Obama makes Joe the Plumber ‘scared’ for nation

Obama makes Joe the Plumber ‘scared’ for nation

Joe the Plumber all but came out of the water closet for Sen. John McCain on Friday, saying his famous exchange with Sen. Barack Obama made him “scared for America” and that he doesn’t trust the Democratic presidential candidate on taxes.

The plumber, aka Joe Wurzelbacher, burst into the headlines after he buttonholed Mr. Obama less than two weeks ago during a campaign stop in his Holland, Ohio, neighborhood and quizzed him about his tax policy. On Friday, he said that he wasn’t impressed by the Illinois senator in their encounter.

“When I was face to face with him, my honest first impression was that I expected something more. I had heard so much about ‘his presence’ in the media that I was surprised to find that he seemed very average,” Mr. Wurzelbacher wrote in a live online chat on The Washington Times Web site.

“My gut feeling as he answered my questions? I was scared for America,” he wrote in response to a reader who asked “When you were face to face with Obama, what were you thinking and how did it feel?”

Mr. Wurzelbacher, arguably the world’s most famous plumber, has become a cornerstone of Mr. McCains Republican campaign, which had embarked on a statewide blitz across Florida in a series of “Joe the Plumber” events aimed at blue-collar workers.

On the trail Friday, the nominee repeatedly cited Joe the Plumber, telling supporters that if Mr. Obama is elected, the middle class is “going to be put through the wringer.”

The plumber, who again refused to endorse a nominee explicitly, said he learned about the tour “on the news only this morning.” He said no one from either campaign “has asked me to join them. I’m out to stick up for the regular folks.”

Even though Mr. Obama promises to give Mr. Wurzelbacher at least a $1,000 tax refund if elected president, the blue-collar worker worries that Mr. Obama will break his word and back off his promise to give a tax break to every worker making less than $250,000 a year.

“What worries me is that he is deciding that $250k is rich right now, but what’s to stop him from changing his mind?” Mr. Wurzelbacher said Friday in a live online chat on The Washington Times Web site.

“As we all know, politicians change their minds at the drop of a poll. Personally, I think it will have to go lower. How else will he pay for all he wants big government to do?” he said.

During his brief discussion with Mr. Obama on Oct. 11, the candidate told the plumber, who had said he hoped to own his own company some day, that it was his intention to, as president, “spread the wealth around.”

Mr. McCain has called the pledge socialist, and Mr. Wurzelbacher said Americans simply don’t want that.

“Whether or not his tax plan, as he states it today, would help me, it still comes down to principles. I don’t want someone else’s hard-earned money. How can you be sure they’re not going to change their minds and decide you make too much money and want to take more of it to ‘spread’ to someone else,” the plumber wrote.

Mr. Wurzelbacher said he strongly supports the “fair tax,” which would repeal federal income taxes established in the 16th Amendment of the Constitution and replace them with a progressive national sales tax.

“I like the principles of it, and especially the idea of doing away with the IRS. That being said, I’m a big proponent of the flat tax, which I believe would have the same effect and is just as fair. We all have to pay taxes for the defense of our country and certain basic government protections for the people. I would be interested in supporting and presenting either tax reforms to Middle America,” he said.

He also said Friday he would consider running for Congress in 2010, challenging longtime Rep. Marcy Kaptur in the Toledo-area district.

“I’ll tell you what, we’d definitely be in one heck of a fight,” Mr. Wurzelbacher said during an appearance on the Laura Ingraham show Friday. “But, you know, I’d be up for it.”

Advertisements

Obama Does Not Regret “Spread the Wealth” Comment

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kNVPZaj1sYA

Fred Thompson Warns Of An Obama Presidency – With Video

Obama advisor praises Iran in Globe op-ed

Obama advisor praises Iran in Globe op-ed

Ed Lasky

Well, is it that hard to believe in this day and age that a major American newspaper offers up an op-ed filled with praise for Iran? This would be today’s Boston Globe in an op-ed written by Lawrence Korb and Laura Conley, both of whom work for the liberal minded Center for American Progress.

By the way, the fact that Korb has been identified as a key foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama is completely unmentioned – a major journalistic lapse but not  a surprising one by the New York Times-owned Boston Globe.

Korb and Conley look upon Iranian efforts to help topple the Taliban as proof of the potential for Iran to work with America in bringing about some sort of Pax Persia in the region. This is a fallacy. Iran opposed the Taliban because the Taliban – a Sunni extremist group – hated the Shiite Persians that were on its border and hated the Shiites within Afghanistan. The Taliban murdered Iranian regime officials. The downfall of the Taliban was in the interest of the regime and their help when America sought to oust the Taliban was based strictly on self-interest. In the diplomatic realm, nations don’t have permanent friends, they have permanent interests. The interests of the Iranian  regime is regional hegemony and the acquisition of nuclear bombs.
Korb and Conley blame Bush for failure to reach out to the Iranians. This argument falls flat. In fact, various Bush officials have sought to reach out to the regime (as even the op-ed mentions in passing) but have been rebuffed – as have a long line of other Presidents who have tried to establish relations with the Iranians.  This is a fact that the op-ed ignores.
The op-ed also seems to blame Bush for the progress of the Iranian nuclear program. This is absurd. The program did not start under Bush (and was actually temporarily put on hold in the wake of our invasion of Iraq) but had its origins going back to the 1980s. The program has progressed apace – under Democratic and Republican Presidents. We have sought, along with the United Nations and our European allies, to work with the Iranians to curb their nuclear program in return for various “carrots” offered to them. The result? Rebuff after rebuff, as the centrifuges spin away.
What is especially striking in this op-ed is the complete silence regarding the nature of the Iranian regime. One would hope that a foreign policy expert close to Barack Obama would at least recognize how important it is to consider the nature of a regime when advocating diplomatic outreach. Where is the recognition that the regime is -and has long been-designated  as the number one terror-sponsoring nation in the world (as Bill Clinton so designated Iran)? Where is the recognition that Iran has been helping kill Americans in Iraq and has done so in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, or the awareness that Iranian proxies have killed innocent Argentineans, Lebanese, Israelis and for that matter Iranians (a regime that hangs children and gays and brutalizes women wins praise from Korb and Conley?).
That little matter of denying the Holocaust while openly boasting of plans to bring about another one? The theological and apocalyptic musings of its leaders (not just President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad), the talk of halos and apocalypse spoken by Ahmadinejad from the podium of the United Nations to bring about the return of the missing Imam? Sheer piffle, not worth mentioning.
We will see more of these efforts to burnish Iran in the days ahead. The Iran lobby is stepping up efforts in Washington. The Persian red carpet is being rolled out.
Welcome to the future of our foreign relations under Barack Obama. Much like his campaign, it involves dreams and fantasy.

Great News: Barney Frank says Dems will cut defense, raise taxes, and spend lots of money

Great News: Barney Frank says Dems will cut

defense, raise taxes, and spend lots of money

Rick Moran
Well, you can’t say they didn’t warn us ahead of time:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said Democrats will push for a stimulus package after the November election, and called for a package reducing defense spending by 25 percent while saying Congress will “eventually” raise taxes.

Frank told the editorial board of the SouthCoast Standard-Times that he wanted to reduce defense spending by a quarter, meaning the United States would have to withdraw from Iraq sooner.

“The people of Iraq want us out, and we want to stay over their objection,” he said. “It’s extraordinary.”

Frank also said the post-election stimulus package will focus on spending for building projects, extending unemployment benefits, and further supporting states’ healthcare costs. “We’ll have to raise taxes ultimately,” Frank said. “Not now, but eventually.” Frank told the Standard-Times that if Democrats cannot secure the votes they need in November, they will try again in January, when they will likely have stronger majorities in the House and Senate.

B-B-B-B-ut we thought Obama was going to CUT taxes for “95% of Americans?”

Suckers.

Meanwhile, that 25% cut in defense spending means, oh, about $115 billion stripped during a time of war. No word on when the Dems are going to raise the white flag and leave Afghanistan – but that is almost certainly in the cards. But don’t worry. Before long, they will run out of enemies to surrender to. Then they will have start surrendering to each other.

Love that stimulating “stimulus package,” don’t you? We’re running a half trillion deficit and the Dems want to throw more money at us. That’s in addition to our “tax cut” that will no doubt be grabbed back in about 6 months when the government begins to collapse under the weight of additional debt piled on by the liberals.

Barack Obama: Change you can drink hemlock to.

The Depraved World of Jihadi Child Porn

The Depraved World of Jihadi Child Porn

By Stephen Brown
FrontPageMagazine.com | 10/24/2008

 

Besides their well-known penchant for anti-Semitism, misogyny and nihilistic violence, Muslim extremists are also gaining a disturbing reputation among British security agencies as collectors of child pornography.

According to a report on The Times website last week, police in Great Britain are discovering that their investigations into Muslim terrorism are leading them into the depraved world of child sexual exploitation. The reverse is also occurring with child protection officers encountering people who are “preparing to carry out terrorist acts.”

At one time, the link between the two deviant behaviours was considered so strong that security officials considered establishing an anti-terrorism project involving child welfare experts, but never followed through because Scotland Yard’s hands were too full with other terrorist investigations.

