Obama’s Religious Ruse: ‘I’ve Always Been a Christian’

Obama’s Religious Ruse: ‘I’ve Always Been a


By Alexander LaBrecque

Part One of Three

Barack Obama insists that he is a “devout Christian” of “deep faith,” and Big Media echoes his claim without question. Even some critics hesitate to challenge the validity of that claim.

The ruse that he is a Christian must be exposed for what it really is: Obama’s cloak to conceal that he is a Marxist from a Muslim background, for which he holds widespread support in the Islamic world. This series of three articles will analyze his exploitation of Christian rhetoric to serve the subterfuge.


Obama’s claim that he is a Christian coincides with his adamant denial that he was ever a Muslim. Yet his sister with whom he lived as a child has disclosed “my whole family was Muslim.”[1] His 1968 registration at a Catholic school lists him as “Barry Soetoro,” a citizen of Indonesia, and his religion is Islam.[2] He himself admits that later he studied the Koran at a public school in Jakarta. Only Muslim children studied the Koran there,[3] and his former principal recalls that Barry studied mengaji – recitation of the Koran in Arabic, an advanced form of study.[4]


Without intent, he corroborated this in a 2007 New York Times interview: with a first-rate Arabic accent Obama recited the opening lines of the Muslim call to prayer and remarked that it is “one of the prettiest sounds on earth at sunset.”[5] These lines chant the confession of faith committing one to Islam: the declaration of Allah’s supremacy, that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is his prophet.[6]


His memoir discloses that in his teens he considered becoming a Black Muslim like Malcolm X.[7] Obama divulged this year that in 1981 he made a three-week trip to Karachi, Pakistan with Muslim friends from college, and there he became knowledgeable of Sunni and Shiite sects.[8] Although his memoir concealed that journey, it revealed his inner state at that very time:  “I had spent the summer brooding over a misspent youththe state of the world and the state of my soul. ‘I want to make amends,’ I said. ‘Make myself of some use.'”[9] Obama’s experience with Islamic sects on that soul-searching, penitential pilgrimage preceded his radical commitment to Marxism as a student at Columbia University. 


For two decades Obama was indeed a member of a “church” in Chicago, but its Marxist “theology” of Black Power, its affinities with the Nation of Islam, and having the raving malevolent Jeremiah Wright as his “spiritual mentor” make Obama’s claim to be a Christian less than credible.


Confirming that Obama’s “deep faith” is not Christian has been his denial that Jesus Christ is Lord of all and the supreme revelation from God for all humankind, and its corollary, his admitted skepticism about an afterlife.


The reality of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead is the most basic confession of the Christian faith and has been affirmed by all Christians since the first generation as God’s revelation of life everlasting.[10] Christians call upon the name of Jesus as the crucified and risen Lord whom God vindicated to become the Savior of all peoples and to give believers eternal life. This hope is so integral to the Christian faith that the apostle Paul reasoned that conversely if resurrection is not the destiny of those who belong to the risen Christ, then Christ himself is dead, the faith has no content, and believers are not reconciled to God. “If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are the most pitiable people of all.”[11] Inherent in Jesus’ teaching and the Christian hope is also the Jewish expectation of God’s judgment of all persons, that beyond this life divine justice will reward the good and punish those who do evil.[12]


In 2004 Obama was interviewed by Cathleen Falsani of the Chicago Sun-Times. He told her that Christians “may presume a set of doctrines” that “I don’t necessarily subscribe to.” Elaborating, he trivialized the core of the Christian faith by which believers live: “If all it took was someone proclaiming I believe [in] Jesus Christ and that he died for my sins, and that’s all there was to it, people wouldn’t have to keep coming to church, would they.” Immediately Falsani asked him if he believes in heaven, and the skeptic mocked: “Do I believe in the harps and clouds and wings?” “I don’t presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die,” or whether rewards for one’s conduct will be in this life only or in a hereafter. He identified “heaven” with feeling that he cares for his daughters and that they are learning from him his mother’s values. In the same way, sin – inconsistency with his values – is “its own punishment.”[13]


Because faith perceives that which is presently unseen, all Christians struggle against weakness of faith, but Christian faith is not skeptical about the hereafter. No one who actually believes that God resurrected Jesus from death to personal immortality remains agnostic about an afterlife.[14] Obama’s skepticism on this core premise betrays his skepticism about the reality of Christ’s resurrection, about the Christian faith itself.


Obama’s definition of “Christian” is likewise illuminating. According to Falsani’s transcript, he said:


I am a Christian. So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith. On the other hand, I was born in Hawaii where obviously there are a lot of Eastern influences. I lived in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world. . . . intellectually, I’ve drawn as much from Judaism as any other faith. . . .
So I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.


Asked if he has always been a Christian, Obama replied: “I was raised more by my mother and my mother was Christian.”[15]


In fact she was never a Christian. Her parents were skeptics, she became a Marxist while attending a high school where The Communist Manifesto was taught, and she proudly identified herself as an atheist.[16] In a July 2008 interview, Obama admitted his mother “never formally embraced Christianity as far as I know.”[17]


Obama has variations of this ruse. MSNBC reported shortly before Christmas 2007 how he personally assured patrons at a small-town cafe that he has never been anything but a Christian, for his Muslim father was not religious and his parents had divorced. “My mother was a Christian from Kansas … I was raised by my mother. So, I’ve always been a Christian.” Asked for his definition of “Christian” Obama answered: “Somebody who believes in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior.” “I’m so glad to hear that,” the inquirer responded[18] – being told what she hoped to hear.


At the very least Obama concealed that this definition of “Christian” never applied to his mother and his upbringing, or else “Christian” includes being an atheist or, as he described her in other accounts, an agnostic and secular humanist. Knowing that his mother was never a Christian, Obama fabricated that she was, in order to make his own claim more plausible.


Obama’s mother did not believe that the crucified Jesus of Nazareth is now the risen Lord and Savior, as Christians do. According to his own testimony his mother was scornful of Bible-believing Christians,[19] an “agnostic”[20] and “a lonely witness for secular humanism”[21] who defined the spiritual values that he still holds today. She “had as much influence on my values as anybody,” and “my mother was a deeply spiritual person,”[22] “in many ways the most spiritually awakened person I’ve ever known.”[23] She was “very suspicious of the notion that one particular organized religion offered one truth,”[24] at most believing in a “higher power” common to all religions. “In our household the Bible, the Koran, and the Bhagavad-Gita sat on the shelf alongside books of Greek and Norse and African mythology.” This may account somewhat for why Obama did not commit to Islam, despite his Muslim childhood and his later affinity for Islam.


