From The Duke

Enablers: Case Study of ALSO

2009-09-21T18:07:00.000-04:00

Have you ever seen someone do something that you know is wrong and said nothing? Of course, we all have. Have you ever thought to yourself afterwards that by not speaking out you actually enabled them to continue doing what was wrong? I have.

My father was an alcoholic. He worked two jobs all his life to keep my mother and two brothers fed, clothed and in a safe home. My Dad would drink half a bottle of Vodka in the evening. I did not say anything to my Dad. He died in his early sixties. I miss my Dad. I have not forgiven myself. I was an “enabler”.

I use this lead in because I do not want to continue to enable bad behavior in my family, my friends, my neighbors, my colleagues, or in our society. But how does one take that first step to stop being an enabler and become what I call a “preventer”?

When does one stand up and say to a family member or a friend "stop doing what you are doing because I know it will harm or kill you"? That takes courage.

Now I will try to discuss a topic that is both emotionally charged and highly political. I will in this first column in a series start with a behavior that is not only harmful to one’s health and well being but also costly and harmful to our society. I will seek out the enablers in our community of this behavior and ask them why they are enablers. That at least is a start.

What is this behavior – homosexuality?

I will begin with some background on this issue and then do a series of articles and I hope do audio tape interviews with key members of our community who are enabling homosexuality in Sarasota County.

Let me begin by saying many enablers do not think they are promoting bad behavior. There are those in our community that embrace a gay lifestyle, there are those who feel they must not speak out in the name of "diversity" or "tolerance", and finally, there are those who just want to go along to get along. Some of these people may not know the facts about the negative impacts of homosexuality on the individual, families and our society. Why? Because no one is seriously looking into this issue, that is until now.

First, I will present some facts from the Florida and Sarasota Departments of Heath about HIV/AIDS in our state and community. In September a comprehensive report was released by the Florida Department of Health on HIV/AIDS titled, “The Man Up Report 2009”. I will draw from this report and data from the Sarasota Department of Health.

I hope we can all agree that HIV/AIDS is dangerous if not deadly to an individual’s health and costly to our society. The question is what is the root cause of this deadly disease? Here are some background statistics:

According to the Florida Department of Health Study, “Man Up Report 2009” 1 in 209 white men, 1 in 44 black men and 1 in 117 Hispanic men in Florida have HIV/AIDS.
The report states, “Males account for the majority of HIV/AIDS cases in Florida. Men should begin engaging in frank discussions about the seriousness of HIV/AIDS and include women and adolescents in the discussions.” [Emphasis added]
In Florida, through 2008, there were a total of more than 90,000 adult persons (13+ years) living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHAs) (reported cases). Seventy percent (62,993) of these PLWHAs were men. [I did not know that 13 year olds were "adults"]
According to the FDH study Sarasota County is 13th in white men, 14th in black men and 13th in Hispanic men in our state in the number of HIV/AIDS cases with a rate of 1 in 339, 1 in 61 and 1 in 192 men infected, respectively.
In 2008 Sarasota County had 800 known cases of HIV/AIDS.
Seventy percent of males infected with HIV/AIDS (426 cases) was the result of men having sex with men (MSM).
Six percent of men (42) and nineteen percent of women (35) were due to intravenous drug use (IDU).
Six percent of cases in males were due to a combination of MSM and IDU.
Heterosexuality accounted for ten percent of males (58) and sixty-five percent of females (119) contracting HIV/AIDS
Eighty-two percent of HIV/AIDS cases in Sarasota are in the 20 to 49 year age group.
Two percent are in the age group of 19 and below. Sarasota has 15 cases in the 13-19 year age group, 2 in 5-12 year old group and 3 cases with children under 5 years old.

It is clear from the “Man Up Report 2009” and 2008 county statistics that MSM (male sex with men) is the primary cause of the spread of HIV/AIDS in Sarasota County. It is also clear that women contract HIV/AIDS from sex with men who are infected (65%) and by IDU (intravenous drug use) (19%).

So what is being done to address this heath crisis that grew by 8.1% in Sarasota County from 2007 to 2008? Who does the County contract with to help deal with this issue? A group named ALSO.

I have tried repeatedly to interview Stephan Warne the Program Coordinator for ALSO. I called Bruce Webster the Chairman of the Board of ALSO and was angrily rebuked by him before he hung up on me. However, what I did learn from Bruce, a former pastor and the Executive Director of Family Promise of Manatee County is that when he came to Sarasota he sought out a volunteer opportunity to get known in the community and he chose ALSO as that vehicle. Bruce said that he has been on the ALSO board for two years and that homosexuality is “not a choice”.

According to the Sarasota Department of Heath:

The Department received approximately $67,000 in funding from the Sarasota County Commission. The funding received is used to contract for services with specific outcome measures with five different agencies. The Community AIDS Network (CAN), along with four other agencies (Multicultural Health Institute, ALSO and Genesis Health Services and Project Challenge of West Coast, Inc.). These agencies formed the Project Unity Initiative and received the prevention contract. The measures are based on the strategic goals of the HIV/AIDS Network of Southwest Florida (HANS). For more information, you can visit the HANS web site: www.hivsarasota.org.
The purpose of the contract with ALSO is to provide HIV/AIDS tests in the community to one of the known high risk groups (as identified by their board): those aged 13 to 21. For 2009, ALSO is contracted to provide 200 tests at a cost of $10 per test to persons in this age group throughout Sarasota County.
ALSO has received tax payer funding in the past three grant cycles that range from $2,000 to $4,000 per grant cycle.

So ALSO provides free HIV/AIDS tests to those aged 13 to 21 in Sarasota County. My question is what is ALSO doing to prevent this behavior and thereby reduce the number of HIV/AIDS cases in Sarasota County? Since I can’t get an interview to answer this and other questions I must rely on their website.

Here is what the ALSO website says:

If you are a youth who has questions about your sexual identity, coming out, or GLBTQ issues; or you want to learn about diversity, tolerance, and acceptance for ALL members of society, ALSO Out Youth may be for you.
The ALSO Out Youth Drop-In Center is a drug- and alcohol-free place where youth engage in social activities, educational programs and peer support groups.
The hotline staff/volunteers also carry a referral list of groups, agencies, and individuals who have identified themselves as open to helping GLBTQ youth.
As the school year is about to begin, ALSO is working closely with our friends and allies throughout both Sarasota and Manatee Counties to make the 2009-2010 school year the safest yet for GLBTQ students. This summer, several youth participated in the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network’s (GLSEN) annual school climate report this year and we hope to see our communities results improve since previous reports. [Emphasis added]
Sarasota County high schools will be sponsoring at least one “Unity Day” per high school this year and we have been invited back to work with each school, as part of our participation in the Coalition for Inclusion and Diversity (CID). “Unity Days” have proven to be a successful way to engage youth in active roles as advocates for their communities and we have been very lucky to participate in such an innovative process. [Emphasis added]

It appears that ALSO is a gay activist organization that is supporting if not promoting homosexual behavior in our youth ages 13-19 – ALSO is an enabler.

Note the link on the ALSO website to their “Partner” GLSEN and the statement of Bruce Webster about ALSO proudly participating in GLSEN activities. I have written extensively about GLSEN and its Little Black Book (WARNING this book contains pornographic material), which was distributed to middle and high school students in Massachusetts.

Enough for this first chapter please take the time to comment and stay tuned for my next chapter on Enablers in Sarasota County. I will be looking at the role of GLSEN, SCOPE, the Sarasota County School Board and local private donors/contributors to see if they too are enablers of this unhealthy behavior.

Dear Readers I am now the Editor of Red County - Sarasota

2008-10-16T08:08:00.001-04:00

Dear loyal readers,

I have been asked to be the Editor of Red County - Sarasota. This is a fantastic opportunity for me to get our conservative message out to a huge audience. I will keep this blog active so you may look at my past articles on key topics.

However, I ask that you now put in your favorites list Red County - Sarasota. Here is the URL for my new blog:

http://www.redcounty.com

Please go to this new web site daily and read the great center-right articles from my fellow bloggers and conservatives like Victor Davis Hanson, Michael Medved, and Hugh Hewitt. You will get both local Sarasota news and commentary, as well as national news and commentary.

Thanks for your loyalty and great support.

Warm Regards,

Rich (theDuke) Swier

The Drama of Obama on Racism

2008-10-15T15:02:00.002-04:00

Show 256 The Drama of Obama on Racism. Medved talks to author Wayne Perryman Podcast Episode

Posted using ShareThis

Healthcare Insurance versus Medical Care by Rich Swier

2008-09-14T09:38:00.003-04:00

There has been much discussion about healthcare insurance. Let me add my humble voice to this discussion.

I recently went to my doctor and he said to me that healthcare insurance is a civil right. He even had a poster taped to his desk saying so. That is wonderful and noble but wrong headed. Healthcare insurance is not a civil right, it is a bet with an insurance company that I will not be healthy.

Each of us makes decisions each day on what we will spend our hard earned dollars on. I am retired. I pay for the basic necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing, and a car. I am blessed in that my wife and I made some good financial decisions over our lifetime and are able to support ourselves. In addition to the necessities, I pay for insurance as a hedge against a variety of disasters. I have life, property, personal liability, and car insurance. I even have insurance on my car in case I am hit by a person without insurance. Finally, I have healthcare insurance. Actually, I have three healthcare insurance policies - one from my wife's employer, Medicare supplemental insurance, and long term care policy. Insurance is a great business or racket, depending on who you talk with.

