Posted on 10/07/2008 7:47:20 AM PDT by jazusamo
This is the first part in a two-part series.
Gov. Sarah Palin doesn't know the ways of Washington, so she has started telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about Sen. Barack Obama. For some reason, even Sen. John McCain has been too kind in campaigning against the most unqualified and most dangerous candidate in our history, made all the more dangerous by the dangerous and uncertain times we now face. We are now in a severe economic crisis and must fight a war with a new kind of enemy, the Islamofascist terrorists, who pose an existential threat, perhaps the most serious threat to our survival in history.
Despite the importance of this election, the mainstream media is trying to sell a total fraud named Sen. Obama, without properly investigating, vetting and reporting on him. If the majority of voters get the truth on Sen. Obama, he will be rejected with decisive vigor. But that may not happen with the mainstream media reporting on him as though he was the second coming. They are pulling off this criminal sale of Sen. Obama to the public because too many are afraid to criticize the mainstream media, and too few are taking the appropriate action, including boycott and switching to the alternative media.
If the Republicans are smart, they should finally start telling the public what the alternative media has long ago announced. Here are two recent pronouncements from Gov. Palin that are right on target and long overdue. They indicate she is willing to tell the truth, however unconventional it might be among the media and Washington elite: Gov. Palin said Sen. Obama seems to see America as so imperfect he has been "palling around with terrorists." This refers to his long and close association with William Ayres, founder of a terrorist group, the Weather Underground, and proud bomber of the Pentagon, the Capitol and other government buildings.
She also said Sen. Obama is disqualified to be president of the United States:
"Some of his comments that he has made about the war that I think may - in my world - disqualifies him from consideration as the next commander in chief. Some of his comments about Afghanistan and what we are doing there supposedly - just air raiding villages and killing civilians. That's reckless. So I wanted to talk about things like that. So I guess I have to apologize about being a little annoyed but that is also an indication of being outside that Washington elite and being outside the media elite also and just wanting to talk to Americans without the filter and let them know what we stand for." Isn't it about time we reject those like Sen. Obama, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.; Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.; and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who tell the most vicious lies about our military who are putting their lives on the line every day and deserve better.
Needless to say, the Obama campaign is in its full denial mode claiming they are being "swift-boated" and this is all a smear. The Obama campaign cites a New York Times story (Oct. 4), which should be disregarded as the Times is nothing more than part of the campaign of Sen. Obama. As I've often said, I wouldn't even wrap dead, rotting fish in the Times, out of respect for the dearly departed fish. And I'd say the same about The Washington Post, another leader in mainstream media bias. And don't forget The Philadelphia Inquirer, another cheerleader for Sen. Obama, which pollutes the local media market.
The fundamental dishonesty of the Times is reflected by its failure to even mention or quote two of the people who have lead the research on the Sen. Obama terrorist-connections: Stanley Kurtz and David Freddoso.
The Obama campaign says Mr. Ayres was bombing the Pentagon and the Capitol when Sen. Obama was only 8 years old. That's a nonsensical response, as Sen. Obama's part in the bombing is not the issue. It is his recent, lengthy and close relationship with Mr. Ayres, when he was not 8 years old.
Like the mainstream media, Sen. Obama thinks he is the Messiah. Maybe that's from reading the likes of The New York Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the other charter members of the dishonest, biased and fraudulent mainstream media. I'd agree he's the Messiah if he could actually cut almost everyone's taxes, give them all health insurance, college tuition and propose another trillion dollars in new spending in addition to the $700 billion rescue of financial institutions just passed. I'd also say it's a miracle if a terrorist-loving, America-hating candidate who associates with a bigot, racist and anti-American pastor for 20 years can win the nomination of the Democratic Party.
Some may think it is a smear, but that's because they have trouble believing a major party presidential candidate would hang around with terrorists and come out with slanderous insults aimed at the American military. Unfortunately, the seemingly incredible is all too true.
At the presidential debate, Sen. McCain ought to ask a series of questions: Why do you hang around with terrorists, bigots and racists? Why do you hate America and always put this great country down?
