Obama's duck and run

Finally people are starting to realize with Barack Hussein Obama that all that glistens is not really gold. With so many on the right being criticized for keeping and maintaining traditional and Biblical values that are no longer considered "politically correct" by many on the left, i was wondering if Sen. Obama would continue to get a free ride based on his membership for the last 20 years at a church that preaches against the United States of America, seeks racial division and uses the bully pulpit to make political statements.

I've personally been annoyed with the constant emails telling me that Obama is a muslim or Obama is the anti-Christ...to the point of actually having to defend the man; but his membership with the racially divisive and hate mongering Trinity United Church of Christ is indefensible. His pastor Jeremiah Wright, a self professed follower of the "liberation theology" of the 60's (which is no where near being Biblical or Christian theology) has turned his worship services into anti-American rants, attacks on our national leaders and even attacks on Bill and Hillary Clinton. Now keep in mind, that if a conservative Southern Baptist pastor were to do such a thing, not only would they be hung in effigy, they would quickly lose their tax exempt status and have the IRS locking the doors quicker than you can say "tithe".

Obama apparently has thrown his spiritual leader under the back of the segregated bus because in an effort to cover his backside and do damage control Sen. Obama went as far as to allow himself to be interviewed by that "evil, right winged, conservative mouth piece" Fox News...pretty desperate, huh. You can watch the clip here: Barack Obama Fox News Interview

I do want to point out one thing Obama mentions in this interview, "If I had thought that was the tenor or tone on an ongoing basis of his sermons, then yes, I don't think it would've been reflective of my values or my faith experience...If I had heard them repeated, I would've quit."

He is the member of a large and very well known church where all one has to do is a simple search on You Tube to find videos from Jeremiah Wright from up to a year ago...with the same hateful and race baiting filled venom we have seen clips of over the last couple of days. All Obama had to do was contact anyone at this so called church to find out what kind of propaganda was being proclaimed from the pulpit of Jeremiah Wright...or better yet, does a church this side not put out a newsletter? How about the church website Sen. Obama? In short, only an idiot would have not known what kind of filth was coming from the mouth of Jeremiah Wright on Sunday mornings.

I pastor a church where we have 80-100 people on most Sunday mornings, and apparently news travels pretty fast as to what i preach. I maintain our church website personally and it will tell the casual seeker what we believe, why we believe it, and what i am preaching on. Even 20-30 miles away people seem to know what i preach, and if i were to preach something controversial it would get around even quicker. So i really find it hard to believe that Barack Obama had no idea that Jeremiah Wright was preaching such rhetoric and propaganda being a 20 year member of this organization.

I hope this is not over just because Jeremiah Wright has allegedly left the Obama campaign as an advisor; because i think Barack Obama still has a lot of explaining to do. "I'm not there enough" is not nearly a good enough excuse and does not excuse the fact that Barack Obama has said in public that he is "proud" of his race baiting pastor.

And just for the record to all of you well intentioned (but misguided) liberals out there wanting to split hairs, John McCain being endorsed by John Hagee whose end of times theology might appear to be anti-Catholic fails in comparison to Obama's relationship with Jeremiah Wright. John McCain was endorsed by Pastor Hagee, a basic political endoresment...John McCain has not supported the ministry of Hagee for the last 20 years; so don't try to compare apples and oranges. I'm sick of the double standard and the hypocrisy of the left, and i think it is about time this is coming to light!

The New Front to the War on Terror

One of the struggles our men and women in uniform have had with our war on terror is knowing who the enemy is. In places like Iraq and Afghanistan those militant Islamofascists can easily blend in with the landscape and the way of life with the average Muslim until their time to strike comes. It has made things difficult to say the least according to many reports from these heroes protecting our freedoms abroad.

Apparently we have a new front to the war on terror, right here within our borders and the primary target is our own US military. Last week's cowardly bombing of a military recruiting station in Times Square is just one of many attacks on our military various ways. Michelle Malkin is keeping track of this for us and reports the following:
***March 2003. Ithaca, NY anti-war zealots plot to pour blood on the walls of a recruiting center. On St. Patrick’s Day, wielding cups of their own blood, they entered a Lansing military recruitment office and splashed the human blood over recruiting posters, military cutouts and the American flag.