Today you see TV ads and hear the AARP, members of Congress, and of course our Presidential candidates talking about healthcare insurance. Politicians never talk about the 250 million of us already paying for some form of healthcare insurance coverage for us and our families. I think that is a fantastic record compared to say China or India or Mexico. The favorite line from liberals is there are 47 million Americans without healthcare insurance. This is portrayed as a national crisis and you and I are guilty because there is someone someplace suffering because you and I are not providing them with all the health insurance they need. Do you feel guilty enough yet?

Let's have some straight talk about healthcare insurance versus medical care. No one in America goes without medial care. Anyone, including illegal aliens, can walk into any emergency room in any hospital and get medical care. We even provide free medical care to terrorists who want to kill us. Who pays for all this medical care? You and me. If the hospital is a public one, like Sarasota Memorial Hospital, county taxpayers pay the bill. If it is a private hospital, like our local Doctor's Hospital, it gets passed on to us taxpayers as Medicaid reimbursements or the hospital charges you and me pay when we visit. This free medical care to those without healthcare insurance is passed on to you and me in higher taxes, higher health insurance premiums or both. People are not dying in the streets for lack of medical care. They are dying in the streets from vicious gangs and drug deals gone bad.

Now to the bottom line. Who should have and who should pay for health insurance? As a conservative I believe it is up to the individual to decide if he or she will purchase health insurance. When the individual decides they want health insurance they then work and budget to pay for it. If the individual cannot afford it then families should step in to help. They help by adding family members to existing policies or providing funds to pay for a son, daughter, grandson or granddaughter, brother or sister's medical care or insurance until that family member can afford it on their own. That is the American way. Families taking care of one another.

Today most individuals or families have health insurance through their employers. Entrepreneurs and small business owners are self-insured. So having a job will do one of two things: the employer will provide coverage or the individual will have money and buy a personal health insurance policy. Some are proposing that we move away from an employer based system to an individual based system. In this system individuals get the tax breaks that companies do for providing healthcare insurance. The concept is exciting because it puts power back into the hands of individuals. As a conservative I like that. Let me make the decision on what coverage I want to meet my needs, not a company or government entity.

Now that I have solved the problem of who should have healthcare insurance and who should pay for it, let's discuss the real political issue.

The political argument is not about you and I having access to medical care, we already have that. The political discussion is who should be the insurance company - the private sector or government. Let me give you a personal example. I am a retired military officer. I have access to medical care through Tri-care for Life and the Veterans Administration (VA). The VA is socialized medicine. What do you hear in the news about the VA? Patient backlogs, veterans falling thru the cracks, long wait times for medical procedures, rationing of medical care, the growing costs of providing medical care, and the need to increase co-pays.The VA system is a parallel government run medical system to private/public hospitals and local clinics. The costs to run such a system are huge. VA is the largest federal government agency, even bigger than the Department of Defense.

As a user of the VA system I get an annual physical including all lab work. I pay for this in part because I have a higher income than other veterans. My supplemental insurance covers most of these co-pays. The VA does a great job on physicals. I see my VA doctor annually, that is it. I cannot call my VA doctor when I am sick or need routine outpatient care. I have another local civilian doctor who is my general practitioner. He refers me to other, non-VA doctors, for specialty care which is covered by my wife's insurance with Tri-care for Life (Medicare for Veterans) as my secondary. Sound complicated? It is and I am a rather healthy 63 year old.

While the VA does great work and provides many veterans with outstanding care it is socialized medicine and does not meet the needs of all veterans. It never will. Why, because it is totally government run. If government can't keep its obligations to our veterans, especially those injured in the line of duty, what makes you think it can take care of all Americans?

The political argument between liberals and conservatives is who should be your insurer. The private sector or government. Who should pay for your medial care? You via the insurance policy you select or government? Which is more efficient? Which is more responsive? Which gives you the decision making power? Which takes that decision making power away from you? Which promotes individual responsibility? Which makes you dependent on government largesse?

There is no such thing as a free lunch. So it is with healthcare insurance. I either pay for my medical care or depend on the government to provide me with medical care. My experiences with the government run VA system tells me to depend on me, myself and I.

The Liberal Media is Drowning in its Own Ink!

2008-09-13T08:43:00.008-04:00

Mark Twain said, "Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel". What is amazing is there is a new quote today, "Never pick a fight with a hockey mom".

The liberal media, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune and their liberal owners the New York Times are drowning in their own ink. The more they attack Governor Sarah Palin the more they sink into a "quagmire". The harder they try to throw dirt at her the deeper they sink and the media is taking the Obama campaign with it. As they say, "If you are in a hole, stop digging".

Let's take a look at just some of the false claims made by the major media about Governor Sarah Palin:

Alan Colmes of Fox News blamed Governor Palin of improper pre-natal care and therefore causing her own son's Down Syndrome. Down Syndrome has nothing to do with pre-natal care as it is an extra chromosome that causes it.
Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.
She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.
She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.
Democrat Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida and chair of the Florida Obama campaign smeared Republican vice presidential pick Sarah Palin as a "Nazi sympathizer".
Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

The Atlantic Magazine ran the horrible and false story from the Daily Kos saying Governor Palin's Down Syndrome son Trig was her grandson. The New York Times ran three front page stories on Sarah Palin's daughter being pregnant. US Magazine put on their front cover over a picture of Governor Palin and her Down Syndrome son the title, "Babies, Lies and Scandals". Major news media outlets are taking their cues from far left blogs like the Daily Kos and Huffington Post, printing their lies and attacks without fact checking any of the allegations. Even CNN "ran" with the Trig is Sarah's grandchild story and reported on it.

Now let's add to this the total breakdown of Obama and his campaign, and his supporters becoming unhinged. We have Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat from Tennessee and Obama supporter, saying on the House floor, "“The parties have differences, but if you want change, you want the Democratic Party, Obama was a community organizer, like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor.” Gee I wonder how that plays with America's fifty Governors let alone Christians.

I have reported on the "Culture of Hate" on the left. We have Obama supporter John O'Brian in sleepy Sarasota, Florida posting the following on the liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune public forum:

"Anyone who could support the retard breeder, isn't thinking about the welfare of our country. Lets hope she doesn't bring any more retards into thsi crazy world. I can't wait until they stop digging up her dirt."

On September 1, 2008 John posted, "SHE LIED ABOUT THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE and kept the 500 million dollars, what a joke you queer loving gop smucks. She needst to stay home and take care of her reatrd and have her tubes tied."

When I asked the leadership of the Herald-Tribune about this and other posts by John I was told, "What we typically do in cases like this is suspend the user's rights for 24 hours to get his/her attention and allow for a cooling-off period."

I commend the Sarasota Herald-Tribune's online editor for taking down the offensive quotes but a "24-hour cooling off period" does not address the issue of vile, hurtful and hateful words.

Surely we can all agree that "retard breeder" is hate speech? Well it seems not. I contacted the Obama campaign in Sarasota and their regional press person in Tampa and they have not commented or condemned this hate speech. When you stand silent on speech like this it is the same as casting a vote of "present".

This culture of hate is backfiring. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 51 percent of voters believe that the media is trying to hurt the Alaska governor with its coverage -- and 24 percent say that makes them more likely to support the Republican ticket.

The liberal media is finally drowning in their own ink. They should be. It is time for a change in the culture of hate. Senator Obama is clearly not up to it. I believe Senator McCain and Governor Palin are.

Barry Goldwater is Back in Town by Paul R. Hollrah

2008-09-13T07:15:00.004-04:00

In the wake of the 2006 congressional elections, in which Republicans received a well-deserved drubbing at the polls, Republican members of Congress spent a weekend together at an east coast resort. Either as testament to their mind-numbing political insensitivity, or as a cruel joke on their constituents, they even had the temerity to call their weekend meeting a “retreat.”

With the political “earthquake” of 1994, Republicans were given the opportunity for leadership that millions of activists had worked toward since the close of World War II… the opportunity to lead the nation according to time-honored conservative principles.

They went to Washington and for four years, under the leadership of Speaker Newt Gingrich, the House of Representatives actually acted as if it were the “People’s” House… as the Founding Fathers intended. But then, in 1998, Gingrich decided not to seek reelection after having his reputation tarnished over a book advance from Rupert Murdock. When the 106th Congress was seated in January 1999, House Republicans elected Dennis Hastert as Speaker – a man who couldn’t buy an appearance on a network news program and who never saw a spending bill he didn’t like.

Meanwhile, in the Senate, after conducting a sham trial of Bill Clinton in 1999, Majority Leader Trent Lott was driven from his leadership position in December 2002 after making a racially insensitive remark at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party. Lott was succeeded by Bill Frist, a heart surgeon from the state of Tennessee. Frist was a totally honorable, totally decent man who, being unaccustomed to dealing with the likes of Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, and Harry Reid, quickly became the Democratic leadership’s favorite breakfast food.

With leaders who were incapable of imposing party discipline, Republicans were soon corrupted by their new-found power. Under the leadership of Tom Delay, House Republicans developed what came to be known as the “K Street Project,” a plan designed to shut Democrats out of the corporate money they had been extorting from K Street lobbyists during all their years in power. It was a completely hare-brained scheme. Since most corporate lobbyists in Washington are what is referred to in the profession as “access” lobbyists, unprincipled and ideologically neutral men and women who buy access to members on both sides of the aisle, they would have given the bulk of their political support to members of the majority party without Delay & Company having to squeeze it out of them.

In a very short time, congressional Republicans became addicted to a Democratic pork barrel invention known as the “earmark.” They began to spend the People’s money like drunken sailors, and in just eight short years after Newt Gingrich’s unfortunate and untimely departure congressional Republicans became indistinguishable from Democrats. In 2006 the American people sent them packing... and deservedly so.

