PUMA PLAN FOR NOVEMBER

 This is the PUMA PLAN for the November election, but we need to start working on it now,

pass it around and let your friends and neighbors and online families know. It’s urgent. We only have two months to assure the defeat of the thugs from Chicago.
Here’s the PUMA plan

Battleground States Residents

Must vote for McCain if they can find it in themselves to do it. Otherwise just leave “President” blank

For Senators and House Reps

the DNC said if their Messiah didnt win, they would still win the dem downline. We’d all fall in line (not) and even if they didnt win the presidency they would still win the house and senate.

If we are to clean out the crooks and thieves and self serving, who have been busy in congress lining their pockets with special interest money, ignoring the state of their constituents, we can’t keep voting them back in office even if they are Democrats. More...

those dems who fell in with Obama from the git go, vote their opponent or leave blank.

those dems who quickly jumped ship from Hillary, accepted payoffs from Obama, the Party, Dean, Pelosi, vote their opponent or leave blank

those dems who resisted the skullduggery and stuck with Hillary to the end until they were threatened by Pelosi , the DNC, Obama, Dean, vote them back into office.

Dont forget these are the superdelegates who could have changed or stopped the rigging of the nomination and theft of votes, but didnt.

these are the same congress we elected in 2006 to end the war, instead they supported a surge.

these are the same congress we elected in 2006 to impeach Bush-Cheney - instead they continued to allow the shredding of the Constitution and Bill of rights

These are the same congress we elected in 2006 to stop the spying on American citizens which is illegal, instead they passed immunity for Bush and ATT and the rest of the phone companies which partook.

And a special note to those who live in San Francisco or are constitutents of Nancy Pelosi. As one of the major powers in this coup of the people’s nominating process, If you have to vote for Mickey Mouse, get her out of congress.

Others who spearheaded this coup against the people and rigged the nominating process are:

Rahm Emanuel of Chicago

Jesse Jackson Jr. of Chicago

Richard Durbin of Chicago

Steny Hoyer of Maryland

James Clyburn of South Carolina

PUMA is voting against these people . All of the above put self interest and interest of their party choice before the interests of the people and legitimate election.

As more bad democrats are identified we will add them to the list.

The Audacity of Hypocrisy

Posted on August 28, 2008 by nobamablog  and reposted here to share:

As more information comes to light about Barack Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers (unrepentant co-founder of violent radical leftist group Weather Underground), and as these facts get closer and closer to leaking into the consciousness of the average American voter, the Obama campaign continues to step up their strong-arm tactics to silence those who would bring the truth out into the open.  

As reported here last week, the American Issues Project put an ad together detailing the dirty deeds of Bill Ayers, and his connection to Barack Obama.  The Obama campaign swiftly petitioned the Justice Department to stop the ad from running.  When that didn’t work, they petitioned the DOJ again, requesting that they investigate and prosecute not only AIP but also an AIP contributor, Harold Simmons.  We also learned that this was not the first time that Barack Obama has called out such big guns against those who would dare to shed light on his past.  Ben Smith of Politico.com writes: More...

It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time (Obama general counsel Bob) Bauer has called for criminal investigations and prosecutions into the donors to independent groups critical of Obama, including one supporting John Edwards and another supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton. His words did have the effect of scaring their donors and consultants, but haven’t yet appeared to result in any prosecution.

At about the same time, it was reported that Stanley Kurtz of the National Review had tried to access records about The Annenberg Challenge on Excellence in Education, on which project Obama worked with Bill Ayers.  Although these records are supposed to be open to the public, access to Mr. Kurtz was initially denied.

Now we learn that the Obama campaign tried to turn their thugs loose on Chicago radio station WGN-AM just last night.  After finally gaining access to the records at University of Illinois on the Annenberg Challenge, the same Stanley Kurtz was interviewed on “Extension 720 with Milt Rosenburg” to discuss the article he wrote for the National Review.  Calling this “one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack”, the Obama campaign sent an email to his supporters telling them to call WGN and shame them for providing Kurtz with airtime.  The email goes on to say “At the very least, they should offer sane, honest rebuttal to every one of Kurtz’s lies.”  Zack Christenson, executive producer of the show says the Obama campaign was asked to have someone appear on the show but declined the request.

Either Mr. Christenson is lying, or the Obama campaign deliberately tried to mislead their supporters into thinking equal time was not even offered.  Hmmm…I wonder who is more believable.

In any case, what do we imagine these same supporters of Barack Obama would do if they learned that George W. Bush or Dick Cheney had tried to suppress a broadcast by a radio station about some of their suspicious dealings?  Or that they tried to block information from a magazine reporter?  Or that they tried to have someone prosecuted for putting together an ad about them?

But wait.

We don’t have to wonder what they would do.  We already know how Obamabots feel about such things, because the Bush administration has already been chastised by their political opponents for putting up walls and slamming doors in the faces of their critics.  And rightly so.

The Obama campaign needs to get a grip before someone accuses them of running for Bush’s third term.

Did Biden have a hand in worsening the mortgage crisis?

That what some experts are saying:

Experts say hundreds of thousands of Americans may have lost their homes due to a bill championed by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., Barack Obama's vice-presidential running mate.

At least two studies have concluded that the United States' foreclosure crisis was exacerbated by a 2005 law that overhauled the nation's bankruptcy law. That conclusion is echoed by other experts, although the banking and credit industry disputes it.

From a political perspective only, you have to wonder if this will be played up as something Biden did because his son was associated with the credit card industry (a *gasp* lobbyist) and whether it will have any legs. More...

The bill was backed by banks and credit card companies including MBNA, which is headquartered in Delaware, Biden's home state. They wanted the bill because it would make it harder for Americans to use bankruptcy to avoid repaying credit card debt. MBNA executives had been Biden's single largest source of campaign donations, and MBNA has employed Biden's son Hunter as a company executive, lobbyist and consultant. The Obama campaign has said Hunter Biden did no work for MBNA on the bankruptcy bill. MBNA has since been bought by Bank of America.

According to some who've studied the home foreclosure situation, they see this bill as one of the contributors to the high numbers of foreclosures:

BAPCPA "is directly responsible for the rising foreclosure rate since the end of 2005," concluded a 2007 study by Credit Suisse. The law "increased foreclosures and the number of homes for sale," echoed a July 2008 study by U.S. Treasury researcher David Bernstein. That study estimated the law had pushed foreclosures or forced sales on 200,000 homeowners since it went into effect, but noted that was a rough, "back-of-the-envelope" calculation.

Others call the study "junk" and "not worth the paper it's written on".

But the logic train seems to lead back to BAPCPA:

But the 2005 law Biden championed made it more expensive and more difficult to declare bankruptcy, experts conclude. That forced hundreds of thousands of distressed homeowners to sell their homes, or default on their mortgages, after which the bank would sell their former home, according to the studies. That flood of homes going up for sale in an already-weakening market further depressed home prices, according to the two reports, snowballing into the current crisis.

BAPCPA "increased home foreclosures, increased the dollar value of financial assets in default, and put additional downward price pressure on real estate markets," concluded the Bernstein report. Bernstein conducted the report as an individual, not as a representative the Treasury Department.

Of course the bill was also touted by Republicans - Biden was a key sponsor and rallied enough Democratic support to get the bill passed.

However, the fact that he had such a large role in its passage and it has had the effect it has had is going to make it a little more difficult for him to claim it is those mean old Republicans who are the reason people have lost their homes. 

Obama tactics used to stifle and intimidate its critics

National Review Online

Stanley Kurtz's Fairness Doctrine Preview   [Guy Benson]

Stanley Kurtz's appearance on the Milt Rosenberg radio program in Chicago last night provided an unsettling look into the authoritarian tactics being employed by the Obama campaign to stifle and intimidate its critics.

More...

I happened to be in the WGN studios for the entire affair because my friend, Zack Christenson, produces the show in question. He was aware of my previous reporting on the Obama-Ayers connection and kindly invited me to sit in on the two-hour interview. (For full disclosure, I work for two other radio stations in Chicago, WIND, and WYLL).

As I arrived at the downtown Chicago studios a few hours before show time, the phones began ringing off the hook with irate callers demanding Kurtz be axed from the program. It didn't take long to discover that the Obama campaign—which had declined invitations to join the show for its duration to offer rebuttals to Kurtz's points—had sent an "Obama Action Wire" e-mail to its supporters, encouraging them to deluge the station with complaints.

Why? Because, naturally, Kurtz is a "right-wing hatchet man," a "smear merchant" and a "slimy character assassin" who is perpetrating one of the "most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack."


Evidently, much of Obama nation is composed of obedient and persistent sheep. They jammed all five studio lines for nearly the entire show while firing off dozens of angry emails. Many vowed to kick their grievances up the food chain to station management. After 90 minutes of alleged smear peddling, Milt Rosenberg (a well-respected host whose long-form interview show has aired in Chicago for decades) opened the phone lines, and blind ignorance soon began to crackle across the AM airwaves. The overwhelming message was clear: The interview must be put to an end immediately, and the station management should prevent similar discussions from taking place.

One female caller, when pressed about what precisely she objected to, simply replied, "We just want it to stop!" Another angry caller was asked what "lies" Kurtz had told in any of his reporting on Barack Obama. The thoughtful response? "Everything he said is dishonest." The same caller later refused to get into "specifics." Another gentleman called Kurtz "the most un-American person" he'd ever heard. Several of the callers did not even know Stanley's name, most had obviously never read a sentence of his meticulous research, and more than simply read verbatim from the Obama talking points.

As Rosenberg repeatedly pointed out that Team Obama had been offered the opportunity to take part in the conversation, the agitated masses adapted their argument to suggest it was outrageous to request an interview from the Obama campaign in the thick of the DNC. Delivering the line of the night, Rosenberg countered, "The Obama national headquarters is just down the street from here. They obviously have the time to send out these angry emails, but they can't walk a few blocks to our studios?"

Throughout the open-line segments, Rosenberg and Kurtz wore incredulous expressions. The hostile callers were so bereft of any legitimate argument, there was little to do but sit back and marvel at what was going on.

The experience was surreal, amusing, and chilling. In a matter of hours, a major national campaign had called on its legions to bully a radio show out of airing an interview with a legitimate scholar asking legitimate political questions. Coupled with the Obama campaign's recent attempts to sic the DOJ on the creators of a truthful political advertisement —which also happened to feature Obama's relationship with an unrepentant terrorist— last night's call to action represents an emerging pattern. Any criticism of Obama's unknown past is to be immediately denounced as a "smear," and the messenger is to be shut down at all costs.

Stanley Kurtz is poring through mounds of documents (access to which was initially blocked) in a public university's library that (a) establish a deeper link between a major party presidential nominee and a man who is proud of bombing US government buildings, and (b) shed light on said candidate's brief, unexplored executive experience. It's entirely understandable why the Obama campaign would prefer that the files remain out of the public eye until at least November 5, but Kurtz's careful research is completely within the bounds of reasonable inquiry. One might even argue it's vital that a man who may be the next leader of the free world be thoroughly vetted.

Team Obama is fast becoming the campaign that cried "smear." They labeled the National Right to Life committee "liars" for providing evidence of some unpleasant facts about their candidate's record on a series of infanticide votes. This tendency to lash out and engage in baseless name-calling not only smacks of desperation; it also may foreshadow an Obama presidency's strategy in handling unfavorable media reports and sources.

If anyone still believes reinstating the Fairness Doctrine isn't a top priority for the American Left, last night's example offered a stark and alarming wake-up call. Still not convinced? For goodness sake, read Jonah's book.

UPDATE: Here is the podcast of the full show.

08/28 09:38 AM

Images of The One

A look at the "Manifest Hope" exhibit in Denver.
by Jonathan V. Last,  The Daily Standard

A FEW MONTHS AGO I wrote about the iconography of Barack Obama; today I toured the "Manifest Hope" gallery, which brings together many of the classic works of Obama along with new additions. Apparently, the school's energy is not yet spent.

Manifest Hope is installed in a shabby, trendy neighborhood, amidst declining warehouses and new small businesses. A couple doors down from the gallery, for instance, is a doggie daycare school called The Barkway. Across the street from that is a Krav Maga studio.

The pieces included in Manifest Hope are similarly bohemian. (You can get a taste of the exhibition online.) They run from worshipful portraits, done in various mediums ranging from oil on canvas:

 

More...

To woodcuts:

There are bits of pop culturama, such as this print: And an Obama action figure: Other of the exhibits were not so playful. One particular work invoked the sacred, picturing Obama's great head--illuminated by sunbursts--emerging from the clouds over a bare-breasted maiden who is robed in an American flag and emerging from a volcano. Note that in the lower-right-hand corner an assemblage of people are literally kneeling before Obama:

Then there are the artists working in the mode of authoritarianism. The Date Farmers and Shepard Fairey created two of the most popular Obama images, and at Manifest Hope they are displayed on the heroic scale, some 10 or 12 feet high, taking up entire lengths of wall: A similarly epic-sized work features side-by-side 20-foot prints of an image melding the faces of Obama and Lincoln: This was not the only bit of Lincolnalia. Another painting pictures Obama at the Lincoln Memorial. In it, Obama stares out into the distance, his back to the Great Emancipator: Like all good galleries, Manifest Hope features a store where they sell related T-shirts, pins, stickers, posters, and prints. They were doing a brisk business this morning. Just above the entrance to the store, a projector displayed, on the ceiling, some Obama mad-libs. The screen read, "When Obama wins . . ." and visitors were invited to send a text message completing the sentence. The various replies were cycled through for all to see. Some were banal, saying, "When Obama wins, the world will be a better place." Some were less grammatical and more radical: "kicks butt! down with The Man and his politics." And some were the type we've come to expect from the cult of Obama. "When Obama wins, people will finally fly," one texter wrote. Another, said simply, "When Obama wins, I will cry." What no one at Manifest Hope seems to consider as even an outside possibility, is what will happen if Obama loses. Not just to the artists, but to their little movement. Jonathan V. Last is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

Gallup: Obama's Strengths and Weaknesses

John McCain has an edge over Barack Obama in the public’s eyes as a strong and decisive leader, and while 80% of Americans say McCain is able to handle the job of commander in chief, only 53% say this about Obama.  Americans are more likely to say that Barack Obama cares about the needs of people and would work well with both parties to get things done in Washington. However, John McCain rates better as being a strong and decisive leader.    Experts believe this is the best indicator regarding which way the undecided will likely vote in November.