Obama Vows to Disarm America

In this remarkable 2007 video, Barack Obama pledges to an anti-war group that he will eliminate and severely reduce America’s nuclear arsenal.  He also promises not to weaponize space and that he wants a world without nuclear weapons.

Now that’s a nice thought.  Wouldn’t we all like that?  There’s just one problem…there are a number of rogue nations (North Korea, Iran, etc) that have the ability to make a nuclear weapon.  So, do we honestly believe that if we eliminate all of our nukes, that they’re going to do the same thing?  Give me a break.

If Obama and his “progressive” followers don’t want America to be the worlds lone military superpower, then who do they want leading the world?  China?  North Korea?  Oh yeah, the world would be much safer under them.  If we’re not the world’s military superpower, somebody else will be.  There are plenty of nations ready and willing to take our place.

If you think back to September 11th, 2001, could you have honestly believed that America would have lasted nearly 7 years without another major attack on our soil?  Most of us believed (including me) that it would be two and maybe three years at the most before we were hit again.  Because of President Bush’s leadership we have lasted this long and America has nearly completely dismantled the Al Qaeda network.

We’re winning the war against terror.  We’re winning the war in Iraq.  We removed the Taliban.  We removed Sadaam Hussein.  Al Qaeda is utterly ineffective and losing to us on every front.  Why would we stop now?  Because we have hope and we want change?  Barack Obama will bring change all right–from winning against terorrist to losing against terrorists; from being the world’s lone superpower to not being a superpower; from being strong to being weak.  Oh yeah, that’s change I can believe in.

Palestinians Campaign For Obama

Sometime next fall, when you get a call from someone with a foreign accent urging you to vote for Barack Obama, you may consider asking where they are calling from. There’s a good chance it may be the Gaza strip and from a member of Hamas.

Palestinians in Gaza have taken it upon themselves to actively campaign for Obama from Gaza. In a world that gets smaller every day through the internet and other forms of communication, this should come as no surprise.

However, when pondering whether or not to vote for Barack Obama in the fall, one should ponder this….why would members of Hamas in the Gaza strip attempt to influence our Presidential election? Why are they so preferential to Obama? What is it about him that makes him so attractive to people who belong to terrorist groups and have pledged themselves to the destruction of Israel? Could it be that they think he’s just pretending to be a supporter of Israel and really isn’t?

That my friends, is exactly what they think. And I think they’re right.

This pro-Obama news video is from Al Jazeera.

Terrorists For Obama

Hamas, the Palestinian Sunni Islamist militant organization (i.e. terrorist group) and political party has come out in support of their favorite U.S. Presidential candidate….Barack Obama. Hamas’ top political adviser in the Gaza Strip, Ahmed Yousef, said in an interview with World Net Daily and ABC radio that Hamas “hopes” Obama will win the presidential elections and “change” America’s foreign policy.

Yousef also went onto say this:

“I hope Mr. Obama and the Democrats will change the political discourse. … I do believe [Obama] is like John Kennedy, a great man with a great principal. And he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community, but not with humiliation and arrogance.”

Naturally the Obama campaign ran away from this faster than it did from Rev. Jeremiah Wright a week ago. The only problem for the Obama campaign is the lingering question that will remain in voters’ minds in November. Why would a terrorist organization endorse Barack Obama?

Well, if you put yourself in the shoes of the leader of Hamas, what would you want out of America’s next President?

1. A weaker America with less military presence in the Middle East, thus allowing terrorist organizations to freely recruit, raise money, and grow.

2. A weak U.S. economy thus diminishing America’s presence in the world.

3. A more “tolerant” view of radical Islam.

4. Abandonment of Israel.

I’m not suggesting that these are Obama’s coming policies, but Hamas clearly believes that they will get more of these with Obama than they do with McCain. It is similar to Al Qaeda’s unofficial “endorsement” of John Kerry four years ago, by Al Qaeda leaders using Democratic talking points on an Al Jazeera released videotape. All organizations (labor unions, religious groups, nonprofit organizations) will endorse who they feel will be in their best interest. Terrorists want what is best for them too!

