Sarah Palin To Meet Karzai [Update]

John McCain and company. This is easy pickings here. Set up an ad with ZERO hearings on the committee meetings for which he chairs. Keep it running until November. Easy pickings.

Hello,

Aides have stated that Obama specifically approved of the attempt to destroy our USA banking system so that he could sieze power.

ARLINGTON, VA — The McCain-Palin presidential campaign today announced the endorsement of Miguel D. Lausell, Senior Political Advisor to Hillary Clinton, and Clinton Delegate-at-Large Luchy Secaira.

“Although I supported Hillary during the primaries, I now support John McCain and Governor Palin because I am putting my country first,” said Secaira, former Hillary Clinton Florida Delegate-at-Large. “They have the experience and judgment to lead America through these difficult times, and I trust them to work with Democrats to do the right thing for our country.”

Lausell, who advised Senator Clinton on a variety of issues including international trade, telecommunications and Latino affairs, added, “John McCain has a long record of reforming government and working across the aisle to achieve bipartisan results. His courageous leadership is exactly what we need in the White House, and I am convinced that John McCain is the right leader at the right time for our nation.”

Both Lausell and Secaira supported Sen. Hillary Clinton during the primaries, but they will campaign for the McCain-Palin ticket.

Lausell has served as President and CEO of the Puerto Rico Telephone Company; Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Telephone Authority; a member of the Governor of Puerto Rico’s Economic Strategic Council; President of the Export Policy Commission of Puerto Rico; and Undersecretary of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico. He served on the National Finance Board of the Gore 2000 Committee and was a member of the Democratic National Committee’s Leadership 2000 Board.

Secaira, who is of Dominican descent, traveled to eight states to coordinate grassroots efforts for Senator Clinton, has a doctorate of neuropsychology and was trained at New York University.

###

a. hillary
b. mccain

america first!

“It’s an absolute shame that this has happened,” Hikind said. “To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don’t withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we’re going to look into your tax exempt status … that’s McCarthyism.”

http://wcbstv.com/local/clinton.palin.event.2.821565.html

Palin meets Karzai. Great, now that she is running for national office, she deserves to get to know world leaders (or at least foreign heads of state).

Does anybody know the exact score after that meeting? I mean Palin-Karzai 1, Obama-Karzai ???

Would not be surprized if Obama just met Karzai once. I mean, he is always telling us that Afghanistan is the smart war and he is soooo enthusiastic about Afghanistan…

A reporter was asking Obama about matters of foreign policy and said “Afghanistan…” Obama cut off the reporter and exclaimed “Gesundheit!”

The neo-Dems are not content with merely trashing the Democratic Party; they have bigger plans.

I agree. This is an excellent oppourtunity for Governor Palin. Like most competent, intelligent people, she knows what she still needs to learn and gets up to speed quickly. (Unlike Barky Oblahblah who arrogantly thinks he knows everything when in reality he knows jacksh!t.)

But I am bracing myself for a new onslaught of misogyny. It will be spinned as “Bring your Daughter to Work Day.” Of course if Sarah was Sam, no one would blink an eye or comment a peep.

Obama is so involved with himself and his socialists/communist friends he doesn’t have time for the piddly stuff like senate comittees, world affairs, and voting, and little people. I overheard someone(???) in California saying Michelle O in one of her divine appearences was telling everyone how surprised all the people would be when they see what kind of government Obama will bring to America.

The book postmodern coup about obama says that Bryzenski would run him at a time of 2 crisis’s.
War and economic meltdown.
Soros and Brezynski are chums and that book sounds very true now. Soros is the puppeteer.
Anyone have any links to the guy who wrote post modern coup? I read about it from some links on here the other night. I heard about it awhile ago but never knew what it was about.
Basically, obama was bred since Columbia by the angry far left radicals to become president at a time of severe problems in our country.
Soros probably did have something to do with this.
The dems in congress running oversight on these banks sure acted like it was a surprise.
That is what really troubles me. Chris Dodd does oversight on the banks and never said a word. Guess who has the most money from fannie and freddie?

