bossie

Stay tuned for more updates as we will be updating this site frequently.

Copyright 2009 by Citizens United

ANOTHER IGNORANT DAMNACRAT

And those dammed Democrats think they know more than the rest of us.  That they are smarter than we are.  That they know and understand the Constitution better than we do.

BULL CRAP

The Constitution was written by the Founding Fathers for a new country and its CITIZENS.

CITIZENS, not for foreign terrorists or illegal aliens.  Those terrorists currently set to be brought to New York for trial in civil courts. These are enemy combatants, they have no civil rights as applied to citizens and legal, foreign, residents.

CNSNews.com

Rep. Kucinich Says Everyone, Including Osama Bin Laden, Should Get the Same ‘Basic Rights’
Monday, November 23, 2009
By Nick Ballasy


Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)

(CNSNews.com) – When asked whether al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden should have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told CNSNews.com that everyone who is accused of a crime should have the same “basic rights” afforded by the U.S. Constitution..

On Capitol Hill on Nov. 19, CNSNews.com asked Kucinich, “If and when the U.S. captures Osama Bin Laden, should he have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer–told he can get a lawyer?”

Kucinich said: “I think that America does best when the values that we want other nations to share that we profess and stand by, and I think that every one who is accused of a crime should have the basic rights that are afforded. I mean, that’s what America’s about.”

“We can’t have one set of rules there and another set of rules there,” said Kucinich. “America is one set of rules. We abide by the Constitution, and I think that Constitution is our protection now and in the future.”

When asked the same question by CNSNews.com on Nov. 19, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, “Well, let’s see, how many years has it been? Nine, eight years. Let’s worry about capturing Bin Laden and not worry about your, your question.”

During a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Nov. 18, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Attorney General Eric Holder several questions about how the capture and legal handling of Osama Bin Laden might be handled and warned that, in his opinion, the United States is “making bad history” by trying 9/11 suspect Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian court.

When Graham asked whether the U.S. would try Bin Laden in a civilian court or military commission, Holder said he “didn’t know” and that the U.S. would have to “go through our protocol” before deciding what to do with the Islamic terrorist.

“If we captured bin Laden tomorrow, would he be entitled to Miranda warnings at the moment of capture?” Graham asked Holder. Holder’s response was “that all depends,” and Graham warned that the Obama administration’s new legal policy would confuse the military and the justice system.

“Well, it does not ‘depend,’” the senator said. “The big problem I have is that you’re criminalizing the war, that if we caught bin Laden tomorrow, we’d have mixed theories and we couldn’t turn him over—to the CIA, the FBI or military intelligence—for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now we’re saying that he is the subject to criminal court in the United States.

“And you’re confusing the people fighting this war,” Graham charged. Later, the senator added, “The only point I’m making (is) that if we’re going to use federal court as a disposition for terrorists, you take everything that comes with being in federal court.”

Holder announced last Friday that he had chosen to try Mohammed in federal court in the Southern District of New York, which includes Manhattan, where the attacks on the World Trade Center occurred in 2001.

CNSNews.com

Rep. Kucinich Says Everyone, Including Osama Bin Laden, Should Get the Same ‘Basic Rights’
Monday, November 23, 2009
By Nick Ballasy


Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)

(CNSNews.com) – When asked whether al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden should have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told CNSNews.com that everyone who is accused of a crime should have the same “basic rights” afforded by the U.S. Constitution..

On Capitol Hill on Nov. 19, CNSNews.com asked Kucinich, “If and when the U.S. captures Osama Bin Laden, should he have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer–told he can get a lawyer?”

Kucinich said: “I think that America does best when the values that we want other nations to share that we profess and stand by, and I think that every one who is accused of a crime should have the basic rights that are afforded. I mean, that’s what America’s about.”

“We can’t have one set of rules there and another set of rules there,” said Kucinich. “America is one set of rules. We abide by the Constitution, and I think that Constitution is our protection now and in the future.”

