It's a Dark Day in America - Socialism Wins the White House

In my opinion, it's a very dark day in America. With the majority of Electoral College votes being called for Barack Obama, it looks like socialism, liberalism and extremism will win the White House. Right now, Fox News Channel and NBC both show: Obama = 220 / McCain = 138.

For the record, I could care less what color Barack Obama's skin is. What I do care about is his record -- and he is clearly the most liberal Senator in recent history. He has sold the American people a lie -- that he is moderate, non-partisan and prepared for the Oval Office. As much as I hate that innocent citizens will suffer, the vindictive side of me hopes we (America) gets what we deserve for voting socialism into the White House.

I have to give 'em this much -- The Democrats and liberals (assuming there is a difference) did their job. They got the vote out -- and seem to have won many key elections across America. Unfortunately, the trend is pretty clear that Barack Obama will win the presidency. Just thinking about the bitchy attitude of Michelle Obama as our First Lady makes me want to puke. Sorry, but that's how I feel about her. And then there's the incredulous Joe Biden as Vice President. Where has integrity in the highest echelons of our government gone?

In my state, it looks like John McCain won the electoral vote, Kay Hagan (D) has beat Lady Dole and Beverly Perdue (D) will be our next governor (beating Pat McCrory). 

It's 10:45pm ET here in North Carolina. I don't see any big surprises coming, so it's time for bed. Before I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord our country to keep. We're going to need it!

Teen Pregnancy Linked to Watching Sexy TV Shows

Article from FoxNews.com
Groundbreaking research suggests that pregnancy rates are much higher among teens who watch a lot of TV with sexual dialogue and behavior than among those who have tamer viewing tastes.

"Sex and the City," anyone? That was one of the shows used in the research. The new study is the first to link those viewing habits with teen pregnancy, said lead author Anita Chandra, a Rand Corp. behavioral scientist. Teens who watched the raciest shows were twice as likely to become pregnant over the next three years as those who watched few such programs.

Previous research by some of the same scientists had already found that watching lots of sex on TV can influence teens to have sex at earlier ages. Shows that highlight only the positive aspects of sexual behavior without the risks can lead teens to have unprotected sex "before they're ready to make responsible and informed decisions," Chandra said.

The study was released today in the November issue of Pediatrics. It involved 2,003 12- to 17-year-old girls and boys nationwide questioned by telephone about their TV viewing habits in 2001. Teens were re-interviewed twice, the last time in 2004, and asked about pregnancy. Among girls, 58 became pregnant during the follow-up, and among boys, 33 said they had gotten a girl pregnant.

Participants were asked how often they watched any of more than 20 TV shows popular among teens at the time or which were found to have lots of sexual content. The programs included "Sex and the City," "That '70s Show" and "Friends." Pregnancies were twice as common among those who said they watched such shows regularly, compared with teens who said they hardly ever saw them. There were more pregnancies among the oldest teens interviewed, but the rate of pregnancy remained consistent across all age groups among those who watched the racy programs.

Chandra said TV-watching was strongly connected with teen pregnancy even when other factors were considered, including grades, family structure and parents' education level. But the study didn't adequately address other issues, such as self-esteem, family values and income, contends Elizabeth Schroeder, executive director of Answer, a teen sex education program based at Rutgers University. "The media does have an impact, but we don't know the full extent of it because there are so many other factors," Schroeder said.

But Bill Albert, chief program officer at the nonprofit National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, praised the study and said it "catches up with common sense."

"Media helps shape the social script for teenagers. Most parents know that. This is just good research to confirm that," Albert said. Still, U.S. teen pregnancies were on a 15-year decline until a 3 percent rise in 2006, the latest data available. Experts think that could be just be a statistical blip. And Albert noted that the downward trend occurred as TV shows were becoming more sexualized, confirming that "it's not the only influence."

Psychologist David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family, cited data suggesting only about 19 percent of American teens say they can talk openly with a trusted adult about sex. With many schools not offering sex education, that leaves the media to serve as a sex educator, he said. "For a kid who no one's talking to about sex, and then he watches sitcoms on TV where sex is presented as this is what the cool people do," the outcome is obvious, Walsh said. The message to parents is to talk to their kids about sex long before children are teens. Parents also should be watching what their kids watch and helping filter messages sex-filled shows are sending, he said.

Obama Campaign's Kevin Jennings' Real Work

For anyone who thought I lost my mind or was exaggerating when I said that GLSEN wants to force kindergartners to embrace and support homosexuality, take a look at the following article from FoxNews.com:

School Clams Up on 'Gay' Pledge Cards Given to Kindergartners

Yep, the card used by the kindergarten teacher is produced by GLSEN, the group Kevin Jennings founded -- the same Kevin Jennings who works for the Barack Obama campaign.