I hear poeple on hear talk about deregulation. That is not what caused this mess. There is regulation in place now. NO ONE WAS REGULATING. They all just let this mess happen.
The democrats are setting up a communist overtaking of our country. First the banks, then healthcare.
It makes me sick. Democrats in control in congress have been derilict in their duty and i believe on purpose.
They think the worse the nation is the easier the elections.

Randi Rhodes on her show yesterday, explaining why “Old white women” have a problem with the idea of voting for Obama: “It’s very simple. He’s a black guy.”

Bill Maher on his show last night spent five minutes trashing the idea that attacks on Palin have anything to do with Sexism. He made it very clear that he considers the claim of “sexism” to be just a dodge.

Literally seconds later, Maher parroted Rhodes, claiming that if Obama loses, it’s “obviously” because America is “not ready” for a black President.

So for those of you keeping score at home: A vote against Palin can NOT be sexist. A vote against Obama MUST be racist. All clear now?

Palin is eager to learn, while BO is eager to get his “rightful” share of the pie. Palin has humility while BO has only pride. Palin has run a state government, while BO couldn’t bother to hold a committee meeting. Palin is running for vice-president supporting from someone who is better qualified, while BO thinks he could skip that step because he would be a “historic” (rather than honorable or capable) president.

Gosh, when Sarah meets with Hamid Karzai, do you think that (since she’s such a reputed neophyte) she will violate the Logan Act (as did Barack)?

http://tinyurl.com/4j525e

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_38F68Treg

OFF TOPIC- BILL CLINTON REGARDING- PALIN, OBAMA, BAILOUT. CNBC INTERVIEW

Rhodes, Maher and Sandra Bernhard are both racist and sexist. I’m still awaiting Al Sharpton’s outrage over Bernhard’s remarks.

Good luck to Gov Palin on her meeting with Prez Karzai. I’m sure he’ll be quite impressed with the American from Alaska. I think they may have a lot in common.

My guess is Obama`s internal polls must be showing him doing badly with women. All week he has only women behind him at the rallys. He is also pushing Hillary to do more.

SusanUnPc – is Larry Johnson in drag. This blogbwas a Bullshit neocon op from the get go and now Larry’s the pig in lipstick.

SusanUnPc – is Larry Johnson in drag. This blog was a Bullshit neocon op from the get go and now Larry’s the pig in lipstick.

From Time Magazine is a transcript of an interview with Bill Clinton on 9/18 (last Thursday). Most interesting especially statements about McCain, Palin, and Barky. I’ve highlighted those parts:

Transcript from Bill Clinton’s Interview with CNBC CNBC EXCLUSIVE: CNBC TRANSCRIPT: CNBC’S MARIA BARTIROMO INTERVIEWS FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON TODAY ON “CLOSING BELL WITH MARIA BARTIROMO”

http://thepage.time.com/transcript-from-bill-clintons-interview-with-cnbc/

WHEN: Today, Thursday, September 18th at 4:38 PM ET

WHERE: CNBC’s “Closing Bell with Maria Bartiromo”

Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC EXCLUSIVE interview with former President Bill Clinton today on CNBC’s “Closing Bell with Maria Bartiromo.”

Video from this interview is available on http://www.cnbc.com, up to two minutes for 24 hours. All references must be sourced to CNBC’s “Closing Bell with Maria Bartiromo.”

—————————————————————-

MARIA BARTIROMO: They’re neck and neck– Senator Obama and McCain. How– how are the democrats going to– narrow that debt?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Well, the latest polls had Senator Obama up a little bit. And I think every– I– I think partly that’s a function of the current distress, economic distress because I think the more people worry about the current set of circumstances, the more likely they are to change parties. I have always said that I thought Senator Obama would win this election because two thirds of the American people are having trouble paying their bills. And because of democratic registration is up and republican registration is flat. And because he has– offered some very specific and sensible economic reforms and healthcare reforms. And as I said, I’ve never concealed my admiration and affection for Senator McCain. I think he’s a great man. But, I think on the issues that matter to our future– the Obama/Biden team is– is more right. That’s what I believe. And I believe they’re gonna win. But, I think that– it will be competitive until the end. And our side has to work hard. But, I think what — what typically happens in these elections if you look throughout American history when the country’s in a fix and you know where we’re going is not sustainable, then there is typically a breakthrough. The biggest example of that was in 1860 when Abraham Lincoln was elected. The republican party had only been in existence for four years. But, both the old-wig party and the democratic party had proved unable to resolve the dilemma of how to hold the Union together and stop the spread of slavery. So, they both had different approaches. Neither one were workin’. So, the public said, “Okay, if we can’t sustain this, we’ll make a change. That’s what I think. Now, I think that the– the people said, “Well, they had the Congress and the White House for six of the last eight years. We’re in trouble. We liked Senator McCain. We recognize he’s a little bit of a different kind of republican. But, we’re gonna make a change.” And I think that’s where they’ll be and I think that you’ll see a victory for Obama and Biden. But, I don’t think you’ll see it clearly. Barring some unforeseen development like in– something happens in the debates we don’t know about. I– I– I– it may not be apparent in the polls until last week or two of the election. But, I believe that it will be apparent on election day. I think that– I think Senator Obama will win this election.

