“You have to pinch yourself – a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so.” (“Pinch Yourself,” Melanie Philips, The Spectator UK, 10/14/08)Read the full article and be stunned at what the American media is not reporting.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Could Not Have Said it Better Myself...
in
2008 election,
media,
Obama
How sad is it that major American media outlets are so in the tank for The Chosen One that it takes a British journalist to set the record straight on Obama:
Monday, October 13, 2008
The Consequences of Obama's Radical Pro-Abortion Views
At a recent campaign stop in Pennsylvania, Governor Sara Palin took off the gloves, charging that Barrack Obama "hopes that you won’t notice how radical, absolutely radical his idea is on [abortion], and his record is, until it’s too late... Obama is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life."
Bravo for Governor Palin putting the issue of life back on the table!
As encouraged as I am with Governor Palin's remarks, I don't think it's enough to simply state that Obama's views are radical or extreme. Many Americans tune out such statements as mere negative political attacks, and the liberal media actively encourages this mistaken assumption. We need to take the gloves off and be very, very explicit about Obama's stated views on abortion and what the effects of those views are.
Senator Obama's voting record is clear. In Illinois he voted multiple times against a bill that would have protected babies that survive abortions and are living and breathing on their own outside their mother.
Furthermore, Obama pledges, as his first act as president, to sign the laughably titled "Freedom of Choice Act," the practical effect of which would be as astounding as it is sweeping. It would eliminate "every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after" the date of its enactment. That means no restrictions of any kind on abortion at all, now and forever.
The practical effect of Obama signing this bill into law is frightening.
We cannot be shy about this! We need to speak the truth and speak it loudly. Political views and votes have consequences and America needs to know the consequences of an Obama presidency on America's unborn babies.
Bravo for Governor Palin putting the issue of life back on the table!
As encouraged as I am with Governor Palin's remarks, I don't think it's enough to simply state that Obama's views are radical or extreme. Many Americans tune out such statements as mere negative political attacks, and the liberal media actively encourages this mistaken assumption. We need to take the gloves off and be very, very explicit about Obama's stated views on abortion and what the effects of those views are.
Senator Obama's voting record is clear. In Illinois he voted multiple times against a bill that would have protected babies that survive abortions and are living and breathing on their own outside their mother.
Furthermore, Obama pledges, as his first act as president, to sign the laughably titled "Freedom of Choice Act," the practical effect of which would be as astounding as it is sweeping. It would eliminate "every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after" the date of its enactment. That means no restrictions of any kind on abortion at all, now and forever.
The practical effect of Obama signing this bill into law is frightening.
- 13-year-old girls will again be allowed to have abortions without their parents' knowledge or consent by striking down parental notification laws.
- Every tax-paying American will be forced to pay for the abortions of others with the removal of the prohibition against public funding of abortions.
- Abortionists will once again be able to bring babies completely trough the birth canal except for their heads before aborting them when the ban on partial birth abortions is lifted.
- Abortionists will no longer have to provide women information on the risks of abortion or other, non-abortion options to an unplanned pregnancy with the elimination of informed consent laws.
We cannot be shy about this! We need to speak the truth and speak it loudly. Political views and votes have consequences and America needs to know the consequences of an Obama presidency on America's unborn babies.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Do Facts Matter?
Thomas Sowell wrote a customarily brilliant article over at National Review Online. In it he wonders whether facts matter in political campaigns or if it is only the perception of facts that count.
Republicans must constantly present the facts to Americans. With every breath, McCain, Palin, and the RNC should tell Americans that Obama was the second largest recipient of contributions from the two main institutions responsible for our current financial mess, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and that Obama counts among his advisers former Freddie Mac CEO Franklin Raines who made off with $90 million while steering the company to disaster.
I want to think that Americans are not dumb enough to elect Obama president. We need to give them all the facts they need to prove that they're not.
“The media are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don’t seem to know what it is to counterattack. They deserve to lose.Republicans would be wise to heed his advice.
But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all, who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric, and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America.”
Republicans must constantly present the facts to Americans. With every breath, McCain, Palin, and the RNC should tell Americans that Obama was the second largest recipient of contributions from the two main institutions responsible for our current financial mess, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and that Obama counts among his advisers former Freddie Mac CEO Franklin Raines who made off with $90 million while steering the company to disaster.
I want to think that Americans are not dumb enough to elect Obama president. We need to give them all the facts they need to prove that they're not.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Obama's Legalistic Approach to Core Moral Values
One mark of a true leader is defending moral truths regardless of the personal repercussions. Obama prefers a legalistic and "balance sheet" approach. Two examples display this tendency in stark detail.
Teaching Kindergarten Children About Sexually Transmitted Diseases
It is morally reprehensible to teach five and six year old children about sexually transmitted diseases, yet, in 2005, as an Illinois Senator, Obama supported a comprehensive sex education bill that would provide, among other things, that "each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections..." (2005 Illinois Senate Bill 99, page 1, line 13-16). Senator Obama claims that the reason he supported the bill was to protect children from sexual predators, and that is one of the bill's intentions, but the clear and unambiguous language of the bill shows that it goes far beyond that claim. Even FactCheck.org, in their convoluted evaluation of a McCain ad calling out Obama on this issue, admitted that Obama voted for this bill when they confirm that "the bill passed in the Health and Human Services Committee with Democrats, including Obama, voting along party lines in support of it."
The bill would teach little children about sexually transmitted diseases. Obama supported it because it also did other good things.
Protecting Children Born Alive after Failed Abortions
Witholding lifesaving medical care to infants that survive abortions and are living independently outside the womb is an abject evil, yet Obama voted four times against a bill in Illinois that would have guaranteed this medical care. His explanation? First, that it would lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Yet, the bill he voted against contained an amendment specifically preventing this outcome (Amendment 001 to SB1082).
Next, he claimed that "it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute." Obama's singular focus on defending abortion at all costs blinds him to the fact that the babies protected by this bill are living outside their mothers. This was not a bill that protects babies inside their mothers wombs. This was a bill to protect babies living independently outside their mothers.
The National Right to Life Committee (NLRC) has an excellent summary of Obama's votes on this issue in Illinois.
A Failure of Leadership
A "balance sheet" defense for teaching five year olds about STDs and a legalistic defense for failing to protect living infants. That is not leadership. That is not change. That is Obama.
Teaching Kindergarten Children About Sexually Transmitted Diseases
It is morally reprehensible to teach five and six year old children about sexually transmitted diseases, yet, in 2005, as an Illinois Senator, Obama supported a comprehensive sex education bill that would provide, among other things, that "each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections..." (2005 Illinois Senate Bill 99, page 1, line 13-16). Senator Obama claims that the reason he supported the bill was to protect children from sexual predators, and that is one of the bill's intentions, but the clear and unambiguous language of the bill shows that it goes far beyond that claim. Even FactCheck.org, in their convoluted evaluation of a McCain ad calling out Obama on this issue, admitted that Obama voted for this bill when they confirm that "the bill passed in the Health and Human Services Committee with Democrats, including Obama, voting along party lines in support of it."
The bill would teach little children about sexually transmitted diseases. Obama supported it because it also did other good things.
Protecting Children Born Alive after Failed Abortions
Witholding lifesaving medical care to infants that survive abortions and are living independently outside the womb is an abject evil, yet Obama voted four times against a bill in Illinois that would have guaranteed this medical care. His explanation? First, that it would lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Yet, the bill he voted against contained an amendment specifically preventing this outcome (Amendment 001 to SB1082).
Next, he claimed that "it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute." Obama's singular focus on defending abortion at all costs blinds him to the fact that the babies protected by this bill are living outside their mothers. This was not a bill that protects babies inside their mothers wombs. This was a bill to protect babies living independently outside their mothers.
The National Right to Life Committee (NLRC) has an excellent summary of Obama's votes on this issue in Illinois.
A Failure of Leadership
A "balance sheet" defense for teaching five year olds about STDs and a legalistic defense for failing to protect living infants. That is not leadership. That is not change. That is Obama.
Friday, September 19, 2008
A Solution to the Email Password Change Hack
in
technology
In the wake of the Yahoo fiasco where some loser without a life hacked Governor Palin's email accont, a forward thinking email service should take the lead in email security. The ability to create a custom question is a good start, but a better solution would be to allow users to add a verification phone number to their account.
The service will send an SMS message to the account phone number to confirm any password change. If the account holder replies to the text message with "YES" the service executes the change. If there is no reply within, say, 15 minutes, they cancel the change request and put a pleasant message on the screen telling the requester that he needs to have access to the account phone number to validate the change. This will account for users who forget where their phones are or whose phone's battery is dead. If the user replies "NO," then the service cancels the password change, starts a hacking investigation, and displays on the site an animated Grim Reaper laughing menacingly and proclaiming "Goctha you loser hacker!" (just kidding, but not really). As an added feature, the service could display the account phone number (or a masked version of it like "the phone number ending in 1234") on users's account home pages so they will remember to change it if they change their mobile phone number.
This feature would virtually guarantee that all password change requests are valid and would provide an instant mechanism for flagging fraudulent requests.
The service will send an SMS message to the account phone number to confirm any password change. If the account holder replies to the text message with "YES" the service executes the change. If there is no reply within, say, 15 minutes, they cancel the change request and put a pleasant message on the screen telling the requester that he needs to have access to the account phone number to validate the change. This will account for users who forget where their phones are or whose phone's battery is dead. If the user replies "NO," then the service cancels the password change, starts a hacking investigation, and displays on the site an animated Grim Reaper laughing menacingly and proclaiming "Goctha you loser hacker!" (just kidding, but not really). As an added feature, the service could display the account phone number (or a masked version of it like "the phone number ending in 1234") on users's account home pages so they will remember to change it if they change their mobile phone number.
This feature would virtually guarantee that all password change requests are valid and would provide an instant mechanism for flagging fraudulent requests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