To acquaint him with religions as diverse expressions of human culture his mother took him occasionally to church on Easter and Christmas, to a Buddhist temple, a Shintoist shrine and Hawaiian burial sites.[25] According to Obama, “her view always was that underlying these religions were a common set of beliefs about how you treat other people and how you aspire to act, not just for yourself but also for the greater good.”[26]


His mother died of cancer in 1995, some seven years after Obama’s alleged commitment to the Christian faith. A decade later Obama ended the “Faith” chapter of his book The Audacity of Hope (2006) with an intimate account of her final days, beset with fear and apprehensive of death: “She had admitted to me during the course of her illness that she was not ready to die. . . . more than once I saw fear flash across her eyes. More than fear of pain or fear of the unknown, it was the sheer loneliness of death that frightened her.” Christians might anticipate that our author will here share some words of divine care from the depth of his faith, to diminish her fear and comfort his dying mother; this is wholly absent.


As his next paragraph confirms, nearly a decade later he still had no answer even for his little daughter’s question of an afterlife, telling her instead that she is too young “to worry about that,” while recognizing within himself that he knows nothing more than that he hopes his mother’s spirit might be in a better place. “I wondered whether I should have told [my daughter] the truth, that I wasn’t sure what happens when we die, any more than I was sure of where the soul resides or what existed before the Big Bang.”[27]


This is the confession of an agnostic materialist –– not of someone who believes that God raised Jesus from the dead, a Christian assured that not even death can separate from the Creator’s love those who belong to the risen Christ. He even doubts that God pre-existed a theoretical Big Bang. Obama’s inability to offer any assurance of God’s care beyond death to either his dying mother or his inquiring child is due to his agnosticism. It is because he himself is an agnostic that he is skeptical of the Christian hope.


What his mother did believe is the atheism of New Age mythologist Joseph Campbell, whose work she admired, and whose influence on Obama is manifest. Campbell popularized interest in the power of myths to affect human experience and denied the Judeo-Christian tradition its historical validity. Campbell’s The Power of Myth was one of her favorite texts, according to an interview in which Obama calls his mother “an agnostic,” qualifying: “I think she believed in a higher power.”[28] According to Campbell, all religions are essentially the same, merely cultural variations of a common human consciousness of being alive; their myths and symbols differ only in details, and those differences are irrelevant. This is an abject rejection of the ethical monotheism of the Judeo-Christian tradition. It is also a denial that God has revealed salvation for humans from all cultures by raising the crucified Jesus from the dead. It means that God has not exalted Jesus as the risen Lord, in whom people of all nations should believe.


Like his mother, Obama himself regards the Christian faith and other religions as merely vehicles for an elevating experience of human consciousness. When he reasons, “I am a Christian. So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith….  So I’m rooted in the Christian tradition,” an agnostic is identifying himself with what he regards as Christian myths so that we will project that he believes as Christians do. Yet he immediately qualifies that the myths of other religions are equally valid: “I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.”[29]


Thus what Obama really believes is that through religion – myths of Christian, Muslim, Hindu or animist origins – all people have in common the same higher power, which is their experience of a collective human consciousness. But this experience need not originate from religious myth: just as Obama can “be transported” by “a good choir and a good sermon in the black church,” so too “I can be transported by watching a good performance of Hamlet …or listening to Miles Davis.”[30] This is Barack Obama’s “deep faith.”


At the time of his 2006 book he defined himself as “Christian and skeptic.”[31] Not Christian and analytical, not Christian and inquisitive, but “Christian and skeptic.” His own testimony confirms he is a “Christian” only in terms of his adopted identity, and a skeptic in regard to the core of the Christian faith, to which he at most “subscribes.” Obama attests that his decision to become a member at Trinity did not remove his skepticism, but manifested an existing commitment to his prior world view. “It came about as a choice and not an epiphany; the questions I had did not magically disappear.”[32]


The lack of a dramatic conversion is common when children who had been raised by Christians but were uncommitted do commit to Christ later as adults. But that was not Obama’s background, and he believes no differently than what his agnostic mother taught him as a child. The one and only difference is his current adoption of Christian identity, that the skeptic now “subscribes to” Christian verbiage.


He tells Christians that he has “a relationship with Jesus Christ,” but that means he has attached himself to the christ myth. Like his mother, he scorns Christians who “cling to their religion,”[33] and he touts the depth of his skepticism as attesting his “deep faith”: “I retain from my childhood and my experiences growing up a suspicion of dogma. . . . I think religion at its best comes with a big dose of doubt.”[34]


In his years as a community organizer Obama taught other activists the tactics of the Marxist agitator Saul Alinsky. One of Alinsky’s tactics is to employ ridicule; here is another: “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more live up to their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”[35] Combining those tactics, Obama has mocked “it’s doubtful that our Defense Department would survive [the Sermon on the Mount’s] application.” This nullification was in context of his arguments for abortion. By Obama’s logic, Jesus’ ethics cannot be applied socially to innocent human life because the Sermon on the Mount is not applied to defending America from those who seek to kill us.[36]


Falsani asked Obama to identify his spiritual role model, and from his answer apparently it was not enough that for the revelation of God’s kingdom and to die for others’ sins Jesus went to the cross; perhaps the Senator finds Jesus too judgmental, or Jesus’ faith in God too strong. For Obama’s spiritual role model is not Jesus but a skeptic, Mahatma Gandhi — “a great example of a profoundly spiritual man who acted and risked everything on behalf of those values but never slipped into intolerance or dogma. He seemed to always maintain an air of doubt about him.”[37]


From that description, one wonders if it is himself Obama seeks to emulate. Asked by Falsani to define sin, Barry replied: “Being out of alignment with my values.” Asked to define when he is most centered and aligned spiritually, he answered: “I think I’ve already described it. It’s when I’m being true to myself.”


In the light of the foregoing we can better discern from Obama’s statements what he actually thinks about Jesus. According to Falsani’s transcript, when she asked Obama, “Who’s Jesus to you?” he laughed nervously and replied: “Right. Jesus is an historical figure for me, and he’s also a bridge between God and man, in the Christian faith, and one that I think is powerful precisely because he serves as that means of us reaching something higher. And he’s also a wonderful teacher. I think it’s important for all of us, of whatever faith, to have teachers in the flesh and also teachers in history.”[38]


It is understandable that Obama laughed nervously at this question, for he had to make his own view of Jesus appear Christian while knowing it is not. For him, Jesus was an historical figure who did exist and is long dead, who was a great teacher not all that unique among other faiths’ venerated leaders, past and present — Gandhi, Buddha, Muhammad, to name a few. In his mind, what distinguishes Jesus from the others is that Christian mythology regards him as “a bridge” between God and humans, therefore to Obama that myth is powerful precisely because it can be a means for reaching his own high aspirations. To quote Alinsky: “The [community] organizer is in a true sense reaching for the highest level to which man can reach — to create, to be a ‘great creator,’ to play God.”[39]


What we have here is a baptized Marxist who denies the biographical reality of his Muslim background, takes pride in his skepticism, is the center of his universe, is posing as a Christian, esteems the power of the christ myth, and seeks the most powerful position of authority in the world.