For those of us who aren’t hypnotized by Obama’s empty platitudes of change and hope, this really comes as no surprise. Obama has shown himself to be not only naive, but dangerously naive regarding foreign policy. He has suggested that he would have negotiations with Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela (without preconditions) and has suggested invading one of our allies, Pakistan. He has promised to raise taxes and has promised to immediately start pulling troops out of Iraq. He has promised to levy windfall taxes on American oil companies, which would not only wreck any hope America has of becoming energy independent, but would give foreign oil companies a distinct advantage over American oil companies. Nearly every Obama plan put forth thus far is a potential disaster that could literally take decades to fix once he left office. What better scenario for Hamas and other terrorist organizations to thrive under? A crippled America is in their best interests.

By mine and any other sane person’s calculations, Obama already has the perfect plan to accomplish the first three things on the Hamas wishlist. Raising taxes weakens the economy and pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan weakens our influence in the Middle East. This would allow terrorist organizations to recruit, train, and expand freely. Hamas recognizes that Obama is a member of a church that has remained very vocally anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian for twenty years. Yousef even went so far as to say that Obama is just “kissing up to Jews” because that is “American politics”.

There will be much more of this in the coming months. No one issue will derail the Obama campaign, but a combination of the combined controversies of Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, and a Hamas endorsement very well could. It just depends on how hungry Americans are for a change in the wrong direction.

Obama: No Al Qaeda in Iraq?

Obama’s been making a lot of unwise statements lately and he almost slips up and makes another one here. No Al Qaeda in Iraq? Better rethink that one….

Obama Calls For Talks With Iran

On Tuesday, Presidential Candidate Barack Obama called for the US to talk to Iran to help sort out the Iraq situation. Which, if you think about it, is pretty funny considering that Iranians are probably largely behind the majority of attacks on US troops in Iraq. What would talking to a clown like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accomplish? Likely nothing other than embarrassing the United States for negotiating with a communist nation and bowing to their desires. Iran has a vested interest in what happens in Iraq. Iran would like nothing more than to turn Iraq into a nation much like Iran. Iran does not want any kind of democracy in the Middle East and will be a major opposing force to any kind of democratic government for a very long time.

Sure, Iran could stop a lot of the violence in the region because they’re the cause of most of it. In case Obama hasn’t noticed, Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. Iran would gladly “help” us quell the violence and in exchange get to exert more influence on Iraq and dictate where oil profits go. Why don’t we just open up negotiations and unilateral talks with Al Qaeda?

Maybe we should “talk” to Iran about the 6000 new centrifuges that they are assembling for their nuclear program. I’m so sure Iran’s only interest in uranium is for nuclear power….does anyone actually believe that?

FITNA Release Leads to Death Threats on LiveLeak Staff

The recent web release of the film FITNA by Dutch Politician Geert Wilders was hosted on British run website LiveLeak.com and has since been removed (although the link still works) due to death threats against its staff. This is the statement from LiveLeak’s website.

Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, Liveleak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers.

This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else. We would like to thank the thousands of people, from all backgrounds and religions, who gave us their support. They realised LiveLeak.com is a vehicle for many opinions and not just for the support of one.

Perhaps there is still hope that this situation may produce a discussion that could benefit and educate all of us as to how we can accept one anothers culture.
We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high.

I have watched the 15 minute film and it is a compilation of verses out of the Quran calling for violence, footage from terrorist activities, and Muslim leaders preaching violence against Jews and Christians. Geert Wilders has already been targeted with assassination before, but is much more likely to face it after releasing this film. He also faces some copyright charges, but that’s irrelevant if he’s killed for this.

