Beginning of the End of the Feminist Movement

Palinism’s Threat to Feminism. Excellent writing over at American Spectator:

...Why are feminists so bothered by her? Could it be that if she were to be elected, it would be the end of their movement? I mean, what would they say at their next feminist meeting: "Women aren't getting ahead"? What they should be saying at their next meeting is: "My God, do you see the way this woman is being treated? Let's do whatever we have to do, even though, yes, she thinks differently on certain issues, let's defend her." But how can they? Her very existence brings to light the waste of the life and years that they have lived on this Earth. Sarah Palin is everything they hate, because she is everything they never could be or chose not to be...

...What could be worse for a woman who has chosen a barren existence, in the name of a movement, than to see a woman get ahead who has already actually gotten so many great things out of life? If Sarah Plain gets elected it would sort of imply that their lives have had no meaning, and would leave open the question: "For what have they done any of this?" Sadly, this has to be how they see it.... (more)

Obama: 'McCain Is Absolutely Right'

Fromthe AmSpec Blog the latest ad from the debates...

A rapid-response ad from the McCain campaign

This is the theme at National Review as well:

Obama was smooth, unflappable, and just a little off balance for much of the evening. Worse for him, he seemed inexplicably eager to concede that McCain was right on issue after issue. A candidate determined to appear congenial might do that once, or even twice, but Obama did it eight times:

• “I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility…”
• “Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused…”
• “He’s also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these…requests…”
• “John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right…”
• “John is right we have to make cuts…”
• “Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families…”
• “John — you’re absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say…”
• “Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran…” read more here

Gee, if they agree this much I guess I'll just go with the guy with experience...

Arctic Sea Ice Melt Season Officially Over; Ice Up Over 9% from Last Year

From IceCap:

We have news from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). They say: The melt is over. And we’ve added 9.4% ice coverage from this time last year. Though it appears NSIDC is attempting to downplay this in their web page announcement today, one can safely say that despite irrational predictions seen earlier this year, we didn’t reach an “ice free north pole” nor a new record low for sea ice extent. Here is the current sea ice extent graph from NSIDC as of today, notice the upturn, which has been adding ice now for 5 days:

..(More)

Obama Campaign Chair Responsible For Major Bank Failure

From American Spectator:

..Which makes it all the more significant that Barack Obama has posted on his campaign website a naive and ignorant defense* of his campaign finance chair, Penny Pritzker, concerning her key leadership involvement in the largest bank failure in the 18 years between the last great banking crisis (the 1980s S&L debacle) and today's even-more-massive banking crisis. The excuses, misdirections, and spin Senator Obama offers in defense of this billionaire failed bank executive are Pritzker spin from start to finish, and expose Obama's profound inability to understand why banks fail and how to keep banks safe. ...
...Superior Bank failed because of the same problem that is bringing down all the banks now: subprime loans. Who got the bank into those loans? Obama's own finance chair, Penny Pritzker. Sworn deposition testimony puts Penny Pritzker not only on the board of the bank and its holding company, Coast, but personally leading the meeting to persuade regulators to let the bank into the subprime market. You have Enron-style accounting that hid the real asset values, two disgraced bank executives under her supervision whom the government forced out of the banking industry with official cease-and-desist orders, a Department of Justice Expert Report placing the blame squarely on the executives and owners, and the Pritzkers agreeing to pay $460 million over 15 years to escape government lawsuits and sanctions. This all happened in Illinois while Obama was an Illinois state senator. What did he know about it? According to his website, the accountants were to blame. Should a presidential candidate accept such an excuse from a failed bank owner? On 60 Minutes last Sunday (Sept. 21), Senator Obama blamed the current banking crisis on "greedy CEOs and investors taking too much risk." Well, Senator, you've got one of those "greedy CEOs and investors taking too much risk" financing your campaign, and writing your website for you, passing the buck to the accountants. Superior's failure was studied by the United States Treasury Department and by banking regulators in special Inspector General reports, and has been documented in the open files of the Court of Federal Claims, available to Obama throughout his term as a U.S. Senator. Did he ever read any of them? Apparently Senator Obama's friendship with Penny Pritzker -- and her billions of dollars -- caused him not to look into any of these reports and documents to understand why, during a period in which almost no banks of any size failed, Penny Pritzker's bank failed so massively that she and her family agreed to pay $460 million. And failed right in Senator Obama's hometown. ..(more)
But go ahead and make him President...

