fuTuRe sHOcK

Osama bin Laden’s top deputy in al Qaeda has released a new tape in which he threatens the United States and vows revenge for the deaths of Palestinians in Gaza. “We will never stop until we avenge the death of all who are killed, injured, widowed and orphaned in Palestine and throughout the Islamic world,” said Ayman al-Zawahiri in a new 10-minute audio recording released today on extreme Islamist Web forums. The message is entitled “The Massacre in Gaza and the Siege of the Traitors”. Zawahiri refers directly to President-elect Barack Obama saying he has partnered with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, whom Zawahiri labels as a traitor to Islam. More…

Dion Nissenbaum
McClatchy
As Israel clamps down on the Gaza Strip and prepares for the possibility of sending thousands of soldiers into the Palestinian area controlled by the militant Islamic group Hamas, its leaders are facing a diplomatic conundrum: They have clear military goals but no political vision for how to end the confrontation. “I don’t see how this ends well, even if, in two weeks time, it looks like it ends well,” said Daniel Levy, a political analyst who once served as an adviser to Ehud Barak, the former Israeli prime minister who’s now leading the military campaign against Hamas as Israel’s defense minister.

Israel’s expanding air strikes already have delivered a costly blow to the Hamas rulers in Gaza by killing hundreds of the group’s soldiers and decimating its network of government security compounds. Beyond that, though, Israeli leaders haven’t explained what could bring the violence to a halt. Once the smoke clears, the rubble is removed and the dead are buried, Hamas is still almost certain to remain in control of the Gaza Strip, and its hard-line leaders are already vowing to strike back. “To the extent to which there’s a scenario where Israel wins a tactical round, it will again lose a strategic round,” said Levy, a senior fellow at The New America Foundation, a liberal policy institute in Washington, D.C. that’s providing ideas and personnel to the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

Israel’s ongoing campaign is already creating an early foreign policy test for Obama, who’s pledged to make Middle East diplomacy an early priority when he takes office next month. On Sunday, Obama chief lieutenant David Axelrod offered tacit backing for Israel, blaming Hamas for sparking the conflict as the Bush administration also has done. If Obama continues to offer similar unqualified support for Israeli military action, it could make it harder for him to demonstrate to the Arab world that he’s a more even-handed middleman than Bush has been. Israeli officials Sunday said their top priority is to destabilize Hamas and cripple its ability to keep firing the crude rockets into southern Israel that have killed seven Israelis in the last two years. Here the Israeli government appears to have learned a lesson from its bungled 2006 war in Lebanon against fighters from Hezbollah, another militant Islamic group. There, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert failed to achieve his main goals: Forcing Hezbollah to return the two Israeli soldiers whose capture sparked the 34-day war and silencing rocket fire from Shiite Muslim militants in southern Lebanon.

“What we want to do is significantly reduce the rocket fire,” said Miri Eisin, a reserve colonel in the Israeli Army and spokeswoman for the Israeli government. “If Hamas says no more rocket fire, then we’ll see where that goes.” Olmert and his government, however, refuse to negotiate directly with Hamas until the group, which is supported by Iran and Syria, renounces its goal of destroying Israel. The standoff worsened last year when, after winning 2006 democratic elections that were backed by the Bush administration, Hamas seized military control of Gaza in a humiliating rout of forces loyal to pragmatic Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Since then, Israel and the U.S. have been trying to provide political support to Abbas by trying to revive stagnant peace talks and helping to rebuild his security forces in the West Bank, between Israel and Jordan. The goal is to show the Palestinian voters who propelled Hamas to political power in 2006 that Abbas and his pro-Western government are a better alternative. “We have a dialogue with the Palestinian Authority,” said Eisin. “You don’t have an alternative to that at the end of the day.”

If anything, however, the U.S.-Israeli effort has pushed Abbas and Hamas farther apart and made re-uniting the rival Palestinian factions more difficult. That leaves Israel, the United States and Abbas with few diplomatic options: Hamas refuses to abandon its pledge to destroy Israel while Israel and the U.S. refuse to talk to Hamas until the group does. Abbas, meanwhile, refuses to reconcile with Hamas until the group surrenders control of Gaza.