At the time of the Falsani interview Obama closely allied himself with Jeremiah Wright and Trinity United Church. But not once did Obama disclose to Falsani that his church’s core is “black liberation theology” or reveal the radical content of Wright’s preaching. He knows the difference between its Black Power and historic Christianity, or else he would be more candid about it. The Audacity of Hope? Obama has the audacity to claim he has always been a Christian while disbelieving the Christian hope and its foundation, the reality of Jesus’ resurrection, whereby Jesus is Lord of all. His definition of “Christian” includes being an agnostic and a skeptic. Not only is he a pseudo-Christian, he’s a messianic poser.


[1] Paul Watson, “As a Child, Obama Crossed a Cultural Divide in Indonesia,” Los Angeles Times, March 15, 2007.


[2] An image of the 1968 form – originally published by the Associated Press, but later scrubbed – is at The Obama File.


[3] Kim Barker, “History of Schooling Distorted,” Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007.


[4] Tine Hahiyary quoted in Indonesia’s Kaltim Post, January 27, 2007, English translation by Laotze, “Tracking Down Obama in Indonesia – Part 5,” An American Expat in Southeast Asia, January 28, 2007.


[5] Nicholas D. Kristof, “Obama: Man of the World,” New York Times, March 6, 2007.


[6] Reuven Koret, “Is Barack Obama a Muslim Wolf in Christian Wool?” Israel Insider, March 27, 2008.


[7] Dreams From My Fathers. A Story of Race and Inheritance (New York: Three Rivers Press, 1995), pp. 86-87.


[8] Mayhill Fowler, “Obama: No Need for Foreign Policy Help From V.P.” The Huffington Post, April 7, 2008; Larry Rohter, “Obama Says Real-Life Experience Trumps Rivals’ Foreign Policy Credits,” New York Times, April 10, 2008.


[9] Dreams, p. 119.


[10] Romans 10:9; John 3:16; John 6:40. See also 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 for a summary of the resurrection faith of Jesus’ disciples and the earliest Christians.


[11] 1 Corinthians 15:12-20.


[12] Matthew 7:21-23; 22: 23-32; 25:31-46; Romans 2:1-16; 2 Corinthians 4:13-5:10.


[13] Citations of Falsani’s March 27, 2004 interview are from the full transcript now on her blog. Her published account was “Obama: I Have a Deep Faith,” Chicago Sun-Times, April 5, 2004.


[14] Paul’s converts from paganism at Thessalonica were anxious about the fate of deceased Christians only because they lacked comprehension of their new resurrection faith. Paul assured them that Christ’s resurrection was for the benefit of those who believe that God raised him from the dead, that they too may rise to life and be with him forever (1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10).


[15] Falsani transcript.


[16] Tim Jones, “Barack Obama: Mother Not Just a Girl From Kansas,” Chicago Tribune, March 27, 2007.


[17] Lisa Miller and Richard Wolffe, “Finding His Faith,” Newsweek, July 12, 2008.


[18] Aswini Anburajan, “Obama Asked About Connection to Islam,” MSNBC First Read, December 22, 2007, italics supplied.


[19] The Audacity of Hope. Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2006), p. 203.


[20] “Finding His Faith.”


[21] Dreams, p. 50.


[22] Falsani transcript.


[23] Audacity, p. 205.


[24] “Finding His Faith.”


[25] Audacity, pp. 203-204.


[26] Falsani transcript.


[27] Audacity, pp. 225-226.


[28] “Finding His Faith.”


[29] Falsani transcript.


[30] Ibid.


[31] Audacity, p. 9.


[32] Ibid, p. 208.


[33] “Transcript of Obama’s Remarks at San Francisco Fundraiser Sunday,” Time, April 11, 2008.


[34] Falsani transcript.


[35] Rules for Radicals. A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals (New York: Random House, 1971), p. 128.


[36] Audacity, p. 218.


[37] Falsani transcript.


[38] Falsani transcript, italics supplied.


[39] Rules for Radicals, p. 61.

An Obama ‘Rescue’ Plan That Doesn’t

An Obama ‘Rescue’ Plan That Doesn’t

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, October 13, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election ’08: On the eve of a final debate, Barack Obama unveiled an emergency “rescue” of the middle class from capitalism. The details show it to be all hype and no help.

Read More: Economy | Election 2008


Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama’s announcement in Toledo, Ohio, of a “middle-class rescue plan” is reminiscent of Groucho Marx’s means of rescuing the drowning damsel who double-crossed him in the film “Horse Feathers.”

“Throw me a lifesaver!” she shouted.

Groucho’s character, buffoonish college president Quincy Adams Wagstaff, promptly produced from his pocket a roll of peppermint Lifesavers and tossed her one.

Obama’s idea of letting people deplete 15% of their 401(k) investment holdings is indicative of the candidate we have come to know, who wants ordinary people to look to the government for money — and not, as has been the trend in recent years, to their investment portfolios. Encourage novice investors to get out and stay out of the stock market right after a historic decline? Only a socialist mind-set would exploit the financial crisis in such a way.

Obama’s campaign likes to call the middle class “the economic engine of America.” But that engine’s fuel is private-sector investment, most of which, naturally, comes from those with higher incomes. This community organizer from Chicago’s South Side, whose career was launched with the help of unrepentant Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, will not accept that.

The Illinois senator might be one of the shrewdest presidential candidates ever, but he does slip. For instance, he promises to end capital gains taxes on investments for small businesses and start-ups.

But on a campaign stop in Toledo, he couldn’t assure self-employed 34-year-old plumber Joe Wurzelbacher to his face that he would get a tax cut. Poised to buy a $250,000-a-year firm, the working-class plumber of 15 years confronted Obama.

“Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?” he asked.

Obama responded with the promise of a 50% tax credit for health care, but the senator conceded that Wurzelbacher’s income taxes would indeed rise.

“It’s not that I want to punish your success,” Obama told him. “I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you — that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

Wurzelbacher, who would shoulder all the responsibility and risk of such an investment, did not look impressed. Obama then let the cat out of the bag, saying:

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

He certainly does, and his unguarded statement to a voter in a key swing state is socialist economics distilled to its simplest terms.

Eliminating small business capital gains taxes — whatever the details would be (and you can bet it would be a fraction of total private investment) — will not rescue the middle class from the job losses of a high-tax Obama administration planning to spend an extra $293 billion annually. It does, however, cunningly deaden charges that Obama is camouflaging a socialist agenda.

The other components of his so-called rescue, lovingly described by the New York Times as “proposals to spur new jobs, to give Americans penalty-free access to retirement savings to help them through the downturn, to urge a 90-day moratorium on home foreclosures and to lend money to strapped local and state governments” are worded to sound equally innocuous. But a close look tells another story.