Couric Diminishes Gov. Palin

From American Spectator:
CBS New anchor Katie Couric ordered staff to drop all references to "Governor" or "Gov." from her interview with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. When a staff member pointed out that in other venues, Couric and CBS News had referred to Governor Palin's opponent, Joe Biden, using his title of "Senator" or the abbreviation, Couric, according to a CBS News editorial aide, sought approval from CBS News management to drop the "Governor" reference during her broadcast interview with Palin that began on Wednesday night."It's not true," said another CBS News source. "We treat everyone the same."But, in fact, that's not the case: as late as September 22, CBS News and Couric -- even on the CBS website -- used Biden's honorific. Here is an excerpt from the transcript of a Couric interview with "Sen." Biden:
Katie Couric: How is it preparing for the debates?
Sen. Joe Biden: Well, it's kind of hard to prepare because I don't know what she thinks. There's been no -- I don't know a lot about her, so I have to assume for purposes of the debate that she agrees with John on everything.
Now compare that the transcript of the "Palin" interview:
Couric: Why do you say that? Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama?Palin: He's got the track record of the leadership qualities and the pragmatism that's needed at a crisis time like this.
In fact, at no point during the broadcast interview does Couric refer to the GOP vice presidential nominee as "Governor." (more)

Hide The Ball

From Townhall:
Why does Barack Obama play hide the ball with his personal resume, concealing his extreme leftist ideology and denying his damning associations? Question kind of answers itself, wouldn't you say? Be concerned, very concerned. ...

...Obama will only come clean about his liberalism when he thinks he is in safe territory, as he did at the San Francisco fundraiser where he trashed small-town Americans, thinking his words wouldn't reach those he was belittling. Nor is Obama upfront about the liberal nature of his policy proposals, choosing instead to mask their liberalism and even disguise them as conservative.
How else do you explain his whopper that he is recommending a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans when we know that the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay very little income tax at all? His plan calls for giving many of these people tax credits, even though they are paying no tax or are paying a small enough amount that the credit would result in them netting money from the government. As others have pointed out, this is welfare, not a tax cut. "Tax cut" resonates well among center-right voters; "welfare" does not. ... (more)

Putin says ties with Latin America a top priority

From My Way News:
NOVO-OGARYOVO, Russia (AP) - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin vowed Thursday to make relations with Latin America a top foreign policy priority, a pledge backed by the first Russian naval deployment to the Caribbean since the Cold War.
Putin greeted Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, on his second trip to Russia in just over two months, with offers to discuss further arms sales to Venezuela and possibly helping it to develop nuclear energy.
Chavez's visit takes place as a Russian naval squadron sails to Venezuela, across the Caribbean Sea from the United States, in a pointed response to what the Kremlin has cast as threatening U.S. encroachment near its own borders.
Both men suggested their countries are working to decrease U.S. global influence.... (more)

Obama funded through Harvard by radical Black Muslim activist with ties to Saudis?

Remember when the mainstream media were our watchdogs and would have been looking into the background of our potential leaders?
A fine piece of work of true journalism by Melanie Phillips over at The Spectator:

There are two American election campaigns currently running. The first, in the mainstream media, accepts Barack Obama at face value, no questions asked, while it viciously turns over Sarah Palin and her family whom it subjects to lies, smears and character assassination. The second, being conducted in the blogosphere and (with one or two notable exceptions such as the Wall Street Journal) not alluded to at all by the mainstream media, is the site of verbal warfare between Camp Obama and bloggers who are practising journalism as it used to be practised – going behind the propaganda to dig out information and asking questions about it. The blogosphere is not only rebutting the Palin lies but also piling up the most disturbing revelations about Obama’s background and associations -- compounded by the troubling manner in which Camp Obama responds to these discoveries.
A few months ago, a claim was made by former Manhattan Borough president Percy Sutton that Obama had been funded through Harvard law school by Khalid Al-Mansour, a ‘mentor’ to the founders of the Black Panther party and advisor to ‘one of the world’s richest men,’ Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal. It was Prince Alwaleed whose $10 million check to help rebuild Manhattan after 9/11 was refused by New York mayor Rudy Guiliani because the Saudi prince hinted publicly that America’s pro-Israel policies were to blame for the attacks.
According to this story by Kenneth Timmerman, Camp Obama denied this claim -- and referred to a story on Politico.com in which reporter Ben Smith wrote that ‘a spokesman for Sutton’s family, Kevin Wardally’ said that Sutton had been mistaken when he made those comments. But when contacted, Sutton’s family not only denied that Sutton had misspoken but also said they had never even heard of Kevin Wardally – who appears to work for a Harlem political consulting firm.
So the claim that Obama was funded through Harvard by a radical Black Muslim activist with ties to the Saudis remains on the table. (more)

Why I Can't Vote for Obama

...or watch network news...
Good commentary over at Rasmussen...
The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign.
While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda. (The American left-wing version of the Volkischer Beobachter cannot be far behind.)
And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly or even halfway honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs -- the press. The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. They consciously have ignored whole years of his life and have shown a lack of curiosity about such gaps, which bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.
Thus, the public image of Obama is of a "man who never was."

The Obama-Ayers connection: Chicago Annenberg Challenge

Over at HotAir some good reading on the Ayers connection. Once again, if Obama just admitted to it and was done it would probably go away. But he denies and lies and attacks-hard. Which makes me wonder, what is he trying to hide and what else is there?

...However, Kurtz’ report provides a very interesting look at the early political life of Barack Obama. He had already entered politics at the time he joined the CAC, and even at that stage had allied himself with ACORN, which has found itself at the center of more than a dozen voter-fraud investigations. Obama also allied himself with Ayers and helped the former Weather Underground fugitive push forward with his plans to radicalize an entire generation of schoolchildren in the area through the CAC. Note well the parallels to community organizing that play out in the activities of the CAC, and recall again how Obama claims that activity as a major qualification for the presidency.... (more)

More (surprise) NY Times Bias

Strong response from McCain and well said:
Today the New York Times launched its latest attack on this campaign in its capacity as an Obama advocacy organization. Let us be clear about what this story alleges: The New York Times charges that McCain-Palin 2008 campaign manager Rick Davis was paid by Freddie Mac until last month, contrary to previous reporting, as well as statements by this campaign and by Mr. Davis himself.
In fact, the allegation is demonstrably false. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis separated from his consulting firm, Davis Manafort, in 2006. As has been previously reported, Mr. Davis has seen no income from Davis Manafort since 2006. Zero. Mr. Davis has received no salary or compensation since 2006. Mr. Davis has received no profit or partner distributions from that firm on any basis -- weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual -- since 2006. Again, zero. Neither has Mr. Davis received any equity in the firm based on profits derived since his financial separation from Davis Manafort in 2006.
Further, and missing from the Times' reporting, Mr. Davis has never -- never -- been a lobbyist for either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Mr. Davis has not served as a registered lobbyist since 2005.
Though these facts are a matter of public record, the New York Times, in what can only be explained as a willful disregard of the truth, failed to research this story or present any semblance of a fairminded treatment of the facts closely at hand. The paper did manage to report one interesting but irrelevant fact: Mr. Davis did participate in a roundtable discussion on the political scene with...Paul Begala.
Again, let us be clear: The New York Times -- in the absence of any supporting evidence -- has insinuated some kind of impropriety on the part of Senator McCain and Rick Davis. But entirely missing from the story is any significant mention of Senator McCain's long advocacy for, and co-sponsorship of legislation to enact, stricter oversight and regulation of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- dating back to 2006. Please see the attached floor statement on this issue by Senator McCain from 2006.
To the central point our campaign has made in the last 48 hours: The New York Times has never published a single investigative piece, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Obama campaign chief strategist David Axelrod, his consulting and lobbying clients, and Senator Obama. Likewise, the New York Times never published an investigative report, factually correct or otherwise, examining the relationship between Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson and Senator Obama, who appointed Johnson head of his VP search committee, until the writing was on the wall and Johnson was under fire following reports from actual news organizations that he had received preferential loans from predatory mortgage lender Countrywide.
Therefore this "report" from the New York Times must be evaluated in the context of its intent and purpose. It is a partisan attack falsely labeled as objective news. And its most serious allegations are based entirely on the claims of anonymous sources, a familiar yet regretful tactic for the paper.
We all understand that partisan attacks are part of the political process in this country. The debate that stems from these grand and sometimes unruly conversations is what makes this country so exceptional. Indeed, our nation has a long and proud tradition of news organizations that are ideological and partisan in nature, the Huffington Post and the New York Times being two such publications. We celebrate their contribution to the political fabric of America. But while the Huffington Post is utterly transparent, the New York Times obscures its true intentions -- to undermine the candidacy of John McCain and boost the candidacy of Barack Obama -- under the cloak of objective journalism.
The New York Times is trying to fill an ideological niche. It is a business decision, and one made under economic duress, as the New York Times is a failing business. But the paper's reporting on Senator McCain, his campaign, and his staff should be clearly understood by the American people for what it is: a partisan assault aimed at promoting that paper’s preferred candidate, Barack Obama

Voters See Media's Prez Debate Moderators as Biased for Barack

From Newsbusters:
Once again Rasmussen Reports presents evidence that more and more Americans are coming to the realization that the media is biased to the left. This time Rasmussen's polling results shows that more Americans than ever think the folks chosen from amongst the Old Media to moderate the upcoming presidential debates are biased in favor of Barack Obama. (more)

Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive

From CNN:
...Both Biden and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama voted to kill a Senate amendment that would have diverted federal funding for the bridge to repair a Louisiana span badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina, Senate records show.
And both voted for the final transportation bill that included the $223 million earmark for the Alaska project.
An amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, would have stripped the money appropriated to connect the Alaskan coastal city of Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely populated Gravina Island and diverted the money to Louisiana.
But Biden andObama and 80 of their colleagues rejected the measure, an amendment to a massive 2005 transportation bill that funded thousands of projects across the country. ...(more)

Obama's Dishonesty on 'The Least of These!'

From Townhall:
Beginning with his economic plan Obama pledges to only tax people making above a certain income level at a higher rate than everyone else. His false claim is that this aids the middle and lower class because he steals from the rich and gives the poor.
In reality he steals from the rich, gives to his administration, and creates dependency in greater numbers upon government entitlements.
This gives nothing to the poor except a statehood of near slavery....
...What Obama's economic plan would do instead is to further punish successful mom and pop business owners by taxing them even more than the presently discriminatory rates they pay, and in the process eat up the capital they could instead be using to employee more workers, expand their operations, buy more supplies, and reduce the cost of their goods and service. In doing so the price of their product increases, fewer people buy it, and they likely will be forced to reduce their work staff. Obama's economic plan is not new, it is historic, and it has always created worse economic conditions. More here

Guess again who's to blame for U.S. mortgage meltdown

From WND:
While many pundits are pointing to corporate greed and a lack of government regulation as the cause for the American mortgage and financial crisis, some analysts are saying it wasn't too little government intervention that cased the mortgage meltdown, but too much, in the form of activists compelling the government to pressure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae into unsound – though politically correct – lending practices....
...Liebowitz puts forward an explanation that he admits is "not consistent with the nasty-subprime-lender hypothesis currently considered to be the cause of the mortgage meltdown."
In a nutshell, Liebowitz contends that the federal government over the last 20 years pushed the mortgage industry so hard to get minority homeownership up, that it undermined the country's financial foundation to achieve its goal.
"In an attempt to increase homeownership, particularly by minorities and the less affluent, an attack on underwriting standards was undertaken by virtually every branch of the government since the early 1990s," Liebowitz writes. "The decline in mortgage underwriting standards was universally praised as 'innovation' in mortgage lending by regulators, academic specialists, (government-sponsored enterprises) and housing activists."
More here

Obama ad goes to war with abortion survivor

From WND:
In the increasing flurry of this election season's negative political ads, the Barack Obama campaign produced a TV commercial that not only attacks Republican rival John McCain, but also takes aim at an unusual target: a 31-year-old woman who was born alive after her mother's botched abortion.
Obama's commercial predictably takes shots at the GOP campaign, calling McCain's ads "the sleaziest ever, truly vile." But when the screen shows clips of abortion survivor Gianna Jessen and the ad she made asking Obama to reverse his stance on born alive infant protection legislation, the Obama ad calls Jessen's appeal "a despicable lie."
The Obama advertisement can be seen here along withthe rest of this article.

Palin Draws Crowd of 60,000 in Florida

And no Greek columns, which is no doubt why the MSM chose to underplay it...
From Fox...But she was welcomed like a star, with tens of thousands cramming into a plaza and nearby streets in this enormous retirement community about an hour north of Orlando. Some waited more than five hours in 92-degree heat to see her speak for 23 minutes... More here

Born Alive Truth

From Born Alive Truth:
“If Barack Obama had his way I would not be here.”
Can you imagine not giving babies their basic human rights, no matter how they entered our world? My name is Gianna Jessen, born 31 years ago after a failed abortion. I’m a survivor, as are many others…but if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn’t be here.
Unfortunately, Barack Obama voted four times against affording these babies their most basic human right. I have serious concerns about Senator Obama’s record and views on this issue, given he voted against these protections four times as a state Senator. Just as abuse victims share their stories to educate the public, fight for the common good and hope that as a result politicians do what’s right, I felt it was important to come forward and give these new born babies a voice.
I am living proof these babies have a right to live, and I invite you to learn more about Senator Obama’s record on this important issue.
-Abortion Survivor Gianna Jessen
go here for more and see the Obama attack ad as well

Who is the abortion extremist?

From Jewish World Review:
...The denial goes very deep. Any number of e-mailers expressed their contemptuous certainty that "born alive" infants were an invention of pro-life activists. OK, enter "abortion survivors" into your browser and see what you get. Or, if you prefer a traditional media source, consult the Daily Mail in Britain. The Mail has reported that in just the past year 66 infants had been left to die after abortions in Great Britain.
When Congress was considering the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA), a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony from Jill Stanek and Allison Baker, two nurses at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. They described several instances in which babies who were moving and breathing after induced abortions were left to die. The committee report quoted Jill Stanek: "Mrs. Stanek testified about another aborted baby who was thought to have had spina bifida, but was delivered with an intact spine. On another occasion, an aborted baby was left to die on the counter of the Utility Room wrapped in a disposable towel." The committee report also quoted Shelly Lowe, a lab technician at Bethesda North Medical Center in Cincinnati. A young woman who had undergone just the first cervix-opening phase of a partial-birth abortion gave birth in the emergency room. The doctor placed the 22-week-old baby in a specimen dish to be taken to the lab. According to the report, when Ms. Lowe "saw the baby girl in the dish she was stunned when she saw the girl gasping for air. 'I don't think I can do that,' Ms. Lowe reportedly said. 'This baby is alive.'" Lowe asked permission to hold the baby until she died. She wrapped the child she dubbed "Baby Hope" in a blanket and sang to her. Breathing room air without any other supports, Baby Hope lived for three hours.
I've received a number of letters from viewers. This one caught my eye: "I am a pediatrician. When I was a pediatric resident on a neonatal intensive care rotation, we were routinely called to … resuscitate infants. In one instance I was called to pronounce a baby dead who had been born an hour earlier after a failed abortion. We were not called to resuscitate the baby immediately after the delivery as the intent was abortion. … I write to attest that babies are sometimes born alive after abortion and then put aside to die."