***January 20, 2005. At Seattle Central Community College, Army recruiter Sgt. Jeff Due and his colleague, Sgt. 1st Class Douglas Washington were surrounded by an angry mob of 500 anti-war students. The recruiters’ table was destroyed; their handouts torn apart. The protesters threw water bottles and newspapers at the soldiers…

***Feb. 1, 2005. At a South Toledo, Ohio recruitment center, unhinged protesters hurled manure all over the building. They broke windows and sprayed vulgar grafitti … on office property.

***Mid-Feb. 2005. 20-year-old anti-war goon Brendan Walsh is sentenced to five years in federal prison for hurling a Molotov cocktail through the window of a Vestal, NY military recruitment office in 2003.

***Jan. 2007. Anti-war radicals lay siege to the US Capitol and smash windows at the recruitment center on 14th and L. [In] Pittsburgh anti-recruiter organizers shut down a military recruitment station for a whole day. They brandish hateful signs [reading]: “Recruiters are child predators.”

***Jan. 2008. The Code Pink/City Council siege at the Berkeley recruiting center reaches a boiling point. Protesters chain themselves to the station to shut it down and vandalize the windows with bloody handprints.

***Feb. 2008. Anarchists trash the recruiting station at 14th and L in Washington, D.C., which has been subjected to multiple attacks.

***March 2008. A bomb goes off at the frequently targeted Times Square recruitment center.

It is one thing to fight an enemy like Islamofascism from the outside that hates our way of life and our freedom; but for us to also have to fight anarchists and hate filled liberals from within is nothing short of treason!
And in the fall, when some of these groups go to the polls...keep in mind who they will be voting for!

The Audacity of Hope: A Second-Generational Query (An open letter to Senator Obama)

Dr. Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, has been one of the great defenders of the sanctity of life and traditional marriage in our time. One of his students, Sherif Gergis, a 2008 Princeton Graduate and Rhodes Scholar, has written a powerful letter to U.S. Senator Barack Obama on the subject of the protection of unborn human life. Professor George has asked that the following letter be read carefully and distributed widely.

Dear Senator Obama:

As an immigrant from Kenya, your father found new hope in America’s noble principles and vast opportunities. The same promise brought my parents here from Egypt when I was still too young to thank them. Now you have inspired my generation with your vision of a country united around the same ideals of liberty and justice, “filled with hope and possibility for all Americans.”

But do you mean it?

As a legislator, you have opposed every effort to protect unborn human life. Shockingly, you even opposed a bill to protect the lives of babies who, having survived an attempted abortion, are born alive. Despite your party’s broad support for legal abortion and its public funding, most Democrats (including Senator Clinton) did not oppose the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. You, however, opposed it. Your vision of America seems to eliminate “hope and possibility” for a whole class of Americans: the youngest and most vulnerable. You would deny them the most basic protection of justice, the most elementary equality of opportunity: the right to be born.

As a prerequisite for any other right, the right to life is the great civil-rights issue of our time. It is what slavery and segregation were to generations past. Our response to this issue is the measure of our fidelity to a defining American principle: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life.”

You have asked me to vote for you. In turn, may I ask you three simple questions? They are straightforward questions of fact about abortion. They are at the heart of the debate. In fairness, I believe that you owe the people you would lead a good-faith answer to each:

1. The heart whose beating is stilled in every abortion — is it a human heart?

2. The tiny limbs torn by the abortionist’s scalpel — are they human limbs?

3. The blood that flows from the fetus’s veins — is it human blood?

If the stopped heart is a human heart, if the torn limbs are human limbs, if the spilled blood is human blood, can there be any denying that what is killed in an abortion is a human being? In your vision for America, the license to kill that human being is a right. You have worked to protect that “right” at every turn. But can there be a right to deny some human beings life or the equal protection of the law?

Of course, some do deny that every human being has a right to life. They say that size or degree of development or dependence can make a difference. But the same was once said of color. Some say that abortion is a “necessary evil.” But the same was once said of slavery. Some say that prohibiting abortion would only harm women by driving it underground. But to assume so is truly to play the politics of fear. A compassionate society would never accept these false alternatives. A compassionate society would protect both mother and child, coming to the aid of women in need rather than calling violence against their children the answer to their problems.

Can we become a society that does not sacrifice some people to help others? Or is that hope too audacious? You have said that abortion is necessary to protect women’s equality. But surely we can do better. Surely we can build an America where the equality of some is not purchased with the blood of others. Or would that mean too much change from politics as usual?

Can we provide every member of the human family equal protection under the law? Your record as a legislator gives a resounding answer: No, we can’t. That is the answer the Confederacy gave the Union, the answer segregationists gave young children, the answer a complacent bus driver once gave a defiant Rosa Parks. But a different answer brought your father from Kenya so many years ago; a different answer brought my family from Egypt some years later. Now is your chance, Senator Obama, to make good on the spontaneous slogan of your campaign, to adopt the more American and more humane answer to the question of whether we can secure liberty and justice for all: Yes, we can.

(Crosspost at CGC)

General Wes Clark Endorses Laura Bush for President

Okay, that's not exactly what Wes Clark said, but it still works:

If you look at what Hillary Clinton has done during her time as the First Lady of the United States, her travel to 80 countries, her representing the U.S. abroad, plus her years in the Senate, I think she's the most experienced and capable person in the race, not only for representing am abroad, but for dealing with the tough issues of national security.

By that reasoning, Laura Bush, Barbara Bush, or Nancy Reagan should have been elected Commander-In-Chief.

In short, it's full of holes, and I expect McCain's campaign to rip it to shreds very soon.

Cross-posted at CCG.

Those crazy liberals!

I often listen to these leftist-liberal spin doctors and politicians and follow what they have to say with a simple question, "Are they nuts?". Well, apparently they are.

The Gallup organization published a survey back in November of 2007 that asked Americans what they thought of their own mental health, and the results were as clear as Red and Blue apparently. According to this Gallup study nearly 2/3 of Republicans (58%) view themselves as having excellent mental health, while only barely over 1/3 (38%) of Democrats would say the same of themselves. Wow...and to think that these people get to cancel out my well thought of, well researched and mentally capable vote in November.

One psychiatrist, D. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., actually goes as far as to say that liberalism is a form of mental illness. "Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

Hey may actually have a point in his research when Dr. Rossiter says, according to World Net Daily, that the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
* creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
* satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
* augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
* rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Personally i have always questioned the mental capabilities of anyone who could listen to the rhetoric of Hill the Shrill or Barack Hussein Obama and hear nothing but a neo-Communist Manifesto...now i really will have to do that even more.

And every knee shall bow at the name of Obama

Is Barack Obama the new liberal Messiah? He'd better be careful before her Highness Oprah decides to knock him off of her throne!

The reason i ask this is because i was watching a clip from a recent speech he gave in Houston and behind him i saw people raising their hands as he spoke...similar to what one might see in a charismatic or contemporary evangelical church. But when it happens in a church, it is a form of worship. When this happens at an Obama speech, it appears to be much the same.



This is so VERY disturbing! This is not a movement, it is not a campaign...it's an enthronement for the liberal establishment. After so many years of denying the one true God it would appear that leftist American has found a new god to bow down to...Barack Obama.

O Che can you see, who is voting for me...

I think a lot can be said about a candidate by simply looking at the hardcore supporters of that candidate who would use their own money to open an office to help with the election. Down in Houston two such offices have been opened for Barack Obama as he moves closer to the Super Tuesday II primary on March 4 in the Lone Star state. And these campaign volunteers may be finally proud of this country for the first time in their life based on the image found behind the desk:



Next to the picture of Sen. Obama you will not find an American flag, or even the Lone Star flag of the great state of Texas...instead it is a Cuban flag with the image of Che Guevara on it. Yes, the same Che Guevara whose claim to fame was leading the Marxist revolution in Cuba that gave us that lovable dictator Fidel Castro who may or may not have stepped down because he may or may not be dead (you know how much they love truth down there!). Not only do the voters of Barack Obama love his mile wide and inch deep philosophies...they apparently love the failing ideology of the ruthless executioner who personally oversaw at the very least 55 deaths by firing squad. Of course these deaths were deserving because they had the audacity to disagree politically with the movement that Che himself was leading.

The ideology of the American left truly scares me, and when they make heroes out of the like of Che Guevara while promoting an all message-no substance candidate like Barack Obama (whose speeches are so full of socialist rhetoric it might as well be Che giving them)...we should all be afraid.

Is this what we want in a First Lady?

I'm 36 years old, just days short of my 37th birthday...and i have seen a lot in my country to be proud of. The 1980 US hockey "Miracle on Ice" followed by the 1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles; the fall of the Berlin Wall and our troops returning home after the first Gulf War; our Senators and Representatives standing united for once on the steps of the Capital singing "God Bless America" after our country was attacked on 9/11...for starters. If given a chance i can think of many other times i have been proud to be an American, especially in the last 18 years of my adult life. Apparently that is not so for Michelle Obama.

The 44 year old wife of Presidential hopeful Barack Hussein Obama apparently has not found much to be proud of in her country in the last 26 or so years...going back to around 1982. In fact, while stumping for her husband in Milwaukee the hopeful First Lady said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country..." Really? Wow...she has only been ashamed of her country for the vast majority of her life? And this is the woman who wants to reside in America's house?

Enforcing Liberal Orthodoxy

Open mouth, insert donkey's hoof seems to be the reasoning behind the latest move made by the Democratic National Committee.

A bit of background is needed. The Party of the Donkey doesn't choose a nominee the way the GOP does... not only to the voters get to vote, but, in a move straight out of Mao or Lenin's Communist Party, the Party Members get two votes... one in their state primary, like all good citizens, and another one at the Convention; they're called "superdelegates." I guess the Donkeys don't want to leave the choice of the direction of the party up to, you know, the "little people."

Now comes the insert hoof part. Senator Joe Lieberman, who is a reliable lefty on basically every domestic policy, has been stripped of "superdelegate" status for the awful crime of (gasp) endorsing a Republican! And of course, this comes after the same Party of the Donkey kicked him out because he (gasp) supported the war in Iraq!

Just more evidence that the lefties support free speech only when it agrees with the Party Line.

(Cross-posted at CCG.)

He said it...

Jack Nicholson on Rick Dees radio show this morning (yes, the same Rick Dees of "Disco Duck" fame or...or maybe infamy) said he is in the Hillary Clinton camp because "She is the best man for the job".
Bad politics Jack...but a great line!

My endorsement...

Just for the record, this is the Liberal Implosion owner, bobby speaking here, not my partner in crime from CCG who is also a contributor to Liberal Implosion.

Tomorrow is the Arkansas Primary, we are one of many states voting on "Super Tuesday" to select our party's nominee for President of the United States. This has been a rough campaign season for me and i've done what i can not to criticize any of the candidates unless it was absolutely necessary, and have seen some great possible Presidents drop out of the race. On issue by issue I probably agreed the most with Rep. Duncan Hunter from CA or former Sen. Fred Thompson from TN, but both of these men have set aside their campaign after seeing the writing on the wall. That now leaves us with Sen. John McCain of AZ, former Gov. Mike Huckabee from AR, former Mitt Romney from MA, and Rep. Ron Paul of TX.

I'll start with Ron Paul...he's a libertarian, and although i can agree with him on many issues, i disagree with him far too much, so he is not an option.

Then there is John McCain, the alleged "maverick" of the Republican party. I have seen his name on too much bad legislation and he has consistently sided with the democrats far too much since 2000 for me to support him in this primary. Although he does have an about an 85% conservative voting record...that 15% worries me.

Mike Huckabee is a great man who i greatly respect. He came in to the Governor's office in AR and had to clean up behind both Bill Clinton and then Jim Guy Tucker who could not carry on the Clinton legacy without getting caught. While i respect him as a leader, and even though i am a baptist pastor myself who is serving in the same association he once moderated...i just don't think i can support him in this primary. I believe Mike Huckabee is the essence of compassionate conservative, but with a little too much emphasis on the compassionate part. I can only imagine him becoming what President George W. Bush has become in terms of spending because of this.

That leaves Mitt Romney, and tomorrow when i walk into the voting booth with a copy of the Constitution of the United States of America and my Bible in hand...i will be voting for Gov. Romney. I realize as a baptist many would expect me to balk at his religious beliefs, which i do disagree with whole heatedly, but i'm also not electing a theologian in chief. I think he has the know how to lead us out of the economic quagmire we are in, and i do believe that he has seen the light when it comes to issues of sanctity of life and traditional family values. And i also have no doubt that when put head to head against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, he will show that he is the proven leader that this great country needs in the Oval Office.

So my endorsement (Bobby speaking only) is Mitt Romney.

From the Gipper

"I'm sure everyone feels sorry for the individual who has fallen by the wayside or who can't keep up in our competitive society, but my own compassion goes beyond that to the millions of unsung men and women who get up every morning, send the kids to school, go to work, try and keep up the payments on their house, pay exorbitant taxes to make possible compassion for the less fortunate, and as a result have to sacrifice many of their own desires and dreams and hopes. Government owes them something better than always finding a new way to make them share the fruit of their toils with others."---Ronald Reagan