As this column has often pointed out, these anti-American antics of Sen. Obama have to be taken seriously, as they are part of a much larger pattern that goes beyond false accusations against the American military and association with terrorists. There is his 20-year close association with Rev. Jeremiah "God Damn America" Wright, at Trinity Church, the longest, most defining relationship of his life, according to a friendly biographer, Stephen Mansfield, author of The Faith of Barrack Obama. There is also his close association with a Rev.-Wright-like Father Michael Pfeger, a well-known racist and bigot. There is his refusal to wear an American flag pin and saying it is a symbol of false patriotism, there is his refusal to place his hand over his heart during the national anthem. There is his wife's reference to America as a "mean country" and her statement that for the first time she is proud of America. There is his statement of moral equivalence between our lawful liberation of Iraq and Russia's illegal aggression in Georgia. And there is his rapture over what Europe and the rest of the world thinks of us rather than whether we are doing the right thing. Like Sen. Kerry, he would probably impose a "world test" before taking any action and would be sure not to offend the Europeans or the U.N.
Even his friendly biographer, Mr. Mansfield, writes, "He can clearly be at home with anti-American sentiment." This aroma of anti-Americanism now seems to come from Sen. Obama, the left, the Democratic Party, and much of Europe. But do we really want an anti-American president. I'd vote for him as president of Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, or Cuba, but not the United States.
While Gov. Palin is starting to tell the truth about Sen. Obama and the kind of government he would bring about, I'll give her some more talking points.
Consider what would happen with Sen. Obama in the White House, Sen. "Wave the White Flag" Reid in command of a veto-proof majority in the Senate, and Rep. Nancy "San Francisco Liberal Anti-American, Anti-family, and Open Border Values" Pelosi controlling a big Democratic majority in the House. All the radical, extremist, liberal ideology of Sen. Obama and his supporters would become law and the courts would be turned over to liberals who would legislate from the bench. Think about what Sen. Reid and Ms. Pelosi would bring to the table in addition to their far-left radical liberal ideology.
In case you missed it, Sen. Reid made one of the most stupid and damaging statements ever uttered by a political figure when he repeated a wild rumor someone else had related to him that "a major insurance company" was on the verge of bankruptcy, sending already tanking stocks down further and further destroying confidence in the system. This was the equivalent of falsely crying "fire" in a crowded theatre, a bit of stupidity beyond comprehension in even a fool, but most certainly in a top leader of the Democratic Party. Ms. Pelosi, who promised the cleanest and most open administration in history, was just hit by serious conflict of interest problems, as are so many of her associates in the Democratic Congress. Like Sen. Obama, Ms. Pelosi's actions are the opposite of her rhetoric.
Here are Sen. Reid's exact comments during the debate on the $700 billion package, called a bailout, a rescue, or a stabilization measure depending on your viewpoint: "We don't have a lot of leeway on time. One of the individuals in the caucus talked about a major insurance company. A major insurance company - one with a name that everyone knows that's on the verge of going bankrupt. That's what this is all about."
He wasn't even speaking from first-hand knowledge but apparently just repeated what another Democrat had said about a rumor that was floating around. This kind of statement was bound to hit major insurance companies hard and it did. Sen. Reid's circulation of this rumor was like throwing gasoline on a fire and insurance stocks tanked as a result.
Dean Barnett, of the Weekly Standard, came up with the cost of Sen. Reid's wild rumor contribution to solving the financial crisis. MetLife went down 15 percent for a $5 billion loss; Prudential went down 11 percent for a $3 billion loss; AFI was down 7 percent for a $1.5 billion loss; and The Travelers Companies went down 6 percent for a $1.5 billion loss. The Standard & Poor's Insurance Index declined more than 10 percent - more than $25 billion in wreckage thanks to Sen. Reid's loose and irrational lips. What's more the insurance stocks' tanking helped lead the whole market down. Maybe we need a new majority leader as much as we need a bailout. That insurance company may not be bankrupt, but Senate leadership certainly is.
Can we afford Sen. Reid, who can destroy tens of billions of dollars with a single sentence?
There is now good reason to believe this rumor is without basis. CNNMoney reports Steven James, an analyst who covers insurance companies for Raymond James & Associates, said these concerns about insurers were overblown. He said insurers have not invested in the types of "truly toxic assets" that have led to losses by investment and commercial banks. He said that AIG was very "atypical" of the insurance industry.