MARIA BARTIROMO: Were you surprised by the Palin bounce for the McCain campaign?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: No, she’s a– she’s an instinctively– effective candidate. And with a compelling story. And– and I think it was exciting to some– that– that she was a woman. It was exciting that she was from Alaska. It was exciting that she’s sort of like the person she is. And she grew up in a– came up in a political culture and a religious culture that is probably well to the right of the American center. But, she didn’t basically define herself in those terms. She’s basically said, “Look, this is where I’m from. I’m not gonna impose this on you. This is what I wanna do that I think we can all be a part of.” So, she handled herself very well. So, I– no, I wasn’t surprised. I think that– you know, I disagree with them on a lot of these issues. And that’s why aside from party affiliation, that’s why I would be for Senator Obama and Senator Biden anyway. But– but, I think she– I– I get why she’s done so well. She– she’s– it’s a mistake to underestimate her. She’s got good in– sorry– intuitive skills. They’re significant.

MARIA BARTIROMO: If McCain wins, will Hillary be back in four years?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: I don’t know. I think that– you know the one thing we’ve learned at– at our age is that– you know, I hope we’re both active till we’re 90 and health. But, I think that her focus will now be– on what she can do in her present position to try to help her deal with all these things that threw her into the presidential race in the first place. For example, today, she gave them a– the most detailed– position I’ve seen on what she felt we ought to do on the finance crisis. And I completely agree with what she said. She said, “We ought to– we ought to follow– not this– the Resolution Trust Corporation model for dealin’ with these homes and commercial properties. We ought to go back to the Homeowner’s Loan Corporation that was a product of the Depression.” That actually made a profit for the American people by stabilizing what was otherwise a disastrous run– on the market for financing homes. And people’s home values were going through the floor. I think that– that what she will do is to continue to try to be a national voice as a result of her campaign on economic and healthcare and energy issues that got her into this presidential race in the first place. And I– you know, I’ve already told you. She’s workin’. She– you– you see her. She’s out there workin’ hard for Senator Obama. She, like me, believe he’s gonna win. And– no matter who wins, we’ve got to put– our– our own personal politics aside– for the next couple of years and get after these problems. We– we can’t continue this, you know, loss of will, no jobs, stagnant incomes, rising costs. We’ve got– we– we’ve got to shelf the politics for a while and work on the substance. And if we’ll do that, the politics will take care of itself.