His $3,000 income-tax credit for each new full-time employee hired by businesses is an obvious anti-outsourcing incentive likely to increase business costs, of which we can expect plenty more — of a directly punitive nature — in an Obama administration. He would replace the judgment of banks with that of the federal government regarding when or if to foreclose. And he wants the Federal Reserve and the Treasury to bail out spendthrift state and local governments.

John McCain is reportedly considering a broad, simple capital gains tax cut. An across-the-board cut would be a real middle-class rescue, focused on generating new private sector employment — the proven way of “spreading the wealth around,” a concept which Obama, with his deftly disguised socialism, cannot grasp.


Testimonial by an 80 yeal old author


I don’t agree that our voting preference reveals if we’re Christian or not. God knows each of our hearts. There’s room for us all at the feet of Jesus..even for the abortionist. But this is from someone who’s been there and done that…..and sees the many mistakes that she warns us not to repeat. Nellie sent this from Canada….may God reveal truth and wisdom to us all.

Posted by: Lori Kalner on Thursday, September 18, 2008


Words of Warning and Hope
Lori Kalner

Dear Friends,
It becomes more difficult for me to write to you these days with a difficult time of dialysis as diabetes
advances. Now I must write at least this one last time. Bodie and Brock are gracious and let my voice of warning be heard.  
I was a young girl in Germany and lived through difficult times.  We have since then had a wonderful life. 
The world, as difficult as it has been, at least for many years remembered what happened politically in Germany with the Depression in the 1930s. You remember how it began and thus progressed with the
horrors of war which followed. 

The battle was at the beginning a Spiritual battle. 
You have read some parts of my story in the Zion Covenant, from growing up in Germany in the days when evil men prevailed and TRUTH was turned upside down.  White became black through a barrage of propaganda and constant repetition of lies against those who spoke the truth.

Here is my warning to all: Perhaps it will be my last warning. (I wake up each day surprised that I am still here and not in heaven with those who wait for me!)
America and the whole world hangs in the balance now.  I believe that America will stand or fall depending on who is elected President this year.  
Good Americans, like the good Germans of my youth,  may think that the issues of their nation center around the economy.  I tell you now that the fate of the greatest nation on earth does not depend on money. 
Every issue must only be judged worthy and true by the Word of God. Prosperity comes to a nation and a people who serves the Lord first.  That is a basic spiritual principle which is seen in every book of Holy Scripture.
“If My people, who are called by My Name, will humble themselves, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” (2 Chronicles 7:14)
This is where the healing of America begins: Friend, you must begin with examination of your own life first
and the confession of your sins.   Then pray for your nation.  Ask yourself now: who supports the rights of the unborn babies and also of those who are handicapped?  



History tells us why this is critical:   In the Germany of my childhood, everyone worried about the economy.  Paying bills. Buying bread. Money! And there were 1 million abortions in the year before Hitler came to power.   (A drop in the bucket compared to America.)  The excuse given for the murder of unborn babies was that economic times were hard.   How could a family feed another mouth?
There followed the legalized forced sterilization of parents who had a handicapped child or who were judged “racially impure.”
Next came the legalized euthanasia of those who were handicapped.  (An example of who would be killed is the Downs Syndrome child of Sarah Palin. He would have been killed immediately at birth.)  
Do we not see such choices carried out with tiny babies being strangled or left to die by abortionists
today?  Evil advances forward in America by law! This is done with the support of men and women in office who have sold their souls for power.   
In those days in Germany all, who were, as I am now, elderly or ill, were gassed. These were all called “useless eaters.”  
Christians and Jews who spoke out against this evil were labeled as radical “religious fanatics.”  A campaign of false accusation, slander and persecution began, targeting people of faith. It was “unpopular” to speak the TRUTH.   (Were these persecuted Christians people like you?) Many were jailed and eventually killed.   Some escaped with only their lives.
Finally, by millions, Jews were hunted, imprisoned and killed.  You know all this from the Zion Covenant
books.  I lived it.  

Now, today, I hear the words and know the deeds of this Barack Obama and I know that he is a “gifted,” convincing, fellow.  He is telling you how bad you have it and saying to Americans he is their messiah and the answer to all problems.   
The propaganda machine loves Obama.  The power of the media is much greater than in my childhood; a frightening thought. 
But here is TRUTH: of all men in the US government this Obama has most strongly encouraged and urged the on-going slaughter of the unborn…”the useless mouths” of America.   This slaughter is performed in the name of “A woman’s reproductive rights.”   
In the land of my birth, the Holocaust all began with the first step of legalized abortion.  Abortion was ENCOURAGED by a downturn in the world economics.     
Scripture teaches us the survival of a nation is not about the economy.   The only nation which will stand is the nation which follows the Lord and the true teachings of scripture.   
I warn you, my dear American friends, with love in my heart and with my last breaths that no man or woman, Protestant or Catholic,  can remain in God’s favor or blessing if they vote for this Obama. This is a man who voted four times to leave tiny babies who survived abortions to die!      
I know many devout American Catholics in my life and many who have never voted for the Republicans because of tradition.   Now I say that you who are Catholic must not follow after this man Obama who is gifted in his words but NOT speaking the TRUE WORDS OF OUR LORD OR THE CHURCH! 
You cannot be a true Catholic Christian and vote for Obama.  To vote for him is to vote for continued infanticide.   To Protestant Christians, I say, you are not a Christian if you  support the slaughter of the unborn!  

Christianity and abortion are spiritually impossible companions.



Protestants and Catholics MUST UNITE in this battle. The victory must be overwhelming!
Do you feel you cannot vote for Mr. McCain and Mrs. Palin, who are for the LIFE of the unborn and handicapped?   If you cannot support these leaders,  then for the sake of your soul,  I, who have seen the spiritual destruction of many good people, Protestants and Catholics,  urge you NOT TO VOTE for Obama
or anyone who does not support protection of LIFE!     
For all those American politicians who have the chance to change the course toward destruction, I who have been witness to national and worldwide tragedy, urge you protect those in your society who are the most helpless.  Publicly deny your support of Obama.  According to 2 Chronicles 7:14  you must turn your life around for the sake of your soul and your country!   To those politicians who use “FAITH” to get votes while they follow the path of destruction,  I must speak this warning: “God will not be mocked.” 
If you, Christian, can vote, and if you can encourage others to vote, then you must VOTE FOR LIFE.   
In the judgment of heaven, there is no other choice but LIFE and protection of the innocent for a Christian. 

I am thankful to Bodie and Brock for letting me be heard once more.  They agree with history and with
the Truth of scripture. Most of my generation is gone now.   You who are taking control of the world have a fight ahead of you as the memory of our peril dims.  I have heard and listened closely to the voices of Sarah Palin and John McCain, and my spirit bears witness that they speak truth and are the true Hope-Bearers of your generation.  Sarah is a true Deborah. Pray for her and her family and also for John McCain. You must all remember what happened to us and not repeat the same mistake of apathy.  