One other point to further demonstrate that Sen. Reid is not only reckless and negligent but also uninformed. He said that a major insurer was about to go bankrupt. If he talked to anyone who knows anything about the insurance industry, he would know that insurance companies are not subject to the federal bankruptcy law. In the event of insolvency, they are handled under a receivership or liquidation supervised by state insurance regulators. I happened to be a co-author of the Wisconsin insurance laws dealing with "Delinquency Proceedings in Insurance."
One of the fist points made in an introduction to the law is as follows: "Insurers are explicitly excluded from the Federal Bankruptcy Act." Needless to say, Sen. Reid talked to no one and didn't bother to fact check. He admits he did not and thus admits his own stupidity and gross negligence. He was so anxious to float the wild rumor he didn't have time to check anything including his mouth, which caused billions in damage to the economy.
And what did Sen. Reid do to set the record straight after it became apparent that he didn't know what he was talking about? He, through a spokesman, had to admit he didn't know of any insurer about to go bankrupt. His spokesman also said, "Sen. Reid is not personally aware of any particular company being on the verge of bankruptcy. He has no special knowledge about [a bankruptcy] nor has he talked to any insurance company officials. Rather his comments were meant to refer to the conditions in the financial sector generally. He regrets any confusion his comments may have caused."
Translated, that means he didn't know what he was talking about, as usual, and he doesn't know how to use the English language to make the point he is trying to make. How does saying a major insurance company is about to go bankrupt translate into the financial services industry is in bad shape?
Mr. Barnett is less kind to Sen. Reid than I am. He called Sen. Reid's comment not merely reckless but idiotic. He writes, "This all reminds me of Ronald Reagan's joke about life's cruelest irony being the phrase, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' It also reminds me of the considerably less famous phrase, 'What a big mouth that senator has!' "
Of course, by now we should know not to believe much of what Sen. Reid says. He earned the nickname "Wave the White Flat" Reid, when he declared defeat even before the surge had started. But then the Democratic Party has become the party weak on national defense and in favor of appeasement, retreat, defeat and surrender.
In my next column, I'll show how Rep. Pelosi easily matches Sen. Reid's record for stupidity if not idiocy and I'll suggest more issues for the McCain/Palin ticket. I'll document how the Democrats now are not only the party of retreat and defeat but also the party of conflict of interest.
Herb Denenberg is a former Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissioner, and professor at the Wharton School. He is a longtime Philadelphia journalist and consumer advocate. He is also a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of the Sciences. His column appears daily in The Bulletin. You can reach him at advocate@thebulletin.us
It is like that Fable.. “the emperor has no clothes”
I wonder why Hillery didn’t probe Obama’s past more when she was campaigning against him.
Obama’s not a bad guy but his past and current associations would seem to make him a poor choice for president.
History might record that the Democrats’ biggest failure in this election was not adquately vetting Obama.
A friend of mine said he was seriously going to vote for Obama, but did not care for the company he kept.
bttt
He supports infanticide....that is pretty bad. He also supports America hating terrorists and they support him, that is also pretty bad.
I don’t know. Maybe they did and chose to lay off that thinking they could easily get the nomination without using it.
She has not yet begun to bite.
Saracuda will rip the flesh off her opponents.
Yeah it just SUCKS when someone from outside of Washington starts doing that. People get realllllly nervous! Squirm you twits, SQUIRM!
“I wonder why Hillery didn’t probe Obama’s past more when she was campaigning against him.”
Hillary couldn’t do this because they both have the same mentor - Saul Alinsky. You have to know that Obama has a thick file on the Clinton associations so this would have blown back on her big time. She tried to get others to do the dirty work for her but she had to be very careful.
She sure shut the heckler up yesterday saying her son is in Iraq fighting for his right to protest, it was beautiful.
It’s about time they put the fans to this fire!!!
Good graphic, love that pic of the sad sack sob.
Thanks for posting Herb. He’s the best these days. I wish he was just beginning his career.
Let's keep this one on the front burner as well since Nobama has sooo many things to prove!
He’s great, IMO. Like a pit bull that won’t let go of BO.
“Obama’s not a bad guy”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Having heard that it would be interesting to know who you WOULD consider to be a bad guy, would Stalin qualify?
Really!!! Thanx for that enlightening bit of information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.