When asked the same question by CNSNews.com on Nov. 19, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, “Well, let’s see, how many years has it been? Nine, eight years. Let’s worry about capturing Bin Laden and not worry about your, your question.”

During a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Nov. 18, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Attorney General Eric Holder several questions about how the capture and legal handling

The Bogus Death Statistic That Won’t Die
By Michelle Malkin
October 23, 2009

Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida has found his calling: death demagogue. First, he accused Republicans of wanting sick patients to “die quickly.” Next, he likened health insurance problems to a “holocaust in America.” Now, he’s unveiled a new website entitled “namesofthedead.com” in memory of the “more than 44,000 Americans [who] die simply because they have no health insurance.”

Just one problem: The statistic is a phantom number. Grayson’s memorial, like the Democrats’ government health care takeover plan itself, is full of vapor. It comes from a study published this year in the American Journal of Public Health. But the science is infused with left-wing politics.

Two of the co-authors, Drs. David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler, are avowed government-run health care activists. Himmelstein co-founded Physicians for a National Health Program, which bills itself as “the only national physician organization in the United States dedicated exclusively to implementing a single-payer national health program.” Woolhandler is a co-founder and served as secretary of the group.

Sounding more like a MoveOn.org organizer than a disinterested scientist, Woolhandler assailed the current health reform legislation in Congress for not going far enough: “Politicians are protecting insurance industry profits by sacrificing American lives.”

How did these political doctors come up with the 44,000 figure? They used data from a health survey conducted between 1988 and 1994. The questionnaires asked a sample of 9,000 participants whether they were insured and how they rated their own health. The federal Centers for Disease Control tracked the deaths of people in the sample group through the year 2000. Himmelstein, Woolhandler and company then crunched the numbers and attributed deaths to lack of health insurance for all the participants who initially self-reported that they had no insurance and then died for any reason over the 12-year tracking period.

At no time did the original researchers or the single-payer activists who piggy-backed off their data ever verify whether the supposed casualties of America’s callous health care system had insurance or not. In fact, here is what the report actually says:

“Our study has several limitations,” the authors concede. The survey data they used “assessed health insurance at a single point in time and did not validate self-reported insurance status. We were unable to measure the effect of gaining or losing coverage after the interview.” Himmelstein et al. simply assumed that point-in-time uninsurance translates into perpetual uninsurance — and that any health calamities that result can and must be blamed on being uninsured.

Another caveat you won’t see on Grayson’s memorial to the dubious dead: The single-payer advocate-authors also conceded in their study limitations section that “earlier population-based surveys that did validate insurance status found that between 7 percent and 11 percent of those initially recorded as being uninsured were misclassified. If present, such misclassification might dilute the true effect of uninsurance in our sample.”

To boil it all down in plain English: The single-payer scientists had no way of assessing whether the survey participants received insurance coverage between the time they answered the questionnaires and the time they died. They had no way of assessing whether the deaths could have been averted with health insurance coverage. A significant portion of those classified as “uninsured” may not have been uninsured, based on past studies that actually did verify insurance status. But the Himmelstein team just took the rate of uninsurance from the original study (3.3 percent), applied it to census data and voila: More than 44,000 Americans are dying from lack of insurance.

Next, the political doctors cooked up scary-specific death tolls for all 50 states (California — 5,302, Texas — 4,675). Newspapers dutifully cited the fear-mongering factoids. The single-payer lobbying group co-founded by Himmelstein and Woolhandler took it from there. Last month, the group set up its own memorial on the National Mall for the phantom 44,000 casualties of uninsurance.

Himmelstein (who was also the driving force behind another flawed study tying medical debt to personal bankruptcies) eschewed scientific nuance and caveats to take to the airwaves and declare starkly that an American “dies every 12 minutes” because of lack of insurance. And now Grayson has taken the monumentally dishonest concept online to solicit sob stories and put flesh on the weak bones of these dubious death numbers.

Where’s the White House health care “reality check” squad when you need it?

Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies” (Regnery 2009).

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM

——————–

Note — The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

SOCIALISTS. or both.  Either way they seem hell bent for leather to destroy this country.  If Senators (and Congresspersons) are elected to represent the best interests of the people who sent them to Congress.  So why do many of them follow the party line and  things that do not represent the people of their home state?


Sunstein headed toward confirmation
By: Alex Isenstadt
September 9, 2009 04:15 PM EST

Democrats succeeded Wednesday in pushing forward the nomination of Cass Sunstein, the controversial Harvard University law professor who has been tapped by President Obama to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

In a 63-35 vote Wednesday evening, the Senate voted to end the debate on Sunstein’s nomination, moving Sunstein one step closer to a full vote in the Senate.

Sunstein has been tapped for one of the more wonky jobs in the White House – reviewing the effectiveness of federal regulations. But his nomination has caught fire with conservatives, led by Fox News host Glenn Beck, who have highlighted some of his more liberal positions on animal rights and end of life care. Sunstein has been described by Republicans as one of the many Obama “czars,” but because he requires Senate confirmation, he doesn’t really fit the mold of a “czar” who wield enormous powers with little oversight.

Conservatives are particularly incensed over statements Sunstein has made advocating for greater regulation of hunting rights.

While Republicans will have little ability to stop Sunstein’s nomination, conservatives are feeling energized after their successful push for the resignation of White House green jobs adviser Van Jones, who stepped down from his post this weekend after it was revealed that he had dabbled with 9/11 conspiracy groups and had made inflammatory statements about Republicans.

The heated debate over Sunstein began on the Senate floor just hours before President Obama sets foot in the Capitol to deliver a nationally televised address on health care to Congress.

On his Twitter account Tuesday, Beck blasted Democrats for “rushing” Sunstein’s vote through the Senate.

“Dems likely to vote on Sunstein’s nomination TOMORROW; they are afraid of WatchDogs; every day increases their risk of losing this vote,” Beck wrote.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

The resignation of avowed communist Van Jones has plenty of people feeling that the future of the country is a bit safer. And it is an interesting “coincidence” that the attendees of the Cincinnati Tea Party demanded his resignation on Saturday, and then it was announced on Sunday.

The newest threat to the free market system and to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, according to many conservatives is the appointment of Cass Sunstein as the regulatory czar. LaTimes.com describes him as “left of center, ” and Forbs.com has reported that he is as a, “progressive. ” Some of his academic writings apparently favor animal rights above human rights to the point of arguing the defense of animal rights over human rights in a court of law.

He’s not known for being a supporter of the second amendment, which is the right to keep and bear arms, and that disturbs ranchers who want to protect their cattle, those who are interested to have a gun on hand to protect their family, and those who are hunters.

Forbes.com has also stated that, Sunstein has “spent years delving into the obscure issues of regulatory law and behavioral economics,” which is a deep concern for conservatives who are supporters of the free market system, and the fact that he has, “embraced a controversial ‘senior death discount’ ” is of great concern to those who are pro life. Somehow, the words ‘senior death discount’ sounds an awful lot like the death panels in the healthcare bill.

Interestingly, TheHill.com reported on Wednesday that Representative Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), “called for President Obama’s ‘czars,’ or appointed high-level advisers, to testify before Congress about their ‘authority and responsibilities’ in the executive branch.”

The question of the legitimacy of their authority is a good one. Especially since Article II section 2 of the Constitution states that, “…he (the President) shall nominate, and  by and with the Advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law” (emphasis added). In other words, the czars need to be confirmed by the Senate. And if the Senate doesn’t confirm them, they have no business standing in the positions to which they have been appointed.

To make matters even more interesting, there is a bill named HR 3226, also known as the “Czar Accountability Act of 2009.”  This particular bill states that, “appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position…without the advice and consent of the Senate.”  The bill was introduced in the House on July 15, 2009 by Rep. Jack Kingston and is being supported by many in the House. It would be in the best interest of “We the People” to demand that it be made into a law.