One would have thought that a Republican president, concerned for the pocketbooks of the American people and for the long term future of his party, might have imposed a bit of spending discipline on his Republican colleagues in Congress… but he didn’t. During his first seven years in office, the years during which congressional Republicans were losing their way, committing political suicide through a thousand self-inflicted wounds, George W. Bush never once used his veto power in the interest of either fiscal sanity or party discipline.

But the downfall of the Republican Party didn’t begin with Newt Gingrich’s departure from Congress or with the dawn of the Lott/Frist era in the Senate. The demise of the Republican brand began with Ronald Reagan’s departure from the White House and George H.W. Bush’s ascension to the presidency. The Bushes, father and son alike, are both products of the eastern liberal establishment (Rockefeller) wing of the Republican Party. They are not conservatives. They were, and are, political moderates… Ivy League elitists in ten-gallon hats… and whatever ideology it is that motivates them, it remains a mystery among the party’s conservative base. George W. Bush won nomination in 2000 by claiming to be a “compassionate” conservative… insulting conservatives and confusing non-aligned voters all at one time.

What the Bushes have done, with the able assistance of Trent Lott, Bill Frist, Dennis Hastert, and Tom Delay, is to besmirch the value of the Republican brand. For the better part of a decade they have made it impossible for conservative Republicans, in good conscience, to publicly defend their own party… the party to which so many have dedicated “their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor.” What they have done to the party, collectively, is unforgivable.

But now, in a single act of courage and insightfulness, whether intentional or not, Senator John McCain has made it possible for conservatives and Republicans to put all of that behind them. In choosing Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, John McCain has given his party’s conservative base reason to once again feel proud and unashamed… to march forward to battle with shoulders square and heads held high. Sarah Palin is an unabashed conservative, in the style of Barry Goldwater.

She is courageous, she is self-confident, she knows who and what she is, she knows intuitively what it is that makes our country great, and she understands the evils of liberalism and the virtues of conservatism.

She punctures Democratic pomposity fearlessly and she does it all with grace, charm, and good humor. Not since Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan have we seen a Republican leader with the kind of piercing eyes and determined jaw that causes liberals and Democrats to quake in their boots. Ladies and gentlemen… Barry Goldwater is back in town and he (er, she) plans to kick butt and take names.

Let the games begin.

Article by Paul R. Hollrah

Whodunit? Democrats of course!

2008-09-12T21:46:00.005-04:00

This is priceless. It is a Mastercard moment. Let me relish this.

We have the liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune pounding the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections for losing ballots in their article, "The latest election whodunit"? Amazing.

The editorial board even remembers the butterfly ballots of the 2000 election. Wonderful!!!

Finally, a liberal newspaper is admitting that Democrats don't know how to properly run an election. You see Palm Beach county's Supervisor of Elections in both cases were Democrats. Democrats have been behind giving Florida its bad reputation. Democrats need to take the blame.

The liberals at the Herald-Tribune can't quite bring themselves to identify the Palm Beach folks as Democrats but does mention a Republican for putting a Senate race at the bottom of the ballot with an unfounded allegation that this somehow would befuddle Democrats. Well maybe it did, what does that say about Democrat voters?

It is sweet to see this all in print. Of course it was another Democrat, Christine Jennings that added to Florida's reputation on elections, but wrongly so. Christine, you see, thought when Republicans run a Supervisor of Elections office they must be as bad as Democrats at it. Wrong.

Kathy Dent was vindicated as were Vern Buchanan and the touch screen machines. Victory is sweet. Better to put Republicans in charge of running elections, at least they are dedicated, honest and capable.

We know whodunit - Democrats!

Pastor Manning's Fierce Prayer for Bristol Palin

2008-09-10T20:57:00.002-04:00

Pastor Manning is back with his comments about Senator Obama's mother and Governor Palin's daughter. Amazing.

I condemn the speech of Obama mentor and pastor of 20 years Jeremiah Wright. I also condemn the speech of Clinton supporter Pastor Manning. However, it is useful to expose this for what it is, hate speech.

Sarah Palin vs. Barack Obama by Gerard Baker

2008-09-10T17:27:00.003-04:00

Democrats, between sniggers of derision and snorts of disgust, contend that Sarah Palin, John
McCain's vice-presidential pick is ridiculously unqualified to be president.

It's a reasonable objection on its face except for this small objection: it surely needs to be weighed against the Democrats' claim that their own candidate for president is self-evidently ready to assume the role of most powerful person on the planet.

At first blush, here's what we know about the relative experience of the two candidates. Both are in their mid-forties and have held statewide elective office for less than four years. Both have admitted to taking illegal drugs in their youth.

So much for the similarities. How about the differences?

Political experience

Obama: Worked his way to the top by cultivating, pandering to and stroking the most powerful interest groups in the all-pervasive Chicago political machine, ensuring his views were aligned with the power brokers there.

Palin: Worked her way to the top by challenging, attacking and actively undermining the Republican party establishment in her native Alaska. She ran against incumbent Republicans as a candidate willing and able to clean the Augean Stables of her state's government.

Political Biography

Obama: A classic, if unusually talented, greasy-pole climber. Held a succession of jobs that constitute the standard route to the top in his party's internal politics: 'community organizer', law professor, state senator.

Palin: A woman with a wide range of interests in a well-variegated life. Held a succession of jobs -- sports journalist, commercial fisherwoman, state oil and gas commissioner-- before entering local politics. A resume that suggests something other than burning political ambition from the cradle but rather the sort of experience that enables her to understand the concerns of most Americans.

Political history

Obama: Elected to statewide office only after a disastrous first run for a congressional seat and after his Republican opponent was exposed in a sexual scandal. Won seat eventually in contest against a candidate who didn't even live in the state.

Palin: Elected to statewide office by challenging a long-serving Republican incumbent governor despite intense opposition from the party.

Obama: A very attractive speaker whose celebrity has been compared to that of Britney Spears and who sends thrills up Chris Matthews' leg.

Palin: A very attractive woman, much better-looking than Britney Spears, who speaks rather well too. She sends thrills up the leg of Rush Limbaugh (and mine).

Executive experience

Obama: Makes executive decisions every day that affect the lives of his campaign staff and a vast crowd of traveling journalists.

Palin: Makes executive decisions every day that affect the lives of 500,000 people in her state, and that impact crucial issues of national economic interest such as the supply and cost of energy to the United States.

Religious influences

Obama: Regards people who 'cling' to religion and guns as 'bitter.' Spent 20 years being mentored and led spiritually by a man who proclaimed 'God damn America' from his pulpit. Mysteriously, this mentor completely disappeared from public sight about four months ago.

Palin: Head of her high school Fellowship of Christian Athletes and for many years a member of the Assemblies of God congregation, whose preachers have never been known to accuse the United States of deliberately spreading the AIDS virus. They remain in full public sight and can be seen every Sunday in churches across Alaska. A proud gun owner who has been known to cling only to the carcasses of dead caribou felled by her own aim.

Record of bipartisan achievement

Obama: Speaks movingly of the bipartisanship needed to end the destructive politics of 'Red America' and 'Blue America', but votes in the Senate as a down-the-line Democrat, with one of the most liberal voting records in congress.

Palin: Ridiculed by liberals such as John Kerry as a crazed, barely human, Dick Cheney-type conservative but worked wit Democrats in the state legislature to secure landmark anti-corruption legislation.

Former state Rep. Ethan Berkowitz -- a Democrat -- said 'Gov. Palin has made her name fighting corruption within her own party, and I was honored when she stepped across party lines and asked me to co-author her ethics white paper.'

On Human Life

Obama: Devoutly pro-choice. Voted against a bill in the Illinois state senate that would have required doctors to save the lives of babies who survived abortion procedures. The implication of this position is that babies born prematurely during abortions would be left alone, unnourished and unmedicated, until they died.

Palin: Devoutly pro-life. Exercised the choice proclaimed by liberals to bring to full term a baby that had been diagnosed in utero with Down Syndrome.

Now it's true there are other crucial differences. Sen Obama has appeared on Meet The Press every other week for the last four years. He has been the subject of hundreds of adoring articles in papers and news week lies and TV shows and has written two Emmy-award winning books.

Gov Palin has never appeared on Meet the Press, never been on the cover of Newsweek. She presumably feels that, as a mother of five children married to a snowmobile champion, who also happens to be the first woman and the youngest person ever to be elected governor of her state, she has not really done enough yet to merit an autobiography.

Then again, I'm willing to bet that if she had authored The Grapes of Wrath, sung like Edith Piaf and composed La Traviata , she still wouldn't have won an Emmy.

Fortunately, it will be up to the American people, and not their self-appointed leaders in Hollywood and New York, to determine who really has the better experience to be president.

Gerard Baker is US Editor and Assistant Editor of The Times of London. Email: gerard.baker@thetimes.co.uk

OBAMA'S NEW "CORPS" AND OTHER SERVICE PROGRAMS by Eugene Volokh

2008-09-08T20:16:00.003-04:00

Senator Barack Obama is proposing to remake American society in a way that the American public does not yet understand.

In his July 2, 2008, speech calling Americans to national service, Obama departed from his prepared remarks to announce his support for a mysteriously named “civilian national security force”:

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

Many commentators were stumped. What is this “civilian national security force” that must be as well funded as the military? Is it merely our existing civilian national security force, the militia, or perhaps the FBI and the CIA? Or was Obama referring to some thuggish new paramilitary street organization?

The answer to this mystery is not hidden. It is prominently displayed in Obama’s speeches and in the position papers on his website. Obama is referring, neither to the militia nor to a reincarnation of the Brownshirts, but rather to his unprecedented plans for universal community service for young people and for hugely increased funding for a myriad of voluntary service programs for the rest of us.