MARIA BARTIROMO: What is your view of these bailouts that we’ve been seeing? Bear Sterns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and, of course, yesterday AIG. Should the government be there if the financial services firms fail and take on too much risk?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: I think in this case, they had no choice. And I’ll tell you– why. I think that there was too little attention for too long to the real estate problems. I know I think Hillary called two years for some device to sort of s– stop the home mortgage foreclosures for the people that could pay, and to rework the mortgages. Too little attention to the fact that the big finance houses were driven into housing. In effect, assume the role of traditional bankers with the derivatives and other things ’cause there was no other place that was growing in our economy. (SLIGHT SIREN) If you and I had been working at one of these finance houses, and we had to make a living, we had to major our– our clients’ money right, that’s where we would have gone because it was the only growth area. And so we allowed this to happen for too long. I– I think the argument that we shouldn’t do it ’cause the taxpayers don’t owe anything to Wall Street is rather shortsighted. That the people are getting the shaft out here are the homeowners, the people that live in their neighborhood whose home values are goin’ down. The people who are losin’ their jobs. In other words, this is not about bailing out Wall Street. This is about restoring confidence in America. This is a country with rising productivity in every year of this decade, which means the working people of this country and their managers are doing their job. It’s still a country of innovation. It’s still a country with available money to invest. And we have had these drastic distortions in the market, which have got us in this fix. I don’t think there’s any choice but for us to have the government sit down with the private sector and all– again, all the stakeholders, and– and do more. And I think the longer you wait, ironically, the more you have to do and the more money you have to spend. So, in a funny way, the people who are most against market intervention wind up having to preside over the biggest market intervention that costs the most money because we all know that markets without disclosure, without capital requirements, without market requirements– if you don’t have these kinds of things to keep the market in tow, they all tend to unsustainable extremes. And that’s where we are today. This– America is better than letting– you know, just using trillions and trillions of dollars of wealth. You’ve got two trillion dollars in home wealth that people are at loss. We can’t sustain it.

MARIA BARTIROMO: But, where do you stop? Should they have bailed out Lehman Brothers? Should they be bailing out Morgan Stanley?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Well, I can only tell you– first of all, you can only answer a question like that in my opinion based on the facts on the ground at the time. That is, this is a practical question to me. Not a philosophical one. I– I think– I believe that if– if– if I– if I had– if I had to say, first, I think the Bear Sterns thing was necessary. And it worked okay. It just didn’t stand (?) the tide because of the underlying massive amount of unsustainable debt in the real estate market both residential and conserv– and– commercial. I think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac– that had to be done because they frankly– it was never an ideal structure. They weren’t– they were government operations. But, not. They were– they– they– they’re– too many of those decisions were made by– (OVERTALK)

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: –politics. But, they got in trouble because the market got in trouble. That is, they weren’t big players in the– in the sub-prime mortgage market. They just were on the– they were the ultimate guarantor of all these mortgages and the value of everything went down. I think that– it looked bizarre that you had the– the– you did Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stern. Then said no to Lehman Brothers and yes to AIG. What does that mean? Does that mean there was no principle involved? Probably I– I– I think that– my instinct would have been to offer Lehman Brothers a line of credit at least. Something along the lines of what was offered at– AIG. It’s not as big. The consequences to the economy are not as great. But, it had a– psychologically, it was unsettling. And I think that– not because I wanna bail out Wall Street. But, because I don’t want every homeowner in this country to lose all the value– m– most Americans– the only savings they’ve got is in their homes.

MARIA BARTIROMO:Of course.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:And so– (OVERTALK)

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Until we get– (UNINTEL) like I said Hillary’s offered some good ideas. Bonnie Frank (PH), the congressman (?) of Massachusetts offered some good ideas. The administration has other (UNINTEL). McCain and Obama are weighing in. The main thing I wanna say is let’s don’t make this like a meal where you’re hungry 30 years later. Let’s have very few sound bi– bites. Nobody trying to get short term advantage. And let’s look at where we are and figure out how to fix this thing over the long. If you’ve got the right kind of regulation, the right kind of capital requirements, the right kind of disclosure to investments, then you won’t have to do a bailout in the future because anybody that fails, it’ll be obvious that it was irresponsible management. Maybe even illegal conduct. And it’s the kind of thing you shouldn’t bail out. But, right now, you’re not bailin’ them out. You’re trying to save the American financial system. And the savings of– of hundreds of millions of Americans.

MARIA BARTIROMO: It’s really a bailout of the system. Not–

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Yeah– yeah– (OVERTALK)

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: ‘Cause the– yeah, look, I mean, the– the– what– if Wall Street drops 500 points one day and 450 points the next day, and on the second day, banks (NOISE) don’t even wanna lend to each other anymore? Then, if you help this or that group, you’re not doing it for them. You didn’t– this wasn’t done for AIG. It was done because AIG is so big that if they didn’t have some way to manager their bad loans over a longer period of time, the consequences not to AIG, but to everybody in the American system were gonna be great. There is no American that has not been potentially damaged by what’s happened the last two days. Even if you don’t have a bank account. Twenty-eight million working Americans don’t have a bank account. They’re still weak if everybody else is in trouble.

