Obama's Bogus "Rule of Law"

Waterboarding is NOT torture, except by the prissy standards of the ACLU and America-haters like George Soros. Of course, Obama's recent speech on "national security," which Obama has redefined as "making nice with those who want to kill us," made much about his commitment to "the rule of law." Obama never really defined that concept, mainly because it is little more than a platitude.

(Note: Scroll down to the previous column for an analysis of Obama's major failings as a public speaker.)

Obama implies that he, our national custodian of righteousness, is for "the rule of law," while the wicked Bush Administration supposedly was against it. Logically and intellectually, his argument is worthy of the third-brightest student in a middle school.

In the real world, people disagree on what laws mean -- on how they should be interpreted. In fact, that's why we have judges, courts, and attorneys -- an insight that shouldn't come as news to lawyers like Obama and his sour, angry spouse. They both went to a big-time law school, Harvard, where they apparently learned nothing except to feel eternally superior to people who didn't graduate from Ivy League institutions.

Barack Obama is "sure" that waterboarding constitutes torture. Actually, it appears he's sure that calling it torture will appeal to the far-left types who catapulted him into high office. Exactly why he supposedly thinks it's torture is something we will never hear in this lifetime. Remember, this is the guy who didn't think that listening to Rev. Wright's harangues for 20 years didn't constitute cruel and unusual punishment for him and Michelle.

Torture is not defined as unpleasant interrogation -- enhanced or unenhanced. It is not defined as questioning people under high-stress conditions -- the kind that might actually produce useful information necessary to prevent the death of thousands (tens of thousands?) of Americans.

"Torture" is treatment that creates permanent injuries and intense, unbearable pain. Examples? Burning someone with a hot poker . . . or tearing out a person's fingernails with a pliers . . . or hooking up battery cables to their genitals . . . or scalding them with hot water . . . or making them read nonstop the various autobiographies of Barack Hussein Obama.

Waterboarding is very different. Essentially, it involves pouring small amounts of water into a supine individual's face to give him the ILLUSION of drowning. Is it very unpleasant? Yes. But is it any worse than jumping into a pool and breathing in when you should have breathed out? Nope.

Is it really dangerous? Of course not. But as we learned with Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheik Muhammed, it was very effective at eliciting information that saved countless American lives. GWB was interested in saving lives. Obama is more interested in saving face.

I'd love to debate this issue with clueless souls like Obama and Eric Holder. But the chances of that happening are about the same as someone actually being harmed by waterboarding. In other words, zero.

Is Obama really a "skilled debater?" We really won't know that until he actually debates someone.

Why GWB's Presidency Failed

. . . and why the Palin presidency doesn't have to fail. Below: I don't want Sarah Palin in 2020 to be complaining that "Soros and the media ruined my presidency." Instead, I want her -- about 2020, at the end of her second term -- saying, "I crushed George Soros, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and all those associated with them."

GWB was and is a good man, an American patriot. His wife was one of the greatest of First Ladies.

But he was a lousy salesman. (Today, Obama did a lousy job of "selling" the Afghan War, because he failed to make it personally meaningful to Americans.) Republican Presidents have a very small margin of error, because of media hostility, and somehow I never got the impression that GWB was having searching discussions of how best to "sell" the war or his handling of Katrina.

On somebody like Harriet Miers, the question is not whether she's an outstanding person, but rather: "How do I sell her as a credible nominee for the Supreme Court?' Yes, some conservatives stabbed her -- and GWB -- in the back, but that's the world we live in.

Compare the nomination of John Roberts, a bullet-proof candidate, versus that of Harriet, who never had a chance. The Gonzalez appointment turned out to be a disaster. Yes, he was loyal, but he wasn't much more than that.

He needed people around him who would say: "Mr. President, NO! It won't work." He didn't have such people.

Frankly, GWB's desire to have "friendly" relations with the White House Press corps showed a truly amazing naivete. Those people inhabit a culture that sees Bush's views and his religious faith as toxic.

His little "teasing" comments to journalists were seen as embarrassing and phony. They are not his friends; they will never be his friends.

Does he understand that? No, but Sarah Palin does.

Yes, Soros types and the Dems did everything they could to undermine GWB's presidency. What was his plan for counteracting that? Potentially, the POTUS is a thousand times more powerful than George Soros. It didn't work out that way. Soros lied -- and [the] Bush [presiency] died.