Earlier posts dealt with mandatory service for middle and high school students, voluntary service for college students, and college “Serve-Study” laid out in Obama’s speeches and his “Plan for Universal Voluntary Citizen Service.” This post covers his other service programs.

A. Green Job Corps, YouthBuild Program

Although Obama’s education proposals would effectively reach over 90% of the 47 million middle, high, and college students in the country (perhaps leaving out only private secondary school children), what about the 2 million young people who are out of school and unemployed or in prison? To reach young prisoners and the young unemployed, Obama will add a new Green Job Corps, “an energy-focused youth jobs program,” and expand by six-fold the YouthBuild Program, which teaches housing construction to low-income youth.

B. AmeriCorps VISTA, Experience Corps, Senior Corps

What about the middle-aged and older Americans not covered by these programs for the young? Obama plans to enlist retirees in his civilian national security force “on a large scale” and to expand service programs for baby-boomers and the elderly: AmeriCorps VISTA, the Experience Corps, and other Senior Corps programs.

C. Classroom Corps, Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans Corps, Homeland Security Corps, Peace Corps, Global Energy Corps

Among other “transformative” community service proposals, Obama will more than triple the number of full-time AmeriCorps members to 250,000 and distribute these new members among five new “Corps”:

1. a Classroom Corps for teachers and students;

2. a Health Corps to improve public health;

3. a Clean Energy Corps to conduct weatherization and renewable energy projects;

4. a Veterans Corps to assist veterans at institutions; and

5. a Homeland Security Corps to deal with emergencies.

Not only will “Barack Obama . . . double the Peace Corps to 16,000 by its 50th anniversary in 2011 and push Congress to fully fund this expansion,” but he will create a "Global Energy Corps to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions overseas and promote low-carbon and affordable energy solutions in developing nations.”

Barack Obama is proposing so many new “Corps” that he runs out of distinctive names for them. Note that his new Global Energy Corps is not to be confused with his new Clean Energy Corps and his new Green Job Corps.

D. Social Investment Fund Network, Social Entrepreneurship Agency for Nonprofits, Corporation for National and Community Service

But Obama is far from finished:

Barack Obama will create a Social Investment Fund Network, . . . a government-supported nonprofit corporation, similar to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, that will use federal seed money to leverage private sector funding to improve local innovation, test the impact of new ideas and expand successful programs to scale.

He promises us that this new corporation will not be just a single entity, but it will involve “a network of funds.”

That’s not all; he’s going to create a “Social Entrepreneurship Agency for Nonprofits”:

Barack Obama will a create an agency within the Corporation for National and Community Service dedicated to building the capacity and effectiveness of the nonprofit sector.

Note the tone of these proposals: none of this false modesty about proposing these new agencies and Corps to Congress and working for their passage. His Plan simply declares: “Barack Obama will create” this; “Barack Obama will create” that.

***

All these programs are just the ones listed on the service pages of his campaign website. This list doesn’t include his most expensive program: health care. All these add up to the biggest expansion of the US government since FDR. If Obama gets most of what he wants, he will make libertarians look more fondly on the relatively modest proposals of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon.

Saul Alinsky' son praises Obama for learning the Alinsky Marxist model well

2008-09-08T07:22:00.005-04:00

This editorial from Boston.com is from L. David Alinsky, son of Marxist and socialist Saul Alinsky, a community organizer. Obama has patterned himself after the Saul Alinsky model in everything he has done since arriving in South Chicago.

"ALL THE elements were present: the individual stories told by real people of their situations and hardships, the packed-to-the rafters crowd, the crowd's chanting of key phrases and names, the action on the spot of texting and phoning to show instant support and commitment to jump into the political battle, the rallying selections of music, the setting of the agenda by the power people. The Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style.

Barack Obama's training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness. It is an amazingly powerful format, and the method of my late father always works to get the message out and get the supporters on board. When executed meticulously and thoughtfully, it is a powerful strategy for initiating change and making it really happen. Obama learned his lesson well.

I am proud to see that my father's model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday."

L. DAVID ALINSKY

In his book "The Obama Nation", Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D. states, "Make no mistake about it: 'change' was always [Saul D.] Alinsky's code word for creating a socialist revolution, even if the methodology meant radicals would cut their hair, put on business suits, and run for political office. Alinsky taught [community] organizers [like Obama] to hide their true intentions in the words they spoke."

In his Rules for Radicals, Alinsky outlines his strategy in organizing, writing:

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families - more than seventy million people - whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default.."

Universal Healthcare – A Backdoor Approach by Paul R. Hollrah

2008-09-07T11:07:00.002-04:00

After living in our city home for two years, where my healthcare needs were provided by a Tulsa-based HMO, we decided in May of 2007 to sell our home in the city and live full time at our lake home, situated in a remote 720-acre gated community of beautiful lakes, rolling hills, and crystal clear streams… a place where it’s possible to catch dozens of bass or crappie in an hour or two of fishing, and the lake is just a short block from our front door.

Who would begrudge me the chance to live in a place like this? No one I can think of… except, of course, the Medicare bureaucrats in Washington who instructed my HMO that, since I’ve relocated across county lines, they are no longer permitted to manage my healthcare needs. And since I was unaware of the rule which requires Medicare recipients to register with a new HMO or PPO within 60 days of a change of residence (how silly of me not to invite a Medicare agent to our real estate closing), I became the subject of a raging dispute between the Medicare bureaucracy and my new insurer, Humana, over who, if anyone, would be allowed to manage my healthcare needs. They’ve been fighting for fifteen months now and they’re still at it.

Do the Washington bureaucrats who made that rule care one whit if I live or die? No, all they care about is keeping their government jobs so that they can have access to a taxpayer-financed healthcare program for the rest of their lives. The entire affair tells me that its time to get serious about solving our healthcare dilemma. So how do we get rid of waste and corruption, eliminate frivolous malpractice lawsuits, and improve the quality of and the access to healthcare, while reducing costs to make it affordable for everyone? That’s a very large order… as Hillary Clinton learned in 1993.

We can begin by recognizing that the hundreds of thousands of nameless, faceless paper-pushers who work for Medicare, Medicaid, the HMOs, and the health insurance companies, and the tens of thousands of lawyers who, like John Edwards, make millions suing doctors and hospitals, are pure non-productive overhead. They contribute nothing to anyone’s healthcare needs and they can easily be declared expendable. But how do we design a system in which all of those people disappear?

A longtime friend, a retired computer whiz who was one of the principal architects of the Sabre reservation system that is used by all of our domestic airlines, has suggested the perfect model for transforming our chaotic and outrageously expensive healthcare system into an efficient and affordable system. He suggests that we design the basic “architecture” of universal healthcare by first doing it to the lawyers… Oops! I should say, by converting our broken and outrageously expensive legal system into an effective and affordable justice system, which actually provides equal protection of the law for every citizen… as our Founding Fathers intended.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment contains what is referred to as the “equal protection” clause. It says, in part, that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Nowhere does it say that a citizen is guaranteed equal protection of the law… only if he/she has the financial resources to purchase the services of an intermediary who has gone to school to learn the intricacies of manipulating or circumventing the law.

Logically, the first step in developing a universal justice system would be to make all lawyers employees of the state in which they are licensed to practice. They and their legal assistants would be provided office facilities in state-owned office buildings and compensated out of funds appropriated by the legislatures. Those who choose to practice in the arena of federal law would be compensated under the federal Civil Service System. Salaries in the legal profession would be commensurate with those in other professions, such as science, engineering, journalism, academia, accounting, etc. There would be no more multi-million dollar contingency fees.

Those persons, organizations, or corporations involved in disputes requiring legal remediation would make application for representation to a government legal services office. Disputes of a civil nature (tort law) requiring simple finding of fact, arbitration, and determination of liability would be assigned to general practitioners, while those of a more complicated nature, requiring special knowledge and experience in specific areas of the law… taxes, corporate law, intellectual properties, anti-trust, etc… would be assigned to attorneys with the appropriate legal specialty.

To insure that the universal justice system would not become a burden to the taxpayers, and to insure that complainants would not use the system as a means of unfairly enriching themselves at the expense of others, the courts would operate under the British “loser pays” system wherein unsuccessful litigants would be required to pay court costs, in addition to any punitive and actual damages awarded by the court.

To avoid any repeats of the O.J. Simpson debacle, juries would be drawn from a pool of paid professionals (peers) comprised of retired senior citizens, all of whom would be required to demonstrate a record of at least fifty consecutive years free of conviction for any offense greater than a traffic violation.

The creation of a universal healthcare system, such as those recommended by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, could easily bankrupt the nation and destroy whatever positive aspects now exist. None of the plans trotted out by Democrats or Republicans hinge on creating economies, reducing waste and inefficiency, or eliminating non-productive overhead… a fatal flaw.

The lessons learned in transforming our dysfunctional and outrageously expensive legal system could later be applied to the transformation of our equally dysfunctional and outrageously expensive healthcare system. In a nation with far too many lawyers and far too few physicians, I vote we first practice on the lawyers.

Democrat Deceptions about Oil By Alan Caruba

2008-09-07T10:27:00.001-04:00

Lost amidst the many speeches delivered at the Democrat Convention was one by Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada. He is the Senate Majority Leader and, as such, controls the legislative agenda in that upper house of Congress. Harry Reid hates oil, but then, so does the Democrat Party.

The reason this nation is held hostage to other oil producing nations is that the Democrats, going back to President Jimmy Carter, have waged war on the American oil industry. This is especially important insofar as nations ruled by monarchies, corrupt, and communist governments, control 75% of the world’s oil.

Seldon B. Graham, Jr., the author of “Why Your Gasoline Prices Are High”, a petroleum engineer and attorney, recently noted that “It is no secret that Democrats are for renewable energy and are against U.S. oil and drilling for U.S. oil. But, Democrats conceal the fact that they have held this position for three decades. Democrats are not about to change their thirty year-old energy agenda.”