If I cannot write to you again I pray we will meet in heaven and you will tell me I helped you encourage
others to do the right thing for the sake of your soul and for the nation.  

God bless you,
Lori Kalner




Whether you’re Republican, Democrat, Independent or which candidate you choose – this is absurd. Don’t people want to know who they are voting for? I thought to be a US President – you had to be born in the US? How does he even qualify if he can’t show proof????

Whether you’re Republican, Democrat, Independent or which candidate you choose – this is absurd.  Don’t people want to know who they are voting for?  I thought to be a US President – you had to be born in the US?  How does he even qualify if he can’t show proof????




Info not available: 

1. Occidental College records — Not released
2. Columbia College records — Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper — not available, locked down by faculty
4. Harvard College records — Not released, locked down by faculty
5. Selective Service Registration — Not released
6. Medical records — Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule — “not available”
8. Law practice client list — Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate – – Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth — Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published — None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

13. Your Record of baptism– Not released or “not available”

14. Your Illinois State Senate records–“not available”


You couldn’t get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143 days of experience. 

You couldn’t become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a surgeon. 

You couldn’t get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143 days of experience. 

You couldn’t join the military and become a colonel after 143 days of experience. 

You couldn’t get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor after 143 days of experience. 


‘From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to th e time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in  the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.  After 
143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the  Free World …. 143 days. 

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start, but after 143 days, that’s all it is – a  start. 

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public is okay with this and campaigning for him. We wouldn’t accept this in our own line of work, yet some are okay with this for the President of the  United States of Am erica ?  Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol! 

Please, please forward this before it’s too late!!!!

“Debate in Obama’s Past”

Saturday, October 11, 2008

JEFFREY: Debate in Obama’s past

Terence P. Jeffrey


The most telling debate Barack Obama ever had was not with John McCain but Patrick O’Malley, who served with Mr. Obama in the Illinois Senate and engaged him in a colloquy every American should read.

The Obama-O’Malley debate was a defining moment for Mr. Obama because it dealt with such a fundamental issue: The state’s duty to protect the civil rights of the young and disabled.

Some background: Eight years ago, nurse Jill Stanek went public about the “induced-labor abortions” performed at the Illinois hospital where she worked. Often done on Down syndrome babies, the procedure involved medicating the mother to cause premature labor.

Babies who survived this, Nurses Stanek testified in the U.S. Congress, were brought to a soiled linen room and left alone to die without care or comforting.

Then-Illinois state Sen. Patrick O’Malley, whom I interviewed this week, contacted the state attorney general’s office to see whether existing laws protected a newborn abortion-survivor’s rights as a U.S. citizen. He was told they did not. So, Mr. O’Malley – a lawyer, veteran lawmaker and colleague of Mr. Obama on the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee – drafted legislation.

In 2001, he introduced three bills. SB1093 said if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present “to assess the child’s viability and provide medical care.” SB1094 gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child’s rights. SB1095 simply said a baby alive after “complete expulsion or extraction from its mother” would be considered a ” ‘person,’ ‘human being,’ ‘child’ and ‘individual.’ ”

The bills dealt exclusively with born children. “This legislation was about preventing conduct that allowed infanticide to take place in the state of Illinois,” Mr. O’Malley told me.

The Judiciary Committee approved the bills with Mr. Obama in opposition. On March 31, 2001, they came up on the Illinois Senate floor. Only one member spoke against them: Barack Obama.

“Nobody else said anything,” Mr. O’Malley recalls. The official transcript validates this.

“Sen. O’Malley,” Mr. Obama said near the beginning of the discussion, “the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was – is that there was a method of abortion, an induced abortion, where the – the fetus or child, as – as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb.” Mr. Obama made three crucial concessions here: the legislation was about (1) a human being, who was (2) “alive” and (3) “outside the womb.”

He also used an odd redundancy: “temporarily alive.” Is there another type of human?

“And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact that they were not being properly cared for during that brief period of time that they were still living,” Mr. Obama continued.

Here he made another crucial concession: The intention of the legislation was to make sure that (1) a human being, (2) alive and (3) outside the womb was (4) “properly cared for.”

“Is that correct?” Mr. Obama asked Mr. O’Malley.

Mr. O’Malley tightened the logical knot. “[T]his bill suggests that appropriate steps be taken to treat that baby as a – a citizen of the United States and afforded all the rights and protections it deserves under the Constitution of the United States,” said Mr. O’Malley.

But to these specific temporarily-alive-outside-the-womb-human beings – to these children who had survived a botched abortion, whose hearts were beating, whose muscles were moving, whose lungs were heaving – to these specific children of God, Mr. Obama was not willing to concede any constitutional rights at all.

To explain his position, Mr. Obama came up with yet another term to describe the human being who would be protected by Mr. O’Malley’s bills. The abortion survivor became a “pre-viable fetus.”

By definition, however, a born baby cannot be a “fetus.” Merriam-Webster Online defines “fetus” as an “unborn or unhatched vertebrate” or “a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth.” Mr. Obama had already conceded these human beings were “alive outside the womb.”

“No. 1,” said Mr. Obama, “whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements of the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – a child, a 9-month-old – child that was delivered to term.”

Yes. In other words, a baby born alive at 37 weeks is just as much a human “person” as a baby born alive at 22 weeks.

Mr. Obama, however, saw a problem with calling abortion survivors “persons.” “I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions,” said Mr. Obama, “because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.”

For Mr. Obama, whether or not a temporarily-alive-outside-the-womb little girl is a “person” entitled to constitutional rights is not determined by her humanity, her age or even her place in space relative to her mother’s uterus. It is determined by whether a doctor has been trying to kill her.

Terence P. Jeffrey is a nationally syndicated columnist.