But demand is growing in Great Britain for the setting up of such a task force that could help security agencies understand the terrorist mindset and prevent future attacks.

“This is an important development,” said Labor MP Andrew Dinsmore. “We have to do more than just police work. It needs child protection, criminological and psychological work. It could become a very important weapon in the fight against terrorism.”

Police say they are already noticing a similarity in methods Muslim terrorists and paedophiles use in manipulating and grooming young people for their corrupt purposes. This usually involves introducing them to their deviant behaviour and then convincing them over time that it is normal.

British security personnel first became aware of a connection between Muslim extremism and child pornography in 2006. When investigating the terrorist connections of an east end London mosque preacher, Abdul Makim Khalisadar, a former primary school assistant, the 26-year-old’s DNA was found to match that of an unsolved rape case of a woman. Upon his arrest, police discovered Khalisadar also had a large amount of hardcore child pornography material on his computer.

In the same year, police made a similar discovery after raiding a suspected Muslim terrorist’s home, looking for a chemical bomb. While no explosive device was found, police did discover 44 “indecent” pictures of children on the 23-year-old man’s home computer and cell phone. Child porn, The Times reports, has been found “during investigations into some of the most advanced suspected plots.”

European security officials first discovered child porn images in a Muslim extremist’s possession when they raided a mosque in Milan, Italy, in 2001. Embedded in the disturbing images, though, they found hidden messages sent by fellow Islamists, causing Italian security agents to believe the terrorists were copying a clandestine method paedophiles use in communicating with one another. At that time, police believed this form of communications camouflage (called steganography) accounted for the child porn’s presence in the mosque.

But other, less doubtful, cases have cropped up since then. When arrested, Abdelkader Ayachine, a suspected Muslim terrorist currently awaiting trial in Spain, possessed almost 40,000 child pornographic movies and images, a number far exceeding any need for encoded communications. Ayachine was connected to the Casablanca bombing terrorist group that killed 45 people in 2003 and stands accused in the Spanish court of inciting jihad and recruiting fighters for the Iraq war. Prosecutors say his child pornography collection consisted mainly of “minors having sex, among themselves and with adults.”

Muslim extremists’ attraction to child pornography has been attributed to cultural factors. An Italian magistrate involved in the Milan mosque case said possession of child porn by Islamists did not necessarily indicate paedophilic tendencies, but rather was the result of cultural differences. Girls, he stated, often become wives in the Muslim world at age 11 and 12.

The Islamists’ interest in boys as sex objects is generally owed to their beliefs and social milieu. Their strict religious convictions do not allow them to be with a woman outside their own families, let alone touch one, before marriage. Moreover, in some Muslim countries, males can’t even catch a glimpse of the demonized female form because of the body-encompassing clothing she is forced to wear. In such a gender segregated environment, homosexual behavior develops, especially towards boys.

Even the Taliban, which executed homosexuals when it ruled Afghanistan, could not eradicate the sexploitation of boys, even in its own ranks. Among the 30 commands it issued to its fighters, Rule No. 19 forbid them from taking young boys without facial hair into their barracks. After the Taliban regime fell, a Fox news report indicated pederasty in Afghanistan returned to its previous place as an accepted social norm.

Sexual exploitation of boys in Muslim countries also has a long history. The Asia Times columnist, Spengler (an anonymous pseudonym), wrote in his column, Sufism, Sodomy and Satan, that, in the High Middle Ages, Sufism, Islam’s mystic branch, “is the only case in which a mainstream current of a major world religion preached pederasty as a path to spiritual enlightenment.” He then cites a German historian who claims this Sufi practice “persisted in many Islamic countries until very recent times.” The 2007 movie, The Kite Runner, located in Afghanistan, showed a “last vestige” of Sufism’s pederast side when dancing boys appeared in female dress.

Perhpas not altogether insignificant in this grotesque phenomenon is that the Koran itself promises to put pre-pubescent boys at the service of jihadi martyrs not interested in the female virgins awaiting them in paradise. The boys will be like “scattered pearls” of “perpetual freshness” (Suras 52:24, 56:17, 76:19).

The consequences of Islamist misogyny, gender segregation and sexual abuse of Muslim boys are far-reaching. Besides growing up to be sexual deviants who collect child pornography and may victimize other children, such sexually traumatized Muslim boys are predisposed to become involved in terrorism as a way of expressing their sexual rage. It therefore comes as no surprise that one anti-terror source told the Times: “A way of finding who the extremists and terrorists are is to go through the child porn sites.”


Stephen Brown is a contributing editor at Frontpagemag.com. He has a graduate degree in Russian and Eastern European history. Email him at alsolzh@hotmail.com

What passes for an informed Obama supporter