“Thirty years ago, Democrats selected ethanol as their renewable energy of choice. Their ethanol agenda has proven to be a total disaster. But, it is a well hidden disaster. Democrats continue to push ethanol as the renewable biofuel which will eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and our necessity to drill for US oil. It is surprising that Democrats have been able to fool so many Americans about ethanol for so long.”

Not only has the Democrat Party left us vulnerable to other oil producing nations, but its ethanol agenda has created vast imbalances in the world’s food supplies as corn is diverted from domestic use and as a factor in our agricultural exports.

If you had heard Sen. Reid, a man who has said, “Oil makes us sick. Coal makes us sick. Global warming makes us sick,” you would have heard him attack oil as the reason for all the woes of the world. “President Carter warned us about it in the 1970s when he proposed real solutions—conservation, fuel efficiency, and alternative fuels—to what he correctly named the ‘moral equivalent of war.’” President Carter, whose weak response to the taking of U.S. diplomats hostage by the Iranian Revolution led to the election of Ronald Reagan, was wrong then and he is wrong now.

So-called “clean energy”, wind and solar, provides barely one percent of the nation’s need for electrical power. It does so only because of the massive subsidies, like those for ethanol, the federal government provides, but Harry Reid could not resist characterizing the Bush administration as rife with “oil industry cronies.”

He made no reference, however, to the Democrat’s agriculture cronies. As Graham points out, “Democrats gave ethanol a 40¢ per gallon government subsidy in 1978. In 1980, Democrats gave insured loans to build ethanol plants.”

“Currently, the government subsidy is 51¢ per gallon through 2010. Last year, the government subsidy payout for ethanol was $3.3 Billion. The government subsidy will increase to $18.4 Billion in 2022. Ethanol is causing severe economic harm to the American economy, not even considering the increase in the cost of all food products made from corn.”

This is occurring as Americans struggle to find the money to fill their gas tanks and many worry about the price of oil to heat their homes this winter.

Sen. Reid praised the Democrat candidate for President, Barack Obama, saying, “He articulates a vision of energy independence that is comprehensive and based on sound science and sound policies…” This is a lie. No nation on Earth can be or is energy independent. Even Iran has to import gasoline because it lacks the refining capacity to provide it despite its own vast oil reserves.

America, too, needs more refineries, but the threat of “windfall profits” taxes has kept our oil industry from making the vast, billion-dollar investments necessary to build them and a matrix of environmental regulations has made it even more costly and difficult.

The Democrats and their choice for the next President have resisted permitting our own oil companies to drill for millions of barrels of known oil reserves in Alaska’s ANWR and have resisted lifting restrictions on exploration and extraction of oil on 85% of our nation’s continental shelf.

Instead Sen. Reid called for more wind power, geothermal, and solar power generation. He called for “smarter vehicles, more efficient and accessible mass transit, energy-efficient building codes…” These are the illusions the Democrats offer in contrast to realistic, pragmatic and vitally needed responses to our need for increased oil and natural gas production.

The Democrats offer the lie that such production would not impact the current price of oil or our needs for “ten years.” The mere mention of off-shore production caused the price of oil to drop when offered by Sen. McCain. The end of the ethanol debacle would lower the price of gas at the pump. Drill now. Drill here. That’s the answer.

Alan Caruba writes a weekly column posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com. He blogs daily at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com.

Are you better off today than when you were when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006?

2008-09-06T18:28:00.006-04:00

You have got to love the liberal Sarasota Herald-Tribune in their editorial, "On the brink of history".

In it they replay the Democrat talking points. The problem is Governor Sarah Palin has changed the game completely. In one single historic decision Senator McCain has made "reform" and "changing" Washington his campaign theme. With the pick of Governor Sarah Palin, Obama no longer owns, if he ever did, the "change" mantra. Change now belongs to two "mavericks" who have a record of shaking up the status quo and "good old boy network".

Senator Obama, with Senator Biden at his side, look like more of the same old big government, tax, and spend liberals. Fresh belongs to Sarah not Biden. Charismatic belongs to Sarah not Obama. Experience belongs to McCain not Obama. Reform belongs to Republicans not Democrats.

Obama and Biden talk about the middle class, Sarah Palin is the middle class.

Together Senator McCain and Governor Palin have real answers to the problems facing America as laid out by our liberal friends on the Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board. What the editorial board does not tell you is most of these problems, the eonomic meltdown, out of control federal spending, unemployment, a growing federal deficit and housing crisis all happened since 2006 when Democrats took control of Congress.

My question is: Are you better off today than you were when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006?

Since Democrats took control gas prices have gone thru the ceiling, federal spending has gotten worse, Democrats raised the federal debt ceiling (after promising they wouldn't), and Democrats failed to deal with the growing housing crisis while they controlled Congress. Their lack of legislative action has led to a financial market crisis and loss of consumer confidence in both the econmy and especially Congress. The Democratic Congress is a laughing stock.

The Herald-Tribune is quick to point out the unpopularity of President Bush but not the dismal failure of the Democratic controlled Congress. A Congress with the lowest approval rating in history. Just think, Democrats only took two years to destroy our economy. Think what they can do with four more years in control of Congress and the White House. Frightening isn't it?

Are you ready to turn over the ship of state to the least qualified, most partisan, and most devisive Democratic candidate ever? Obama, by rejecting Hillary Clinton as his VP choice and the most qualified person for that position, inextricably divided his party. If he cannot unite his own party how will he unite America? By selecting Joe Biden, a national security dove who told Isreal just get used to a nuclear armed Iran, he showed his lack of judgement. He also reinforced his credentials as an appeaser and equivicator on foreign policy by selecting Biden, who supported the nuclear freeze in the 1980s, a position supported by the KGB and one that history has proven wrong. By picking Biden, who voted against driving Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in 1991, Obama reinforced his credentials as weak on defense and prone to take miltary option off the table when it comes to a nuclear armed Iran.

However, Senator Biden is correct on one point, Senator Obama is not qualified and the job "does not lend itself to on the job training".

This is a historic election. The stakes cannot be higher.

This election boils down to this: Experience versus inexperience. Character and tested beliefs against a lack thereof. A record of accomplishment against no record at all, other than "present". Landmark legislation against no legislative accomplishment. A military leader against an anti-war activist and community organizer. I am comparing Governor Palin and Senator Obama.

Putting Senator McCain in the mix and the choice is clear - McCain/Palin 2008.

Obama Campaign improperly throws away American flags - put them in a dumpster

2008-09-06T14:28:00.004-04:00

According to the Denver Post, "This morning, Republicans tell me that a worker at Invesco Field in Denver saved thousands of unused flags from the Democratic National Convention that were headed for the garbage. Guerrilla campaigning. They will use these flags at their own event today in Colorado Springs with John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Before McCain speaks today, veterans will haul these garbage bags filled with flags out onto the stage — with dramatic effect, no doubt — and tell the story.

“What you see in the picture I sent you is less than half of total flags,” a Republican official emailed. “We estimate the total number to be around 12,000 small flags and one full size 3×5 flag.”

I’m not sure what the DNC was supposed to do with unused hand-flags, frankly. But the Republicans are obviously questioning someone’s patriotism here."

Obama and Democrats must know that you never, ever dispose of the American flag by dumping it into a trash bin. There is a proper way of disposing of the American flag and this is not it. Anyone see a pattern here?

Oprah: Five Reasons Why Palin Should Appear

2008-09-06T08:02:00.006-04:00

Oh! Oh! - Oprah decides that Governor Sarah Palin, Republican nominee for Vice President, will not appear on her show. This is amazing given that Oprah has been a champion of working women and is a working woman herself. Sarah Palin is now a historic figure and beacon to other women.

NewsDay.com has five reasons Oprah should have Governor Palin on her show before November 4, 2008. Here they are:

1.) To talk about motherhood, her family and Bristol; if you're really hung up on politics, O, then this doesn't have to be a "political" debriefing at all, per se, but a larger look at even more important issues, which your show claims to care about.

2.) It'd get a huge number. Hell yeah! Perhaps one of the biggest numbers in "O" history. This is a mercenary business, O, in case you've forgotten.

3.) It'd get the show back to that sweet spot of "relevance" and "news-worthiness." Wonderful to have all 150-or-so Olympians on Monday's season premiere, but the Olympics are old news; Palin is fresh news.

4.) Of course, it's O's right to support Obama in whatever forum she chooses, but she's simply too transcendent - her word - a cultural figure to pretend she's lil' ol' objective and non-political Oprah on her show, and yet Obama's most important supporter in the WORLD when she's not on screen. That's a silly artifice, transparent to all. Why not get Palin on and say, "OK, lady, I happen to think this guy walks on water. Now you tell me why he doesn't, and let's go at this." That would be great TV, and far better than a dreary debate between Palin and Joe Biden.

5.) O helped secure at least a million additional votes for Obama but probably lost hundreds of thousands of McCain supporter-viewers - if not more - to her show in the process. Here's her chance to say to everyone, "I have a right to support whomever I choose, and now to prove to you just how open-minded I am, here's the gun-toting mama from Alaska on the show."

ABC in an article asks the simple question, "Is Oprah biased?" I definately think so. She is also afraid she may like Sarah.

Whadda ya know, it's appeasement Joe by Greg Crosby

2008-09-06T06:31:00.003-04:00

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/ Besides being a blowhard, a proven plagiarist, an alleged crook and full-time party-hack attack dog, it now seems that Joe Biden has shown himself to be Obama's official Vice Appeaser when it comes to dealing with the world's evil empires. To that end, he will be the perfect compliment to Appeaser-in-Chief Barak Obama, should Obama get elected, God forbid. Biden told Israeli officials that they need to accept the idea Iran will acquire nuclear weapons.