Are these the values you want your President to promote?

Thanks to Protect Marriage California for providing the scan of the "pledge card".

Real Christians CANNOT Vote for Obama

I'm going to come right out and say it - Real Christians CANNOT vote for Barack Obama! Although I'm not THE person to judge a person's commitment to Christianity, I believe (with everything in me) that any true, Bible-believing, God-fearing, Jesus-worshiping Christian cannot -- under their beliefs and faith -- vote for Barack Obama. Let's look at a few reasons why -- whether black, white, red, yellow or green -- NO real Christian can, in good faith, vote for Obama...

ABORTION
Let's face it. Obama is on record voting for abortion, even the most heinous of procedures, partial-birth abortion. He even voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act -- which would save lives of botched abortions -- those where the baby lives to be born. Obama's vote would have thos children murdered as well.

HOMOSEXUALITY
The Bible is clear - Homosexuality is a sin. Never mind the politically correct bunk you've been brainwashed into believing. Homosexuality is wrong. Therefore gay marriage is wrong. Yet, Barack Obama not only supports homosexuality, he wants our five and six year old children to be forced into celebrating and embracing homosexuality. He even hired one of the gay agenda's lowest lowlifes, Kevin Jennings, to work for his campaign.

ISRAEL & JEWS
Although the story has been told several times over the past two years, it is finally catching traction only this week -- B. Hussein Obama's friendship with Rashid Khalidi, a known terrorist apologist and anti-Israeli pundit, along with several others.

SOCIALISM
Call it what you want, but when you spread the wealth, tax the people and remove capitalistic and democratic values from a society in the way Barack Obama plans to "change" America, it's socialism.

CONCLUSION
As such, any person who calls themselves a Christian would be "a house divided" if they were to vote for Obama. As the Bible says, we cannot serve two masters. From his words, deeds and proposed policies, we KNOW that Barack Obama cannot truly be a Christian. Therefore, he must be serving someone other than the God of the Holy Bible and Christianity.

Therefore, real Christians cannot vote for Obama -- and still say they are living by their beliefs and faith. The two are incongruous.

LA Times 'suppressing' Obama link to anti-Israel professor

Conservative author and counterterrorism expert Andy McCarthy is criticizing the Los Angeles Times for not releasing a 2003 videotape it obtained of Barack Obama giving a toast to an anti-Israel professor who formerly served as a spokesman for late PLO leader Yasser Arafat. The LA Times is being accused of "suppressing" a 2003 tape of a farewell gathering in Chicago for then University of Chicago Mideast studies professor Rashid Khalidi, who is a longtime virulent critic of Israel and has justified Palestinian terrorist attacks against the Jewish state. Barack Obama paid a special tribute to Khalidi that night and noted that he and Michelle were frequent dinner companions of the Khalidis.

Former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn were also in attendance at the Khalidi bash. While Obama and Ayers served on the board of the left-wing Woods Fund together, they underwrote the Arab-American Action Network (AAAN) to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. The anti-Israel group was started by Khalidi and his wife Mona.

Andy McCarthy, the chairman of the Center for Law and Counterterrorism at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the legal affairs editor at National Review, says it is obvious why the LA Times is not releasing the tape of the Khalidi bash.

"If either John McCain or Sarah Palin or another prominent Republican or prominent conservative had been at a party, basically in honor of somebody who is a terror apologist, at which terrorists were front and center in attendance, one can't even imagine the thought that the mainstream media, including the LA Times, would not only release that tape but actually fill us for days if not weeks with story after story about the gory details of it,"

This is yet another example, according to McCarthy, of the mainstream press "covering up" an event that is embarrassing and difficult for Obama to explain.

See also:
Obama's Ties to Funding Terrorists
Barack Obama's Friends
Photo from freerepublic.com

Obama's connection to GLSEN

Excerpts from article by Marcia Segelstein

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has had relationships with some questionable characters. Bill Ayers, unrepentant former domestic terrorist, is one. Despite evidence to the contrary -- and with the mainstream media turning a blind eye -- Obama has succeeded in dismissing his association as minimal and meaningless. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is another. While there's no denying the fact that Wright was Obama's pastor, and that Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children, Obama managed to distance himself from Wright after the fact, claiming he was no longer the man he'd once known.

But there is another questionable character associated with Obama, and there's no denying the relationship this time. This questionable character is Kevin Jennings. Jennings is the founder of GLSEN -- the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network. ...

Courtesy of GLSEN's website, you can get a list of "recommended books" for every age group, starting with kindergarten, to introduce children to the subject of homosexuality.

In Massachusetts, GLSEN is infamous for what's become known as "fistgate." On March 25, 2000, GLSEN sponsored, along with the Massachusetts Department of Education, a taxpayer-funded conference. Its goals included putting Gay/Straight Alliances into more Massachusetts schools, and expanding homosexual teaching into lower grades. Many gay-friendly teachers (who received development credits for being there) and administrators attended, along with students who were bussed in from their home districts.

One particular workshop was listed as a "youth only, ages 14-21" session, run by three self-professed gay presenters. Thanks to two members of a local Parents' Rights Coalition who secretly taped the session, we know exactly what happened. One of the teachers asked the assembled students what "fisting" meant. Following a descriptive definition, another of the adult presenters proceeded to demonstrate the proper formation of the hand for this sexual act. After a student of about 16 said that it didn't sound very appealing, the third adult presenter calmed his concerns. This technique, she explained, "often gets a really bad rap," and that it was "an experience of letting somebody into your body that you want to be that close and intimate with." Other homosexual acts were discussed and described in detail.

Here's some of what Marjorie King wrote about GLSEN for City Journal back in 2003:

"GLSEN often presents itself as a civil rights organization, saying it is only after 'tolerance' and 'understanding' for a victim group...But it is, in fact, a radical organization that...seeks to transform the culture and instruction of every public school, so that children will learn to equate 'heterosexism' – the favoring of heterosexuality as normal – with other evils like racism and sexism and will grow up pondering their sexual orientation and the fluidity of their sexual identity... One of the major goals of GLSEN...is to reform public school curricula and teaching so that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender – or LGBT – themes are always central and always presented in the approved light."

Jennings himself spoke about the importance of "framing" the debate in a speech he gave in March of 1995 to the Human Rights Campaign Fund Leadership Conference called "Winning the Culture War." Here's a small portion of what he said:

"In Massachusetts the effective reframing of this issue was the key to the success of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. We immediately seized upon the opponent's calling card – safety – and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students' safety by creating a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems, and suicide are common. Titling our report 'Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth,' we automatically threw our opponents onto the defensive and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling from day one."

Kevin Jennings wrote the foreword to the book Queering Elementary Education, which offers essays on "Locating a Place for Gay and Lesbian Themes in Elementary Reading, Writing and Talking." (Interestingly enough, Bill Ayers wrote a glowing blurb for the back of the book.)

Kevin Jennings now works for the Obama campaign, as fundraising co-chair for the LGBT community.

• Does Obama support the radical homosexual agenda that Jennings and GLSEN, the organization he founded, have already managed to impose in public schools across the country?

• Would Obama defend the GLSEN-sponsored conference at which teenagers were given explicit descriptions of homosexual acts?

The American public has a right to know.

The Sub-prime Crisis Was Created by Democrats

Partially from a commentary on PoliticUsUSA.com

So many people are turning a blind eye to the fact that the Democrats, especially Bill Clinton, Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, are responsible for the present state of our economy.

1977: President Jimmy Carter (D) signs the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) into law. The law pressured financial institutions to extend home loans to those who would otherwise not qualify. The Premise: Home ownership would improve poor and crime-ridden communities and neighborhoods in terms of crime, investment, jobs, etc. Results: Statistics show that CRA has not helped decrease crime nor significantly improved so-called poor communities.

1992: Representative Jim Leach (R- Iowa) warned of the danger that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were changing from being agencies of the public at large to money machines for the principals and the very few who held stock in the agencies.

1993: President Bill Clinton's administration extensively rewrote Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's rules turning the quasi-private, mortgage-funding firms into semi-nationalized monopolies dispensing cash and loans to large Democratic voting blocks. Both were also growing into entities handing out favors, jobs and contributions to political allies. This potent mix led inevitably to corruption -- and now the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

1994: Despite warnings, Bill Clinton unveiled his National Home Ownership Strategy, which broadened the CRA in ways Congress never intended.

1995: President Bill Clinton ordered Robert Rubin's Treasury Department to rewrite the rules of home finance. Robert Rubin's group reworked rules, forcing banks to satisfy quotas for sub-prime and minority loans in order to receive a satisfactory CRA rating. The rating was key to expansion or mergers for banks. Loans began to be made on the basis of ethnicity -- specifically minority loans were approved almost carte blanche.

1997 - 1999: Bill Clinton , bypassing the newly Republican led Congress, enlisted Andrew Cuomo (then Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) to assist in allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to get into the sub-prime market in a BIG way. Led by Representative Barney Frank (D) and Senator Chris Dodd (D), Congress doubled-down on the risk by easing capital limits and allowing the agencies to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments vs. 10% holdings for normal banks. Since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could borrow at lower rates than commercial banks, their enterprises' boomed!
With incentives in place, banks poured billions of dollars of loans into poor communities, often "no documentation", "no income verification" -- requiring no money down and no verification of income.
Worse still was the cronyism: 384 politicians got big campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie. Over $200 million had been spent on lobbying and political activities. During the 1990's Fannie and Freddie enjoyed a subsidies of as much as $182 billion. Some analysts say that much of those billions went to the priviliged shareholders and not to poor communities.

1999: New Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, became alarmed at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's excesses. Congress held hearings the following year, but nothing was done because Fannie and Freddie had donated millions to key Congressmen and radical groups (such as ACORN), ensuring no meaningful changes would take place. "We manage our political risk with the same intensity that we manage our credit and interest rate risks," Fannie CEO Franklin Raines, a former Clinton official and current Barack Obama advisor, bragged to investors in 1999.

2000: Treasury Secretary Summers sent Undersecretary Gary Gensler to Congress seeking an end to the "special status" afford by the CRA and Clinton's expansion of it. Democrats raised a ruckus, as did Fannie and Freddie, headed by a politically connected CEO. "We think that the statements evidence a contempt for the nation's housing and mortgage markets," Freddie spokesperson Sharon McHale said. That was the last chance, during the Clinton era, for reform.

2001: Republicans tried repeatedly to bring fiscal sanity to Fannie and Freddie, but Democrats blocked any attempt at reform. Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd, who ran key banking committees and were huge beneficiaries of campaign contributions from the mortgage giants, were especially critical of any reforms.

2003: President George Bush proposed what the NY Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago". Even after discovering a scheme by Fannie and Freddie to overstate earnings by $10.6 billion to boost their bonuses, the Democrats killed reform.

2005: Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan warned Congress: "We are placing the total financial system at substantial risk". Senator John McCain, along with two others, sponsored a Fannie/Freddie reform bill and said, "If congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole". Senator Harry Reid (D) accused the GOP of trying to "cripple the ability of Fannie and Freddie to carry out their mission of expanding home ownership". The bill went nowhere.

2007: Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee over half of the twelve trillion dollar US mortgage market. The mortgage giants, whose executive suites were top-heavy with former Democratic officials, had been working with Wall Street to repackage the bad loans and sell them to investors. As the housing market fell in 2007, sub-prime mortgage portfolios suffered major losses. The crisis was on, though it was fifteen years in the making.

2008: Presidential candidate John McCain has repeatedly called for reforming the behemoths. President Bush urged reform a recorded 17 times. Still the media have repeated Democrats' talking points about this being a "Republican" disaster. A few Republicans are complicit, but Fannie and Freddie were created by Democrats, regulated by Democrats, largely run by Democrats and protected by Democrats. That's why taxpayers are now being asked for $700 billion!

It's clear that the Democratic Party cannot be trusted with our tax dollars. Adding the extreme liberalism of Barack Hussein Obama will NOT turn our economy around -- but only make things MUCH worse. If you truly want to know how bad it can get, cast your vote for Obama. As for me and my house, "NObama - Keep the change!"

SBA List President: 'Obama is Lying About Record on Born Alive Infant Protection Act'

Article from christiansunite.com
Today, in response to a new Ohio ad by the Barack Obama campaign addressing Obama's position with regard to opposing the Born Alive Infant Protection Act the Susan B. Anthony List offered comment and facts on Obama's record: "If only 'change' was all about how Barack Obama could change his past votes. He knows his extreme record on abortion doesn't resonate with values voters in battleground states, and sadly it is too late to change his votes. So now he's truly lying - bordering upon the pathological -- with this new television ad. The only favorable interpretation of this ad would be that he is suffering from some sort of amnesia," said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser.

"However, that seems unlikely. His inhuman vote on the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act is too memorable and will repel values voters across the country. American voters are savvy - they can and will see through Barack Obama's cynical attempt to play the politics of personal gain when unborn lives are on the line. Obama built a straw man out of the public's condemnation of his vote. No one claimed he wants to leave every single newborn infant to die - just the most vulnerable ones - those almost full term girls and boys whose abortion was unsuccessful," said Dannenfelser.

Documents recently obtained by the National Right to Life Committee reveal a discrepancy between the facts and Barack Obama's rhetoric about the Born- Alive Infant Protection Act: - Barack Obama opposed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act as an Illinois State Senator. He spoke against the bill, calling it an "unnecessary burden" for women and voted against it three times. Despite that opposition, he has since declared support for the federal version of the same legislation that aims to protect newborn babies who survive abortions.
- After NARAL pulled its opposition to the legislation, Obama continued to oppose it.
- Obama has publicly stated he opposed the legislation due to its lack of a "neutrality clause" - language expressing that the bill had no bearing on the legal status of unborn children with regard to abortion.
- Official legislative documents show that Obama in fact presided over a committee hearing where "neutrality clause" language - identical to the federal language - was added to the Illinois version of the Born- Alive Infant Protection Act.
- After voting in support of the "neutrality clause," Obama then joined fellow Democrats to oppose the bill, killing it by a vote of 6-4, even after the addition of the "neutrality clause."
- The bill Obama killed is nearly identical to the federal version of the Born- Alive Infant Protection Act signed by President Bush in 2002.

Since its founding, the Susan B. Anthony List has helped elect seventy-five pro-life candidates to the House, seven to the Senate, and seven to other statewide offices across the country. The Susan B. Anthony List is a nationwide network of Americans, over 147,000 residing in all 50 states, dedicated to mobilizing, advancing, and representing pro-life women in politics. Its connected Candidate Fund increases the percentage of pro-life women in the political process.

Stealing the Minds of America: Compelling Truths for Black America

[This is one of THE most important posts The Sope-Bocks has ever published.]

While listening to a radio talk show yesterday evening, I was blessed to hear a proud black woman speak on the coming election and the two major political parties in America. This morning, I visited her website in an attempt to find out more. Here is an excerpt from her opening salvo on the site:

“I was ignorant and proud. Ignorant of what the political parties really embraced and too proud to set aside my preconceived ideas to listen. Yet when I began to research the facts for myself, I was shocked to discover that what I thought I knew was all a lie. In reality, I had aligned myself with the very party that historically, had determined to eliminate African Americans from the entire political process. This is a must read book for all truth-seekers who vote!” –Janice L. Ponds

Janice L. Ponds is writing about the Democratic Party. Remember, she is black or as the politically correct would say, African-American. Janice and her husband have researched and published a book entitled, Stealing the Minds of America. The subtitle is: A Must for All Truth-Seekers Who Vote. I plan to order the book -- then read it from cover to cover.

After listening to Janice Ponds last night, I would encourage everyone -- especially the black community to read the book. But, only if they are truth seekers. Those who want to blindly (and ignorantly) follow the black community's mandate to vote Democratic will not want to read the book. It's for truth seekers ONLY.

In the event, The Sope-Bocks readers might want to know more about the truth, here are a few questions asked and answered in Ponds' book:

Do you know what political party…

1. Was initially created as anti-slavery leaders broke away to establish a new political group to abolish slavery?
2. Allowed black Americans to participate in the political process subsequent to slavery; resulting in hundreds of black men who were former slaves, becoming congressmen and prominent political leaders?
3. Spearheaded the Dred Scott decision of 1857, delivered by a party-specific Supreme Court declaring blacks were not persons or citizens, but instead property with no rights?
4. Repealed all civil rights laws in 1876 and instituted “Jim Crow” laws to deprive blacks of their voting and civil rights?
5. Did not have a single one of its 56 Congressional members vote for the 15th amendment which supported granting explicit voting rights to black Americans?
6. Formed the Ku Klux Klan in an effort to prevent African-American leaders from being elected to political office after slavery was abolished; and terrorized both black and white Americans who had a specific party affiliation?
7. Had its key leaders vote against a bill called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004; which would protect unborn children from assault and murder?

Here are the answers:

1. Republican
2. Republican
3. Democratic
4. Democratic
5. Democratic
6. Democratic
7. Democratic

This information was somewhat of a surprise to me. I knew that Republicans and Christian leaders in Congress were at the forefront of abolishing slavery, but was NOT aware that the Democratic Party had pushed so hard to keep blacks from having civil and voting rights.

Furthermore, Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, came up with the idea of her organization as a means of wiping out the black race. Now, Presidential candidate Barack Obama is in bed with Planned Parenthood -- and supports ALL abortion (including late term abortion). So much for looking out for your fellow man, huh?!? Black so-called "civil rights leaders" need to get their head out of the sand and get with the reality of the party they so vehemently support.

Ponds' website, Thinking for Yourself, also has five powerful and thought-provoking excerpts from the book. Take the time to review the truth contained therein: Excerpt 1, Excerpt 2, Excerpts 3 and 4, and Excerpt 5.

Janice Ponds' book, Stealing the Minds of America, is past due. It was needed before the 1992 elections -- and is needed more than ever in 2008. I challenge the black community to start thinking for yourself!

Richard Viguerie: It's Sarah Palin's Principles, Stupid

Article from christiansunite.com
With the popularity of Governor Sarah Palin providing lift to the GOP ticket, Republicans are starting to feel better about races for Congress and at the state level. But most of them are missing the point of her popularity and may be personally disappointed on Election Day, Richard A. Viguerie said.

"Too many Republican candidates think Governor Palin is popular because of her gender or because she's a fresh face with a 'cool' life story. They think they can hold onto her skirt and that her popularity will help carry them to victory," said Viguerie, Chairman of ConservativeHQ.com.

"The truth is, 'It's Palin's principles, stupid!' It's what she represents, as a reformer fighting corruption, even in her own party. It's because you can believe her when she says she will wage war on the corrupt Washington establishment. That's not something you can say about most candidates, who stood by throughout their careers doing precisely nothing about the culture of corruption that infests Washington and politics in general.

"And she's popular because she holds to the core beliefs of the coalition that elected Ronald Reagan in two landslides--on taxes, spending, the role of government, and traditional ideas of right and wrong.

"The popularity of Palin--and the heightened popularity of John McCain, who selected her as his political soul mate--won't help other Republicans unless they also hold to those principles and campaign credibly on those principles.

At a minimum, Republican candidates must demand the top-to-bottom removal of the Republican leadership that nearly sank the party over the past few years. That includes the leadership in Congress, the Bush administration, and GOP officials at the national level and in most states.

Republican candidates must tell us how they'll shut down the lobbyist-and-Big-Government political machines that dominate the nation's capital and most state capitals. And candidates for Congress must tell us how they'll tear K Street down to street level and sow salt in the earth so that nothing ever grows there again."

Said Viguerie: "It's a cliche, but it's true: The American people are fed up, and want change. By picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has gone a long way in convincing voters that he will be a warrior for the right kind of change. But lower-level Republicans will do poorly unless they demonstrate clearly and credibly that they will be on the front lines of the epic battles to come."

A Clear and Present Media Bias

I just ran across an excellent post by Larry Clifton over at the American Politics and Media blog. Mr. Clifton published the post on September 8th. I'll share some of it with you...

... There is a lot about Sarah Palin that I don’t know. I do feel that I am comfortable and impressed with what I do know about her. On the other hand, there is a lot about McCain that I do know. Probably too much. In either case, I believe both are brave patriots who put country first.

Regarding Obama…not so much. Perhaps there is a bias behind my discrimination against his campaign; if so, it is appropriate and well documented. Today, Obama claims he is for the Bush tax-cuts that he has railed against for so long. Last week, along with House Speaker Pelosi and her ilk in Congress, he suddenly decided that offshore drilling might be a good idea after opposing it for his entire 300 or so career days present in Congress. And that whole thing about rural Americans “clinging to guns and religion…” he didn’t mean it, but it sure sounded good in San Francisco. Far more troubling is Obama’s reluctance to show our military - the military he wants to lead - a small modicum of respect.

Americans may argue the merits of the Iraq war for decades, or at least until Middle Eastern women no longer need to worry about being murdered by their fathers for choosing their own husbands. But arguing that our soldiers and their highly successful surge against Al Qaeda, which calmed the country and slowed violence against civilians while drastically lowering our troops’ combat casualties, didn’t work – well, even Al Jazeera can’t spin that garbage.

So, last week Obama admitted that the surge that he voted against and vehemently protested is a military success. It seems that as the election enters the home stretch, Obama is morphing into a rabid right-wing Republican. ...

You should read the entire post -- here.

T-shirt from NOBama.com

Why Biden's Plagiarism Shouldn't be Forgotten

From Slate.com: Teachers and scholars consider the unattributed use of someone else's words and ideas to be a very serious offense, but the public doesn't seem to mind much, at least when it comes to politics. The incidents of plagiarism and fabrication that forced Joe Biden to quit the 1988 presidential race have drawn little comment since his selection as Barack Obama's vice presidential running mate ... .

In 1987, before Biden quit the race, he called the incidents "a tempest in a teapot." ... Biden's exit from the 1988 race is worth recalling in detail, because his transgressions far exceeded Obama's own relatively innocent lifting of rhetorical set pieces from his friend Deval Patrick, which occasioned a brief flap last February. Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect.

Read the rest of the article here.

Also in Slate: Shmuel Rosner examined the "erratic pragmatism" of Biden's Middle East policy. Jack Shafer called Biden "the unusually creepy kind" of plagiarist.

Concerned Women for America Says, 'Stop Bullying Sarah!'

Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) is appalled at the distortions about women and Christianity embodied in the personal attacks against a political candidate who is unapologetically also a woman, wife, mother and evangelical believer.

"In its continuing game of 'gotcha' journalism and the 'politics of personal destruction,' the mainstream media (MSM) and celebrity reporters are piling on Sarah Palin," said, Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, political commentator for CWALAC. "The personal attacks have reached unprecedented pettiness and hypocrisy. Even former journalistic giants (like the Washington Post and New York Times) are engaging in tabloid-like sensationalism and printing vicious distortions about her life, faith, experience and family. Even feminists -- who supposedly promote women's equality and the so-called 'women's rights' agenda -- are questioning a female candidate's ability to get the job done. It's past time for the bullying to stop!"

Crouse continued, "As an outsider who came to Washington without political connections and became a presidential speechwriter and denizen of the West Wing halls of power, I'd like to offer the governor a bit of advice: Don't be intimidated by the ubiquitous 'data robots' who are like children's wind-up toys spewing out facts and information. They sound impressive, but I've found that they often lack wisdom, insight and vision; many of them haven't the foggiest idea what those facts mean, sometimes lack common sense and too often are unable to shape ideas into reality. Don't be impressed by 'inside-the-Beltway' lingo; far too often the short-hand language that the inside crowd uses to talk to each other obscures the fact that they know very little about the real world inhabited by mainstream Americans."

Seven Years Later: How to Remember September 11

Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship Ministries President Mark Earley.

September 11, 2008

Today, seven years after terrorists flew a plane into the Pentagon, killing 184 people, a memorial to that attack will be dedicated. That it has taken seven years to erect this memorial is a testimony to our uncertainty as to how best to memorialize the events of that day.

In contrast to the Pentagon memorial, any memorial to the victims in New York is “years away.” Reinhold Martin of Columbia calls the situation at “Ground Zero” an “incredible mess.” The iconic status of the site, combined with “disagreements and competing priorities among government agencies, family groups, and Wall Street interests,” has made settling on a design near impossible.

While we debate what to do with stone and metal, there are some things we can do with our thoughts and actions right now.

I do know this: The best way to honor those who died has nothing to do with architecture.

One group is calling on Americans to make September 11 a “national day of charitable service.” They urge us to “volunteer, donate to a cause, or perform another good deed of [our] own choosing.”

Charitable service is always a good idea, and any attempt to inspire volunteerism is welcome. So is the decision by the presidential candidates to pull campaign ads on this day. That kind of respectfulness is appropriate. But there is more to memorials than architecture and good deeds, as important as they are. The word memorial comes from the Latin word memor, which means “mindful,” “remembering,” and even “grateful.”

What should we remember? Of course, we remember the victims and their families. And we are grateful for those, such as the New York firefighters and police, who died trying to save others. But we should also be mindful of why they died. We should not let the passage of time dull us to the threat posed by those who perpetrated the attack, their distorted worldview, and their continuing determination to kill us. You can be sure that bin Laden, his followers, and would-be followers will be celebrating the seventh anniversary of these attacks and calling for more just like them.

Events like the Madrid and London bombings testify to the continuing appeal of al Qaeda-like jihadism. The cult of the suicide bomber is, unfortunately, alive and well in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Their resilience should come as no surprise: Their memories go back nearly 1,400 years. They bemoan events that took place before the discovery of America. Their attention span and patience easily accommodate seven years. The real question is: Do ours?

We should also remember that their inability -- for now -- to attack us on our own soil does not mean they cannot threaten our way of life. Recent months have highlighted our dependence on foreign oil -- oil that disproportionately comes from the part of the world where these enemies are most active.

While architecture can honor the past, the only memorial worthy of that name are the lessons we learn that keep the past from ever being repeated again.

Vice President Palin? Now, That is REAL Change!

Conservatives and mainstream Republicans, one and all, received a pleasant surprise when Presidential hopeful John McCain announced his running mate this morning. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is going to keep the hopes of a woman in the White House alive for voters in 2008. As for conservatives, worried about the auspices of an ultra-liberal like Barak Obama becoming our next President....

“They’re beyond ecstatic,” said Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition. “This is a home run. She is a reformer governor who is solidly pro-life and a person of deep Christian faith. And she is really one of the bright shining new stars in the Republican firmament.”

The forty-four year old Palin is known to conservatives for choosing not to have an abortion after learning that she was carrying a child with Down syndrome. “It is almost impossible to exaggerate how important that is to the conservative faith community,” Mr. Reed said.

Ms. Palin, a former mayor of the small town of Wasilla, an Anchorage suburb, mother of five and one-time beauty pageant queen, first rose to prominence as a whistle-blower uncovering ethical misconduct in state government.

As she was introduced by Senator McCain this morning, Ms. Palin praised the achievement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who lost a long and bitter primary race against Senator Obama, saying that she had left “18 million cracks” in the highest glass ceiling in the land. Then, making an explicit appeal to Ms. Clinton’s disappointed supporters, she said, “It turns out that the women in America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling.”

Personally, I'm glad to know that a true, pro-life Christian woman is going to be part of the Presidential election process. Her influence will be needed as our next President is sure to select at least two Supreme Court justices -- a decision that will positively or adversely affect every person in this nation. Vice President Palin? Now, that is REAL change!