Similar Articles:

Tea Party attendees demand Van Jones resignation, and it happens
Socialism in America is unconstitutional
Congressman says Obama has potential to ‘make himself a dictator’
Senate’s fiscal irresponsibility is scaring the UN
Former communist turned Christian organizes interdenominational group in Prayer for Nation

Websites of possible interest:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3226 (HR 3226: Czar Accountability & Reform)
cincinnatiteaparty.org/
teaparty.org/


Posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago in OpinionPolitics

(Newser) – Barack Obama’s cabinet picks have elicited howls from the political left, but he won’t sell out his progressive supporters, E.J. Dionne, Jr. writes in The New Republic. First off, Obama never was a true economic leftie—that was John Edwards’ role. But like John F. Kennedy 45 years ago, Obama will probably push a progressive agenda through a team that conservatives can accept.

Lefties in Congress still like him, too. Obama knows that “the country faces more problems than at anytime since 1933,” says liberal Sen. Bernie Sanders. Obama is also entering the White House as most of the country is leaning left; even conservatives want to partly socialize Wall Street these days. “Reality has moved left, particularly over the last six months,” Dionne writes.

Source New Republic

· Time, CNN Top College Faves

Dec 1, 08 6:34 AM CST
Time, CNN Top College FavesCollege students took a break from beer pong to take stock of the world, a study of their favorite brands suggests. Time unseated Cosmopolitan as top magazine among the 1,000 students surveyed, while CNN.com bumped Perez Hilton off the list of top websites, Advertising Age reports. “World peace” became the fourth most desired wish for this election year—though, to be fair, the No. 6 most cherished was the ability to fly. More »

· Clinton at State Troubles Obamanauts

Nov 18, 08 9:55 AM CST
Clinton at State Troubles ObamanautsWhile a Hillary Clinton appointment as secretary of State has been greeted with enthusiasm worldwide, Barack Obama’s own team of believers is feeling some confusion and dissonance, reports Politico. “These guys didn’t put together a campaign in order to turn the government over to the Clintons,” says a Democrat close to Obama. “I can’t stand her,” said another—”but I think she’s a great choice.”
More »

· Has Obama Tipped Murdoch Left?

Nov 17, 08 9:35 AM CST
Has Obama Tipped Murdoch Left?Media watchers have been tracking the post-election New York Post with particular interest: Instead of being dyspeptic over the Democratic presidential win, Rupert Murdoch’s gleefully right-wing tabloid has treated Barack Obama to coverage ranging, as the New York Times puts it, “from warm and fuzzy to downright heroic.” Which fuels speculation, first raised by biographer Michael Wolff in a book excerpt in Vanity Fair, that the 77-year-old media magnate (and owner of Fox News) is veering leftward.
More »

· Gen X to Boomers: We Get It Now

Nov 9, 08 5:09 AM CST
We Get It NowSorry, boomers, for taking so long to drop the cynicism and eye-rolling, writes Heather Havrilesky in Salon. But to those who “became rational adults at the exact moment a reckless frat boy boomer became president,” your generation’s idealism and tales of ’60s radicalism fell flat, she spills. Barack Obama’s win changed that. Gen X’ers get it now, understanding “there’s no shame in throwing ourselves into this new future with full hearts, with tears in our eyes.” More »

· DC Anticipates 1.5M for Historic Inauguration

Nov 8, 08 6:35 AM CST
DC Anticipates 1.5M for Historic InaugurationHotel rooms will be as scarce as McCain-Palin T-shirts in Washington on Inauguration Day, the Wall Street Journal reports, as a record-breaking tide of Obama supporters—especially black Americans—makes a pilgrimage to witness the historic moment. More than 1.5 million people are expected to flood the city for the Jan. 20 event. Hotel rooms, even at rates above $1,000 a night, are booking three times faster than for the last inauguration.
More »

President-elect Barack Obama walks towards the podium during a news conference in Chicago, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2008.   (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