`
The U.S. military will be on high alert during Barack Obama’s inauguration, increasing air defenses and deploying chemical attack experts and medical units, a general said Wednesday. Air Force Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., who heads the military command that oversees security for North America, said the Defense Department had not been told of specific Inauguration Day threats. Nonetheless, he said, the armed services must be ready. “It would make news for a terrorist element or rogue element to interrupt that event,” Renuart said. “So it is prudent to plan for the possibility of that event and to deter it or to respond to it.” The preparations come against a backdrop of heightened security concerns over the presidential transition. The Bush administration is planning to provide the president-elect with a series of contingency plans for potential international emergencies, including terrorist strikes and electronic attacks, that could occur after Obama takes the oath of office.

The Secret Service is in charge of security for the inauguration. The agency is coordinating with local police departments, as well as with 4,000 officers from 96 jurisdictions. About 11,500 military personnel will take part. Secret Service officials have established 23 planning teams but have provided few details. Inauguration organizers are considering a loudspeaker system to broadcast evacuation instructions in the event of an attack. Renuart said the military’s preparations were meant to support civilian-led efforts. After 2001, the U.S. Northern Command, frequently called Northcom, was given broad responsibility for assisting with domestic security. Renuart is also the commander of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, which guards U.S. airspace. More…

`
F. William Engdahl
The Federal Reserve has bluntly refused a request by a major US financial news service to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from US taxpayers and to reveal the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral. Their lawyers resorted to the bizarre argument that they did so to protect ‘trade secrets.’ Is the secret that the US financial system is de facto bankrupt? The latest Fed move is further indication of the degree of panic and lack of clear strategy within the highest ranks of the US financial institutions. Unprecedented Federal Reserve expansion of the Monetary Base in recent weeks sets the stage for a future Weimar-style hyperinflation perhaps before 2010.

As well, the Federal Reserve’s panic actions since September, by their explosive expansion of the monetary base, has set the stage for a Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation. The new money is not being ’sterilized’ by offsetting actions by the Fed, a highly unusual move indicating their desperation. Prior to September the Fed’s infusions of money were sterilized, making the potential inflation effect ‘neutral.’

That means once banks begin finally to lend again, perhaps in a year or so, that will flood the US economy with liquidity in the midst of a deflationary depression. At that point or perhaps well before, the dollar will collapse as foreign holders of US Treasury bonds and other assets run. That will not be pleasant as the result would be a sharp appreciation in the Euro and a crippling effect on exports in Germany and elsewhere should the nations of the EU and other non-dollar countries such as Russia, OPEC members and, above all, China not have arranged a new zone of stabilization apart from the dollar.

The world faces the greatest financial and economic challenges in history in coming months. The incoming Obama Administration faces a choice of literally nationalizing the credit system to insure a flow of credit to the real economy over the next 5 to 10 years, or face an economic Armageddon that will make the 1930’s appear a mild recession by comparison.

In the period from August 1929 until he left office President Herbert Hoover oversaw a 43-month long contraction of the US economy of 33%. Barack Obama looks set to break that record, to preside over what historians could likely call the Very Great Depression of 2008-2014, unless he finds a new cast of financial advisers before Inauguration Day, January 20. Required are not recycled New York Fed presidents, Paul Volckers or Larry Summers types. Needed is a radically new strategy to put virtually the entire United States economy into some form of an emergency ‘Chapter 11′ bankruptcy reorganization where banks take write-offs of up to 90% on their toxic assets, that, in order to save the real economy for the American population and the rest of the world. Paper money can be shredded easily. Not human lives. In the process it might be time for Congress to consider retaking the Federal Reserve into the Federal Government as the Constitution originally specified, and make the entire process easier for all. If this sounds extreme, perhaps revisit this article in six months again. More…

Photo: REUTERS — Sarah Hussein Onyango Obama
described how ‘white soldiers’ carried out ‘disciplinary action’

The Telegraph reports Barack Obama’s grandfather was imprisoned and tortured by the British during the violent struggle for Kenyan independence, the Kenyan family of the US President-elect has claimed. Mr Obama’s paternal grandfather Hussein Onyango Obama was part of the Kenyan independence movement when he was arrested in 1949 and jailed for two years. His family allege he was tortured by his British guards to extract information about the insurgency. “The African warders were instructed by the white soldiers to whip him every morning and evening till he confessed,” said Sarah Onyango, Hussein Onyango’s third wife, told the Times. Mrs Onyango, who Mr Obama calls Granny Sarah, described how “white soldiers” carried out “disciplinary action”. “He said they would sometimes squeeze his testicles with parallel metallic rods. They also pierced his nails and buttocks with a sharp pin, with his hands and legs tied together with his head facing down,” she told the paper. More

There may be more to the horrific terrorist attacks in Mumbai than meets the eye. Corporate owned news pundits give us the predictable speculations: terrorists linked to Al Queda are motivated by gaining world wide attention for their cause. Rarely discussed are the geopolitical implications of such attacks. Two interesting reports have surfaced on the web. The first from Foreign Policy.com, who brings to our attention “…one India journalist claims the pattern of the attacks suggests that Lashkar-e-Taiba, a nasty Islamist organization based in Lahore, Pakistan, and with a significant presence in Kashmir and links to al Qaeda, may be to blame.”

“Here’s where it gets interesting,” speculates Foreign Policy, “Lashkar-e-Taiba’s main goal is to expel India from Kashmir. In the past, some have accused elements of the Pakistani military and intelligence services of having ties to the group. Pakistan’s government has always hotly denied such accusations. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has in recent weeks moved closer to the United States, made some significant gestures toward India, and moved to shut down the political wing of the ISI, Pakisan’s powerful intelligence service (that’s the unit that tries to steal elections). How likely is it that some angry ‘rogue elements’ of the ISI, aligned with Kashmiri jihadists and a team of Indian domestic extremists, sought to head off these moves? I have no idea, but it’s definitely a theory worth exploring.”

During the course of Obama’s election campaign, he made several references to shifting American troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and tracking terrorists down in Pakistan — even if it meant attacking inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government. Do you recall Joe Biden and Colin Powell warning of a major international “incident” in the near future? Obama would be tested, they claimed. Biden also stressed that Americans might not be happy with some of the difficult decisions Obama might have to make. Les Blough, Editor of Axis of Logic makes an interesting observation: “Motivation for the U.S. to take it’s war to Pakistan fits perfectly with these attacks. As a matter of fact, Barack Obama and Joe Biden already declared their intention to take the war to Pakistan and stated with certainty that Obama’s ‘mettle would be tested’ by a major international ‘incident’ in the near future.”

Les Blough goes on to suggest: “History is replete with examples of U.S./Israeli use of a surrogate to attack their enemies. William John Fox pointed this out in his exemplary analysis, Deliver Us From Chaos: Ten Political Commandments. In 1953 they used domestic terrorism to overthrow Mohammad Mosaddeq, former Prime Minister of Iran. They used the Afghan Mujahideen to attack Russia in the same year of their resistance. The CIA and the U.S. ambassador secretly engineered the “Rose Revolution” in Georgia in 2003 and “the U.S. encouraged the Israeli-trained Georgian army to invade the disputed enclave of South Ossetia five years later”.

Webster Tarpley discusses Obama’s planned move to invade Pakistan
“Back last summer in Chicago, there was a debate among the democratic candidates, and Obama came out and said I want the unilateral US bombing of NW Pakistan. And now the US is doing what Obama demanded: the US is bombing NW Pakistan and indeed the US and NATO troops and the Afghan troops are preparing to invade Pakistan across the Afghan border. Why are they doing that? They want to destroy the Pakistani central government…The goal is to destroy Pakistan. You see Iraq now carved into three parts, Pakistan will be carved into 4 or 5 parts. There doing this because Pakistan is a potential ally of China. So now look at the hit list: Sudan and Pakistan.”

The future president of the United States of America is for a large part dependent on and being fed by his team of advisors and future cabinet members. Webster Tarpley wrote a book on the men and women behind president-elect Barack Obama. He argues that there is more to Obama than his charismatic appearance and that some of his advisors pose a danger to the US and the world….Whether Tarpleys view is correct for now is a matter of opinion and remains to be seen, but for the public debate it is relevant to take note of his facts and arguments.

Part 2

news.com.au
HE has already been the target of two assassination plots and delivered a victory speech from behind bulletproof glass. Although US President-elect Barack Obama will not take office until January, he will be guarded as he prepares to move into the White House. In May 2007, fears for his life lead to him being the most heavily-guarded US presidential candidate ever, when he was placed under Secret Service guard. The potential threats against him are numerous and are likely to come from hate groups, or any number of organisations in and outside the US. Accordingly, Senator Obama’s closest relatives will also be affected. Family outings will be cut out and his daughters will receive protection on their way to and from school.

Already, there is speculation that Senator Obama might not live to see out his term - just hours after his victory, the term “Obama assassination” appeared on the top 100 Google search terms. In a video shot before the outcome of the election was known, the national director of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Thomas Robb, predicted “there may be a backlash” if Senator Obama won the presidential race. In a lengthy rant on the Klan’s official website, the white supremacist said: “We are in a race war.” He went on to describe yesterday’s poll as “the last real election this country is going to have” before describing Senator Obama as a Marxist whose intention was to redistribute the earnings of hard-working whites.

Patrick Martin
On the eve of the US elections
In the run-up to Election Day, with polls pointing to a lopsided victory by the Democratic Party, both Barack Obama and leading congressional Democrats are making it clear in advance that a popular repudiation of the Bush administration will not determine the policies of an Obama White House or Democratic Congress. Having capitalized on popular hatred for President George Bush and mobilized working and young people on the basis of calls for “change” and “new politics” and invocations of the “fierce urgency of now,” Obama and the Democratic leadership are taking pains to reassure the ruling elite that if they win the election, they will carry out a thoroughly conventional and conservative agenda that upholds the interests of the financial aristocracy.

The mantra of spokesman after spokesman is that the Democrats should not “overreach,” that they should disavow “one-party rule,” and that bipartisan consensus should be the goal of the new administration. They are, in other words, repudiating the most fundamental precept of democracy—that the decision made by the voters on Election Day should determine public policy. Tens of millions of people are going to vote for Obama in the hope that this will lead to a rapid end to the war in Iraq and to domestic policies that promote jobs and decent living standards, as opposed to the unrestrained profiteering by big business and the wealthy fostered by the Bush administration.

The policy of the incoming administration will not be guided by these popular illusions, however, but by the reality of a worldwide financial crisis, a deepening slump in the United States, and the ongoing resistance to imperialist military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. A principal concern of Obama and his key strategists is that a large-scale Democratic victory will arouse popular expectations that they have no intention of meeting. The disavowal of any political mandate in Tuesday’s voting was spelled out by the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, Senator John Kerry, in an appearance as an Obama surrogate on the NBC Sunday interview program “Meet the Press.” Program host Tom Brokaw asked Kerry about statements from House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat, that Obama should move rapidly on tax cuts for middle-income and low-income families, health care reform and a substantive program to promote alternative energy.

Asked how he would pay for such policies, Rangel had replied, “Don’t ask me where the money will come from. I’m going to go to the same place that Paulson went”—referring to the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street authored by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Brokaw asked Kerry, “Is that responsible fiscal policy?” The senator responded, “I don’t agree with all of that and nor does Barack Obama. Barack Obama is the person running for president and he’s made it very clear we’re going to have to restore fiscal responsibility to Washington.”

Kerry added that Obama would seek significant Republican input and involvement in his administration. “He’s going to govern in a way that brings the country together, and no matter what our majority, he’s going to seek to reach a broader consensus because that’s the only way we can govern America at this time.” The senator suggested that the Democrats would not seek to use their majority to push through policies opposed by the Republicans. “We don’t need to pass things by 51 votes or 60 votes,” he said, referring to the Senate. “We need to build 85-vote majorities.”

This statement deserves serious consideration. Insistence on “85-vote majorities” in the Senate means giving the Republican minority veto power over government policy. It amounts to a repudiation of any conception of democracy. If the Democrats win on Tuesday, it will be because of broad popular sentiment for a reversal of the policies of war and social reaction pursued for the past eight years by Bush. But Kerry insists that it would be wrong for the Democrats to govern as though they had a mandate.

The anti-democratic character of this stance was underscored as Kerry voiced his agreement with comments by former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey, who declared recently: “By my lights, the primary threat to the success of a President Obama will come from some Democrats… emboldened by the size of their congressional majority… Obama will need to communicate the following to Congress, in no uncertain terms: The Democrats have not won a mandate for all their policies. Rather, the American people have resoundingly registered their frustration with a failed status quo, and the next president must chart a new, less partisan course.”

Such a position is in stark contrast to the way the Republicans governed after Bush was installed in the White House in 2000 by the Supreme Court. Although Bush had lost the popular vote to his Democratic opponent Al Gore, and the Republicans had far smaller majorities in the House and Senate than the Democrats will enjoy after November 4, the incoming administration boasted that the election had delivered it 100 percent of the power.

Bush proceeded to make policy accordingly, ramming through (with significant Democratic support) massive tax cuts for the wealthy, and then embarking on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and a host of other policies that were widely opposed by the American public.

Kerry’s remarks are an indication that an incoming Democratic administration will do as the Democrats did after their sweeping victory in the 2006 congressional elections, which was propelled largely by popular hostility to the war in Iraq. The newly installed Democratic majorities in the House and Senate pledged to work with President Bush on a bipartisan basis. The new House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, immediately ruled out any effort to impeach Bush and eventually agreed to continue funding the Iraq war throughout the remainder of Bush’s presidency.

The comments by Kerry and other Democratic spokesmen underscore the essentially fraudulent character of the entire 2008 election. Despite large increases in voter turnout and widespread involvement by new layers of the population, particularly youth and students, the American people will end up serving as little more than extras in a conflict within the ruling elite. Once Election Day is past, Obama will put “hope” and “change” back in his briefcase and go about his real business: defending the interests of corporate America.

The Democrats responded with alacrity to the danger of a meltdown in the financial markets, turning over trillions in public funds to bail out the banks and speculators. The same political figures will turn to working people after the election and tell them that there is no money to provide health care, jobs, education and other social benefits, especially given the need to spend even more for wars in the Middle East and Central Asia.

CBS4 speaks to a suspect

Source
CBS4 speaks to a suspect involved in what appears to be a disorganized assassination plot to kill Barack Obama, who says, “He don’t belong in political office. Blacks don’t belong in political office. He ought to be shot.” This is an update on a story that broke last night, when only two men were arrested; a routine traffic stop led police to believe there might have been a plot to kill Barack Obama.

The video above outlines one account about the plot, with an interview with one of the suspects involved. According to CBS4 there have been four people arrested at this time in relation to the plot. They were in possession of rifles, ammunition, walkie talkies, a bullet proof vest, wigs, a spotting scope, licenses in the names of other people, and drugs. Brian Maass from CBS4, seen in the video above, asked the suspect “So your friends were saying threatening things about Obama.?

His reply was “yeah”.

One of the suspects admitted to the authorities that they were “going to shoot Obama from a high vantage point using a … rifle … sighted at 750 yards.” The plan, which a U.S. government official familiar with the investigation says these men might not have had the ability to carry out such a plot, according to one of the suspects, Nathan Johnson, was a plan to “kill Barack Obama at his acceptance speech.”

The reasoning given was stated to be because he was black. “He don’t belong in political office. Blacks don’t belong in political office. He ought to be shot,” Johnson told Maass. No word has been given on what links the suspects together nor if there will be any further arrests, but the authorities are stating that there is no credible threat against Barack Obama at this time nor to the people of Colorado. The case is still under investigation with the Secret Service, FBI, ATF and the joint terrorism task force all participating.

Bob Ostertag
The current dust-up in the Obama camp over this week’s FISA vote may have real consequences for the rest of this campaign. As you may know, the largest “group” on the Obama campaign’s social networking site, MyBarackObama.com, is now a group assembled to protest Senator Obama’s reversal of his promise to filibuster against the FISA legislation up next week. Reading through the blogoshpere, many commenters appear baffled at the intensity of the passions involved, and criticize the protestors for making such a fuss over “just one issue.” But there are good reasons why core activists have taken a strong stand, and why the campaign may look different after this is over. More

Rocky Mountain News
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader accused Sen. Barack Obama, the presumed Democratic Party nominee, of downplaying poverty issues, trying to “talk white” and appealing to “white guilt” during his run for the White House. Nader, a thorn in the Democratic Party’s side since the 2000 presidential election, has taken various shots at Obama in recent days while ramping up his latest independent run for president.

Nader was asked if Obama is any different than Democrats he has criticized in the past, considering Obama’s pledge to reject campaign contributions from registered lobbyists. “There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate.

He’s half African-American,” Nader said. “Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We’ll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.” More

Nancy Pelosi’s dialogue epitomizes the insanity of political double talk. Translation—Sexism was responsible for Hillary’s defeat, but I don’t have scientific data to support what I just told you I believe.

Suntimes
“I’m a victim of sexism myself all the time,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) discussing Tuesday morning whether sexism played a significant role in the defeat of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) by presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)

At a reporters’ breakfast organized by the Christian Science Monitor, Pelosi, the first female Speaker of the House reflected on the White House bid by Clinton, who would have been the first major party nominee if her bid had succeeded.

“Is there sexism? Probably so,” said Pelosi.

“Is it responsible for the defeat? I really wouldn’t have the scientific knowledge, all of the information to know that. But I do think that being a woman has a positive upside in the campaign, probably offset by more sexism. I don’t know. Of course there is sexism, we all know that. I mean but it is a given, it is a given….” More

Photo Credit
NME.com
Bob Dylan has claimed that Democratic US presidential nominee Barack Obama is “redefining politics”. The singer/songwriter said that he was hopeful that the political system in the US would change as a result of him winning the race to be the Democratic nominee for the election in November.

Dylan told The Times: “America is in a state of upheaval. Poverty is demoralising. You can’t expect people to have the virtue of purity when they are poor. “But we’ve got this guy out there now who is redefining the nature of politics from the ground up – Barack Obama. He’s redefining what a politician is, so we’ll have to see how things play out.

Steven Thomma
WASHINGTON — Get ready for a special guest star in the Republican campaign against Democrat Barack Obama: Hillary Clinton. Months of bare-knuckled campaign fights, pitched rhetoric and debate jousting produced a treasure chest of sound bites and videos of Clinton ripping Obama as inexperienced, elitist or simply wrong on various issues.

Now that the Democratic primaries are over and Obama has clinched his party’s nomination, the Republicans are ready to pounce. The Republican National Committee on Wednesday rolled out new ads quoting Clinton criticizing Obama, the first of what likely will be many such ads.

In one, Clinton is heard in a Democratic debate ripping Obama’s stance that he’d meet with foreign dictators without preconditions if elected. “I disagree with his continuing to say that he would meet with some of the worst dictators in the world without preconditions and without the real, you know, understanding of what we would get from it,” she says. More

Salon
Ickes — deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and one of the great rules mavens of the Democratic Party since the 1960s — had come back from the three-hour break looking distraught as he silently paced back and forth before the committee reconvened. Confronted with the apostasy of the Clinton defectors, Ickes thundered before the Michigan vote, “This motion will hijack, remove, four delegates won by Hillary Clinton. This body of 30 individuals has decided that they’re going to substitute their judgment for 600,000 [Michigan] voters.”

After the committee adjourned, Steed, a former DNC official, explained the logic behind the compromise in an interview, saying, “Our goal was what could be done to unify the party. The only unity proposal on the table was the Michigan proposal, so we accepted it.” Kamarck, a former top Gore aide, put it simply, “It was the only answer.” More

While commenting on Hillary’s RFK gaffe, Liz Trotta, on Fox News Channel first referred to Barack Obama as “Osama” and then laughed, commenting that they both be knocked off if we could.

Victim of Sexism? Women Rally ‘Round Clinton
KATE SNOW and JENNA MUCHA
“If you can read racism into something someone says, the media is all over it, but so many blatant sexist things have been said,” Clinton volunteer Robin Rowlinson said. Many female Clinton supporters are suddenly galvanized and are angry at what they call blatant sexism in this presidential race.

“If you can read racism into something someone says, the media is all over it, but so many blatant sexist things have been said,” Clinton volunteer Robin Rowlinson said. Clinton supporter Cynthia Ruccia is part of a grassroots movement comprised of many people who say that if Clinton isn’t the nominee, they’ll try to stop her Democratic opponent Sen. Barack Obama from being elected president. Read more

Glob-a-log
Geraldine Ferraro, the only woman to run on a major party presidential ticket and a supporter of Hillary Clinton, has accused Barack Obama of conducting a “terribly sexist” campaign. Miss Ferraro, the losing Democratic candidate for vice-president in 1984, said that she might abandon her lifelong party loyalties and vote for the Republican John McCain if Mr Obama is confirmed as the nominee.

Now, I’m very sure misogyny is alive and well in the USA, as it is mostly everywhere else on this fine planet of ours but I think madame Ferraro should be advised not to complain too much about the way Obama has campaigned. As far as I can remember he has not spread evil rumours about her - as some of those coming from team Clinton. Remember the one about Obama wearing some traditional garb? Yes, that one, which had one of the Clinton people dig up the Muslim thing again. Which Hilary was good enough to - well, not to deny, when she said that “as far as she knew” Obama was a Christian. Read more

Photo sskennel

POLITICO
Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), piling on to Democratic complaints about President Bush’s speech in Israel today: “This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset … and make this kind of ridiculous statement.”

Speaking before the Knesset, Bush said that “some people” believe the United States “should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.”

Democrats have interpreted the comments as an attack on Sen. Barack Obama, and Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that the president was out of line. Read more

Susan Allen
opednews.com
Dear Senator Kennedy,
Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states, No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.

Despite this, Senator Barack Obama, has submitted S. 2433 The ‘Global Poverty Act.’ Obama’s bill (S. 2433), seeks to commit U.S. taxpayers to spend 0.7% of our gross domestic product on foreign aide, which is $30 billion more than we’re already paying in foreign aide. The submission of this bill, I allege, is high treason.

The Founders of this country fought the Revolutionary War to free the United States from the scourge of British taxation without representation. Read more