Israel's Army Radio reported this week details of a 'behind closed doors' meeting that Biden, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had with Israeli officials a few years ago. He told them that diplomacy and sanctions would be futile against Iran. Biden went on to say that he opposed 'opening an additional military and diplomatic front' against Iran.

'Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran,' Army Radio quoted Biden as telling the Israelis. In other words, 'Oh well, you Israelis will just have to deal with annihilation! Hey, get over it, okay?' This is far worse than simply appeasement of Iran, this is throwing our friends under the bus, or rather the speeding train.

Least we forget, Iran's president Ahmadinejad has stated that he will wipe Israel off the map, making clear his use of weapons of mass destruction against the Jewish state. So you can bet that Obama's pick has not given the Israeli's any great confidence in what an Obama presidency would mean for them should they get into office.

Remember, Obama has said that he believed in direct negotiations with Iran. He thinks that sitting down at a table over croissants, or whatever the hell they eat in Iran, is the way to deal with people who proudly state loud and clear their intentions of obliterating an entire race of people. Yes, by all means, let's negotiate with insane imams who want to slit our throats. And just how do you 'negotiate' that? Okay, we'll allow you to slit the throats of just HALF of the population?

That great appeaser, Neville Chamberlain said 'Peace in our time' after he 'negotiated' with Hitler. Obama's slogan might be something like, 'Appeasement we can believe in.'

Another American put the issue of appeasement this way: 'Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy 'accommodation.' And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer — not an easy answer — but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.

'Alexander Hamilton said, 'A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.' Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.

'Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender.

'If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand — the ultimatum. You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, 'There is a price we will not pay.' There is a point beyond which they must not advance.'

The American who said those words was Ronald Reagan. It was a major part of his 'A Time for Choosing' speech in October 1964.

Forty-four years ago Reagan understood. He got it. In this election year John McCain gets it. Sarah Palin gets it. The Obama team just doesn't get it - they never will. But one thing is for sure - Israel will get it but good if Iran remains unbridled.

Joe Biden tells Israel that diplomacy and sanctions would be futile against Iran. I happen to agree with that. But when he goes on to say that he would not use military force to stop Iran in their development of nuclear weapons and that 'Israel must reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran,' then he is basically telling Israel to put their head down between their legs, say a little prayer, and drop dead. Way to go, Joe.

Do you know who Barack Obama's friends are?

2008-09-05T21:24:00.000-04:00

Victory In Iraq, WE HAVE WON! by Matt Bruce

2008-09-05T10:57:00.004-04:00

SARASOTA, FL (NS/WND) - What kind of headline would you expect newspapers nationwide totrumpet if America won the war in Iraq and destroyed al-Qaida there? Maybe something like this? "VICTORY IN IRAQ ! AL-QAIDA SMASHED!"

Perhaps even old-fashioned newsboys on the street corners, yelling"Extra, extra! Vic'try in Iraq ! Read all about it!"

Don't hold your breath.

You won't see such headlines in Americannewspapers or leading network news broadcasts – even though, believeit or not, by all credible accounts America has indeed won the war inIraq!You see, the "mainstream press" isn't really too excited about Americawinning the war right now. Why? It's just bad timing: Success in Iraq doesn't fit the media's overriding agenda for the next couple months,which is to further discredit George W. Bush and Republicans, and to assure that Barack ("We must end this failed war") Obama is elected president and as many Democrats as possible are installed in Congress, legislatures and statehouses nationwide.

Barack Obama and his running mate Joe Biden have already proven bytheir most recent statements that they haven't been watching orhearing the recent successes in Iraq. It's merely 'politics as usual' instead of giving a huge 'atta boy'and 'job well done' to those have been responsible for the majora chievements in Iraq. With the recent turnover of Anbar Province to Iraqi Forces, the mostviolent Province in Iraq, a significant milestone has been reached.

Unfortunately our 'agenda minded' mainstream news media has all but ignored this 'historic event' that once again proves beyond any doubts that the U.S. has and is winning the War In Iraq.

This reporter is dedicated to telling the whole story of America 'sstunning success in Iraq. Our brave Military men and women deserve to have the truth told about what they're doing to combat Terrorist'saround the World in the Global War on Terror...2008 has become known as "the year the media died," because of its astonishingly biased treatment of the two major presidential candidates.

Network anchor groupies tagging along with Obama on hisEuropean campaign trip while all but ignoring McCain; the New York Times running Obama's op-ed on Iraq, but refusing to run McCain's response the following week, and so on. Obama is dangerous! You just don't lay down your weapons and stop fighting an enemy that is sworn to your destruction while you try to 'negotiate' with them. This is naive and will result in even more deaths of our Military Troops and civilians who are the target of al-Qaida every day of the week.

And folks, who cares about the rights of an 'enemy combatant' capturedon a battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq who has been shooting at ourMilitary Troops? These people have NO rights when it is clear what their intentions arewhen caught while shooting at our Troops. They have NO rights and to think they do is absolutely WRONG!

It is extremely obvious that our mainstream media has chosen to keepAmericans in the dark when it comes to the clear successes of ourMilitary Troops. While things were going terribly and it looked like America was losing, news coverage was constant – and unrelentingly negative. Bad news – IED attacks, political setbacks, accusations of atrocities on the part of U.S. soldiers, statements by Democrat leaders condemning the "failed" Iraq war – led the evening news night after night. But recently, Americans haven't heard very much about Iraq. The reason is that the news is GOOD.

In fact, as documents and successes on the ground have shown, the U.S. is winning in Iraq – big-time and folks who was it that threw thousands of American Flags into trash cans in Denver at the recent Obama DNC Rally?It was mostly the Democrats who were there and supporters of Barack Obama. Is that the way we want to see our flag treated? I think not!

Here are some recent statements that have been overlooked:

Ryan Crocker , U.S. ambassador to Iraq , says, "Very clearly, the insurgency is in no position to overthrow the government or, really,even to challenge it."

An Associated Press story on America 's success in Iraq reveals: "InBaghdad , parks are filled every weekend with families playing andpicnicking with their children. That was unthinkable only a year ago,when the first, barely visible signs of a turnaround emerged."

Army Colonel Tom James, a brigade commander on his third combat tour in Iraq , says: "We've put out the forest fire. Now we're dealing with pop-up fires."

Gen. David Petraeus says, "Attacks in Iraq hit a four-year low in mid-May and … Iraqi forces were finally taking the lead in combat andon multiple fronts at once – something that was inconceivable a year ago."

Independent embedded journalist and former Green Beret Michael Yon, reporting from the front lines, says, "By my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won. Iraqi citizens who formerly were intimidated by al-Qaida atrocities into joining and protecting the terror group now take up arms and shoot al-Qaida terrorists in their midst, saying they're sick and tired of the terror and are not going to take it anymore. The turn about in Iraq should provide every American and every freedom-loving, peace-loving person in the world reason to cheer."

Ladies and gentlemen, ask yourself why the mainstream media would choose to march lock step with Barack Obama and repeat the untruth's of the huge successes made in Iraq.

The time has come to stand up for ourbrave American Military Troops and DEMAND the truth from our elected officials and our mainstream media. In short, if they don't stop lying about our successes in the War onTerror, VOTE THE BUMS OUT! Stop buying the NY Times, LA Times and quit watching MSNBC or any other Newscast that won't tell the TRUTH. Remember gasoline and diesel prices have SKYROCKETED under theleadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. That is a FACT theDemocrats can not deny...If they don't want to Drill HERE, Drill NOW, Build More REFINERIES and keep on doing the research for ALTERNATIVE ENERGY to get off our dependency on Foreign Oil so we'll all pay LESS, just VOTE THE BUMS OUT!!!!!

That's just the way I see things as of today.

Thanks,

Matt Bruce
Managing Editor
News Sarasota.com. Host Of "The Captain's AMERICA Radio Show".

The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime by Don O'Nesky

2008-09-04T16:40:00.005-04:00

In his book '100 People Who Are Screwing Up America,' Bernard Goldberg asked and answered an interesting question. "So, what is it that so many ordinary Americans want? It's actually pretty simple. We want a little more appreciation for the values that most of -- liberals as well as conservatives, Democrats as well as Republicans -- used to take for granted: civility, mutual respect, a semblance of decency and yes … a little old-fashioned love of country, too.

Is that asking too much?

I don't think that is asking too much. But every four years we have an election for President and we learn some Americans have lost, or never had, the "old-fashioned love of country." And every four years we talk about this being 'the most important election in our lifetime.' When we look back, it seems it was true for that particular time in our history. However, there is no doubt this election is more important than any previous election.

Democrats of the distant past would put national security ahead of partisan politics. But all that changed on November 4, 2003, when we learned the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee had circulated a staff memo outlining a plan to use top-secret intelligence information in an attempt to defeat George W. Bush in his 2004 reelection.

Thus, the 2004 election became the most important election of our lifetime. Yes, John Kerry was the Democrat candidate in 2004. He is a far out leftist and he gave aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war with a communist government. But he was not openly pursuing communism.

Those of us who remember the history of the USSR and China know that millions of their own citizens were slaughtered - imposing their Communist beliefs by force. Even today in China it is still a Communist dictatorship. Yet, as columnist Austin Hill points out:

"Candidate Barack Obama has put himself "on record" praising the communist government of China, suggesting that the United States should aspire to do as the communists do, and "invest" in our "infrastructure," the way the Chinese government has done in Beijing.