President-elect Barack Obama speaks at a news conference in Chicago, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2008.   (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

President-elect Barack Obama gestures during a news conference in Chicago, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2008.   (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)


Democrats Sink to New Low in Ohio Legislative Race

Posted by Bobby Eberle
October 27, 2008 at 6:29 am

To say that we are in troubling times is a huge understatement. We have an organization like ACORN running around the country in a blatant attempt to steal an election. We have a Democrat presidential candidate garnering huge support by talking about “hope” and “change” while never being questioned about his socialist agenda. We have the media carrying his water. And, of course, we have the media, whose blatant bias for Barack Obama throws the integrity of the whole profession into question.

There is another problem which has been seen over and over again with the Democrats, and it has now shown up in a legislative race in Ohio. That problem is the double standard that the media and Democrats hold Republicans too. How dare anyone question Barack Obama’s associations. It doesn’t matter that one of his chief financial backers is a convicted felon, or that one of his political mentors is an
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:””; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} p.h2, li.h2, div.h2 {mso-style-name:h2; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

There is another problem which has been seen over and over again with the Democrats, and it has now shown up in a legislative race in Ohio. That problem is the double standard that the media and Democrats hold Republicans too. How dare anyone question Barack Obama’s associations. It doesn’t matter that one of his chief financial backers is a convicted felon, or that one of his political mentors is an unapologetic terrorist, or that his long-time spiritual advisor engages is America bashing. All that is off limits. However, as we see in the race between Ohio State Rep. Josh Mandel and his Democrat opponent Bob Belovich, nothing is out of bounds for the Democrats, including attacking Mandel’s service in Iraq and his religion.

As noted in a column by Joel Mowbray, Josh Mandel has become a top target of the Democrats since winning his seat in 2006 in a highly Democrat district. Already a veteran of the Iraq war, Mandel received a call from the Marines asking him to serve in Iraq again.

As Mowbray writes, Mandel said, “I didn’t join the Marine Corps to say no when my country called.”

Now, not only that service, but Mandel’s religion is being used by the Democrats to try to oust Mandel from office.

Even Mr. Mandel’s motives for serving in Iraq are being questioned. Mrs. Belovich claimed in an interview with this columnist that Mandel “put his personal ambitions ahead of his constituents.” Asked why anyone would enter a war zone out of “personal ambition,” Barbara Belovich replied curtly, “Certainly he wasn’t serving our needs.”

Mowbray also reports on comments made by Belovich and his wife at a party, when they were discussing Mandel:

As Mowbray notes, “The obvious implication is that by serving in Iraq, Mr. Mandel was a do-nothing legislator. Yet he was one of the two people who lead the successful fight to force Ohio’s multi-billion dollar pension funds to divest from companies doing energy-related business in Iran and Sudan. Pension fund managers agreed to start divesting when legislation co-sponsored by Mr. Mandel and Rep. Shannon Jones was poised for passage.”

The real problem here is the double standard to which the media treats Republicans and Democrats. Where is the outrage?!?! Someone puts their life on the line to serve our country in Iraq, and that service is used against him? This is disgraceful, and the use of religion is equally pathetic.

“I really believe that no matter how someone feels about the war, just about everyone truly supports the troops,” says Mr. Mandel in Mowbray’s column. I hope he is right, because attacks like this, as well as actions by left-wing groups, show that the Democrats will do anything to win, and the media will let them.

, or that his long-time spiritual advisor engages is America bashing. All that is off limits. However, as we see in the race between Ohio State Rep. Josh Mandel and his Democrat opponent Bob Belovich, nothing is out of bounds for the Democrats, including attacking Mandel’s service in Iraq and his religion.

As noted in a column by Joel Mowbray, Josh Mandel has become a top target of the Democrats since winning his seat in 2006 in a highly Democrat district. Already a veteran of the Iraq war, Mandel received a call from the Marines asking him to serve in Iraq again.