The film is very damning against radical Islam and seeks to have the Quran banned in Holland for the same reason that Mein Kamph was banned.  It’s isn’t very well made, but it is powerful.  Geert Wilders has a right to say what he thinks without being threatened with death.

The film was downloaded from LiveLeak.com and made it onto YouTube. If you want to watch the film, the two parts are below. It is about 15 minutes long total. I wouldn’t recommend watching it with kids.

Part 1

Part 2

Obama’s Race Speech Won’t Be Enough

In an America that is hungering to forget some of its ugly past such as slavery and racial separatism, it might seem that Barack Obama is the candidate to heal these ostensibly permanent wounds. His attempt at solidifying himself as the post-racial candidate in his race speech will likely only solidify his place in history as another Democratic presidential nominee to not win the White House. Barack Obama had a big chance to walk through that door and lead the nation into post-racial America, but he slammed it shut and threw away the key. While the speech was flowery and poignant, as Obama’s speeches are known, it lacked in some very significant areas.

Several weeks ago, I mistakenly thought that Obama was bigger than the race issue and that because he could unite the races that people would think he would automatically be able to unite ideologies. I was wrong. Instead of stepping past the race issue, Obama catapulted race right to the forefront of his campaign. While it may be true that he blew his chances over the years while he sat quietly in the pews of Trinity United Church of Christ, I think he could have weathered this storm and survived.

Obama

Just some things I noticed:

Mistake #1- Talking about slavery. I hate to break it to anyone who doesn’t know, but slavery ended over 140 years ago. There probably isn’t a person alive whose parent or grandparent experienced it. It’s over and Americans don’t respond well when they are made to feel guilty about something that happened in the 19th century.

Mistake #2- Justifying Wright’s racism. Obama denounced his hate-speech, but rather asked that we understand where Wright is coming from. The Rev. Wright has said some over-the-top stuff, but justifying it doesn’t allow Obama to step beyond the race issue. In order to be the post-racial candidate, Obama has to be race-neutral. He can’t do that by having close associations with a guy that is well known for speeches with outrageous claims like “America created HIV for a black genocide”. Obama touched on the race issue, but didn’t mention the anti-American message that is prominent in the church, which is perhaps a larger problem than racism.

Mistake #3- Changing his story about when he heard Wright’s rantings. Perhaps his error was when he initially lied, however, now he is telling the truth. Originally he said he never heard anything controversial in what Wright had said. Now he admits to hearing them. Of course he heard them. How could he be in a church for twenty years and not hear them? It isn’t like Wright started this yesterday! What is going to be really damning is if the Clinton’s get some video of one of Wright’s “hate-America” sermons and the video shows Obama clapping after one of the rants.

Mistake #4- Throwing his Grandmother under the bus. Not a cool move no matter how you look at it. If you haven’t read it, you can read the full text of the speech here.

I do not believe that Barack Obama is a racist and I am not suggesting that he might be. However, you are known by the company that you keep, and Obama has quite a few interesting ties to people and groups with radical ideas and positions. How can he have such a close friend in Rev. Wright and disavow so much of what Wright says from the pulpit? Why does Obama have guys like Louis Farrakhan and the New Black Panther Party coming out to endorse him? What do these people and groups see in Barack Obama? Is there something that we’re missing here?

Even if Obama does win the nomination, he has all sorts of stuff coming down the pike right now to tie him up for at least 3-4 months. Right after his speech his campaign took down the link from his official website to the New Black Panther Party’s website. It’s also been discovered that Obama was the first presidential candidate to call for Don Imus to step down from his position after Imus’s comments. Why was Obama so quick to call for the resignation of a radio talk show host? Jeremiah Wright had been saying things a whole lot worse than Don Imus ever did for years and years and Obama never called for his resignation.

On top of just these things, Obama has another scandal coming in this Tony Rezko trial, several other ties to anti-American pastors, as well as ties to a terrorist organization known as The Weather Underground. Not too good.

Is it any wonder why McCain is now leading in the polls?