"Throughout his entire campaign, Obama has packaged inherently communistic economic ideas in contemporary, visceral, and at times inflammatory paradigms. Think that's too harsh? Think again. And also consider the communism that is a part of Obama's family lineage.

"Barack Hussein Obama Sr., Senator Obama's father, was a bureaucrat in the communist government of Kenya back in the 1960's. And while Kenya's government was embarking upon a pro-Western revolution and an embrace of free-market economic reforms, Obama staunchly opposed the changes, and sought to push Kenya in a more solidly communist direction.

"That was the communist father. Today, the Democrat son is proposing massive tax increases, and new social programs to be funded at the expense of businesses.

"There is clearly a connection between Senator Obama's stated ideals, and the ideals of communism, and the startling similarities between the father and son illustrate this."

Many people fled Communist countries and now enjoy freedom in the U.S. They know the difference and they opted for the country with "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness!"

Yes, 2008 is the most important election in our lifetime. For "a little old-fashioned love of country" we need to pull together as Americans, volunteering our time and money in the campaign, to ensure we elect John McCain as the next American President.

Don O'Nesky

AhMADinejad by Alan Caruba

2008-09-04T15:46:00.001-04:00

Mamoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, was bouncing off the walls in August. Hardly a day went by without his getting crazier and crazier about Zionism, Israel, and Jews in general. The last guy who talked like this was Adolf Hitler and he started World War Two.

Here’s just a sample of Ahmadinejad’s ravings:

“About 2,000 organized Zionists and 7,000 to 8,000 agents of Zionism have dragged the world into turmoil.” Last time I checked most of the turmoil is being generated by the likes of the Russians, al Qaeda murderers, Hezbollah, Hamas, and, oh yes, Iran.

I have no idea where Mamoud came up with his numbers, but it is safe to say that most citizens of Israel can be called Zionist insofar Zionism was a movement to reestablish Israel. I know a lot of Christians who proudly call themselves Zionists, so I think Mamoud is off by a couple of million.

“The era of the Zionists has come to an end, and I recommend that the leaders of Europe and the U.S. not submit to the Zionists. If they help them, they will be harmed.” Whoa! Anybody hear a threat to nuke Europe and the U.S. in this statement? I do. And I am thinking, “preemptive strike.”

“We will witness dismantling of the corrupt regime (Israel) in a very near future,” said Mamoud during World Mosque Week in August. He went on to say that Israel is “the main cause of all corruption and wickedness in the contemporary era.” He has likewise described Israel as “a dirty microbe”, “a wild animal”, and “the West’s scarecrow.”

Mamoud is not just talking about Israel. He’s really talking about Jews because, like a lot of Muslims, he has absorbed all the anti-Semitic teachings of the Koran. It’s worth noting that Mohammad also mocked Christianity and committed all Muslims to impose Islam on the world.

But Mamoud wasn’t finished. He went on to advise “writers in the West” to avoid referring to the Holocaust, the extermination of six million Jews by the Nazi regime, because that would be “tantamount to backing the identity of the Zionists.” Mamoud doesn’t believe the Holocaust ever happened or so he says.

“Soon the world will celebrate the elimination of the oppressing Zionism.”

So much for the wit and wisdom of Mamoud Ahmadinejad circa August 2008.

What one can swiftly discern from this selection of comments is that Ahmadinejad is doing a poor job of hinting that an attack on Israel is coming. He may just have in mind something similar to the Hezbollah attack out of Lebanon in July-August 2006 or a combined attack with Hamas.

Or he may be saying that, as soon as Iran can put nuclear warheads on top of missiles, it will not only destroy Israel, but threaten Europe as well.

I will leave the parsing and analysis of Ahmadinejad’s ravings to people who do this for a living. I am sure that August alone gave them cause to send a number of lively intelligence reports for inclusion in President Bush’s daily briefings.

For my part, though, I’m thinking the sooner Israel and/or the United States blows Iran’s nuclear facilities off the face of the Earth, the better.

We don’t need to invade Iran or occupy it. We just need to send a message that we have read the history of World War II and we don’t want to repeat the errors of the past by not believing what our enemies are saying.

I have no ill feelings for the people of Iran. They are descended from an ancient civilization and they deserve to be liberated from the insane ayatollahs that hold them captive to their primitive and barbaric interpretation of Islam.

What the world must rightly fear is the madness of Ahmadinejad and his cronies. He lives for the return of the mythical Twelfth Imam and he believes the only way that can be brought about is with the maximum spilling of blood.

Just because America, Europe, Israel and a host of other nations may want peace does not mean they will permitted to have it. When there’s a nut loose in the neighborhood, he needs to be removed from the streets.

Alan Caruba writes a weekly column posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com. He blogs daily at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com.

CAIR Threatens Muslims With $25,000 Penalty by David Gaubatz

2008-09-04T15:26:00.003-04:00

September 3, 2008 – Washington, DC: The Mapping Sharia Project, a research project sponsored by the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE), is issuing an alert that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a self-described public interest civil rights law firm, may have engaged in criminal fraud.

Mapping Sharia calls for a full investigation by the appropriate government agencies. The victims of this fraud may also be due compensation for their losses and suffering. Reliable sources have produced solid information that Morris Days, the Manager for Civil Rights at the CAIR MD/VA chapter, who was widely publicized by CAIR as one of its civil rights attorneys, was in fact not an attorney, and failed to provide services for Muslim American clients who came to CAIR for assistance and who paid for Days’ services. Not only has CAIR not revealed the facts about Days and his fraudulent, criminal behavior, but as of yesterday, September 2, 2008, the CAIR National office in Washington, D.C. continued to post articles at its website naming Days as an attorney. This amounts to a de facto cover-up of CAIR’s involvement in this criminal affair and a perpetuation of the fraud with CAIR’s assistance.

At the same time that CAIR promoted Days as a lawyer while knowing he was not, it continued to solicit donations for its “legal” representation of Muslims in civil rights cases. Prospective plaintiffs, who may have been victimized by CAIR’s fraud in the Morris Days affair, as well as any donors to CAIR who feel they have donated to CAIR under false pretenses thinking it was a legitimate and law abiding public interest law firm, should recognize that CAIR controls an extensive real estate asset portfolio, either owned directly by CAIR or by CAIR related companies. These assets are attachable and fair game for damages claims.

The evidence for the alert has been provided from Muslim American sources. A significant body of evidence has been obtained from these sources, which include individual citizens in several states, as well as Muslim American leaders who no longer support CAIR. Copies of pertinent documents are provided for download as pdf files at the Mapping Sharia website and provided here as links:

CAIR promotions of Morris Days as a lawyer: http://www.mappingsharia.us/uploads/application/24.pdf

CAIR Release Form for Morris Days’ “clients”:
http://www.mappingsharia.us/uploads/application/28.pdf

CAIR Real Estate Portfolio Documents (Deeds for CAIR, Greater Washington LLC and Zahara Investment Corporation):
http://www.mappingsharia.us/uploads/application/29.pdf

David Gaubatz, Director of Operations, Mapping Shariah Project
contact@mappingsharia.us

Governor Sarah Palin's Speech last night at the Republican National Convention

2008-09-04T11:00:00.001-04:00

The best man turned out to be a woman.

Nothing else needs to be said. Palin Power!

Newt Gingrich on Senator Lieberman and Governor Palin

2008-09-03T16:22:00.002-04:00

This is a great interview with MSNBC reporter Ron Allen. Newt is so eloquent and straight to the point.

About Senator Joe Biden - Things you may not know

2008-09-03T10:05:00.003-04:00

This excellent review of Senator Biden's record and positions on key issues is provided by DiscoverTheNetworks.org.

Longtime Democratic U.S. Senator from Delaware
Vice Presidential candidate in 2008
Believes that global warming is caused by industrial and automotive pollution, and that broad and immediate action must be taken to curb its effects
Has consistently opposed all bills seeking to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration
Received an 8 percent rating from the U.S. Border Control, signifying that his voting record on immigration issues reflects an open-borders stance
Supports affirmative action

Joseph Biden, Jr. is a senior U.S. Senator from Delaware. He has served as Chairman of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. On August 23, 2008, Barack Obama announced that Biden would be his running mate for the U.S. presidential election in November.

Biden was born in November 1942 in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and grew up in New Castle County, Delaware. He graduated from Archmere Academy in Claymont, Delaware in 1961. In 1965 he earned his undergraduate degree (with majors in history and political science) from the University of Delaware in Newark, and in 1968 he earned his Juris Doctor degree from Syracuse University College of Law. Biden then found work as a public defender in Wilmington, Delaware.

In 1972 Biden ran successfully for one of Delaware's seats in the U.S. Senate, beating Republican incumbent J. Caleb Boggs. Prior to his swearing in, Biden's then-wife Neilia Hunter and the couple's three children were involved in an automobile accident. Neilia and daughter Naomi died from the injuries they sustained, while Biden's two sons, Beau and Hunter, eventually made full recoveries. When Biden was sworn in to office at his son's hospital bedside in Wilmington, Delaware on January 5, 1973, he became the fifth-youngest senator in American history. Biden would win each of his reelection bids -- in 1978, 1984, 1990, 1996, and 2002 -- with relative ease, becoming the longest-serving U.S. Senator in Delaware's history.

Biden became a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January 1975, and of the Senate Judiciary Committee two years later.

On June 17, 1977, Biden married schoolteacher Jill Tracy Jacobs.

In 1979 Senator Biden shared President Jimmy Carter's belief that the fall of the Shah in Iran and the advent of Ayatollah Khomeini's rule represented progress for human rights in that country. Throughout the ensuing 444-day hostage crisis, during which Khomeini's extremist acolytes routinely paraded the blindfolded American captives in front of television cameras and threatened them with execution, Biden opposed strong action against the mullahs and called for dialogue.