As Mowbray writes, Mandel said, “I didn’t join the Marine Corps to say no when my country called.”

Now, not only that service, but Mandel’s religion is being used by the Democrats to try to oust Mandel from office.

Even Mr. Mandel’s motives for serving in Iraq are being questioned. Mrs. Belovich claimed in an interview with this columnist that Mandel “put his personal ambitions ahead of his constituents.” Asked why anyone would enter a war zone out of “personal ambition,” Barbara Belovich replied curtly, “Certainly he wasn’t serving our needs.”

Mowbray also reports on comments made by Belovich and his wife at a party, when they were discussing Mandel:

As Mowbray notes, “The obvious implication is that by serving in Iraq, Mr. Mandel was a do-nothing legislator. Yet he was one of the two people who lead the successful fight to force Ohio’s multi-billion dollar pension funds to divest from companies doing energy-related business in Iran and Sudan. Pension fund managers agreed to start divesting when legislation co-sponsored by Mr. Mandel and Rep. Shannon Jones was poised for passage.”

The real problem here is the double standard to which the media treats Republicans and Democrats. Where is the outrage?!?! Someone puts their life on the line to serve our country in Iraq, and that service is used against him? This is disgraceful, and the use of religion is equally pathetic.

“I really believe that no matter how someone feels about the war, just about everyone truly supports the troops,” says Mr. Mandel in Mowbray’s column. I hope he is right, because attacks like this, as well as actions by left-wing groups, show that the Democrats will do anything to win, and the media will let them.

Person Barbara Belovich
Right click for SmartMenu shortcuts

“Angry,” Hostile Whites May Cost Democrats in “Racially Polarized” Mississippi
Southern-based reporter Adam Nossiter unloads his racial baggage on the state’s U.S. Senate race: “The numbers in this state — which has perhaps the most racially polarized electorate in the nation — do not favor the Democrat: whites, the majority, overwhelmingly vote Republican, and 85 percent of them voted for President Bush in 2004.”

Posted by: Clay Waters
10/17/2008 4:25:57 PM

On Friday afternoon, Southern-based reporter Adam Nossiter filed from Jackson, Mississippi (Times Watch’s hometown) on the trail of the U.S. Senate race between Democratic challenger Ronnie Musgrove and Republican incumbent Roger Wicker. Nossiter didn’t forget to pack his racial baggage for the trip:

As a Democrat running for the Senate in the Republican stronghold of Mississippi, Ronnie Musgrove faces a challenge that was summed up in the angry words of a middle-aged white voter doing business at the courthouse here this week.

“I wouldn’t vote for him if he was the last man on earth,” said Roger Case, an employee of a fire-extinguisher company, as Mr. Musgrove campaigned a few yards away. Blacks in the courthouse beamed at Mr. Musgrove, a lanky former governor; whites, mostly, looked the other way.

Mississippi has not elected a Democrat to an open Senate seat since 1947, but that is not stopping the Democratic Party from heavily financing a major effort here, one of a handful of states — including North Carolina, Minnesota and possibly Oregon — it thinks it can pull from Republicans this fall in a reach for the filibuster-proof 60-vote majority.

Nossiter stacked the deck of race cards by not breaking down the percentage of blacks that vote Democrat, only the percentage of whites that vote Republican.

The odds for a Democratic pickup, however, out of all the states in play, may be longest in Mississippi.

The numbers in this state — which has perhaps the most racially polarized electorate in the nation — do not favor the Democrat: whites, the majority, overwhelmingly vote Republican, and 85 percent of them voted for President Bush in 2004. Even if there is a record black turnout, Mr. Musgrove would have to get about 30 percent of the white vote to win. Nonetheless, analysts give Mr. Musgrove, a hill-country populist who championed education during his terms as governor and lieutenant governor, a better-than-passing chance, particularly as the credit squeeze penetrates even here.

And look at the sneaky way Nossiter conflated the now-disreputable Confederate flag with the state and U.S. flag.