I don't want Sarah Palin in 2020 to be complaining that "Soros, Pelosi, Reid, and the media ruined my presidency." Instead, I want her saying, "I crushed Soros and all those associated with him and his kind." As Gen. MacArthur said, "There is no substitute for victory."

Barack Obama's Unsavory Financial Dealings

TOMORROW: I'LL HAVE A COLUMN CALLED "WHITHER GOEST HILLARY CLINTON?", a discussion of the diminishing number of options available to her. As far as "whither," her campaign, an ill-conceived one, is slowly "withering." However, I believe she has some very damaging information Obama, and the question is: will she release it? I expect she will have a big win in Ohio and a narrow win in Texas, as well as a solid win in Rhode Island. As far as "The People's Republic of Vermont," who knows? (I used to live in Vermont.) Mrs. Clinton has a very narrow window leading to the nomination, and if she doesn't win both Ohio and Texas that window will slam shut. People in the MSM still have a hard time grasping that fact, because they are the ones who long ago proclaimed Hillary The Inevitable Winner. So much for inevitability. Obama would be the most under-qualified presidential candidate since Ohio's Warren Gamaliel Harding, also a silver-tongued orator but an exemplar of cluelessness when it came to being President. He was, however, wise enough to die during his first (and last) term, thereby enabling a better man to become President: "Silent" Calvin Coolidge of Vermont. On the strange picture below, is it just me, or is Obama appearing increasingly anorexic? If he drops below 100 pounds, that could hurt his chances.

Tim Russert, Keith Olberman, Wolf Blitzer, and Chris Matthews award Barack Obama 2008 Heisman Trophy! Michelle Obama is early favorite in Las Vegas odds for Mrs. America! This site provides some of the best humorous pictures of the wildly overrated Senator Obama. If you have any good photos, please send them along to me at: TalkTop65@aol.com.


Today, Chicago political "fixer" Tony Rezko, Obama's friend since 1990, goes on trial in Chicago for federal corruption charges. You probably haven't heard much about Mr. Rezko, a major contributor to Obama's 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate. In a recent debate, Mrs. Clinton correctly mentioned Rezko as a Chicago "slumlord" and a buddy of Obama. That was the first time most Americans had heard of the man, who's been a constant political presence during the Illinois Senator's career.


How corrupt are Illinois politics? In fact, three of the previous seven governors have spent time in federal prison. The current governor looks as if he's trying hard to make it four-out-of-eight.


MSNBC had a story this morning (Monday) about Rezko's trial. Of course, the network had a banner indicating that Senator Obama of course had nothing to do with the bribery and sweetheart deals engaged in by Rezko. However, aside from the the two Chicago dailies and a Boston weekly paper, the media generally have avoided any careful examination of the relationship between Rezko and Senator Obama.


Recently, Cincinnati talk-show host Willie Cunningham called Obama "a Chicago political hack." John McCain repudiated Cunningham's remarks, but they don't appear to be far from the truth. In his Senate campaign, Obama raised an amazing amount: $14.5 million.


Much of that money came from unsavory characters, including the relentlessly anti-American Soros family, billionaires who "earned" their money through financial speculation. (See information about Obama's fundraising at http://opensecrets.org/. At opensecrets.org you can also find records of the millions the Soros family has poured into the campaigns of left-wing Democrats over the past decade-and-a-half.)


Here's the link to the Soros families' massive contributions: http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=CB5VB&txtName=Soros&txtState=(all%20states)&txtAll=Y&Order=N


Of course, Obama's national finance director in his presidential effort is one Penny Pritzker, a member of a fabulously wealthy Chicago family. As a board member of a major Chicago financial institution (Superior Bank), Ms. Pritzer played a significant role in the subprime mortgage crisis. Check the following link re Ms. Pritzker: http://www.bostonnow.com/blogs/oldmole/2008/02/12/obama-campaign-finance-chair-involved-in-superior-bank-sampl-scandal


If you want to read more about Obama's interesting financial dealings, please go "Samantha's" site at: http://democratsforsale.blogspot.com/.


Obama has received heavy contributions from organized labor, which is the biggest donor in American politics. What do the Senator's union buddies receive for their money? If you go to the section on Obama in Michael Barone's The Almanac of American Politics, you'll find that Obama's AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees) rating for 2005-2007 is 100%. That means he never deviates from the public employees' stance on issues.


Of course, one of Obama's main tactics in soliciting votes is to suggest that he will "reach across the aisle" to work with Republicans. However, his record demonstrates no such tendency. He is the farthest left-wing member of the U.S. Senate in a country that's relentlessly moderate in its views.


Of course, Obama claims Tony Rezko didn't get anything for his contributions and a sweetheart land deal. Yeah, sure, right. The place to look in Obama's record is the 130 times he voted "present" in the Illinois State Senate, something that's never been clarified. The question is: how many of those votes benefited Tony Rezko?

OBAMA & SOROS: AMERICAN NIGHTMARES

WELCOME TO MY MANY VISITORS FROM BRAZIL. IF YOU KEEP COMING, I PROMISE TO LEARN SOME PORTUGESE. WHEN IT COMES TO ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, WE HAVE A LOT TO LEARN FROM BRAZILIANS.

NEW COLUMN FOR FRIDAY UP AT 7 A.M. EASTERN TIME.

Michelle Obama says: Her husband has always had "a healthy ego."
Katie Couric asked her: "How do you keep it in check?"
My Answer: "Have him read this blog."

Over the next week, I'll be writing about Barack Obama, who he is, what he's done, and why his election as President would be bad for America. Recently, I noted that Obama -- in terms of finances -- is largely a wholly owned subsidiary of George Soros, billionaire founder of Moveon.org and a full-time "Amerika-hater."

I noted that Soros is a supporter of Hamas, the terrorist organization centered in Gaza.One of my critics replied that I was part of "the Republican attack machine" in regard to Obama -- and that Soros merely wanted to "negotiate" with Hamas.

My response to him is as follows: "Negotiate" with Hamas about what? The morality of suicide bombings? The wisdom of firing Kastusha rockets into Israeli settlements? The seriousness of Hamas about its stated commitment to the destruction -- the annihilation -- of Israel? Or about the mass killings of members of the rival Fatah political group?

Go over to Moveon.org, the nation's largest hate-machine, and you will find out all you need about George Soros and his minions. They despise their country, the one that enabled someone like Soros to amass a fortune of roughtly $10 billion.

In my criticisms of Obama, I've noted that he was not only militantly pro-abortion, but also that he favored a form of infanticide. As Michael Barone, favorable in many ways to Obama's political skills, said in the curent edition of The Almanac of American Politics (p. 539): "He [Obama] voted against requiring medical care for fetuses who survived abortions."

Unfortunately, I'm not making this up, and, yes, I do attack Obama for refusing to support any limitations on abortion.Obama will talk a lot in his campaign about the importance of "our children." He won't indicate that he favors the destruction of our most vulnerable children, those gasping for air. I guess his commitment to "universal health care" doesn't apply to children who are victims of botched abortions.

How does this man sleep at night? Would he have advocated such a fate for his own beautiful children? You won't ever hear Tim Russert or Katie Couric asking such questions, but they should.

In all his empty rhetoric about bringing the country together and "reaching across the aisle" to Republicans, Obama neglects to mention that his political stands allow for no real compromises. Yes, he will occasionally work with Republicans on non-controversial issues, but on anything of true significance, he will function as a militant leftist.

When I noted that the non-partisan National Journal had designated Obama as the most liberal Senator, my critic replied that was only true of 2007. In the previous year, he has been "only" the 9th most liberal Senator. One doesn't know whether to laugh or cry. I guess the point is that Obama is a militant Leftist only when he's running for President.

Obama is the first presidential candidate ever endorsed by Soros' Moveon.org. The three million members of that group comprise most of the 20% of the Democrats in national survey who indicate they want the U.S. to lose the war in Iraq.

Obama's prescription for what we should do in Iraq is to have us flee as soon as possible, leaving the country to the tender mercies of al Qaeda and other sectarian fanatics.On the other hand, he apparently doesn't have a problem with having us invade Pakistan in search of al Qaeda leaders. In other words, his foreign policy is to desert one ally and alienate another. This is Soros-ism to a fault. It makes no sense, but it does produce standing ovations from the mindless Moveon types.

Honestly, I do wish I were making this stuff up, but I'm not. I wish Obama were the attractive candidate he sometimes he tries to convince us he is. But he's not.

Yes, I'm going to continue attacking Barack Obama. I will never, never make up any charges against him. He has a terrible record, one of extreme partisanship and dishonesty about his motives. An individual who favors denying medical care to injured infants is beneath contempt. That's not a gratuitous attack on Obama. Rather, it's just a call for him to practice some basic human decency.

The other day, before he attacked McCain, Obama said "John McCain is an American hero." What he should have said afterwards, but didn't, was "And I'm not." Like Soros, he's an American nightmare, and he must be defeated.

____________________________________________

OBAMA, CONGRESSIONAL ALLIES BACKING HUGE TAX INCREASE

Senator Obama's office today disseminated the following news release:

"Obama, Hagel, Cantwell, Smith Hail Committee Passage of the Global Poverty Act."

U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Congressman Adam Smith (D-WA) today hailed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's passage of the Global Poverty Act (S.2433), which requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community, businesses and NGOs. This legislation was introduced in December. Smith and Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) sponsored the House version of the bill (H.R. 1302), which passed the House last September.

Here's the link to the entire release: http://obama.senate.gov/press/080213-obama_hagel_can_1/

The following is an assessment of the "Global Poverty Act" by Cliff Kincaid, director of Accuracy in Media (AIM) who, unlike Senator Obama, talks about the small matter of costs:

"A nice-sounding bill called the 'Global Poverty Act,' sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations. Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends. "

Here's the link to the entire Kincaid article: http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff207.htm

Steve says: Frankly, I wish Senator Obama had asked his billionaire friend and financial backer George Soros (worth about $10 billion) and the folks at Moveon.org to use their own vast resources to eliminate poverty throughout the world. It doesn't seem fair to saddle U.S. taxpayers, in a time of economic downturn, with the obligation. It seems likely that most of the $845 billion will go down the usual rathole that is the repository of much economic aid.

Barack Obama: The Hope-Monger

Above from Chicago Sun-Times: "Exactly what did Obama just say?"

Note: I'm doing rsearch on the relationship between George Soros and his political funding of -- and ideological influence on -- Barack Obama. A Hungarian who emigrated to American and made billions of dollars in finance and currency speculation, Soros, his family, and business associates have contributed huge sums to Barack Obama in his senatorial and presidential campaigns. (See the "Obama" financial sections on http://opensecrets.org/, especially the "top contributors" segments for 2006 and 2008.)

Soros is the financial "godfather" of Moveon.org, the nation's largest political hate group. He's also a fan of Hamas, the Palestine-centered terrorist group. On Feb. 1, 2008, Moveon.org, an organization that claims 3 million-plus left-leaning members, gave its first endorsement to a presidential candidate: Barack Obama. The vast amount of money that's recently poured into Obama's coffers apparently has come from Moveon-types. Moveon.org members and Soros have been pressuring Obama to take more extreme positions on the economy and the war on terrorism.

My columns on Soros, Moveon, and Obama will begin appearing on Sunday, February 17.

Michael Barone's The Almanac of American Politics, 2008, p. 539, says the following of Obama as an Illinois State Senator: "He voted against providing medical care for fetuses who survived abortions." So much for his "universal health care."

"Hope is the thing with feathers [the bird that flies]." -- Emily Dickinson

"I'm not a hope-monger." -- Barack Obama (Oh, really?)

"It's not a promise of hope. It's a platitude." -- John McCain on Barack Obama's "message"

"My friends, I'm fired up -- and ready to go." -- John McCain

I'll have a new column on Barack Obama on Wednesday by noon, EST. My first column on Obama, the one with Che Guevera on a Cuban flag, is below. So are the links that will take you to the news sources that broke the flag story. Two columns down you'll find a column about Mrs. Clinton ("Iraq: Is it Hillary's War?"). Mrs. Clinton is starting to look a lot like the silver medalist in the race for the nomination.

CNN announced earlier tonight (Tuesday) that the Virginia Republican Primary was "very competitive" (and thus "too close to call," their other favorite cliche). In fact, John McCain apparently won VA by about 60,000 votes. Anderson Cooper just called it "a close win." Wonder who CNN is backing?