MARIA BARTIROMO: Let me ask you this President Clinton. You– you said, you know, we were in a period where money was so easy, rates were so low. You really were the dream team. You, Alan Greenspan and Bob Rupman (PH) oversee the– one of the greatest if not the greatest economic up periods– we know. But, isn’t it fair to say Alan Greenspan is somewhat to blame here for leaving rates as low as they were?

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: You can argue that. But, let– let’s just talk about this. I don’t believe that was the primarily factor here. I think that if– if you look at it f– apart from this, there was no inflation in this economy for a long time. There was a lot of competition, open markets keeping inflation down. There was money seeking safe haven. America was thought to be that. So, even if the Fed had kept rates a little higher, I think the money that most people get, which has nothin’ to do with the government and its policies now, would still have been available at very low costs. And the fundamental problem is this. This is my opinion now. Listen, I’m not speakin’ for Hillary, for the government, for anything. I think the fundamental problem is this. If you look at– we have now good economic data on the first five years of this decade, okay? Forty percent of our growth was in housing. The other 60 percent in consumer spending. So, what happened? That’s– that– it attracted the money. And after a while, the consumers had maxed out their credit cards, taking out all the second mortgages on homes you could– taken out. And there’s only so much you can do with even commercial as well as residential real estate. And without a more balanced economic strategy, this thing was gonna come to not a very good end. Now, the other thing that happened is you had the finance houses in effect supplementing what the– the financial– the traditional banks were doing. That is packaging these mortgages and derivatives highly leverage. You didn’t have–

MARIA BARTIROMO: Innovation.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Yeah, it was innovation. But, it was innovation without adequate disclosure, capital and margin requirements. So, what happened was it was the magnet that attracted the money ’cause it was the only game in town. And I personally think– you may fault Mr. Greenspan one way or the other. But, the truth is if he’d raise rates a little bit, there was no inflation in this economy. You were sti– and there was lots of money. You were still gonna be able to get good money at low prices. And the real problem was that good money at low prices didn’t have a lot of options apart from housing or other real estate. Because there was not other growth. I believe if we’d started a serious energy policy six years ago, we might be in this fix. But, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad ’cause we’d had a whole ‘nother range of things for people to invest money in. Areas for people to work in and less incentive for people to– to move this money in ever more clever ways just through the same old hold in real estate.

UNITED NATIONS – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad put Barack Obama on the spot Thursday, offering to debate with Barack Obama when he arrives at the United Nations next week for its annual summit.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he’ll gladly debate Barack Obama.

Who is Valerie Jarret. She is known as the other half of Barack Obama. A close advisor and family friend. Valerie was born in Iran and is tap to be Barack Obama Sec. of State if he is elected.

Why are so many foreign born naturalized citizens on Obama advisory team?

Valerie Jarrett and Obama refusal to see Iran as a serious threat is alarming. Would Valerie Jarrett loyalities be to America or Iran?

Obama never held a single NATO commitee hearing because then Obama would have a record and Obama hates having a record, because then he cannot make up his record, ie HIS banking commitee and his ecenomic program introduced to congress!

BREAKING –

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Bush administration asked Congress on Saturday for the power to buy $700 billion in toxic assets clogging the financial system and threatening the economy as negotiations began on the largest bailout since the Great Depression.

The rescue plan would give Washington broad authority to purchase bad mortgage-related assets from U.S. financial institutions for the next two years. It does not specify which institutions qualify or what, if anything, the government would get in return for the unprecedented infusion.

Democrats are pressing to require that the plan help more strapped borrowers stay in their homes and to condition the bailout on new limits on executive compensation.

Congressional aides and administration officials are working through the weekend to fill in the details of the proposal. The White House hoped for a deal with Congress by the time markets opened Monday; top lawmakers say they would push to enact the plan as early as the coming week.

“We’re going to work with Congress to get a bill done quickly,” President Bush said at the White House. Without discussing specifics, he said, “This is a big package because it was a big problem.”

Lawmakers digesting the eye-popping cost and searching for specifics voiced concerns that the proposal offers no help for struggling homeowners or safeguards for taxpayers’ money.

The government must bail out the financial system “because if we don’t, it will have a tremendous impact on American consumers, homeowners, taxpayers and the rest,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in San Francisco.

But, she added, “We cannot deal with this unless this bailout helps families stay in their homes.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. said “we cannot allow ourselves to be in denial about the threat now facing the world economy. From all indications, that threat is real, and the consequences of inaction could be catastrophic. Every single American has a stake in preventing a global financial meltdown.”

The proposal would raise the statutory limit on the national debt from $10.6 trillion to $11.3 trillion to make room for the massive rescue.

“The American people are furious that we’re in this situation, and so am I,” the House’s top Republican, Ohio Rep. John A. Boehner, said in a statement. “We need to do everything possible to protect the taxpayers from the consequences of a broken Washington.”

Signaling what could erupt into a brutal fight with Democrats over add-on spending, Boehner said “efforts to exploit this crisis for political leverage or partisan quid pro quo will only delay the economic stability that families, seniors, and small businesses deserve.”

Bush said he worried the financial troubles “could ripple throughout” the economy and affect average citizens. “The risk of doing nothing far outweighs the risk of the package. … Over time, we’re going to get a lot of the money back.”

He added, “People are beginning to doubt our system, people were losing confidence and I understand it’s important to have confidence in our financial system.”

Neither presidential candidate took a position on the proposal. GOP nominee John McCain said he was awaiting specifics and any changes by Congress.

Democratic rival Barack Obama used the party’s weekly radio address to call for help for Main Street as well as Wall Street.

“We need to help people cope with rising gas and food prices, spark job creation by repairing our schools and our roads, help states avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, and help homeowners stay in their homes,” Obama said. “And we must also ensure that the solution we design doesn’t reward particular companies, or irresponsible borrowers or lenders, or CEOs, some of whom helped cause this mess.”

Their language reflected a tricky balance that politicians in both parties are trying to strike, just six weeks before Election Day: Back a plan that doles out hundreds of billions to companies that made bad bets and still identify with the plight of middle-class voters.

Besides mortgage help and executive compensation limits, Democrats are considering attaching middle-class assistance to the legislation despite a request from Bush to avoid adding items that could delay action. An expansion of jobless benefits was one possibility.

Bush sidestepped questions about the chances of adding such items, saying that now was not the time for posturing. “I think most leaders would understand we need to get this done quickly, and you know, the cleaner the better,” he said about legislation being drafted.

Treasury officials met congressional staff for about two hours on Capitol Hill on Saturday. Discussions centered on how the plan would work, and Democrats proposed adding the executive compensation limits and new foreclosure-prevention measures. Details of those changes were not available Saturday, as staff aides worked to draft them. Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson conferred by phone for about 20 minutes in the afternoon, gauging how the negotiations were unfolding.

Among the key issues up for negotiation is which financial institutions would be eligible for the help. The proposed legislation doesn’t make it clear, leaving open the question of whether hedge funds or pension funds could qualify.

The proposal does not require that the government receive anything from banks in return for unloading their bad assets. But it would allow the Treasury Department to designate financial institutions as “agents of the government,” and mandate that they perform any “reasonable duties” that might entail. The bailout would be sheltered from court review.

The government could contract with private companies to manage the assets it purchased under the rescue.

Paulson says the government would in essence set up reverse auctions, putting up money for a class of distressed assets—such as loans that are delinquent but not in default—and financial institutions would compete for how little they would accept.

If enacted, the plan would give the treasury secretary broad power to buy, manage and sell the mortgage-related investments without any additional involvement by lawmakers. It would, however, require that the congressional committees with oversight on budget, tax and financial services issues be briefed within three months of the government’s first use of the rescue power, and every six months after that.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93ANOMG0&show_article=1

Orlando Patterson , a major Obama supporter was a Harvard profesor and there is something I think everyone should know about him! around 20 years ago he lived on Shepard street in Cambridge and early one morning a meter maid (male) was shot in the back and parylized from the wound this happened on shepard street and the shooter said “you won’t be writing any more tickets!” The victim was wearing a red sox hat similar to anther metermaid who also worked that beat who had several run/ins with Orlando Patterson. There was an investigation of Patterson and the detectives assigned could not prove it and Haev.U. was uncooperative. Patterson soon transferred to another college. Many local old timers in Cambridge are sure Patterson was the shooter. figures he’s an “bama supporter!

Barack Obama used the party’s weekly radio address to call for help for Main Street as well as Wall Street really?

So what does that mean, he feels more money should be allocated to just hand out to every tom, dick and harry? Why does not Obama just tell Bush to open up the federal reserve and invite all those in need to come help themselves.

I have never heard so much crap from anyone and I guess not one person in the media is going to take him up on this nonsense he spoke.

I don’t know if you are in NY but here is something to read…YID is asking people not to go to the rally on Monday…

Why You MUST NOT ATTEND Monday’s ANTI-IRAN RALLY
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-you-should-not-attend-mondays-anti.html

I have been at every major rally in support of Jewish Issues during the past three years. I have also been at many of the tiny ones where there were 40 of us holding signs in the rain. This Monday I will NOT be going to the United Nations to join the rally against Iranian aggression. I urge you to stay home also. By showing up at the rally we would be teaching the Democratic party and the Obama Campaign that the supporters of Israel can be bullied around. The Jewish groups that are running the rally WERE THREATENED WITH A LOSS OF THEIR TAX EXEMPT STATUS IF THE KEPT PALIN ON THE ROSTER:

pass it around and help YID out.

SusanUnPC-I totally agree with your update. It’s so depressing that this guy has re-defined Teflon to a new level: NOTHING matters to the msm about what (or what NOT) his qualifications are based on his past actions or associations. He isn’t held to the same standards as other mortals.

I was listening to Pacifica Radio this morning and they were talking about the problems in Afghanistan –corruption and worse. The resurgence of the Taliban plus Kharzai’s own brother is involved in heroin/poppy and weapon smuggling. But of course, Bambi was too busy getting adored by his acolytes to hold a meetin’….

OT but I’m so sick of the msm criticizing Palin for giving the “same speech”. First of all, most of the people at her rallies haven’t heard it before and didn’t Obama spend about 12 months giving the same hope and change speech to the masses? I guess if you bring that up you’re racist.

BTW, the victim said the shooter fit pattersons general description (AA)

Obama already put a dent in this thing by getting Palin disinvited, I think it was done to embarrass her as usual, in other words if Hillary did not want to come they did not need to hear Palin, I am just disappointed Hillary was part of this.

But while Obama is looking to get political points 55 are dead in Pakistan from a bombing, so he can play games with these terrorist they sure as hell will not play game with us.

I think the will all love that idiot Obama to be in charge they will run circles around him daily, they will surely have America right where they always wanted us.

It doesn’t matter what Palin does, the cable news harpies
will eat her alive.
They want a spineless, ineffectual sell-out like Obama.
He is the perfect follow-up from George Bush.
The powers that be made sure that we would not have
a choice in this election.
We either end up with a senile geriatric or a corrupt neophyte.

If Cramer flat out says financial terrorism is involved, then I believe him.

I heard it on Monday. The Obama people were screaming chicken little and telling everyone to run on their brokers and banks, trying to create a crash to blame on the GOP leadership.

The way to start a run is to start a rumor that a run is starting. Problem for them is the institutional investors, with the proper data, did not buy into it and actually started on Thursday buying all the undervalued stock.

Gov. Palin will receive a warm reception from these leaders, I believe.
Since Senator McCain is highly respected around the world, his running mate will have an entree that others would not!
Additionally, they both have children serving at this time, so they are putting a lot on the line, and therefore will be considered trustworthy!
Who would not prefer experience and proven leadership? Only BO’s worshippers!

I think Soros is involved for the benefit of Mr. Lite there will be a show tonight.

No. Seriously. I think the Obama team tried to take down our economy just to get votes.

Time for an Eastan Article. Hello.

Even Paulson has no idea why people were selling stuff they were making money off of.

Sec. Paulson on naked shorting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq4BimfA_UQ&NR=1

Some real weird stuff happened this week and it was not natural. Somebody manipulated our markets.

Susan and Sassy.

Sorry if I stepped OT on your conversation. I am just a bit upset. I too believe that Sarah will do much better with the Afghan leaders than Zero, with his ego so bright, could ever do.

And the plot thickens.

Check this out, from CBS source:

http://wcbstv.com/campaign08/clinton.palin.event.2.821565.html

Sep 19, 2008 8:10 pm US/Eastern

Sources: Intense Pressure Led To Palin UN Snub
CBS 2 HD Has Learned Democrats Threatened To Attack Jewish Groups’ Tax Exempt Status Over VP Nominee Invite

NEW YORK (CBS) ― Hillary Clinton won’t be speaking at Monday’s anti-Iran rally at the United Nations — and neither will Republican Sarah Palin or any other politicians for that matter.

The reason? A heated behind the scenes tug-of-war.

Sources tell CBS 2 HD that a decision to disinvite Palin from the high profile rally after Clinton pulled out in a huff came as the result of intense pressure from Democrats.

“This is insulting. This is embarrassing, especially to Gov. Palin, to me and I think it should be to every single New Yorker,” Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, told CBS 2 HD.

Sources say the axes were out for Palin as soon as Sen. Clinton pulled out because she did not want to attend the same event as the Republican vice presidential candidate.

“I have never seen such raw emotion — on both sides,” said someone close to the situation.

The groups sponsoring the rally against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN were reportedly told, “it could jeopardize their tax exempt status” if they had Palin and not Clinton or Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden on hand.

So all politicians were disinvited, most prominently, Palin.

“It’s an absolute shame that this has happened,” Hikind said. “To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don’t withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we’re going to look into your tax exempt status … that’s McCarthyism.”

Another Jewish group tried to step into the breach by inviting Palin to a different protest a day earlier.

“I’m absolutely appalled at the behavior of the Democrats,” said Bob Kunst of Defenders.net. “I’m a Democrat and for the first time in my life I’m going to vote Republican. I can’t take it anymore.”

As for Sen. Clinton, she brushed right past CBS 2 HD’s Lou Young when he tried to ask her about the issue on Thursday night.

Lou Young: “Were the organizers of Monday’s rally right to depoliticize it?”

Clinton walked past Young, said “Thank you all very much” and started hugging people.

Clinton’s people tell CBS 2 HD she intends to make some statement of support for the protestors. She is also expected to attack Ahmadinejad’s pro-nuke, anti-Israel stance.

————

This is a great opportunity for Governor (soon to be vice-president) Palin. The camera and all of the attention will be back on her.

SusanUnPC
Great article.

Here is another story which reinforces what Joe Wilson says:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3080794.ece

Sen Obama has int’l experience? Tell that to the Europeans and others

March 20, is that when the Cheetoh-eaters decided that Joe Wilson wasn’t one of them anymore?

I recall an interview that Mr. Johnson did with Amb. Wilson during this time. If I recall correctly, Amb. Wilson stated that Senator Obama had not returned his phone call or reached out at anytime.

BO was no where to be found.

SusanUnpc, I understand your disposition.

One question for you to add to the questions you raised that I KNOW the answer to.

If Amb. Wilson called Gov. Palin would she take the call?

I recall an interview that Mr. Johnson did with Amb. Wilson during this time. If I recall correctly, Amb. Wilson stated that Senator Obama had not returned his phone call or reached out at anytime.

BO was no where to be found.

SusanUnpc, I understand your disposition.

One question for you to add to the questions you raised that I KNOW the answer to.

If Amb. Wilson called Gov. Palin would she take the call?

clicked to fast, sorry for the double post.

I suspect it probably isn’t a good idea at this time to go to this rally against Iran at the UN in any event. Perhaps Obama can be there all by himself – he did say he was going didn’t he? Or is he going to the rally to SUPPORT Ahmadinijab – after all there is that debate the Iranian President is anxious to have with Obama when he arrives.

OFFENDED BY HEARING THE WORD CHICKEN SHIT FOR 10 SECONDS ??? … How about listening to ‘God damn America” for 20 years ??? … or, hanging out with anti-American Marxists, racists, terrorists and crooks for 20 years ??? It seems that those voting for Obama are able to equate a careless statement or two with a completely empty career, with very bad associations, and policies which will turn America into a defenseless Socialist third world country.
It seems that the judgement of these commenters to weigh what’s REALLY IMPORTANT, is about equal to that of Obama’s … scary !