Mr. Wicker is making sure the flag issue stays on voters’ minds, running a ubiquitous television advertisement this week saying Mr. Musgrove “tried to kill our state flag.” At the fish-fry rally for the Republican, an outsized flag, Confederate heraldry intact, presided over the room. On the highway into Jackson, billowing, gargantuan Mississippi and American flags fly over a giant banner promoting the McCain-Palin ticket.

Mr. Wicker is identifying himself with all three banners, a strategy to compensate for his unknown status outside his home precincts in the northern part of Mississippi, though he represented it over seven terms in Congress.

Later, Nossiter assumed that “liberal” is a toothless scare word that has no real meaning, (although he’s never had a problem using “conservative” to mean something specific and kind of nasty).

Privately some Democratic insiders still give the edge to Mr. Wicker, in a state where the word “liberal” is still the most potent scarecrow of all.

Larry Rohter Takes a Wrench to “Joe the Plumber”
Don’t cross our favorite candidate or this may happen to you: “As it turns out, Joe the Plumber…may work in the plumbing business, but he is not a licensed plumber….His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes back taxes, too, public records show.”

Posted by: Clay Waters
10/17/2008 5:04:44 PM

Embarrass Obama, and expect the liberal media to go after you, no matter who you are: That’s what National Review journalist Byron York warned early Thursday afternoon.

He was quickly proven right by a story from reporter Larry Rohter in Friday’s Times, “Real Deal On Plumber Reveals New Slant,” in which Rohter took a wrench to Joe Wurzelbacher (aka “Joe the Plumber”), the citizen who dared to question Obama on his tax plan as the Democrat campaigned in his neighborhood in Toledo, Ohio. Obama responded with a classic paleo-liberal cliche: “I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

That insight into Obama’s mindset was politically fascinating, but Rohter buried it in the 11th paragraph of his story, focusing his investigation on such vital matters as “Joe’s” actual first name (Samuel) and whether or not he has a plumber’s license.

The story was teased with an over-the-fold front-page photo of Wurzelbacher talking to the press. The caption sneered: “Joe Wurzelbacher, a national figure after Wednesday’s presidential debate, learned Thursday that fame has two sides.” As if Wurzelbacher intended to become famous when he had the temerity to ask the media’s favored candidate a challenging question.

One week ago, Joe Wurzelbacher was just another working man living in a modest house outside Toledo, Ohio, and thinking about how to buy the plumbing business where he works. But when he stopped Senator Barack Obama during a visit to his block last weekend to complain about taxes, he set himself on a path to becoming America’s newest media celebrity — and as such suddenly found himself facing celebrity-level scrutiny.

Besides digging up other grievous scandals such as Wurzelbacher allegedly committing acts of plumbing without government permission, Rohter found a local union official (whose union endorsed Obama) to hammer him.

As it turns out, Joe the Plumber, as he became nationally known when Senator John McCain made him a theme at Wednesday’s final presidential debate, may work in the plumbing business, but he is not a licensed plumber.

Thomas Joseph, the business manager of Local 50 of the United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters and Service Mechanics, based in Toledo, said Thursday that Mr. Wurzelbacher had never held a plumber’s license, which is required in Toledo and several surrounding municipalities. He also never completed an apprenticeship and does not belong to the plumber’s union, which has endorsed Mr. Obama. On Thursday, he acknowledged that he does plumbing work even though he does not have a license.

His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes back taxes, too, public records show. The premise of his complaint to Mr. Obama about taxes may also be flawed, according to tax analysts. Contrary to what Mr. Wurzelbacher asserted and Mr. McCain echoed, neither his personal taxes nor those of the business where he works are likely to rise if Mr. Obama’s tax plan were to go into effect, they said.

Why would the Times go after an ordinary Joe asking a presidential candidate a question at a campaign stop? Oh, right:

But he became the hero of conservatives and Republicans when he stopped Mr. Obama, who was campaigning on his street, and asked whether he believed in the American dream. Mr. Wurzelbacher said he was concerned about having to pay higher taxes as an owner of a small business.

“I’m getting ready to buy a company that makes $250,000 to $280,000 a year,” he told Mr. Obama. “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?”

That encounter wound up on YouTube and led to appearances on the Fox News Channel, interviews with conservative bloggers and a New York Post editorial, all of whom seized on a small part of Mr. Obama’s long reply. “I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody,” Mr. Obama had said.

….

According to public records, Mr. Wurzelbacher has been subject to two liens, each over $1,100. One, with a hospital, has been settled, but a tax lien with the State of Ohio is still outstanding.

The Times has already shown far more avid curiosity about Wurzelbacher’s personal life than it ever displayed regarding Obama’s domestic terrorist supporter, Bill Ayers.

There’s a double standard at work at the Times regarding the private affairs of public citizens thrust into the political spotlight. Back in October 2007, Democrats paraded 12-year old Baltimore resident Graeme Frost as its poster boy for expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, a government program to assist families without health insurance. The program helped Graeme after a car accident left him in comatose for a week. The Democratic Party pushed him into the spotlight to deliver the Democratic radio address on September 29, 2007 (hat tip K. Daniel Glover at Eyeblast.tv).

When conservatives pointed out that the Frost family was hardly destitute and could have easily afforded health insurance on its own, the Times and the rest of the media were aghast at conservatives for prying into the Frost’s family finances. Times reporter David Herszenhorn went after bloggers for “attacking a family with injured children.”

But go after the media messiah and you are fair game for pro-Obama reporters like Rohter.

Vicki Iseman Suggests Libel Suit vs. NYT Over McCain Affair Allegations
Edward Pound interviewed Iseman for National Journal: “Iseman says she answered every question put to her by The Times, but that the newspaper ‘chose to disregard’ many of her answers.”

Posted by: Clay Waters
10/17/2008 11:23:39 AM

Telecommunications lobbyist Vicki Iseman, who the Times suggested had an affair with John McCain in a tabloid-style story back in February, is still steamed and is considering a libel suit against the paper. She sat down with National Journal’s Edward Pound for an exclusive interview in “Lobbyist Speaks: Rumor Of McCain Affair False, Damaging,” where she accused the Times of disregarding her answers and being “wrong on all counts.”

What did Iseman, whose blond good looks helped to drive the story, have to say about the explosive allegations? She refused to be interviewed by The Times , but in e-mail exchanges with the paper’s reporters, she denied ever having a romantic relationship with McCain and disputed key assertions made by The Times ‘ unnamed sources.

She denies an affair, saying her relationship with McCain was “strictly professional” and cordial and that she had never been alone with him

Iseman says she answered every question put to her by The Times, but that the newspaper “chose to disregard” many of her answers. “The New York Times set out to write a story about a ‘romantic relationship’ in exchange for legislative favors….Make the lobbyist a prostitute — pretty heady stuff. The only problem was, they were wrong on all counts.”

Iseman alleged career blowback:

Strangers, she says, sometimes blame her for damaging McCain. “While waiting in the ladies room line, [a woman] told me that I should be ashamed of myself for what I did to ‘that man, Senator McCain,’ ” Iseman recalls. “To this day, I will be typing on my computer and will get an e-mail calling me the worst of the worst names.” She also says that three clients dropped her after The Times ‘ story.

Kevin Williamson at National Review’s Media Blog pointed to the National Journal’s headline and sees possible litigation in the future: “I hope Iseman has hired a very hungry lawyer.” Indeed, Pound wrote that Iseman is considering filing a libel suit against the Times:

The fallout from the story, Iseman says, has been costly. She has retained Rodney Smolla, a First Amendment scholar and the dean of the Washington and Lee University School of Law, as part of a legal team and is considering filing a libel suit against The Times. She believes she has lost three major clients as a result, she says, although she can’t prove that. She recounted how one longtime client terminated its arrangement with her firm shortly after The Times story hit