A letter from Illinois An Email

Subject: FW: A letter from Illinois Dear Friends: My name is Joe Porter. I live in Champaign, Illinois. I’m 46 years old, a born-again Christian, a husband, a father, a small business owner, a veteran, and a homeowner. I don’t consider myself to be either conservative or liberal, and I vote for the person, not Republican or Democrat. I don’t believe there are ‘two Americas ‘ but that every person in this country can be whomever and whatever they want to be if they’ll just work to get there and nowhere else on earth can they find such opportunities. I believe our government should help those who are legitimately downtrodden, and should always put the interests of America first. The purpose of this message is that I’m concerned about the future of this great nation. I’m worried that the silent majority of honest, hard-working, tax-paying people in this country have been passive for too long. Most folks I know choose not to involve themselves in politics. They go about their daily lives, paying their bills, raising their kids, and doing what they can to maintain the good life. They vote and consider doing so to be a sacred trust. They shake their heads at the political pundits and so-called ‘news’, thinking that what they hear is always spun by whomever is reporting it. They can’t understand how elected officials ca n regularly violates the public trust with pork barrel spending. They don’t want government handouts. They want the government to protect them, not raise their taxes for more government programs. We are in the unique position in = this country of electing our leaders. It’s a privilege to do so. I’ve never found a candidate in any election with whom I agreed on everything. I’ll wager that most of us don’t even agree with our families or spouses 100% of the time. So when I step into that voting booth, I always try to look at the big picture and cast my vote for the man or woman who is best qualified for the job. I’ve hired a lot of people in my lifetime, and essentially that’s what an election is – a hiring process. Who has the credentials? Whom do I want working for me? Whom can I trust to do the job right? I’m concerned that a growing number of voters in this country simply don’t get it. They are caught up in a fervor they can’t explain, and calling it ‘change’. ‘Change what?’, I ask. ‘Well, we’re going to change America’, they say. ‘In what way?’, I query. ‘We want someone new and fresh in= the White House’, they exclaim. ‘So, someone who’s not a politician?’, I say. ‘Uh, well, no, we just want a lot of stuff changed, so we’re voting for Obama’, they state. ‘So the current system, the system of freedom and democracy that has enabled a man to grow up in this great country, get a fine education, raise incredible amounts of money and dominate the news, and win his party’s nomination for the White House that system’s all wrong?’ ‘No, no, that part of the system’s okay we just need a lot of change.’ And so it goes. ‘Change we can believe in.’ Quite frankly, I don’t believe that vague proclamations of change hold any promise for me. In recent months, I’ve been asking virtually everyone I encounter how they’re voting. I live in Illinois, so most folks tell me they’re voting for Barack Obama. But no one can really tell me why only that he’s going to change a lot of stuff ‘Change, change, change.’ I have yet to find one single person who can tell me distinctly and convincingly why this man is qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful nation on earth other than the fact that he claims he’s going to implement a lot of change. We’ve all seen the emails about Obama’s genealogy, his upbringing, his Muslim background, and his church affiliations. Let’s ignore this for a moment. Put it all aside. Then ask yourself, ‘What qualifies this man to be my president? That he’s a brilliant orator and talks about change?’ CHANGE WHAT? Friends, I’ll be forthright with you I believe the American voters who are supporting Barack Obama don’t have a clue what they’re doing, as evidenced by the fact that not one of them – NOT ONE of them I’ve spoken to can spell out his qualifications. Not even the most liberal media can explain why he should be elected. Political experience? Negligible. Foreign relations? Non-existent. Achievements? Name one. Someone who wants to unite the country? If you haven’t read his wife’s thesis from Princeton, look it up on the web. This is who’s lining up to be our next First Lady? The only thing I can glean from Obama’s constant harping about change is that we’re in for a lot of new taxes. For me, the choice is clear. I’ve looked carefully at the two leading applicants for the job, and I’ve made my choice. Here’s a question – ‘Where were you five and a half years ago? Around Christmas, 2002. You’ve had five or six birthdays in that time. My son has grown from a sixth grade child to a high school graduate. Five and a half years is a good chunk of time. About 2,000 days. 2,000 nights of sleep. 6 000 meals, give= or take.’ John McCain spent that amount of time, from 1967 to 1973, in a North Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp. When offered early release, he refused it. He considered this offer tobe a public relations stunt by his captors, and insisted that those held longer than he should be released first. Did you get that part? He was offered his freedom, and he turned it down. A regimen of beatings and torture began. Do you possess such strength of character? Locked in a filthy cell in a foreign country, would you turn down your own freedom in favor of your fellow man? I submit that’s a quality of character that is rarely found, and for me, this singular act defines John McCain. Unlike several presidential candidates in recent years whose military service is questionable or non-existent, you will not find anyone to denigrate the integrity and moral courage of this man. A graduate of Annapolis, during his Naval service he received the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. His own son is now serving in the Marine Corps in Iraq . Barack Obama is fond of saying ‘We honor John McCain’s service…BUT…’, which to me is condescending and offensive – because what I hear is, ‘Let’s forget this man’s sacrifice for his country, and his proven leadership abilities, and talk some more about change.’ I don’t agree with John McCain on everything – but I am utterly convinced that he is qualified to be our next President, and I trust him to do what’s right. I know in my heart that he has the best interests of our country in mind. He doesn’t simply want to be President – he wants to lead America, and there’s a huge difference. Factually, there is simply no comparison between the two candidates.20A man of questionable background and motives who prattles on about change, can’t hold a candle to a man who has devoted his life in public service to this nation, retiring from the Navy in1981 and elected to the Senate in1982. Perhaps Obama’s supporters are taking a stance between old and new. Maybe they don’t care about McCain’s service or his strength of character, or his unblemished qualifications to be President. Maybe ‘likeability’ is a higher priority for them than ‘trust’. Being a prisoner of war is not what qualifies John McCain to be President of the United States of America – but his demonstrated leadership certainly DOES. Dear friends, it is time for us to stand. It is time for thinking Americans to say, ‘Enough.’ It is time for people of all parties to stop following the party line. It is time for anyone who wants to keep America first, who wants the right man leading their nation, to start a dialogue with all their friends and neighbors and ask who they’re voting for, and why. There’s a lot of evil in this world. That should be readily apparent to all of us by now. And when faced with that evil as we are now, I want a man who knows the cost of war on his troops and on his citizens. I want a man who puts my family’s interests before any foreign country. I want a President who’s qualified to lead. I want my country back, and I’m voting for John McCain.

Elections board testimony: ACORN pestered me into registering multiple times


Elections board testimony: ACORN pestered me into registering multiple times

Posted by rrutti October 13, 2008 11:54AM

Freddie Johnson talks to reporters outside the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in Cleveland Monday.

Two Cleveland men who each signed multiple registration cards as part of a national voter registration drive told the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections today they did so to help ACORN canvassers keep their jobs.

One of the men said he was sometimes offered a cigarette or a dollar bill by workers with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

“They would come up with a sob story when they needed a signature,” said Freddie Johnson.

The other man, who came to the board wearing a Domino’s pizza delivery shirt, said he would tell ACORN workers who approached him while he was reading on Public Square that he already was registered. But the workers would persist.

“They’d just keep saying I could help them hold onto a job,” said Christopher Barkley.

Cuyahoga board of elections members learned recently that many ACORN canvassers had quotas and often had to scramble to meet them. Board employees had flagged a number of registration cards handed in by ACORN that showed the same names, but with different addresses or birth dates.

After testifying, both men were led to a private office and were interviewed by Cuyahoga County sheriff’s deputies. The board decided during its meeting that it would turn over the ACORN investigation to the sheriff and county prosecutor’s office.

A sheriff’s deputy said neither Johnson nor Barkley have been charged with a crime, but could be used as witnesses later.

ACORN has been under fire in several states for possible fraudulent voter registration activities.

The board subpoenaed two other people for today’s meeting. One could not be found. The other did not show up.bankert says…

donnaandstan: are you thinking the more you post, the smarter you sound? Didn’t work! Take it easy on the keys, will you?

