The Shotgun Blog
« International Women's Day #2 | Main | Homeschoolers in trouble »
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Another peek behind the curtain
The Audacity of Hype took another hit, as two MSM papers discovered Obama supporting America's military presence in - Iraq. I would say the most damaging line comes from the New York Times: "He voted against the withdrawal of troops and proposed legislation calling for a drawdown only after he was running for president and polls showed voters favoring it."
Posted by D.J. McGuire on March 8, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22305/26926868
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another peek behind the curtain:
Comments
Real Republicans already knew all that...
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8
Posted by: Marc | 9-Mar-08 11:27:12 AM
While I personally fall into the military non-interventionist camp, there is no denying that neo-conservatives have a principled, thoughtful foreign policy platform. Left-liberals, on the other hand, are hard to figure out.
Some left-liberals support military intervention in Afghanistan, as long as we build roads and hospitals and have an arbitrary deadline for the combat role.
They strongly opposed the invasion of Iraq. But then there was an ill-considered suggestion by Dion that we send troops to Pakistan.
Iran is sensibly a no-go, but Darfur? Absolutely! Whatever tribal mess is going on in Sudan, we need to be part of it.
Is there a coherent foreign policy on the left, other than disagreeing with conservatives?
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 10-Mar-08 12:31:11 AM
Here's what one Journalist had to say....
Michael Reisig is the editor of the paper "The Polk County Pulse" in Mena,
Arkansas
This was in the paper on February 20, 2008...
President Obama.
By Michael Reisig
Well, having observed the progress of the Democrat and Republican
Primaries I would have to say at this point, America is probably close
to electing Barak Hussein Obama as its next president. I understand the
need for change - but for all my observation of Obama I have yet to hear
any decisive, detailed plans - it all seems to be continual rhetoric on
the concept of change.
It's all rather a puzzlement to me, and more than anything I think this
phenomena is representative of the new Survivor/ Oprah Winfrey/American
Idol consciousness (where the bizarre is applauded as reality and image
is more important than substance), and it is undoubtedly brought about
by the overwhelming dissatisfaction Americans have for a government that
has cheated, lied and stolen from them for at least the last two
generations.
But for minorities, and in particular blacks, this election represents a
moment of long-awaited validation. There is no question that the
election of an African-American president will empower the blacks of
this country.
Don't misunderstand me - this is not a racist statement, this is just a
fact, and in many respects this could be a good thing. But there is no
denying the sense of audacious rebellion that constantly simmers in much
of the black community, particularly with the youth of the large
metropolitan areas. I have some concern that the election of a black
president will take us back to a consciousness that promotes the power
of race over intelligence, reason, and the value of law, and that this
may divide black and whites more than uniting them. I hope that I'm
wrong.
Obama speaks a lot about a uniting of black and white America, but the
church he has attended for years would contradict that. Although you
won't hear much of this on national television, one has but to go to
Obama's church of choice, Trinity United Church of Christ (go to the
website to check for yourself) to find, and I quote, "An unabashedly
black congregation with a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. "An
African people, 'true to our native land, the mother continent, the
cradle of civilization."
Nowhere in the website is America even mentioned. Can you imagine if
one of the other white candidates for president were a member of a
church that declared itself "unashamedly white?" What would the media
have done to them already?
I was also startled by a number of the points in Trinity United Church's
10-Point Vision:
*A congregation with a Non-negotiable Commitment to Africa.
*A congregation committed to Cultural Education (Africa).
*A congregation committed to the Historical Education of African People
in Diaspora.
*A congregation committed to Liberation.
*A congregation committed to Restoration. (Could this mean
restitution?)
In addition, Trinity's senior pastor Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., is
considered by many to be a black racist, who, without question, preaches
radical Afro-centric theology.
It appears, by affiliation, that we have a man who wants to be president
of America while much of his loyalty is invested in black Africa.
But there is also a deeper, perhaps darker consequence in terms of
America and its multi-national population when we consider Mr. Obama as
our new leader.
Investigations have shown that Obama's father and stepfather were devout
Islamics. Both faithfully practiced their religion. His stepfather,
who had a much greater impact on Obama's upbringing, was a radical
Wahabbi Muslim. Obama's mother married Lolo Soetoro, a Wahabbi
extremist who lived in Indonesia. When Obama's mother moved to
Indonesia - before she married her second Muslim husband - she enrolled
her son in Francis Assisis Catholic School. He was enrolled as a Muslim
because he was a Muslim.
Obama's campaign website has been hailed as a testament to the
candidate's transformative politics. But at least part of the senator's
online outreach, "Muslim Americans for Obama '08" proposes installing
Muslim prayer areas in public places and giving Muslims time off for
prayer, and has denounced Obama's colleagues in the U.S. Senate who
happen to be Jewish.
Further troubling are the issues and solutions on this site:
1. A Law against harassment of Muslim women wearing Hijab at the
Airport, DMV and other public arenas.
2. Institute a Law to allow Muslim Employees to take an hour off
from
work for Friday Jummah Prayer.
3. Make the 2 Eid's (Muslim festivals), recognized National
Holidays
on Calendars with days off from work.
4. Optional Halal meals in federal building, public schools and
colleges.
5. Provide prayer areas suitable for Salah and Jummah, in public
and
private facilities. (i.e. Malls, Airports, Universities and government
buildings.)
6. Organize a Muslim American group to assist in recommendations
for
US foreign policy affecting majority Muslim Countries.
I have to wonder how many encampments of Islamic extremists hidden in
the hills of Afghanistan and quiet rooms of Baghdad and Tehran listen to
the news of America's primary elections with unadulterated glee,
considering first, that we may have a president who has virtually no
experience in managing a government, or attending to military/
international affairs, and secondly; the chance (as remote as it is) of
a quasi-Muslim president of the United States.
Think of the possibilities.
I have sent this to almost everyone I know. If you agree with this, I
hope you will do the same, or at least make sure you vote. It really
scares me to think of Obama being president. It's time we as Christians
stand up and let our voices be heard. Let's stop being the silent
majority!
"May you be poor in misfortune, rich in blessings, slow to make enemies
and quick to make friends. But rich or poor, quick or slow, may you know
nothing but happiness from this day forward."
-Bum Phillips
Posted by: JC | 10-Mar-08 7:42:04 AM
Scary? You are right! But people are sick and upset about the government fleecing us to the skin, so they are looking for change and they will try to get him elected. Mine is one vote he will not get.
Posted by: Joanna Richards | 17-Mar-08 9:35:18 PM
Reisig is a bigot
Posted by: b.smith | 27-Mar-08 12:52:19 PM
I am appalled that hardly anyone bothers to check out this kind of "journalism." It's one man's opinion, not fact. I checked the Obama official Website, the Trinity Church Website, and Snopes.com. The few facts in the article are taken out of context, selective, and in some cases distorted. I wish everyone would at least check with Snopes.com before passing along such trash.
Posted by: Marilynn Lanig | 17-Apr-08 8:37:44 PM
Post a comment