Sending the 'Very Best'? - Hallmark Introduces New Line of Cards for Gay Marriage

Hot on the heels of the California Supreme Court decision to allow same- sex "marriage," Hallmark Cards is cravenly introducing a new line of greetings cards celebrating "gay marriage." Playing it safe with generalized images such as two tuxedos and taglines like "one promise, two hearts," there is no mention of the words wedding or marriage. Hallmark can easily market the cards for civil unions and domestic partnerships should the California decision go against them and be overturned in November.

Hallmark prides itself on "quality, innovation and caring." A family-owned business since 1910, Hallmark has grown into the most recognized greeting card chain in the nation. For over 50 years, families have gathered to watch the award winning Hallmark Channel for quality movies based on American values and pro-family principles.

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, "Hallmark is jeopardizing its brand as a family-friendly company. Customers used to be able to trust Hallmark to produce quality products that were safe for all ages. Now parents will need to steer their kids from Hallmark's section of the greeting card aisle and away from its previously heartwarming movies for fear that they too will push homosexual messages."

Janice Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of CWA's Beverly LaHaye Institute, said, "By latching onto the latest fad generated by the homosexual special interest groups, Hallmark is negating its image as a wholesome company that promotes American values and pro-family principles in its products. American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products. Instead of bolstering campaigns by special interest groups like the homosexual activists, corporations like Hallmark should be protecting American culture from those forces that would destroy the family and create a public environment that is detrimental to general well- being, especially children's well-being."

Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.

National Black Pro-Life Union Calls Obama A Liar -- Has Proof!

Article from ChristiansUnite.com
Photo from StarPulse.com
The following is submitted by Day Gardner, President of the National Black Pro-Life Union, commenting on Barack Obama's opposing the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.

There has been much talk about Barack Obama's vote against Illinois' Born Alive Infants Protection Act that would protect babies who survived abortion.

It's hard to believe that this man, who wants to hold the highest office in this land, would not only oppose legislation to protect children born alive, but would then lie about it for 4 years stating that he didn't oppose it.

For four years, Mr. Obama misrepresented his vote, saying that the bill he opposed in the Illinois State Senate was different from the bill that was passed by the U.S. Senate and signed into law by President Bush. However, the National Right to Life Committee has produced documents that confirm the two bills were exactly the same.

So, Mr. Obama lied...big time!

The identical legislation to protect babies who survive abortion was passed by the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly (before Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate) by a vote of 98-0, which means that even the most adamant pro-abortion Senators did not oppose it. Even NARAL was neutral on this bill, which goes to say that Barack Obama is far more extreme than anyone else on this issue.

Let's understand what opposing this important legislation means. Suppose that a woman goes to an abortion facility for an abortion and by some blessing the child survives--alive. Barack Obama has voted that the abortionist, medical staff, and anyone else in the room should stand by and watch the child die a horrible death -- gasping for air -- without lifting a finger to help him or her. There are also cases where completely delivered living babies were suffocated or strangled to death.

Barack Obama is an extremist who, in supporting what amounts to infanticide, would like to see all of us stand idle--twiddling our thumbs as unplanned children, who are born alive, die this terrible death.

We must realize this is definitely part of Mr. Obama's plan for America. But it is definitely not mine. In my America, all voices shout, "NO WE CAN'T!" "NO WE WON'T!"

The Sope-Bocks has reported before -- Barack Hussein Obama is THE MOST EXTREME LIBERAL Senator in the US Congress. It has been demonstrated MANY times that he is a liar and cannot be trusted. This is not a black and white thing. It's a character issue. It's an integrity issue. Barack Obama cannot be trusted with the White House, near-future Supreme Court Justice nominations nor with the nuclear codes. He is NOT a trustworthy man -- nor is his wife, Michelle, a person of high character (as heard in her "Claire Huxstable" speech at the Democratic National Convention).

Obama is destroying the work of Dr. King!

Finally, a black pastor who is not suckered by Barack Hussein Obama. That is not a racist statement, but one of my own observation. I've seen so very few blacks who dare challenge the direction in which Barack Obama will take our country.

The Reverend James Manning is calling on a boycott of CNN, Oprah Winfrey, the NY Times, ABC, CBS and NBC. He is also calling blacks to stop all giving to the NAACP -- singularly because it supports fascists -- in the form of Barack Obama. Reverend Manning is serious -- and makes some excellent points. Listen to his words with an open mind! If you believe his calls for boycott will awaken the black community, then please pass a link to the ATLAH.org website (or this blog post) along. If I say something against Obama, I'm called a bigot. But, if someone respected in the black community, such as Reverend Manning, says the same thing -- he is heard. So, let him be heard!

"Obama is destroying the work of Dr. King!"
YouTube Video on the ATLAH.org website:
http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/ndnr07-28-08.html