Obama’s Tax Plan and Small Businesses


Obama’s Tax Plan and Small Businesses

Statistics about Business Size (including Small Business)



Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 10:25 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

At tonight’s Town Hall Presidential debate, I think Barack Obama said this about his tax policies [EDIT: according to the CNN transcript]:

“Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan.”

The US Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a “small business” according to its average annual receipts or the number of its employees. Here are examples from the SBA’s Table of Small Business Size Standards setting forth the maximum average annual receipts by industry that a business can have and still be classified as a small business:

Crop production of all types — $750,000
Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs — $750,000
Cattle feedlots — $2.5M
Chicken/egg production — $12.5M
Forestry & logging — $7M
Fishing — $4M
Irrigation, sewage, water supplies — $7M
Housing construction — $33.5M
Heavy and civil engineering construction — $33.5M
Dredging and cleanup — $20M
Concrete, framing, and other housing contractors — $14M
Car dealers — $23-29M
RV, motorcycle, & boat dealers — $7M
Furniture, hardware, clothing & sporting good stores — $7M
Electronic stores — $9M
Supermarkets, gas stations & department stores — $27M
Pharmacies — $7M

There are many more examples at the link. In addition, most of the industries in the Table — such as manufacturers of food, beverages, apparel, print, oil/gas, plastics, plumbing, machinery, computers, electronics, electrical, transportation, and furniture — are considered small businesses based on their total number of employees instead of average annual receipts. In those industries, the cut-off between small and large businesses ranges from 500-1,000 employees per business/industry.

It’s difficult for me to imagine a business that has 50 or more employees (let alone 500-1,000) that has receipts of less than $250,000 per year. And, given the SBA definitions of “small business,” it seems likely that many small businesses in a wide range of industries have receipts of more than $250,000 per year.

If so, it is appalling that Obama would imply that, if he is President, a small percentage of businesses exceed the $250,000 per year cut-off for increased taxation under his tax plan. In fact, the number of businesses subject to additional tax may be large and could well be the 50% number I think John McCain mentioned.

Small businesses are vital to the American economy and Americans’ livelihoods, and it sounds like Obama wants to tax as many as he possibly can.


America’s Second Wake-Up Call!

America’s Second Wake-Up Call!

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, October 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT

History is important to study… if you can trust the national media to not withhold key information they don’t want you to see or twist daily news to fit their agenda.

Read More: Economy


In the last 40 years, there have been nine major surveys of editors and reporters who work for national media. The most they ever voted Republican in a national election was 14%; the more common range has been 4% to 7%.

This is one reason why no matter who wins a political debate, the media almost en masse repeatedly tell you their man won. And most voters who don’t pay close attention will believe them. It’s called coordinated propaganda.

What were the most consistently repeated and strongly asserted slogans you’ve heard over the last few years? “We’re losing in Iraq . . . we must get out . . . it’s costing us $10 billion a month we could use here at home . . . we’re not any safer . . . the surge won’t work.”

A year ago, vice presidential candidate Joe Biden opined that we should get out of Iraq immediately and then divide it into three separate countries. This is the sound, seasoned judgment that’s supposed to compensate for running mate Barack Obama’s youth and complete lack of experience with the military or America’s security in a dangerous world!

Well, the surge in Iraq has worked, we are winning decisively and, as a result, now have a new democracy and strong ally in the Mideast. Meanwhile, seven years have passed since 9/11, and we still haven’t had another major terrorist attack on our soil.

Yet the media give no credit at all to President Bush, the only president to do something about the terrorist attacks that we had suffered repeatedly beginning in 1992.

With the economy slowing and a weak financial market created solely by our subprime mortgage mess, what do we keep hearing now from the media in hopes the majority will believe it and vote accordingly? “The mess is caused by eight years of failed Bush economic policies, including the tax cuts for the rich that should be rescinded.”

This is not the talk of a uniter of people, but rather a separator stirring up class warfare, envy and resentment. It’s a stirring-up of hate in an attempt to endlessly criticize, condemn, demean and destroy every opponent.

Do you know the real cause of the out-of-control subprime loan mess that’s creating so much fear and hurting every American? It’s not something the media or a certain political party wants you to find out. A picture is worth a thousand words, however, and we’ve made notes of key events on the chart above that you can follow as we give you some key facts.

In 1995, President Clinton mandated new regulations that coerced banks to make significantly more subprime loans to inner-city residents previously viewed as unqualified buyers in high-risk areas. Banks were rated on how well they complied and faced big fines if they didn’t do what government regulators wanted.

The government’s worst decision was allowing and encouraging banks, for the first time, to bundle these subprime loans in giant packages with prime loans. These packages were then sold to other investors as safe because they were government-sponsored by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The first of these government-encouraged packages came to market in 1997. For the banks, they were profitable because they could be sold quickly and thereby absolve the banks of any risk in the loans they made. Many subprimes were variable-rate loans made without down payments or documentation of borrowers’ incomes.

The banks could then use the money to make even more of these lower-quality, government-required loans, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought them with virtual abandon.

It evolved into a Big Government pyramid scheme with Democrats in charge of Fannie and Freddie making large political donations to Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Barack Obama and other politicians who continually defended the anything-goes lending of the two agencies.

In short, this was yet another well-intended, Democrat-supported,government-designed and run program that failed miserably and had the usual unintended consequences.

A few more facts:

April 2001: The Bush administration’s fiscal budget stated that the size of Fannie and Freddie was “potential problem because financial trouble of a large Government-Sponsored Enterprise could cause repercussions in financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity.”

May 2002: The Office of Management and Budget wanted disclosure and governance principles in Bush’s 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie and Freddie.

February 2003: A federal housing oversight report warned that unexpected problems at Fannie Mae could immediately spread into financial sectors.

September 2003: Treasury Secretary John Snow, in testimony to the House Financial Services Committee, recommended that Congress enact legislation to create new agency to regulate and supervise financial activities of housing-related government entities to set prudent and appropriate minimum capital requirements.

Rep. Frank, the committee’s ranking member, strongly disagreed, saying: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis . . . . The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we’ll see in terms of affordable housing.”

February 2004: The president’s new budget again highlighted risks of the explosive growth of these government enterprises and the then-low levels of required capital. It also called for the creation of a world class regulator. The administration determined that housing regulators of government agencies lacked the power and stature to meet their responsibilities and should be replaced with a strong new third regulator.

February 2004: Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, cautioned Congress against taking the strength of financial markets for granted. He too called for reducing the risk by ensuring that housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.

April 2004: Rep. Frank ignored warnings, accusing the administration of creating an “artificial issue.” “People pay their mortgages,” he told a group of mortgage bankers. “I don’t think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren’t there.”

