And that is why I took particular delight in Andy Borowitz’s most recent piece, “Obama Quits While Ahead; Prez Resigns After Hundred Days: “It’s All Downhill From Here.” Oh, if only:

In a move that stunned both political allies and foes alike, President Barack Obama resigned today after serving 100 days in office, telling the White House press corps, “It’s all downhill from here.”

The reporters seemed stunned by the President’s decision in light of the fawning media coverage he received during his first 100 days, but the hyperbolic nature of that reportage, ironically, may have been the prime motivator behind Mr. Obama’s shocking move.

“Let’s face it, I’m not going to get better coverage than I have to date,” he said. “The only guy with a higher approval rating is that dude who landed the plane on the Hudson – or maybe that other dude who escaped from those pirates.”

Click HERE to read the rest – it is pretty funny, especially to see who has higher poll numbers than Obama!

Sigh. I guess it is easy for him to have slightly better than half approval ratings when liberals and progressives ignore: expanded faith-based initiatives, a program we detested under Bush; keeping No Child Left Behind intact, a program we have all widely decried, especially teachers; and Obama’s EXPANSION of warrantless wire-tapping on American citizens. For added irony, here is a video from Keith Olbermann, of all people, on this very thing:

Then there is the attempt to nationalize our banks, firing the CEO of a private company, and the list goes on and on. These are just off the top of my head. I am sure there are more – feel free to add them!

The point is, someone who was inexperienced and unqualified was elected president as the result of the best marketing ploy I have ever seen. His connections to: Tony Rezko; Jeremiah Wright; Bill Ayers; Khalid Rashidi; Kwame Kilpatrick; Louis Farrakhan; and James Meeks, to mention a few, all ignored. Also ignored was his massive contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as was his his dearth of a record, both as an IL state senator and a US senator (or how he got to either one of those positions – getting the qualified people kicked off with the very thinnest of reasons). His sexist behavior, and his homophobic associates, all ignored by the MSM and his followers, people who ordinarily would never give quarter to such a person (and about which I have written extensively here. To find those posts, and other related articles by fellow No Quarter writers on those issues, and Obama’s associates, feel free to do a Search at No Quarter.).

Oh, what might have been. Below are a few very good videos on Hillary Clinton, the one who received the most votes in a Primary EVER, despite being outspent at every turn, and having the MSM expose its Clinton Derangement Syndrome at every turn. Still, STILL, she received the most votes of anyone EVER. That says something, both about her, and about the DNC’s choice to pick Obama over her, for all of their concocted reasons and unethical machinations to make it so. In recognition, then, of Obama’s 100 Days in the White House, I hope these will bring a smile to your face (though they also brought tears to my eyes):

Now, for the t-shirts (oh, the colors are great!).

Here’s the video up at Gerard’s, er Bill’s site:

There’s much, much more where that came from, at Gerard’s, er Bill’s site, including articles.

Recently, Soldier4Hillary had a powerful piece on this very Bill Ayers Op-Ed, “Quiet Storm.” In it, she decried this domestic terrorist being treated as “Hail, fellow well met” by major media outlets. I could not agree more. We are not alone, thank heavens.

The other day, Paul Greenberg, the head of the editorial board for the Arkansas-Democrat Gazette, had this piece: HE’S B-A-A-ACK! Yes, the one to who he is referring is none other than “Not in prison on a technicality” Weatherman, Bill Ayers:

He lay low during the presidential campaign, and for good reason. His various connections to a neighbor named Barack Obama would have embarrassed both of them.

To hear Sen. Obama tell it during the campaign, this was just somebody he would occasionally pass on the street in Hyde Park, their upscale enclave back in Chicago. No need to go into detail about the various committees and fundraisers they’d put together for their mutual benefit. It wouldn’t do for a presidential candidate to acknowledge the depth or variety of his associations with an unrepentant terrorist out of the literally explosive 1960s.

But now that the campaign is over, Bill Ayers has resurfaced. In the New York Times, of course, where his latest apologia appeared earlier this month. Like so many distinguished old terrorists, he now denies he ever was one. A founder of the Weather Underground, which he once described as “an American Red Army,” he now says it was guilty only of “symbolic acts of extreme vandalism.”

I’m sorry, but “extreme vandalism”?? Seems like he’s still on those ’60′s drugs if this is how he now chooses to frame the terrorist activities of his “posse”:

Euphemism is still the last resort of the violent. The Weathermen, the talented Mr. Ayers explains, were guilty only of “attacks on property, never on people. … But it was not terrorism; we were not engaged in a campaign to kill and injure people indiscriminately, spreading fear and suffering for political ends.”

He could have fooled me. In Weatherman’s heyday back in 1969 Chicago, aka the Days of Rage, its members attacked police and civilian targets alike. Is he now saying that they killed and injured people only discriminately?

The rhetorical distance between Bill Ayers’ old memoir, “Fugitive Days,” and the mild persona he’s now adopted on the op-ed page of the New York Times is impressive mainly for its sheer chutzpah. For in his book, which might as well have been a confession in full, he wrote proudly of having “participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.”

Of the day he bombed the Pentagon, Bill Ayers recalled: “Everything was absolutely ideal. … The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.”

See? Nothing but a little “vandalism” going on there! Who could possibly claim that Ayers and his little gang were actually terrorists?? I mean, c’mon already! Oh, wait, Ayers wasn’t finished:

There’s a lot more of that kind of thing in his rhetoric: “There’s something about a good bomb. … Night after night, day after day, each majestic scene I witnessed was so terrible and so unexpected that no city would ever again stand innocently fixed in my mind. Big buildings and wide streets, cement and steel were no longer permanent. They, too, were fragile and destructible. A torch, a bomb, a strong enough wind, and they, too, would come undone or get knocked down.”

Mr. Ayers’ earlier defense of his terrorist past had appeared, with perfect timing, in an interview in the New York Times published on the morning of September 11, 2001. The events of that day rather took the shine off his remarks. Or were those terrorists just practicing “symbolic acts of extreme vandalism,” too?

Lest we forget, people were killed during the Weatherman’s reign of terror, notably three Weathermen — including Mr. Ayers’ then-girlfriend, Diana Oughton. They blew themselves up accidentally in their Greenwich Village town house while preparing a bomb that had been intended for an Army dance at Fort Dix.

Just because terrorism is incompetent doesn’t make it any the less terrorism. As a more honest Bill Ayers once admitted, that bomb could have done a lot more damage if it hadn’t killed the terrorists themselves, “tearing through windows and walls and, yes, people, too.” Instead, it tore through the terrorists. There is a raw justice in these matters.

I see – so attempted murder doesn’t count, then, right? Because of their own incompetence, the Murtaugh family, particularly NY State Supreme Court Justice Murtaugh, in Manhattan was not killed when they firebombed their house. So, that doesn’t count in the reign of terror – oops – “vandalism.” Oh, of course not. We were all just taking this Weather Undergound thing a little tooseriously, at least according to the BIll Ayers of today:

But the greatest violence Bill Ayers has done, and continues to do, is to the language. He now presents a campaign of terror as just vandalism, and his old speeches as just a lot of posturing. (“Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.”) Today, thanks to his remarkable forgettery, he can’t even remember saying such things.

Bill Ayers may be willing to twist the simple meaning of words, but he can’t seem to admit their power, and take responsibility for the effect his own might have had on impressionable young minds. Naturally he’s now become a professor of “education” at the University of Illinois. If he couldn’t destroy American society in his youth, maybe he can undermine the next generation in his advancing years.

And that is, in a nutshell, one of the major concerns about Bill Ayers. Not only is he completely unreprentant for his deeds, and is now trying to couch them in far less incendiary language, but it is what he is imparting to this generation (you nkow, Obama), and the next.

And speaking of Obama:

It wouldn’t be quite accurate to say Professor Ayers never made an appearance during the late presidential campaign. Fox News sent a camera crew to waylay him outside his nice home in Hyde Park. The newsmen found him wearing a shirt adorned with, of course, a big red star. And he did not welcome their attention. “This is my property,” he told them, ordering them off the place. Then the old Weatherman and cop-baiter called … the police.

The professor would seem to be all against vestiges of the old, oppressive capitalist order like private property — unless of course it’s his. His guiding philosophy isn’t communism, it’s hypocrisy. Bill Ayers’ politics and maybe life can be summed up simply enough: He’s the personification of the spoiled brat as ideologue.

Now that I’ve written this column, I almost regret it. If I hadn’t spotted his self-righteous little act in the New York Times, I might have spared both you, Gentle Reader, and me this brief review of his miserable career. The man isn’t worth wasting good time and words on. But attention must be paid, a record kept. So some future innocent won’t take his type, and hype, seriously.

Well, amen to that, but the vast majority of the media is far too complacent, even encouraging, of Ayers’ “type and hype.” Yes, vigilance is required to keep an HONEST record of what this man did, of what his group did, and how terrorized people were byt his organization. For Ayers to try to claim now that it was essentially just some spirited hijinks on his part is not only disingenuous, but dangerous. We must remember the truth, and not let him get away with his revisionist history (or that of Obama’s relationship with this man). It is far past time this man was held accountable for his actions, no matter his words.

There have been reforms in the state, most notably a new ethics law designed to limit the impact of money in politics. It was approved only after Obama, a former state senator, called his one-time mentor, Senate President Emil Jones, and urged its passage.

His “one-time mentor”? Are you freakin’ KIDDING me??? How about the Kingmaker who put Obama’s name on legislation on which he had not worked?? Oh, wait, that’s just too close to the truth of Obama’s lack of experience/qualifications. No way can the AP get that close…

Ahem. But of course, the ONLY reason The One made the decision to begin his political career in Chicago, apparently, was to clean up Illinois politics. Hahahahaha! Yeah, and that’s why he endorsed Blagojevich – TWICE. And worked on his campaign. But why quibble over past history, right? RIGHT??

That does seem to be the MO around anything related to BO. It is really amazing to me. In my opinion, though, the only way someone can deny Obama is a Chicago-style politician is flat our ignorance, or flat our denial of reality. Take your pick. There is NO way from the stories that have come out about Obama, his relationships to Blagojevich, Rezko, Wright, Meeks, Ayers, et al, that he is above typical Chicago politics. The Rezko thing ALONE is indicative of his involvement. And there is no way that Blagojevich JUST became corrupt as of Nov. 5th when Obama, with the help of ANOTHER corrupt Chicago political institution, ACORN (there have been so many stories on ACORN, and their actions this year, it is hard to single out just one, but here’s a YouTube video, and here’s another. There are many more videos on this subject. If you want more article information, please feel free to use the”Search” function at the upper right hand corner of this page.), helped him become PEBO.

Yes, I know the MSM has been a HUGE help in both regards – ignorance and denial. But not ALL reputable sources were completely in the tank for The One. The New Yorker, for instance, had some impressive pieces, particularly this one,The Political Scene: “Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama. The article title alone is indicative of the effect of Chicago-style politics on Obama. The author, Ryan Lizza, published this article in July 21, 2008, so like I said, the information was definitely available…

Many of us have heard of Alice Palmer, one of the first people (of whom we are aware) thrown under the bus by a power-hungry Obama. There was another woman, too, Toni Preckwinkle, who had a whole lot to say about the young Mr. Obama on his ascension into Chicago politics:

One day in 1995, Barack Obama went to see his alderman, an influential politician named Toni Preckwinkle, on Chicago’s South Side, where politics had been upended by scandal. Mel Reynolds, a local congressman, was facing charges of sexual assault of a sixteen-year-old campaign volunteer. (He eventually resigned his seat.) The looming vacancy set off a fury of ambition and hustle; several politicians, including a state senator named Alice Palmer, an education expert of modest political skills, prepared to enter the congressional race. Palmer represented Hyde Park—Obama’s neighborhood, a racially integrated, liberal sanctuary—and, if she ran for Congress, she would need a replacement in Springfield, the state capital. Obama at the time was a thirty-three-year-old lawyer, university lecturer, and aspiring office-seeker, and the Palmer seat was what he had in mind when he visited Alderman Preckwinkle.

“Barack came to me and said, ‘If Alice decides she wants to run, I want to run for her State Senate seat,’ ” Preckwinkle told me. We were in her district office, above a bank on a street of check-cashing shops and vacant lots north of Hyde Park. Preckwinkle soon became an Obama loyalist, and she stuck with him in a State Senate campaign that strained or ruptured many friendships but was ultimately successful. Four years later, in 2000, she backed Obama in a doomed congressional campaign against a local icon, the former Black Panther Bobby Rush. And in 2004 Preckwinkle supported Obama during his improbable, successful run for the United States Senate. So it was startling to learn that Toni Preckwinkle had become disenchanted with Barack Obama.

Well, I’ll be damned – Obama DIDN’T win all of his races! Amazing how we have RARELY (if ever) heard about his “doomed” race. Or that some people who know him, really know him, no longer are delighting in his glow:

Preckwinkle is a tall, commanding woman with a clipped gray Afro. She has represented her slice of the South Side for seventeen years and expresses no interest in higher office. On Chicago’s City Council, she is often a dissenter against the wishes of Mayor Richard M. Daley. For anyone trying to understand Obama’s breathtakingly rapid political ascent, Preckwinkle is an indispensable witness—a close observer, friend, and confidante during a period of Obama’s life to which he rarely calls attention.

Although many of Obama’s recent supporters have been surprised by signs of political opportunism, Preckwinkle wasn’t. “I think he was very strategic in his choice of friends and mentors,” she told me. “I spent ten years of my adult life working to be alderman. I finally got elected. This is a job I love. And I’m perfectly happy with it. I’m not sure that’s the way that he approached his public life—that he was going to try for a job and stay there for one period of time. In retrospect, I think he saw the positions he held as stepping stones to other things and therefore approached his public life differently than other people might have.”

Well, again, if anyone could see the trajectory of Obama’s career as anything other thank opportunistic “stone-stepping,” it is only because they did not WANT to see that Obama was a driven POLITICIAN.

But here is my point: Chicago politics. This is a major foundation the MSM and Obama worshipers/supporters refuse to acknowledge – because it does not fit the narrative they have created:

On issue after issue, Preckwinkle presented Obama as someone who thrived in the world of Chicago politics. She suggested that Obama joined Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ for political reasons. “It’s a church that would provide you with lots of social connections and prominent parishioners,” she said. “It’s a good place for a politician to be a member.” Preckwinkle was unsparing on the subject of the Chicago real-estate developer Antoin (Tony) Rezko, a friend of Obama’s and one of his top fund-raisers, who was recently convicted of fraud, bribery, and money laundering: “Who you take money from is a reflection of your knowledge at the time and your principles.” As we talked, it became increasingly clear that loyalty was the issue that drove Preckwinkle’s current view of her onetime protégé. “I don’t think you should forget who your friends are,” she said.

Others told me that Preckwinkle’s grievances against Obama included specific complaints, such as his refusal to endorse a former aide and longtime friend, Will Burns, in a State Senate primary—a contest that Burns won anyway. There was also a more general belief that, after Obama won the 2004 United States Senate primary, he ignored his South Side base. Preckwinkle said, “My view is you have to bring your constituency along with you. Granted, you have to make some tough decisions. Granted, sometimes you have to make decisions that people won’t understand or like. But it’s your obligation to explain yourself and try to do your supporters the courtesy of treating them with respect.” Ivory Mitchell, who for twenty years has been the chairman of the local ward organization in Obama’s neighborhood—considered the most important Democratic organization on the South Side—was one of Obama’s earliest backers. Today, he says, “All the work we did to help him get where he finally ended up, he didn’t seem too appreciative.” A year ago, Mitchell became a delegate for Hillary Clinton.

What?? Obama not appreciative? Yeah – no kidding. He has made it abundantly clear that he will step on whoever whenever it is politically – I said, POLITICALLY – expedient for him to do so. And still:

The same month Mitchell endorsed Clinton, the Obama campaign reached out to Preckwinkle, and eventually she signed on as an Obama delegate. I asked her if what she considered slights or betrayals were simply the necessary accommodations and maneuvering of a politician making a lightning transition from Hyde Park legislator to Presidential nominee. “Can you get where he is and maintain your personal integrity?” she said. “Is that the question?” She stared at me and grimaced. “I’m going to pass on that…”

Can’t say as I blame her. What does it say when someone who DOES actually know him has “to pass” on answering a question regarding Obama’s integrity? Or when the governor of his home state refers to him as a “mo***r f***er”?? These are the people who KNOW him, after all, not just who worship him from afar.

And then there is this (emphasis mine):

Chicago is not Obama’s home town, but it’s where he chose to forge his identity. Several weeks ago, he moved many of the Democratic National Committee’s operations from Washington to Chicago, making the city the unofficial capital of the Democratic Party; his campaign headquarters are in an office building in the Loop, Chicago’s downtown business district. But Chicago, with its reputation as a center of vicious and corrupt politics, may also be the place that Obama needs to leave behind.

Exactly. Chicago, with its long, long, LONG history of corrupt politics, is the city in which Obama decided to forge his political identity. One other interesting note on Obama and Chicago politics:

…David Axelrod, who has been Obama’s chief strategist since 2002 and is the foremost political consultant in Chicago, was a witness to all of it, first as a political reporter for the Chicago Tribune and later as the chief consultant to two mayors: Harold Washington, Chicago’s first black mayor and a hero of the Independents, and the current Mayor Daley, whose last name still carries negative connotations in the precincts of Hyde Park…

Uh huh. David Axelrod has shown himself to be a part of Chicago-style politics in the way he has run Obama’s campaign, that’s for sure. And no doubt, he will continue to use Chicago-style politics in the White House, too. Why change horses in mid-stream, right?

Oh, wait – that’s the wrong talking point. Ahem. Yes, Obama is trying to distance himself from Chicago politics NOW. Now that so many of its players’ wrong-doings are in the headlines, but those of us who have been keeping score know the real deal. Obama is inextricably bound to Chicago politics, and Chicago STYLE politics, as we saw this year with Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and John McCain. Basically, anyone who had the “audacity to get in Obama’s way experienced Chicago politics up close and personal, and it was not pretty.

There is much, much more to the New Yorker article, and I hope you will click HERE to finish reading it (it’s long, which is why I am not reprinting it all here). In it you will read about Obama’s contentious relationship with another member of the IL Senate, Rickey Hendon; his relationship with Rezko, Ayers, and Dorhn; how his community organizing REALLY went (hint: not as well as he likes to claim NOW), and much more. I will leave you with this passage:

Part of Obama’s political success is that he has been able to exploit relationships with important yet ethically dubious figures in Illinois while still maintaining his independence. In some ways, this is an Illinois tradition. When the liberal reformer Adlai Stevenson ran for governor, in 1948, one Democratic boss reportedly noted that he would “perfume the ticket.” The earnest Lincoln scholar Paul Simon stood out in the Senate for his moral rectitude and his commitment to good government even as his state wallowed in scandal. “The political bosses knew they had to have what they used to call in business a loss leader—the showcasing,” Don Rose, the Chicago political consultant, said. “The car that you sold for under its value for advertising purposes. While you had at the top of your ticket a shining star, under that it was like turning over a rock.”

Obama has said little about the scandals in his home state. Besides the Rezko and Blagojevich cases, there have been indictments and convictions against the Daley administration concerning hiring and contracting practices. Getting close to the sullied political leadership in Illinois was probably an unavoidable cost of winning the U.S. Senate seat. Emil Jones told me that another of the lessons Obama learned after his 2000 loss was the importance of political sponsorship.

You can say that again…

Tonight at 9:00 p.m. ET: Our View with Patsy and Sugar! (Patsy is also Soldier4Hillary!)

The views and opinions are my own and do not reflect the views or opinions of NQR

Reading earlier this week an opinion piece on the editorial by Ayers in the New York Times on a blog called The Moderate Voice titled: Prediction: The Ayers haters still Won’t be Satisfied,” reading the recent transcript, and viewing the actual footage on Hardball with Ayers, reminded me of my last deployment to Iraq and an incident that happened. I had just pulled my vehicle to park in the back of our TOC (Tactical Operations Center) with my TC who rode with me to pick up the mail. There wasn’t much that day so on the way back we stopped at the main PX that was located on another camp to get a carton of cigarettes since they always ran out at the small one on our camp. My TC who was also one of my tent mates wanted to smoke before we went in by the barriers, but we had to smoke five feet from the TOC, which was in front of one of our LMTVs, so I told her we should take our bags in first. Instead of walking around we decided to just cut through the TOC because it was quicker. We did not even make it inside all the way before we heard the whistle of a Mortar, the sound it makes when incoming. And the next thing we heard and felt, was that mortar as it hit the vehicle parked behind us, where not even a minute prior we had just left. It took out the truck, caused the chapel ceiling to cave in, and hit inside our camp, directly behind the vehicle we just left and in the exact place we had formations each and every day.

Mortars & IEDs. It was what people on convoys never want to encounter when they are convoying on dark roads since we ran our convoys at night. It is what you would hear while in the shower, in your sleep tent, while eating or when they constantly and consecutively attempted to hit BIAP (Baghdad International Airport) which was close to our camp, all the time. From mortars you can hear and IEDs you cant even see, till this day I have yet to see a non issue “friendly bomb” mortar or IED. There is no ducking or running for cover. Just like you are unable to dodge or outrun a bullet. When you hear that whistle you are screwed and can only hope where it hits will not happen in your vicinity and have you end up dead. I used to say that I would rather be in my tent sleeping if it hit us and not know it. Then to be awake taking a shower, eating or working, hear it and know what is coming next. These people who do this don’t care about who you are, what you may do or who you may be, the only thing that they care for is to cause destruction because of there cause. For them, if they take out even one of us, they consider it winning.

Because they are fighting for something which we don’t understand or believe in. They were not fighting against us, they were/are fighting for there cause, their beliefs, their ideology. And whether we were there in there country or not, they will continue to fight for their beliefs and will continue to strap bombs to themselves because it is not just about dying for them, it’s about believing in their cause to the point their death does not even matter. But I know and knew all of this when I reenlisted two weeks after 9/11. I knew it 10 March 1998 when I joined. I knew it when I deployed to Kuwait. I knew it when I deployed to Uzbekistan. I knew it when I was in Bagram in Afghanistan after 9/11, and I knew it when in Iraq on my last deployment. I was in Afghanistan during Operation Anaconda in 02 when 10th Mountain Division, the US Special Forces groups from USSOCOM, JSOC and CIA’s Special Activities Division and 101st Airborne Division, as well as other allied forces, went in to the Shahi-Kot Valley and Arma Mountains for Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar. Our task force from Fort Bragg, one of the many battalions in the rear which was part of the command of the former Coscom Commander General Dunwoody, was pulling base logistical support from fuel, ammo, water and running the SSA in Uzbekistan before we picked up to move down to Bagram to fall under 10th Mountain. Where part of your briefing was “if you didnt drop it, don’t pick it up” because of the amount of unexploded ordnance left from when they were fighting the Soviets could be found any and everywhere. When paths walked every day, walking in the wrong spot on a path you have been on daily, had the possibility to become deadly.

I knew this and I understood it, but we were fighting against something that was much bigger than my fear. It was a sacrifice worth making and I know it and still do till this very day. Which brings me to my point. What I do not know, do not understand, and will not even attempt to, is why in the hell anyone would give a man a platform to explain the ideology of their organization who is giving the impression that “bombs” are just a form of self expression. When I read the words of this portion of the exchange between the recent interview of Chris Matthews and Ayers I literally became sick to my stomach:

MATTHEWS: What’s the lesson of Vietnam for America?

AYERS: Well I think one of the lessons is that we should be, very, very wary when the United States government tells us that we must invade and occupy a country. We should be very wary of led down, being led down that path. And we should be rethinking, right now, most of all, we should rethink America’s role in the world. Do we have to be the policemen of the world? Do we have to be the one and only superpower? Or could we imagine ourselves a nation among nations. Could we imagine a foreign policy based on justice, rather than power.

MATTHEWS: Yeah. Aren’t you scared a little bit, I certainly am, by the willingness of the American people to assume language, brand new language like “weapons of mass destruction,” “Homeland Security,” all these references to a new kind of foreign policy? “Forward leaning.” “A preemptive, preventive war.” Preventive war sounds like an oxymoron to me. But aren’t you scared that the American people bought every one of those words, bought the whole argument that we had to go to Iraq?

AYERS: I actually think that those are contested. And I think you’re right to worry about how much we did buy into that. But on the other hand I think we should be very hopeful that people rejected quite, a month ago, rejected eight years of the politics of fear, the politics of terror, the politics of violence and war and said, “Let’s turn in a different direction.” So we’re, we’ve ended the era, I think, of 9/11, or at least turned a page on it.

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

AYERS: And we’ve entered an era of “Yes We Can!” But the question remains, “Yes we can, what?” And in foreign policy can we become a nation among nations? Can we become a nation who believes in justice for everyone.

MATTHEWS: Yeah well those are good things. I think you’re a different man. I think you’re a different man than the one that was in the Weather Underground and you’ve said so. Let me ask you are you concerned that the centrist positions of the people, Senator Obama, President-elect Obama has named – Senator Clinton, Jim Jones, General Jim Jones, Bob Gates, the holdover Defense chief – are you concerned that she’s putting establishment figures, who, who, who supported the war authorization in Iraq in powerful positions of influence over him? That the people in the room, all around him now, will be people who disagreed with him and you about the Iraq war? Are you worried about that?

AYERS: A bit but I think that people like you and me, and probably most of the people who watch your show are suffering a kind of postpartum depression. That is we were so used to reading the polls and getting agitated about every nuance of what was happening that we now don’t know what to do with ourselves. So we try to read the mind of the President-elect. I think it’s much less important that we do that, than that we pay attention to building, on-the-ground, forces that want to rethink-

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

AYERS: -and, and re-imagine what America could be.

Attempting to explain why they deemed it necessary to set bombs and actually have people not only explaining his actions but rallying to this man’s side is unbelievable. But to have the goddamn nerve to ask an individual about positions in the new administration as if his opinion counts? Unbelievable. I am amazed. I am astounded and I am furious. What in gods name are we coming to when this new Pro- Ayers media and bloggers have the audacity to insinuate that we, the people, are considered “haters” and that something is wrong with us for believing placing a bomb inside of a building is not some form of freedom of expression? Have they lost there minds? Do they even know what it is like to pray daily you will come home the same way you left when deployed? Or to pray daily for those once you left, for those still there? Have they ever seen the damage to a person who has been on the receiving end of what they are giving justification for? Seen what shrapnel can do to a person’s face? Their body? Their arms? Their legs? I have, as well as so many others who are watching this shit play out in the court of public opinion. It’s one thing to have injuries you can see as a daily reminder, this I know, but to hear explanations is entirely different.

They will send the message to those who would do our country harm that if they have a “valid reason” for their actions, they will be excused because pundits, commentators, and the MSM says it‘s a non- issue? We are fighting against something in which they have the gall to explain and give justification. And no one will say a word in fear the majority will label them “racist”. That they will be blacklisted, shunned or taken apart in the mainstream media if they have the audacity to question those who are considered the majority. I will not be held hostage by the label “racist” to keep me from speaking up or defending what is right. For the MSM to give this man a platform, for bloggers to make excuses for what he has done, and political parties to remain silent feels like a betrayal. What so many see as a “non-issue” is a very big issue for me because I do not see the difference in his type of “expression” and the same type of “expression” I have seen overseas.

What makes his type of bombs any different from anyone else’s? If his name would have been Akbar Jamal Muhammed and he did the exact same thing Ayers did, but did it in 2001? Would he have the opportunity to write opinion pieces to garner support in the New York Times? Would he be on a book signing tour? Have Democrats & Republican pundits, and commentators agreeing it was harmless while saying it’s racist to bring it up, asking advice on national security and appointments like he is qualified to do so, while lining up to the closest microphone and spotlight on his behalf to use that “non-issue” word? Or would he have the opportunity to do guest appearances on “Hardball” and “Good Morning America?” Chris Matthews deserves to be fired. We have not reached the level of desperation where we need to solicit the opinion of a domestic terrorist on national security or on how our government should govern.

Our elected officials are becoming next to worthless for not calling the media out on this. I want change but not at the cost of compromising what I know to be right. I want our country to prosper, but not at the cost of turning into a spineless wimp who cant do their job because they have seen how they destroyed others who didn’t cater to a certain campaign and the MSM. We don’t make friends with terrorists. We don’t listen to terrorists’ ideology. We don’t allow them to explain there actions. We don’t make excuses. We don’t attempt to sympathize, condone, attempt to believe, justify or encourage their form of “expression” when it involves anything that could do this country or the people harm. And I could care even less about the biased shill, in the pocket, media because they are just another organization that has to pay the bills to keep the lights on just like we do but thiee paycheck comes from ratings.

But what they do not realize, is that what is given to them, can be taken away. They may be bought and paid for but no one owns me and I refuse to join the crowd that lacks a spine, and a backbone who can’t form their own opinion without checking with the media first. I want someone to get up and say enough is enough and send that man back to the hole, rock and bridge he crawled out from under and do us all a favor by staying there. Either you are against terrorists who go about using bombs to get their message across or you are for it. Anyone wanting to sympathize and become buddies with terrorists, foreign and domestic, in my opinion should pack their damn bags, get a strip map for their training camps from officials in India and head to the goddamn borders of Pakistan or the mountains in Afghanistan. They can blog and report the news from there. This is the final straw for me.

There is no man or woman that walks on this earth, put their pants on the same way that I do, that can instill this type of fear that would make you compromise your integrity. I could care less. I was born from dissent and was told years ago the first time I was deployed to a combat zone and touched ground that no weapon ever formed against me shall prosper. And each time I stepped off a C130 when I made it home safely, I knew it to be true. But it was not and will not be at the expense of fighting terrorists in a foreign country just to see one on every damn channel on tv or writing editorials and doing interviews in the newspaper while whining about how they are misunderstood and done wrong. Who will the MSM interview and drag out next? Bin Laden? Will we have to listen to how its really our fault for not understanding his beliefs? Do we get to read his editorial in the New York Times? Will he do “Hardball?” Or maybe “Oprah” or “Good Morning America?” There is a quiet storm building over this and I cannot wait for the day the binds that currently hold me no longer exist. And any party, pundit, or person believing this will be the new way to fight the war on terrorism, is to relate with the enemy and attempt to explain and understand their cause may need to step back and realize that everyone does not care about being part of the majority.

Or care about being on the “winning side” with the MSM. Because the only “winning side” to be on is the side with this country and the American people on it. They have ALL failed the test the minute these elected officials, who we gave jobs with our vote to represent us, lost their minds, lost their voice, their credibility, and their common sense the moment they lost their backbone to stand up and represent us. If they can’t even fight for a cause here in our own damn country, they are going to get run the hell over by people in other countries. I want elected officials willing to fight, not watered down individuals scared to say or speak the truth because they need the majority to stand behind them. I don’t want to be Bff’s forever and couldn’t care less if the so called “enemy” in third world countries hate our guts. They should hate us . We don’t need to cater to or understand their beliefs or work on our nations social standing with them, they need to work on there social standing with us. We should not bow down to any individuals in any country. We don’t have anything to prove, they do, and if they dislike us even more so be it. That just means we are doing something right. Because when they begin to want to be buddies and best friends for life, then we have something to worry about.

Look at them. In the news acting as if government positions or no better than powerball tickets waiting to see if they bought and paid for enough while hoping they are the ones to have the winning number. Acting as if this is a high school student council instead of our governing body of our government. While other countries are dealing in politics, we look like fools who don’t know what politics actually is. We are not sending a message of strength. We look weak. I want individuals willing to stand up and take on the MSM for this, by calling them out for what they are doing by promoting these type of actions. It is wrong. It’s pathetic. Just because they don’t have the heart or strength to execute what they were elected to do, because they are too scared to do their job for fear of being labeled “racist” by “the report nothing and do nothing” MSM does not mean we, as a whole, should suffer.

All because they want to be on the “right side”. The “right team”. With the “right crowd”. There is no way on gods green earth will I listen to them hype this man up for the next four years. There is no way in hell I will watch individuals get smacked in the face daily by those explaining this man’s organization and what they have done as a “non-issue”. I don’t care if this man is best friends with the king and queen of England and considered royalty. What he did was wrong and there are no explanations in the world that can give legitimacy to his actions. If they want to sell their souls to the devil to prove they are not racist by embracing him that is their choice. They can stand behind and defend whoever they want, in their own warped thinking, thinking that speaking highly of him based on his past perceived association will gain them favor. By hiding behind the facade that they are standing behind this country and what is best for it by not questioning his actions so it will not reflect negatively on the President Elect. Bullshit. Theodore Roosevelt said it best:

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiently, or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.

Yes, Emily Yoffe, the writer, treats us to this informative study about emotions, and how Obama used them to bring in the masses. Now, many of us already knew it was rhetoric over substance, but here she lays it out for us in her Own way:

For researchers of emotions, creating them in the lab can be a problem. Dacher Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California-Berkeley, studies the emotions of uplift, and he has tried everything from showing subjects vistas of the Grand Canyon to reading them poetry—with little success. But just this week one of his postdocs came in with a great idea: Hook up the subjects, play Barack Obama’s victory speech, and record as their autonomic nervous systems go into a swoon.

In his forthcoming book, Born To Be Good (which is not a biography of Obama*), Keltner writes that he believes when we experience transcendence, it stimulates our vagus nerve, causing “a feeling of spreading, liquid warmth in the chest and a lump in the throat.” For the 66 million Americans who voted for Obama, that experience was shared on Election Day, producing a collective case of an emotion that has only recently gotten research attention. It’s called “elevation.”

Elevation has always existed but has just moved out of the realm of philosophy and religion and been recognized as a distinct emotional state and a subject for psychological study. Psychology has long focused on what goes wrong, but in the past decade there has been an explosion of interest in “positive psychology”—what makes us feel good and why. University of Virginia moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who coined the term elevation, writes, “Powerful moments of elevation sometimes seem to push a mental ‘reset button,’ wiping out feelings of cynicism and replacing them with feelings of hope, love, and optimism, and a sense of moral inspiration.”

* Oh, isn’t she witty?? And way to keep the bias out of this “scientific” piece.

Ah – so Obama has learned how to hit the reset button so that normally thinking human beings will be transported into La-la land. Everyone has now donned their rose colored glasses, and let all the bad reality just slip away. Oh, see how much happier they are than those of us still stuck in the real world!

This is just the beginning, though. Seems this idea has been around for some time:

Haidt quotes first-century Greek philosopher Longinus on great oratory: “The effect of elevated language upon an audience is not persuasion but transport.” Such feeling was once a part of our public discourse. After hearing Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address, former slave Frederick Douglass said it was a “sacred effort.” But uplifting rhetoric came to sound anachronistic, except as practiced by the occasional master like Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan. And now Obama.

We come to elevation, Haidt writes, through observing others—their strength of character, virtue, or “moral beauty.” Elevation evokes in us “a desire to become a better person, or to lead a better life.” The 58 million McCain voters might say that the virtue and moral beauty displayed by Obama at his rallies was an airy promise of future virtue and moral beauty. And that the soaring feeling his voters had of having made the world a better place consisted of the act of placing their index fingers on a touch screen next to the words Barack Obama. They might be on to something. Haidt’s research shows that elevation is good at provoking a desire to make a difference but not so good at motivating real action. But he says the elevation effect is powerful nonetheless. “It does appear to change people cognitively; it opens hearts and minds to new possibilities. This will be crucial for Obama.”

Wait, say what? First we have “moral beauty,” character and virtue being exhibited by Obama in his speeches (or so it seems to his followers), written by the Bozo on the left:

Then we have an acknowledgment that people who voted for McCain are pretty much right that the extent of this “elevation” is pushing a button, concluding with the benefits to OBAMA of the mind control (well, what the hell else is it when it wipes the slate clean, making normally rational people start believing in a hope-y change-y rainbow unicorn??)? Wow – that is some massive movement, all within one paragraph: character not demonstrated but framed in “words, just words” which many did not buy into but good for Obama those who threw away their analytical, rational selves. Check.

There is so much about Obama in this regard, though:

Keltner believes certain people are “vagal superstars”—in the lab he has measured people who have high vagus nerve activity. “They respond to stress with calmness and resilience, they build networks, break up conflicts, they’re more cooperative, they handle bereavement better.” He says being around these people makes other people feel good. “I would guarantee Barack Obama is off the charts. Just bring him to my lab.”

I’m sorry, sir, but you seem to be caught up in the Rainbow Unicorn of Hope yourself. Obama has actually demonstrated he is NOT calm, but rather testy (examples here, here and here), quick to anger, and a bully. You are buying into the MSM definitions of him, not the REALITY of him. Just like when they termed George Bush’s arrogant smugness as “charm.” Despite the attempts by the MSM to paint Obama as the new Buddha, he has shown in debates and unscripted interactions who he really is. Maybe you shouldn’t be watching MSNBC while you do your “research.” Just a suggestion.

I barely know what to say about this next part, so I will just leave it to you:

It was while looking through the letters of Thomas Jefferson that Haidt first found a description of elevation. Jefferson wrote of the physical sensation that comes from witnessing goodness in others: It is to “dilate [the] breast and elevate [the] sentiments … and privately covenant to copy the fair example.” Haidt took this description as a mandate. Since it’s tricky to study the vagus nerve, he and a psychology student conceived of a way to look at it indirectly. The vagus nerve works with oxytocin, the hormone of connection. Since oxytocin is released during breast-feeding, he and the student brought in 42 lactating women and had them watch either an inspiring clip from The Oprah Winfrey Show about a gang member saved from a life of violence by a teacher or an amusing bit from a Jerry Seinfeld routine.

About half the Oprah-watching mothers either leaked milk into nursing pads or nursed their babies following the viewing; none of the Seinfeld watchers felt enough breast dilation to wet a pad, and fewer than 15 percent of them nursed. You could say elevation is Oprah’s opiate of the masses, so it’s fitting that she early on gave Obama her imprimatur. And that for his victory speech was up front in Grant Park, elevation’s moist embodiment, feeling so at one with humankind that she used a stranger as a handkerchief.

Thank heavens Haidt is such a dedicated scientist. Ahem. How else would we know why Oprah was so moved to use someone she didn’t know as her handkerchief?

Are we PAYING for this research, by the way? You know, with our tax dollars?? Just wondering.

Back to the research:

The researchers say elevation is part of a family of self-transcending emotions. Some others are awe, that sense of the vastness of the universe and smallness of self that is often invoked by nature; another is admiration, that goose-bump-making thrill that comes from seeing exceptional skill in action. Keltner says we most powerfully experience these in groups—no wonder people spontaneously ran into the street on election night, hugging strangers. “We had to evolve these emotions to devote ourselves into social collectives,” he says.

When you start thinking about mass movements, all those upturned, glowing faces of true believers—be they the followers of Jim Jones or Adolf Hitler—you don’t always get a warm feeling about mankind. Instead, knowing where some of these “social collectives” end up, the sensation is a cold chill. Haidt acknowledges that in “calling the group to greatness,” elevation can be used for murderous ends. He says: “Anything that takes us out of ourselves and makes us feel we are listening to something larger is part of morality. It’s about pressing the buttons that turn off ‘I’ and turn on ‘we.’ “

Thank heavens someone finally said it. I mean, besides those of us in the reality-based world. It is important for a scientist to be able to step outside him/herself. And with Obama, what we have is massive turning back the clock on women’s rights, race relations, transparency of our “elected” officials (a PEBO who doesn’t have to submit ANY paperwork for the greatest job in the world, but demands that and much, much more from his subordinates. I’d sure like to see this Haidt guy do some research on that. Or anyone in the freakin’ MSM.).

Your patience with this article is about to be rewarded:

Even at its most benign, elevation can seem ridiculous to outsiders. Think of how Obama’s opponents love to mock his effect on people. During the campaign, if your chest was contracting while all about you chests were dilating, you may be a Republican. If you were unmoved by Obama, watching your fellow citizen get all tingly, even fall into a faint (too much vagus stimulation, and you’re going down), was maddening. “Other people’s reverence seems unctuous and sanctimonious,” says Keltner.

Obama himself seemed aware of the dangers that too much elevation might pop his candidacy like a helium balloon hitting a power line. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer described Obama’s canny strategy to make his rhetoric more pedestrian for the final months of the campaign.

Or, one might still have one’s WITS about one, thus not being taken in by this charlatan, this snake oil salesman. But of course, anyone who was not moved to tears or into a faint by this lying, conniving, arrogant, bullying, race-baiting, misogynistic, homophobic unqualified first term senator was just because someone was a “Republican.” Newsflash: those of us who actually prefer qualified, intelligent, candidates who compose their own policy positions rather than steal them from others, and come up with their own words to use, not plagiarizing others, may simply be mature. I’m just sayin’. Despite the MSM’s characterizations of Hillary Clinton’s speeches, I attended two of them, and I am here to tell you she is moving, compelling, funny as hell, and brilliant. But not once did I feel faint. Nor did I ever feel faint when Obama was speaking, even as I watched his 2004 speech which seemed sufficient experience for those “elevated” people who swooned over his “borrowed” words. But that’s just me. And millions others. Whatever.

Oh, but you knew it wasn’t going to stop there. There had to be a way for the author to turn this back to Obama worship:

While there is very little lab work on the elevating emotions, there is quite a bit on its counterpart, disgust. University of Pennsylvania psychologist Paul Rozin has been a leading theorist in the uses of disgust. He says it started as a survival strategy: Early humans needed to figure out when food was spoiled by contact with bacteria or parasites. From there disgust expanded to the social realm—people became repelled by the idea of contact with the defiled or by behaviors that seemed to belong to lower people. “Disgust is probably the most powerful emotion that separates your group from other groups,” says Keltner.

Haidt says disgust is the bottom floor of a vertical continuum of emotion; hit the up button, and you arrive at elevation. This could be why so many Obama supporters complained of being sickened and nauseated by the Republican campaign. Seeing a McCain ad or Palin video clip actually felt like being plunged from their Obama-lofted heights.

Disgust carries with it the notion of contamination, which helps to explain the Republicans’ obsession with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright and their frustration that more voters didn’t have a visceral reaction that Obama had unforgivably sullied himself by association with these men. But this time, elevation won. And expect that on Inauguration Day, even if the weather’s frigid, millions will be warmed by that liquid feeling in their chests. (Emily Yoffe is the author of What the Dog Did: Tales From a Formerly Reluctant Dog Owner. You can send your Human Guinea Pig suggestions or comments to emilyyoffe@hotmail.com)

Oh, yes – it was the REPUBLICANS’ problem that they, and all others not in the tank for Obama, were concerned about a CONFIRMED DOMESTIC TERRORIST, a convicted felon, and a racist in whose church Obama sat for over TWENTY years. And of course, it had nothing to do with the MSM downplaying those connections, even dismissing them )like Obama’s speechwriter groping a cut-out of the incoming Secretary of State of the United States), because those inconvenient people/facts did not fit their preconceived narrative of who Obama is. It wasn’t so much Republicans who wanted to highlight the nefarious associations of the PEBO, but AMERICANS who care about the sanctity of the Constitution, who care about with whom the PEBO chooses to associate himself. Unrepentant domestic terrorists, convicted felons (don’t forget Kwame Kilpatrick!), and anti-American racist ministers are not the kinds of people with whom a potential president should surround himself. In my humble opinion, of course.

In conclusion, what this “research” highlights is that Obama followers really did drink the Kool Aide. Vindication for those of us who did not, and managed to keep ourselves in emotional balance. Now we can say, “Told you so!” But, they’ll probably be too busy polishing their rose-colored glasses and looking for the rainbow unicorn to notice…

As in other recent interviews, he denied having a very close relationship with Barack Obama but at the same time he states that the residents in his neighborhood are very friendly, get together in each others’ homes and “laugh about the inflated rhetoric of the 60s”. Tell me, Bill, do Barack and Michelle sit in on these pow-wows? He says that the ads that Senator McCain aired about Obama’s relationship with him and his past activities were lies. He says that it is a credit to the American people that the ads didn’t work. Then it is good that Americans elected a president who probably agrees with your past activities and may even have some dangerous agenda in store for all of us?

Ayers denies that the Weather Underground was a terrorist organization but that it was a militant one.

So explain this to me: How is bombing the Capitol Building, the Pentagon, the NYC Police Headquarters and a judge’s home NOT terrorism? His reasoning is that they didn’t hurt or kill anyone. He says the police officer killed in 1970 was not done by them. He goes on to explain that the bomb at the Pentagon was a small one set in a restroom. It knocked out a computer and held off the air war for a couple of days. It was intended to harm property, not people. Give me a break!! A bomb is a bomb is a bomb!! What if someone had been in that restroom at the time that the bomb went off? Or standing next to the computer that was hit? These actions, he states, were “Extreme acts of Vandalism”. Gosh, I must be naive. I thought vandalism was like painting graffiti on bridges or turning over outhouses, as kids in my younger days did. I wouldn’t have labeled setting bombs as vandalism. Now, mind you” 9-11 was terrorism pure and simple”. Whew! I was glad to hear that!!

Regarding the statement that he has made, “I feel we didn’t do enough” he says that he was misquoted by he NY Times. When Terry Gross stated that people call him an “unrepentant terrorist” he responded that he would “need something specific to apologies for”. What say all of you? Can YOU think of any specifics?

Submitted by No-Nonsense Nancy
Here is the link to hear this interesting interview. It was an hour long but well worth the time.

One is reminded of the scene with Faye Dunaway and Jack Nicholson in Chinatown: “she’s my sister, she’s my daughter….” Bill Ayers says Obama is a “family friend” but at the same time only a “professional” colleague.  

And he was just as ambiguous about when they met. Today Ayers said it was at the same time that Obama was active on issues related to job loss and education. Well, that would mean the late 1980s when Obama was a community organizer working with laid off steel workers and also on the same school reform efforts that Ayers helped lead. 

Cuomo did not pursue the ambiguity and Ayers was content to let it sit there, unresolved.

But the larger impression made is of the utter political idiocy of Bill Ayers.

He still wants to argue that his violent tactics as a founder and leader of the 70s cult Weather Underground somehow contributed to the peace movement at the time. Instead, of course, he and his wife in arms, Bernardine Dohrn, helped destroy a generation’s efforts on behalf of peace and genuine social justice.  But that has not stopped him from re-issuing his apologia for his life, Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Anti-War Activist, as well as co-authoring with Dohrn a new book that makes race the key explanatory variable for what ails America (“Race Course Against White Supremacy.”

The right wing tried, valiantly, to portray Obama as somehow tainted by his association with this political relic. But what is, frankly, more disturbing is how or why Obama would have believed there was any value, whatsoever, to spending any time listening to this guy or his wife, at all.

Washington Wire – WSJ.com : Ayers Speaks Out on Campaign ’08 and His Tie to Obama

As a bonus for those of us who used to go to Taylor Marsh, that was another part of the trip down Memory Lane – before she became addicted to the Kool Aide and was actually a reasonable, rational person. Was that really only 8 months ago?? Seems like a lifetime ago, that’s for sure…

Then there is this:

Of course, I don’t understand why Morris, or the “52% of people” (I know, I know – there weren’t really that many given the duplicate fraudulent votes), DON’T think that Voldebama getting his start in Ayers and Dorhn’s living room, or working with him at Woods, wasn’t important! It goes to a pattern, a way of thinking, that is the issue here. That DOES matter, as Sean Hannity points out so succinctly (I know – I’m quoting Hannity, but he is right when he recites these associates. More in the media SHOULD have done so). Morris raises some great questions. Ones that were never answered by the media, that’s for sure. Just one more strike against them, in my humble opinion.

Anywho, I wonder how long it will be before Voldebama announces Bill Ayers as Secretary of Education? I think it will be January 21st. Maybe we should have a pool! Yeah, that’s the ticket!! And then we can watch all of the university professors who supported Voldebama, and others, trying to excuse the ideology of this unrepentant terrorist who wants to “radicalize” our youth. Oh, yeah – that should be some fun. If only it wasn’t so damn problematic. Let’s hope this is one bet that doesn’t come to fruition…

This was the best laugh I had all day, until one of the creative readers at No Quarter, Obama Is A Fraud, posted this:

Please join us for this historical Inaugural Celebration for President Barrack Hussein Obama. It will be a day of great events for all!

Midnight – Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez drink champagne toast to their brother in communism Comrade Obama. Burning of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and fireworks display. Long live the US of Hussein!

It’s an Open Thread – how was YOUR day?

Throughout this campaign season, any attempts to discern the “content of (Obama’s) character” have been thwarted by the Propaganda Machine, formerly known as the Fourth Estate, his handlers, the DNC, and his followers who claim, irrationally, I might add, the “Obama will heal us!” as Cher did on The Ellen Degeneres Show Nov. 3rd, as if he truly IS the Obamessiah, ignoring the tremendous splitting of the country, of the Democratic Party itself.

For the first time in memory, a candidate was NOT “known by the company he keeps,” “the birds of a feather which flocked together.” Rather, any mention of Bill Ayers was met, even by university professors with the illogical justification that Obama was only 8 when Bill Ayers and his compatriot, Bernadine Dorhn, were bombing the US Capitol, Pentagon, and other US buildings.

That may be so, but the ideology which drove Ayers and Dorhn is the ideology to which they still adhere. Obama has chosen to have them in his life, to live near them, work with them, and seek them out, as we recently learned for sure (as many of us suspected, and confirmed in this article by Steve Diamond at No Quarter, “Ayers and Obama In Regular Contact Says Source Close to Obama Candidacy“).

The list of his close associates in addition to Ayers and Dorhn are troubling: Rezko, Wright, Khalidi, Kilpatrick, Farakkhan, Blogajevich, et al, a list that contains convicted felons and one under investigation. I have said before, and will say again, any ONE of these people would have sunk any other candidacy, yet in the case of Obama, they were brushed aside as irrelevant. As was the glaring reality that Obama took the majority of his policy positions, often lock, stock, and barrel, from Hillary Clinton. But the Propaganda arm flipped it around, and his minions, again, many university professors, brushed aside his plagiarism as inconsequential. What a great lesson they are teaching their students, and their children.

Along those lines, I am in disbelief that adults, people who would not hire Obama at their own universities or businesses with his refusal to provide ANY documentation of his academic life, or allow friends, families, or fellow students to discuss him to ANYONE trying to get information on this first term senator running for the highest office in the land, would gladly give this man their votes.

I despair that adults, and their children, believe that the means justify the ends, that hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registrations, over 200,000 in Ohio, and 212,000 discovered in Georgia, in which voters were registered in GA, as well as OH or FL, are dismissed because as one neighbor, a retired university professor said, “ACORN does great work.” The level of voter registration fraud was through the ceiling, as the 16 investigations into ACORN indicate, yet the Propagandists say NOTHING about this as Obama “wins” contests in states where voter registration fraud was rampant. Even duplicate voting is brushed aside, as this video demonstrates (and h/t to a listener of Truthteller’s Election Night Radio Show mentioned):

Um, no – it is NOT okay for anyone to vote more than once in an election. It is FRAUD, and it is ILLEGAL!! But we already know there were instances of this in OH and FL. Heck, in VA, felons were allowed, no, RECRUITED, to vote for Obama, but absentee ballots to our military serving abroad went out late, sparking a lawsuit to make sure THEIR votes were counted. And on and on it goes.

As I said, I despair that adults are teaching our young people that you cheat, lie, and steal to get what you want. While you are at it, make sure you are a sore loser, hammering away at the vanquished in a juvenile, mean-spirited manner, never having learned the concept of gracious winning (especially when the “winning” is suspect). These are the same people who said NOTHING, or were SUPPORTIVE, of the Democratic Party forever smearing its very name by stealing votes from one candidate to give to another. The ends justify the means, and if that means we tarnish, tear down, belittle, smear, and steal from a candidate to win, so be it. Oh – and blame them for it, too, while we are at it as the NY Times did in an incredibly offensive editorial it had up last night celebrating Obama’s defeat of Clinton (I won’t link to it – go find it yourself if you want to read that dribble). We have now taught our young people that you can register as many times as you want, and vote as often as you want – just like on “American Idol”! – to make sure YOUR candidate wins. Fair and square is old school. Now it is win at all and any costs, and belittle your opponent while you are at it.

Then there are the issues of misogyny and race-baiting that sustained this campaign, with the willing participation of the Propaganda Arm, Obama, and the DNC. The treatment of women during this campaign was a low I have not seen in DECADES, yet many women were willing participants to this abuse, claiming even as Obama contradicted them, that he was going to be great for women. Ask Hillary. Ask Sarah. Ask those folks wearing, “Sarah Palin Is a C–t” t-shirts, or the organization that used the “C-word” as its acronym regarding Hillary. Women were treated as not just objects, but as sexual anatomy period, in a most vulgar and derogatory way. Still, since it was the DNC, too many women accepted this treatment from the very party of which they are the majority. How they can celebrate the future presidency of a man who treats women in such a hostile manner is beyond me. That goes for the GLBT community, too. But hey – they got their “Bro Before Ho,” so I know they are happy.

The race baiting that was used to tear down our only two term Democratic president in decades was horrendous to watch, especially as members serving in Congress, people whom President Clinton had helped personally, went out of their way to paint him with the stigma of being racist. Hillary, too. Two people who have worked TIRELESSLY to end discrimination in this people were called racists, and it stuck. Then anyone who would not, could not, imagine voting for the most inexperienced, unqualified candidate who was taking Chicago-style politics national, with his thugs attacking people around the country, were labeled, no, BRANDED racists if they did not support Obama. As women’s rights have been set back decades after this election season, so have been race relations. All in the service of getting this man elected because of the color of his skin, not the content of his character, which is still largely ignored or unexplored by the electorate and the Propagandists.

I do not think this is what Dr. King had in mind. I do not think this is what our founders had in mind, either. This election, with its win at all costs, even if it means cheating, lying, and stealing, is not democracy. It surely isn’t decent. And it is not the American Way. At the moment, I can’t see how this will change – how we will regain any semblance of justice, of knowing right from wrong, of being ethical, moral, good. Yes, we made history last night, but I ask you, at what cost to us, to our country? I weep for us today, at what we have become. I have to hope, and pray, that we will regain what we have lost, but for today, grief overwhelms me.

The suit filed by Mr. McCain’s campaign against elections officials states Mr. McCain could lose votes from military members overseas who support the Vietnam War hero.

“There are many military service members and overseas voters who support Senator John McCain for president in the upcoming election and whose right to vote will be denied without relief from this court,” stated the complaint, also filed in U.S. District Court in Richmond.

The complaint states some Virginia localities did not send absentee ballots to overseas voters at least 45 days before the election, as recommended in 2004 by a congressionally created commission.

Wow. That is just a tad problematic, don’t you think? It is 2008 – surely 4 years is sufficient lead time to make sure that everything is squared away in order to fulfill this recommendation. Just sayin’.

This lawsuit was sparked by one case – see? Making your voice heard DOES matter! Hopefully, anyway. THe article continues:

The complaint cites the specific case of a Marine stationed in Iraq who did not receive his absentee ballot from Arlington County until Oct. 29. It asks that the court order absentee ballots for federal offices sent by Nov. 4 from qualified voters and received by Nov. 14 in the state to be counted.

“The McCain-Palin campaign believes without exception that the servicemen and women on the front line protecting our freedoms deserve every opportunity to make sure their vote counts,” McCain spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said.

It was not clear last night when the suit would be heard in court.

“Of course we want to make sure that all the absentee ballots that are coming in from overseas are counted,” Miss Skinner said. “We’ll comply with whatever order the judge gives on that.”

I dunno – I don’t think 10 days is all that long to wait, all things considered, do you? Whether one agrees with the Iraq War (I don’t), the reality is that these people are putting their lives on the line, their lives at home on hold, making sacrifices the enormity of which many of us cannot fathom, including, sadly, the ultimate sacrifice for some. I think the least we can do is allow them to VOTE. THis goes for ALL of our military serving abroad, whether it be Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Germany – wherever it is, our citizens deserve to execute their right in a democracy to cast their vote. Anything less is unacceptable, especially when they are in harm’s way. And especially when people like these two get to vote unimpeded:

Isn’t it weird seeing people go up and hug them? Like they are just anybody else in the neighborhood, not two unrepentant domestic terrorists who want to teach their children?? I wonder – was it from them that Obama learned to be a con man? Ahem.

So, yeah – I don’t think 10 days is too much to ask to allow late absentee ballots from our military, through no fault of their own, to come back in, do you?

But as I reviewed the history of the primary and the current issues facing us, it seemed increasingly like the only ethical, pragmatic and appropriate choice.

Consider the caucus fraud, stripping of Clinton’s votes and denial of a fair and open roll call. The relentless sexism from the media and the silence from Democratic Party. Obama’s refusal to have town halls with her and then McCain. Obama’s waffling on important issues like FISA and campaign finance reform. The obscene amounts of money that Obama’s campaign has spent when people are losing their homes. Over 680 million dollars of which we know. Probably more. His lack of judgment in choosing close associates and friends. Like Jeremiah Wright. Tony Rezko. William Ayers. Khalidi.

It is clear that the Democratic Party as we knew it, the Democratic Party of my parents, no longer exists. Its leadership does not support the most basic principle of one person, one vote. And they do not support women, the majority of its membership.

Clearly, it is time to look somewhere else.

And then the economy tanked and the choice became very clear. I have never voted Republican in my life. As I began to study the issues more closely, I grew to really appreciate what John McCain has to say. He understands that you cannot tax small businesses at a high rate, as Obama is proposing. Small businesses are what drive the economy. We need and must create opportunities for Joe (and Josie!) the Plumber. What can Obama be thinking? And how does he possibly plan to pay for all of the programs he is proposing? More taxes in a struggling economy?

Nobody gets this more than the Cuban community in Miami.

Traveling much of the time in Miami with Dr. Lynette Long, the leading expert on the caucus fraud perpetuated against Hillary Clinton by Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee, we did a lot of canvassing and shaking of hands, otherwise known as retail politics. Almost everyone we met were proudly, even vehemently pro McCain. Even the seniors who didn’t speak English would shake their heads and wag their fingers when we asked them about Obama. They are suspicious of charisma and empty promises. Families who had made the treacherous journey to come to America, often leaving behind everything they knew or had owned compared Obama to Castro. “Fidel said change, too,” one young woman said whose family’s property had been seized and whose father had been imprisoned in Cuba for six years. “I don’t want socialism. I know how bad it can be. Our families want to work hard. We want opportunities, not hand outs. We love John Mccain. We trust him.” America is the land of immigrants and opportunities. In honor of these wonderful Cuban Americans who are the soul of Miami and part of the extended heart of this great country, let’s get out the vote.

The common theme from Obama’s adoring media in these last hours before the polls open is that he did not know that his aunt’s asylum claim was denied and that she was ordered deported, did not know that she was in the country for the past four years illegally in defiance of that deportation order, did not know that she was living illegally in Boston public housing, and did not know that she had contributed close to three hundred dollars to his campaign.

Further, it has been recently noted that he also did not know that his Kenya-residing grandmother, Sarah Hussein Obama, was living in squalor. On top of this incredulous set of circumstances, Obama’s nutroots gangs are pushing the talking point that this is all a smear, based on data that no one should know about.

Yeah, right. If there is no other defining character trait fitting for Barack Obama, it is that he is a pathological liar always ready with an “I did not know, I did not hear, and I did not see.” In almost every case that Obama has used this defense it has eventually been proven a lie.

On November 1, Truthteller had an excellent piece on this very point, “A Dolt and a Thug, Obama Claims He Knows Nothing,” in which Truthteller wrote:

One would think Obama would know the immigration status of his aunt after he rendered her into a textual spectacle in his 1996 memoir entitled Dreams of My Father. One would also think a relative would have contacted him in 2004 in order to inform the aspiring US Senator and Illinois political official that auntie needed assistance with her asylum petition. After all, auntie attended Obama’s swearing-in to the US Senate the same year her asylum petition was unfavorably adjudicated. Moreover, one would think that Obama would have been informed by someone related to his aunt that she donated tainted money to his campaign. And furthermore, the Obama campaign must have asked Obama a question or two after an article on Obama’s aunt surfaced a few days ago in the London Times. Surely they would have asked about the aunt’s immigration status after it was revealed she fraudulently donated $260 to the campaign from her public housing address in South Boston.

Also on Nov. 1, Truthteller had another excellent piece, “Obama Relegates Aunt Who Resides Illegally in US to the Shadows While Taking Her Campaign Contributions, ” which I commend to you, as well as American Girl in Italy’s exceptional piece on Obama’s aunt on Oct. 30, “If You Are Not Caring For Your Own Family…“.

As you read this, keep in mind Barack Obama’s recent statement:

“Most people understand that if you are not caring for your family, then you are probably not the kind of person who is going to be caring for other people.”—Barack Obama, October 23, 2008

We now know that Obama had contact with his aunt as recently as 2006, two years after her deportation order, which implies that he knew she was here illegally. What is more, it seems that Obama and Governor Patrick colluded to help his aunt

• Has he financially helped her? If not, why not?
• As a newly minted U.S. Senator, why didn’t he help his aunt with her asylum claim in 2004?
• How does he justify his recent comment that, “this is a country of laws and that his aunt should be deported (!)” with the evidence that he knew she was still here?

Then there is the matter of financial assistance for is family. Why is his dear grandmother in Kenya living in squalor? Obama has been a penny pincher with regards to charities (2000-4: 0.88% of his AGI, 2005-6: 5.22%) but has spoke often of families and the support and care they should share with each other. He has visited Kenya on several occasions and cannot credibly say that he did not know where his grandmother lived and in what conditions. Why did he not help her? Additionally, why did he not sponsor her to join in him in the U.S.? Why is his brother still living in squalor? What happened to being his brother’s keeper? Or his grandmother’s? Or his aunt’s?

Well, one thing is for sure, Obama was not constrained by finances. Here is his adjusted gross income for the past seven years:

• 2000: $240,505
• 2001: $272,769
• 2002: $259,394
• 2003: $238,327
• 2004: $207,657
• 2005: $1,655,106
• 2006: $983,826
• 2007: $4,139,965

Right. Obama does not suffer from a lack of funds with which to help his family.

Back to the “I didn’t know, didn’t hear, and didn’t see” mantra that exemplifies Obama’s campaign season. It is simply unbelievable. Like I said, we’ve heard it all before from him on a number of issues. There are two major examples that highlight his dupicity: Reverend Wright and domestic terrorist William Ayers:

Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

• Barack Obama described Reverend Wright as his spiritual guide, mentor, and friend.
• Barack sat in Reverend Wright’s church pews for over 20 years.
• Reverend Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama. He also baptized their two daughters.
• Together Barack Obama and Reverend Wright helped their mutual friend, Minister Louis Farrakhan, organize his 1995 Million Man March.
• Obama directed tens of thousands of dollars to his church from organizations he directed.
• When details of Trinity United Church of Christ and Reverend Wright came out, Obama lied and claimed he had not heard anything controversial from his pastor friend or from his church.
• Obama said he did not know his church and pastor promoted Marxist-oriented Black Liberation Theology.
• Obama said he did not know his church and reverend promoted the view that the United States was a white racist nation and that the white church was the Antichrist.
• Obama said he did not know that his church and pastor repeatedly praised their mutual friend, Minister Farrakhan.
• Obama said he did not know his pastor and church blamed the U.S. as the source of the AIDS epidemic, nor that they claimed its goal is to wipe out minorities.
• Obama said he did not know his pastor and church blamed the U.S. for 9/11.
• Obama said he did not know that his friend and pastor damned America from the pulpit of Obama’s church.
• After all of these claims, after 20 years of sitting in the pew, Obama abandoned his friend and church for the political expediency of his presidential campaign. He’s since admitted he may have heard some controversial things but refuses to discuss it further.

William Ayers.

• Barack Obama dismissed William Ayers back in April as ‘just some guy in his neighborhood’ and claimed he knew nothing of Ayers’ terrorist past, even dismissing Ayer’s terrorism as something that occurred when he was only eight years old. While Ayers’ founded the Weather Underground in the 1960s, he led it on a bombing spree that lasted to 1981 in a quest to overthrow the U.S. He even called for youth to kill their parents. After escaping prosecution because of technicalities, Ayers was quoted by David Horowitz in 1981 as bragging “Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. America is a great country.”
• Ayers remains unrepentant to this day.
• “This guy” in the neighborhood shared common cause in the 1980s working through companion organizations funded by William Ayers’ father, Tom Ayers, to protest the local education system in Chicago.
• “This guy” in the neighborhood hired Obama to chair his Chicago Annenberg Challenge in 1995. Together, from 1995 to 2001, they spent $160 million in failed education projects, some that benefited their friends, including Reverend Wright.
• “This guy” in the neighborhood helped Obama begin his political career in 1995, hosting a get-together at his and domestic terrorist-wife Bernadine Dohrn’s home and by contributing to his campaign.
• “This guy” in the neighborhood received money from organizations that Obama headed. They also directed funds to Ayers’ fellow terrorists, his wife Bernadine Dohrn and Michael Klonsky, who would become an advisor to Obama
• Obama wrote a short review for one of Ayers books in 1998.
• Obama joined Ayers in at least one joint panel organized by Michelle Obama in 1997.
• Michelle Obama and Bernadine Dohrn worked together at the law firm Sidley Austin. Among Sidley Austin’s clients were Commonwealth Edison led by Tom Ayers, William’s father. Barack worked with them during a summer internship while in law school.
• Michelle Obama and terrorist Bernadine Dohrn worked together with several local Chicago groups.
• Obama and Ayers traveled to New York City in 2003 and toasted their mutual friend, Rashid Khalidi, the former spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). While a video of the event has not been released, there was a LA Times article that contained a number of comments made during this dinner, which included an anti-Israel poem read by a young man. The next year, Khalidi and his wife Mona, also a former member of the PLO, hosted fundraisers for Obama’s U.S. Senate campaign.
• And Ayers, is not a “former” terrorist, as Obama would like us to believe. Ayers is unrepentant. In an interview published on September 11, 2001, he boasted “I don’t regret settings bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.”
• In 2002 Barack, Ayers, and Dohrn participated together in a conference and panel entitled “Intellectuals: Who needs Them?”
• In promoting his autobiography, Ayers had himself photographed stomping on the U.S. flag.
• Later, he says he condemned Ayer’s actions. He even defended himself saying that he was only 8 years old when Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and Michael Klonsky, were active terrorists.

The bottom line is that Obama is a pathological liar whose defining character trait is the lies, misstatements, and omissions of I did not know, I did not hear, and I did not see. In my opinion, that is not a qualification for president. I urge everyone to set party affiliations aside and vote for Senator John McCain and Governor Palin.

Cross-posted at my blog, The Independent View.

The relationship between the Democratic Party’s Presidential candidate Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, the founder and leader of the now defunct terrorist organization Weather Underground, is deeper and closer than currently understood, according to an individual who has had a senior role in the Obama candidacy. Ayers has had direct contact with the candidate.

The Weather Underground was responsible for a series of bombings during the 1970s that caused extensive property damage. [Only two bomb's failures (at the front of the home and under the gas tank of the family car) kept an entire family from dying as they slept, reports John Murtagh, then the 9-year-old son of the judge whose family WU wanted to kill. See Uppity Woman's story, "When This Man Was 9 Years Old, Ayers Bombed His Home." - Ed.]