Throughout the 1980s, Biden opposed President Ronald Reagan's proactive means of dealing with the Soviet Union. Biden instead favored détente -- which, in practice, meant Western subsidies that would have enabled the moribund USSR to remain solvent much longer than it ultimately did.

Biden first ran for U.S. President in 1987. He was considered a strong contender for the Democratic Party's nomination, but in April of that year controversy descended on Biden's campaign when he told several lies about his academic record in law school. In an April 3, 1987 appearance on C-SPAN, a questioner asked Biden about his law school grades. In response, an angry Biden looked at his questioner and said, "I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do." He then stated that he had gone "to law school on a full academic scholarship -- the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship"; that he had "ended up in the top half" of his law school class; and that he had "graduated with three degrees from college."

But each of those claims proved to be untrue. In reality, Biden had attended law school on a half scholarship that was based on financial need; he had graduated 76th in a class of 85; and he had earned only two college degrees -- in history and political science. "I exaggerate when I'm angry," Biden would later concede, "but I've never gone around telling people things that aren't true about me."

Then, in August 2007 Biden plagiarized a portion of a speech made by British politician Neil Kinnock. Before long, revelations surfaced that Biden also had plagiarized extensive portions of an article in law school and consequently had received a grade of "F" for the course. (He eventually was permitted to retake the course, and the failure was removed from his transcript.)

As a result of these embarrassing examples of dishonesty, Biden withdrew from the presidential campaign on September 23, 1987 and resumed his duties as a U.S. Senator.

Following is an overview of Biden's policy positions and his voting record on key pieces of legislation during his years in the Senate.

Education

Senator Biden has received a 91 percent rating from the National Education Association(NEA), indicating that more than nine-tenths of his votes have been satisfactory to America's largest labor union. Like the NEA, Biden opposes merit pay for teachers and a voucher system which would permit parents to redirect a portion of their tax dollars away from the public schools and toward private-school tuition for their children. He voted "No" on a voucher proposal in 1997.

Environment

Biden believes that global warming is caused by industrial and automotive pollution, and that broad and immediate action must be taken to curb its effects. In 2007 he co-sponsored the Boxer-Sanders Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act, perhaps the most stringent climate bill in the history of the Senate. Labeling the U.S. as the world's "largest emitter of greenhouse gases," the bill sought to implement a cap-and-trade system requiring the U.S. to reduce its emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Biden also has called for the raising of fuel-economy standards for automobiles to an average of 40 miles per gallon by 2017.

Energy

Biden has consistently opposed all bills seeking to open Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. In 2006 he voted against a bill "providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico." And in 2007 he voted against a bill that would have allowed for natural gas exploration and extraction off the coast of Virginia.

Abortion

His Roman Catholic beliefs notwithstanding, Biden believes that abortion should remain legal in the United States, and that the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision should not be overturned. "The best policy for our country on the question of abortion is a policy of government neutrality," he says. "Put another way: I do not believe that the government should be involved in making judgments on whether a woman can, or should have an abortion, or -- if she chooses to do so -- in paying for that abortion."

In 1997 Biden voted against the continuance of a policy stipulating that federal health insurance plans would not pay for abortions except in cases where the woman's life was in danger or the pregnancy was the result of incest or rape.

In 2004 Biden voted against a bill that would have attached criminal penalties to the killing or injuring of a fetus while carrying out a violent crime on a pregnant woman.

In July 2006 he voted against parental notification laws and against punishing those who would transport minors across state lines to get an abortion.

In 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999 and 2003, Biden voted in favor of bills to prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Gun Rights

Biden has received an "F" rating from the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund, for his consistent record of voting to limit the rights of gun owners and manufacturers. He also has voted in favor of exposing the firearms industry to potentially crippling lawsuits.

Counter-Terrorism

In 2007 Biden voted against a bill permitting the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General "to authorize foreign intelligence acquisition concerning those reasonably believed to be outside of the U.S., provided that written certification is presented that the procedure does not constitute electronic surveillance under existing law, the surveillance is made with the assistance of a communications provider, and the significant purpose of the acquisition is to obtain foreign intelligence information."

Immigration

Biden has voted "Yes" on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security, and "Yes" on allowing more foreign workers into the U.S. for farm work.

In 2006 he voted in favor of erecting a fence on the U.S./Mexico border, but later explained that for him, the vote was an anti-drug trafficking vote, not one aimed at curbing illegal immigration. "I voted for the fence related to drugs," Biden said. "A fence will stop 20 kilos of cocaine coming through that fence. It will not stop someone climbing over it or around it."

In 2007 Biden voted against a bill to prohibit illegal aliens convicted of serious crimes -- such as aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or the illegal purchase or sale of firearms -- from gaining legal status.

That same year, he voted to scrap a point-based immigration system (i.e., a system which seeks to ensure that people with skills that society needs are given preference for entry into the United States). He advocates instead a system focusing on the reunification of family members, even if that means permitting the foreign relatives of illegal aliens to join the latter in America.

Biden also has voted in favor of continuing to send federal funds to sanctuary cities; against requiring a photo ID from people registering to vote; and "No" on declaring English the official language of the United States.

Biden has received an 8 percent rating from the U.S. Border Control (a nonprofit lobbying organization dedicated to ending illegal immigration and securing our America's borders), signifying that his voting record reflects an open-borders stance.

Taxes

Throughout his Senate career, Biden has, with few exceptions, generally supported higher taxes, though he has voted against specific tax increases which were advanced by Republican presidents.

When President Reagan pushed for across-the-board-tax cuts in 1981, Biden twice voted for bills that would have watered down Reagan's proposal. When the full Reagan tax cuts came up for a final vote, however, Biden voted in favor of them, as did 88 of his 99 Senate colleagues.

In March 1983 Biden voted for a $40 billion increase in Social Security taxes.

In June 1986 Biden supported Democrat Senator George Mitchell's effort to raise the top income tax rate to 35 percent.

In October 1990 Biden voted against President George H.W. Bush's proposed 5-year, $164-billion tax hike. That same year, he supported an amendment sponsored by then-Senator Al Gore to raise the income-tax rate on middle-class Americans (i.e., married couples earning more than $78,400 a year and individuals earning more than $47,050) from 28 percent to 33 percent.

In August 1993 Biden voted in favor of Bill Clinton's proposed $241 billion in new taxes over five years.

In May 2001 Biden voted against both of President George W. Bush's major tax cut proposals -- one for $350 billion and another for $1.35 trillion over a ten-year period.

In all but three of the 16 years spanning 1992 to 2007, the non-partisan National Taxpayers Union (NTU) -- which grades each member of Congress on taxing and spending issues -- gave Biden an "F." In 2007, NTU gave him a 4 percent rating and ranked him 94th out of 100 senators.

The First Gulf War

In 1990 Biden opposed President George H.W. Bush's decision to forcibly drive Saddam Hussein's army of occupation out of Kuwait.

Iraq War (2003)

Prior to the Iraq War, Biden consistently spoke out about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. "He's a long-term threat and a short-term threat to our national security," Bidensaid of Hussein in 2002. "… We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world." Also in 2002, Biden said: "Saddam must be dislodged from his weapons or dislodged from power."

Consequently, in October 2002 Biden voted "Yes" on authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. He continued to express his resolve on the matter in 2004, emphatically stating: "I voted to give the President the authority to use force in Iraq. I still believe my vote was just."

In 2005 Biden said this to the Brookings Institution: "We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq. I think that would be a gigantic mistake. Or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out -- equally a mistake."

In April 2007 Biden appeared with the late newsman Tim Russert and defended Vice President Dick Cheney and the international community's assessment of Saddam's WMD (weapons of mass destruction) program. "[E]veryone in the world thought he had them [WMD]…. This was not some, some Cheney, you know, pipe dream."

But later in 2007, while running for the Democratic presidential nomination, Biden said that his 2002 vote authorizing the use of force against Iraq "was a mistake" that he regretted. "I vastly underestimated the incompetence of this administration," Biden said during a 2007 Democratic primary debate in Carson City, Nevada. Civil Rights

Biden is a defender of affirmative action (i.e., race-, ethnicity-, and sex-based preferences) in academia and the business world. He was also a supporter of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

America's Moral Standing in the World

In 2004 Biden told an audience at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that the U.S. had no moral authority to preach about the need for democracy in the Middle East. "We don't have much of a democracy ourselves," he said mockingly. "Remember our own presidential election; remember Florida!" -- a reference to the disputed ballot recount in 2000.

Bid for the Presidency

As early as June 2005, Biden first made public his intention to seek the nomination for U.S. President in 2008. On January 31, 2007 he officially entered the presidential race. His campaign failed to gain any traction, however, and on January 3, 2008 he withdrew from the race, which by then was being dominated by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Prior to his selection as Barack Obama's running mate in August 2008, Biden had been consistently effusive in his praise of John McCain, the Republican Senator who was running for President against Obama. Conversely, Biden had often been critical of Obama and his judgment on matters of import:

In a February 2007 interview with the New York Observer, Biden expressed doubts that American voters would elect "a one-term, a guy who has served for four years in the Senate." "I don't recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic," Biden added.
Around that same time, Biden, in an interview with the Huffington Post, said: "The more people learn about them [Obama and Hillary Clinton] and how they handle the pressure, the more their support will evaporate."
In August 2007, Biden was asked during a debate if he stood by his previous criticism of Obama's inexperience when he said that "the presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training." Biden responded, "… I stand by that statement."
In December 2007, Biden said in a campaign ad: "When this campaign is over, political slogans like 'experience' and 'change' [the latter was Obama's signature slogan] will mean absolutely nothing. The next president has to act."