From 2004 to 2008 the Bush administration made 12 more attempts to get Congress to pass legislation to have safer, sounder regulatory oversight of Fannie and Freddie and capital rules. You can see them for yourself on the White House Web site. But here are a couple of examples that show how Democrats resisted:

July 2005: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected legislation on reforming Fannie and Freddie. “While I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that would limit Americans from owning homes and harm our economy in the process,” he said.

August 2007: Sen. Dodd, another Democrat, ignored President Bush’s emphatic calls for Congress to pass Fannie and Freddie reform legislation and called for him to immediately reconsider his ill-advised position.

Democrats have become a far-left propaganda party with the lowest-ranked Congress in history. For six years, they have consistently refused to rein in the monumentally risky subprime loans that Clinton Democrats gave birth to.

Yet, voters are blaming Republicans for this crisis and seem to think that a newcomer they know little about, despite his questionable past associates and mentors, can bring us more huge programs. These include one that would socialize the health care system at a time when government-run systems in Canada and Britain are lower in quality and nearly bankrupt.

We will not have another 1929. The chart above shows we are in a 1937-type correction with a 1938-39 perhaps ahead. That’s when England’s Neville Chamberlain thought he could appease Hitler just by talking to him and getting a signature on a piece of paper that guaranteed “peace in our time.”

Today, a new Hitler in Iran says he wants to have similar relations with the U.S. Are terrorists hoping that we will sign a nice agreement that gives Iran another couple of years to develop a nuclear weapon?

Finally, history shows that since World War II, our best results-oriented presidents were Truman, Eisenhower and Reagan. They were much older — in their 60s and 70s — more experienced and made sounder, more productive decisions. The three youngest presidents — Kennedy, Carter and Clinton — all had more problems, particularly with national defense and dealing with dangerous dictators that were threats to America’s security.


HYMAN: Obama’s Kenya ghosts


Sunday, October 12, 2008

HYMAN: Obama’s Kenya ghosts

Mark Hyman


About 50 parishioners were locked into the Assemblies of God church before it was set ablaze. They were mostly women and children. Those who tried to flee were hacked to death by machete-wielding members of a mob numbering 2,000.

The 2008 New Year Day atrocity in the Kenyan village Eldoret, about 185 miles northwest of Nairobi, had all the markings of the Rwanda genocide of a decade earlier.

By mid-February 2008, more than 1,500 Kenyans were killed. Many were slain by machete-armed attackers. More than 500,000 were displaced by the religious strife. Villages lay in ruin. Many of the atrocities were perpetrated by Muslims against Christians.

The violence was led by supporters of Raila Odinga, the opposition leader who lost the Dec. 27, 2007, presidential election by more than 230,000 votes. Odinga supporters began the genocide hours after the final election results were announced Dec. 30. Mr. Odinga was a member of Parliament representing an area in western Kenya, heavily populated by the Luo tribe, and the birthplace of Barack Obama’s father.

Mr. Odinga had the backing of Kenya’s Muslim community heading into the election. For months he denied any ties to Muslim leaders, but fell silent when Sheik Abdullahi Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum, appeared on Kenya television displaying a memorandum of understanding signed on Aug. 29, 2007, by Mr. Odinga and the Muslim leader. Mr. Odinga then denied his denials.

The details of the MOU were shocking. In return for Muslim backing, Mr. Odinga promised to impose a number of measures favored by Muslims if he were elected president. Among these were recognition of “Islam as the only true religion,” Islamic leaders would have an “oversight role to monitor activities of ALL other religions [emphasis in original],” installation of Shariah courts in every jurisdiction, a ban on Christian preaching, replacement of the police commissioner who “allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists,” adoption of a women’s dress code, and bans on alcohol and pork.

This was not Mr. Odinga’s first brush with notoriety. Like his father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, the main opposition leader in the 1960s and 1970s, Raila Odinga is a Marxist He graduated from East Germany’s Magdeburg University in 1970 on a scholarship provided by the East German government. He named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

Raila Odinga was implicated in the bloody coup attempt in 1982 against then-President Daniel Arap Moi, a close ally of the United States. Kenya has been one of the most stable democracies in Africa since the 1960s. The ethnic cleansing earlier this year was the worst violence in Kenya since that 1982 coup attempt.

Mr. Odinga spent eight years in prison. At the time, he denied guilt but later detailed he was a coup leader in his 2006 biography. Statue of limitations precluded further prosecution when the biography appeared.

Initially, Mr. Odinga was not the favored opposition candidate to stand in the 2007 election against President Mwai Kibaki, who was seeking his second term. However, he received a tremendous boost when Sen. Barack Obama arrived in Kenya in August 2006 to campaign on his behalf. Mr. Obama denies that supporting Mr. Odinga was the intention of his trip, but his actions and local media reports tell otherwise.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama were nearly inseparable throughout Mr. Obama’s six-day stay. The two traveled together throughout Kenya and Mr. Obama spoke on behalf of Mr. Odinga at numerous rallies. In contrast, Mr. Obama had only criticism for Kibaki. He lashed out against the Kenyan government shortly after meeting with the president on Aug. 25. “The [Kenyan] people have to suffer over corruption perpetrated by government officials,” Mr. Obama announced.

“Kenyans are now yearning for change,” he declared. The intent of Mr. Obama’s remarks and actions was transparent to Kenyans – he was firmly behind Mr. Odinga.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama had met several times before the 2006 trip. Reports indicate Mr. Odinga visited Mr. Obama during trips to the U.S. in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Mr. Obama sent his foreign policy adviser Mark Lippert to Kenya in early 2006 to coordinate his summer visit. Mr. Obama’s August trip coincided with strategizing by Orange Democratic Movement leaders to defeat Mr. Kibaki in the upcoming elections. Mr. Odinga represented the ODM ticket in the presidential race.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama’s father were both from the Luo community, the second-largest tribe in Kenya, but their ties run much deeper. Mr. Odinga told a stunned BBC Radio interviewer the reason why he and Mr. Obama were staying in near daily telephone contact was because they were cousins. In a Jan. 8, 2008, interview, Mr. Odinga said Mr. Obama had called him twice the day before while campaigning in the New Hampshire primary before adding, “Barack Obama’s father is my maternal uncle.”

President Kibaki requested a meeting of all opposition leaders in early January in an effort to quell the violence. All agreed to attend except Mr. Odinga. A month later, Mr. Kibaki offered Mr. Odinga the role of prime minister, the de facto No. 2 in the Kenyan government, in return for an end to the attacks. Mr. Odinga was sworn in on April 17, 2008.

Mr. Obama’s judgment is seriously called into question when he backs an official with troubling ties to Muslim extremists and whose supporters practice ethnic cleansing and genocide. It was Islamic extremists in Kenya who bombed the U.S. Embassy in 1998, killing more than 200 and injuring thousands. None of this has dissuaded Mr. Obama from maintaining disturbing loyalties.

Mark Hyman is an award-winning news commentator for Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc.