Jeremiah Wright, Obama, and Hitler - what do they have in common?

Obama being compared to Hitler?!?
Obama has to take responsibility for a few of the 2000+ sermons his pastor has given!
Obama's patriotism being questioned!

The definition of patriotism is: devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty.

True love and support is exhibited by our actions not our words. True love and support of our friends and families is illustrated by our willingness to jeopardize our relationship with that family member in order to help them grow. Some call it tough love. I call it nurturing. In order to nurture effectively you have to be willing to take the blinders off, recognize the character defects, and love them towards growth. The key phrase here is RECOGNIZE THE CHARACTER DEFECTS.

Pastor Jeremiah Wright recognizes this country's character defects. Senator Barack Hussein Obama recognizes this country's character defects and so do I. If America were our friend what would we say to him? What would we say as he strutted around, chest poked out, claiming intellectual and moral superiority?

Let's take it a step further. Say our friend, we'll call him Joe. Say Joe was the victim of slander at his job. It wasn't enough to get him fired but it was enough to slow down or stop a promotion. What would we advise him to do? What if Joe found out who started the rumors and decided that he would retaliate. Perhaps the perpetrator (let's call him Tim) had been padding his expense report and Joe knew about it. So Joe let's everyone know that Tim has been padding his expense reports - the news gets Tim fired. But it also gets his two supervisors fired because they should've caught it. And it gets Tim's secretary fired because maybe she conspired with him. What would we tell Joe? Should we say anything if he asks for our advice? Does he have a right to still feel morally superior? In his fury and lust for revenge and so called justice, he not only "killed his foe" but also "killed 3 innocents". Was this justified?

When asked, would we advise Joe that what he did was fine but his method was wrong (ala Clinton)? Would we tell him that he is the father figure and therefore the moral authority so if he says it's right then it's right? (ala John McCain). Or would we advise him that what he did was wrong because his thought process was wrong, because his motivations were wrong and so the outcome was wrong? Would we say that we have to get at the root cause of A. why did Tim disrespect him enough to smear him in the first place and B. What could he have done differently, without becoming a doormat or flunky, so as to create an ally out of Tim as opposed to an enemy. (ala Obama)

True love is rooted in the notion that one has an obligation to respect and nurture the objects of that love. So I question the patriotism of, the Rush Limbaughs, GW Bushes, and Bill O'Reillys of the world. Do they truly love this country? Are they truly patriotic? Or are they that sick, self-indulgent parent who can't be bothered to nurture their child; who can't be bothered to correct that child because it gets in the way of what they want to do.

I feel confident in saying it is the latter. Now watch as Fox News continues the mind manipulation and smears the hope of this nation - Senator Barack Obama



If you like this video, you might want to donate to the filmmakers so that they can continue with the truth;

PENTAGON REPORT - Iraq had no previous link to al Qaida

WASHINGTON — An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaida terrorist network.
The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release later this week, did confirm that Saddam's regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. officials told McClatchy. However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.
The new study of the Iraqi regime's archives found no documents indicating a "direct operational link" between Hussein's Iraq and al Qaida before the invasion, according to a U.S. official familiar with the report.
TO READ MORE:

Barack supporter makes us look GOOD

This interviewer thought he was going to railroad this beautiful black man. He got tricked. He was so taken aback by the knowledge in this young man that he ended up agreeing with him. HAH!

Clinton, the Prime Minister, and NAFTA

Why do you suppose this story is not bigger than it is? Why have most of the media outlets chosen to ignore the fact that while Clinton was accusing Barack Obama of double talk - it was HER CAMP, doing the political two-step?



The Clinton camp denies the allegations, and so did Obama's team. So why is her denial more believable than Obama's?

Why does the media LIE?

Here we go again, CNN is saying that Obama is an amateur because a member of his team, said that he will re look at the best way to withdraw from Iraq in 2009. Is that the rational thing to do? Does that mean he will turn into John McCain? And why wasn't the Clinton campaign called amateurs when a member of her team spoke out of turn? hmmmm....

The truth is that Obama's economic adviser did not talk our of turn, his words were twisted - purposely. Here is the apology that is on the Canadian consulate's website.

http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/chicago/menu-en.asp

Statement by the Consulate General of Canada in Chicago

Chicago, IL, March 3, 2008 — The Canadian Embassy and our Consulates General regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials. In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.

The people of the United States are in the process of choosing a new President and are fortunate to have strong and impressive candidates from both political parties. Canada will not interfere in this electoral process. We look forward, however, to working with the choice of the American people in further building an unparalleled relationship with a close friend and partner.

NAFTA, CANADA Hillary and the Minister

Why are the members of the Canadian Parliament so upset at the supposed "wink wink nod nod" agreement that Obama's people made with Canada? BECAUSE IT IS A LIE! That's why. Here is actual footage from the Canadian Parliament's last session.

The other thing that I find very odd after looking at the interactive maps on CNN politics is that in some counties not one single Republican vote was cast...this on the heels of Limbaugh urging the GOP to vote for Clinton. Needless to say that in these counties Clinton won. hmmmm.... Is this how America chooses a President?!?

Hillary Clinton's foreign policy experience

Well folks, here it is. All of her famed experience can be summed up in this media conference call with Clinton's campaign advisers.

Click below to listen to the actual phone call

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/02/pregnant_pause.html

Clinton continues the Muslim Smear

“You don't believe that Senator Obama's a Muslim?” Kroft asked Sen. Clinton.

“Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that,” she replied.

“You said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not…a Muslim. You don't believe that he's…,” Kroft said.

“No. No, there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know,” she said.

“It's just scurrilous…?” Kroft inquired.

“Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors, that I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time,” Clinton said.



So I ask the question again, at what point is an apology no longer acceptable? Is this the America that we want; where politicians will get on national TV and lie to get votes? We must not let this happen - for our children's sake!

McCain and Clinton's record listed as EXTREMELY POOR

In fairness Obama's success rate is listed as poor the other two extremely poor. So what is all of this experience that they're talking about?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300071

Barack Obama has sponsored 129 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 120 haven't made it out of committee (Poor) and 1 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Obama has co-sponsored 551 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).
S. 2030: A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require reporting relating to bundled contributions made by persons other than registered lobbyists.
S. 2111: Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act
S. 2066: Back to School: Improving Standards for Nutrition and Physical Education in Schools Act of 2007
S.Con.Res. 46: A concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month.
S. 2044: Independent Contractor Proper Classification Act of 2007 (to help workers not get exploited by employers by labeling them indie contractors)


Hillary Clinton has sponsored 354 bills since Jan 22, 2001, of which 307 haven't made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 2 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Clinton has co-sponsored 1728 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).
S. 2114: American Home Ownership Preservation Act of 2007 (no co sponsors)
S. 2082: A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a Coordinated Environmental Public Health Network, and for other purposes. ( no explanation of goals)
S. 2059: Airline Flight Crew Technical Corrections Act (family and med leave amendment)
S. 1148: Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commemoration Commission Act of 2007 (PR bill let’s commemorate some one)
S. 2054: Neighborhood Reclamation and Revitalization Program Act of 2007 (self explanatory – want’s to give grants to realestate developers)

John McCain has sponsored 403 bills since Jan 21, 1997, of which 263 haven't made it out of committee (Extremely Poor) and 12 were successfully enacted (Extremely Good, relative to peers). McCain has co-sponsored 876 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers).
Some of McCain's most recently sponsored bills include... (View All)
S. 722: Walnut Canyon Study Act of 2007 (land study – goals not mentioned)
S. 2172: Saffron Revolution Support Act of 2007 (a bill to stop import of gems and hardwood from Burma?!?!)
S. 1304: Arizona National Scenic Trail Act
S. 32: Defense Acquisition Reform Act of 2007 (how they acquire stuff)
S. 1255: Indian Arts and Crafts Amendments Act of 2007

TAKEAWAYS
So, McCain get's extremely good for the amount finally enacted. However, let's look at the last 5 bills sponsored. They seem really safe! I've added explanations when the titles of the bills weren't self-explanatory. I'm not going to go back to the 1990s to look but I did at least look at 2007 and McCain’s only sponsored one bill dealing with foreign policy and ZERO dealing with the troops. Obama has sponsored 4 regarding foreign policy and Clinton 1.5 (one is so vague and has no explanation) Both Obama and Clinton have sponsored a handful of bills dealing with the troops, but Obama has sponsored more. Remember now, the Republicans claim to have the patent on patriotism. Forget a lapel pin how about trying to help our troops!!! The media doesn't bring up these things. I wonder why not...

Now let's see what they value based on these last 5 bills: Obama: schools, public health, worker's rights, and ethics
Clinton: public health, worker's rights, housing, revitalization (though I question this last one there's not enough info)
McCain: protecting Native American arts and craft, studying the land, stopping Burma from exporting, and adding bureaucracy to the military acquisitions process

Hmmmm, now who cares more about America? Obama and Clinton win this hands down, but again the Republican's think they own the patent on patriotism. Forget the lapel pin bring our troops home!

So, we've blown experience out of the water, and values, now let's look at character.

Do I need to even comment on Sen. Clinton - naahhh
McCain was demonized by Karl Rove in the 2000 election calling his adopted daughter an illegitimate black child of his - now he embraces Rove. Hmmmm (this is a fact mentioned on numerous news programs- including CNN just last night)
Regarding Obama's church; Barack Obama attends a historically black church. This church’s pastor has some daughters who run a magazine. That magazine published by the daughters of the pastor of the church that Sen. Obama attends gives out awards to those who have helped the downtrodden — historically black communities across the country and black peoples around the world. Last year, one of those awards was given to Louis Farrakhan because of his and his organizations’ dedication to rehabilitating and improving the plight of ex-convicts. (for those of you who don't know The Nation of Islam has had a phenomenal success rate for eliminating recidivism among ex-cons. I don't agree with Farrakhan - but I cannot dispute a fact)
Regarding its African-centric views: "This is no different than the hundreds of UCC churches from the German Evangelical and Reformed stream that continue to own and celebrate their German heritage, insisting on annual sausage and sauerkraut dinners and singing Stille Nacht on Christmas Eve. Recognizing and celebrating our distinctive racial-ethnic heritages, cultures, languages and customs are what make us unique as a united and uniting denomination.' While Trinity UCC is predominately African American, it does include and welcome non-Black members. The Rev. Jane Fisler-Hoffman, Illinois Conference Minister, who is white, has been a member of the congregation for years."

It's 3am and your children are safe and asleep... What CRISIS DECISION has Clinton ever been forced to make?

RHETORIC: Clinton claims she is better qualified to answer the phone at the White House

FACT: Clinton failed her key foreign policy test with her support for Iraq. Also, Clinton and her campaign can still not answer the question of what in her experience makes her more qualified than Obama to handle tough foreign policy decisions

On CNN today:
Q: Senator, can you talk about one specific time when you've had to make that kind of 3 A.M., split-second decision based on foreign policy?

Clinton: Well, I was involved in a lot of the decisions that were made. But again, you're looking at it from the wrong perspective. I'm presenting – you know, no one who hasn't been president has ever done that. So, that's not the right question. The question is, what have you done over the course of a lifetime to equip you for that moment. Now, I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say. He's never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth the speech he made in 2002. And that's why national security is a critical issue for Democrats as we go into this primary; because everyone knows that John McCain will make this election about national security, that is a given. And it will be imperative that we have a nominee who is able to stand on that stage with Senator McCain, and I believe I am the person best able to do that. [CNN, 3/1/08]

From her campaign's conference call yesterday:
It was, in this reporter's opinion, the most interesting moment in today's Clinton campaign phoner with reporters. Responding to the release of HRC's new TX TV ad, which asserts in no subtle terms that only she has the experience to deal with a major world crisis, and, relatedly, to keep your children safe, Slate's John Dickerson asked the obvious question: "What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary's career where she's been tested by crisis?" he said. Silence on the call. You could've knit a sweater in the time it took the usually verbose team of Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson and Lee Feinstein, Clinton's national security director, to find a cogent answer. And what they came up with was weak -- that she's been endorsed by many high ranking members of the uniformed military. Take a listen... [Hotline, 2/29/08]

CLINTON ENDORSES BARACK OBAMA

Clinton in 2004 campaigning for John Kerry

WE ARE THE ONES - new song by will.i.am

"...The larger question going forward is: do specifics really matter? To quote Mike Tyson: the best fight plan in the world only lasts until you take the first punch in the face. Similarly, the best political ideas only last until you get them before a divided and ineffectual Congress.

Perhaps, more than specifics, we need a leader who can inspire people to pressure their reps to bend to the will of the new. What is rhetoric if not a call to action?

Perhaps that's a question someone would care to ask of Barack Obama..." (excerpts from a Huffington Post article written by writer of Three Kings, John Ridley)