Vlemx News: Keep Informed

What does this mean.

Does not this election remind you of 1968—Radicals against society.

About half the voters were black, according to polling place interviews, and four out of five of them supported Obama. Black women turned out in particularly large numbers.

All I heard in his victory speech was, more and more taxes for a more and more entitlement society. Run away from Iraq and let everyone in this country who gets here. Anyone who makes money will be more heavily taxed. and the U.S.A. should be more like a third world country.

Elect someone with no experience. Elect someone because he is black.

This writer believes this could happen. Face it, blacks will vote for him, minorities will vote for him and whites will vote for him because we had enough and “white Guilt”.

The Obama campaign has taken advantage of our so called societal problems.

We should not be concern with our economy, the war, extremist or anything else.

Just vote Obama to say you are politically correct.

Election ‘08: After revealing she had never been “really proud of my country,” Michelle Obama damns business as “the money-making industry.” By contrast, she says, the Obamas are in “the helping industry.” Bad omen.

Visiting a day-care center in Zanesville, Ohio, America’s would-be first lady advised the assembled women not to “go into corporate America.”

“Become teachers,” she counseled. “Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the moneymaking industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.”

No disrespect to teachers and nurses, but there are problems with those remarks.

First, when she says “move out of the moneymaking industry into the helping industry,” she speaks volumes. Apparently, well-paid people in all kinds of profitable fields are, in the Obama worldview, just idle, scheming splinter-collectors who help only themselves.

On the other hand, the social workers who make sure the cash flows from the various elements of the massive government bureaucracy are the great and noble helpers.

However, the oil CEO who invests billions of dollars of his firm’s profits in the research and development of new technologies that bring hitherto unreachable deposits of fuel to the cars and homes of millions of Americans is very much in “the helping industry.”

So is the pharmaceutical executive who uses her business skills and scientific knowledge to decide to spend billions on R&D for new drugs that lengthen the lives of millions.

The real, productive jobs in the private sector help people in ways government can’t. A president who does not understand these things will kill the geese who lay the golden eggs — kill them with high taxes and onerous regulations and ultimately adverse economic conditions.

Second, did the Obamas really make a tough choice to give up high-paying jobs to work in community service? The University of Chicago Medical Center reportedly pays Michelle more than $300,000 a year for her services as “vice president of community and external affairs.”

Her husband made a big splash last year with a bill to curtail lavish executive compensation. If he could incorporate that concept into his health care plan and stop hospitals from overpaying their public liaisons, it might go a long way toward cutting health costs.

We doubt, however, that Michelle would find that very “helpful.”

Campaign ‘08: In blaming America first for al-Qaida in Iraq’s presence, Barack Obama shows the difference between being glib and being articulate and just why John McCain should be president of the United States.

It was as if Neville Chamberlain was blaming World War II on Winston Churchill, or if someone had claimed Hitler wouldn’t have invaded France if the British hadn’t put their expeditionary force there first.

In an incredible long-distance exchange with McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee for president, Sen. Obama first states that he would send soldiers back to Iraq “if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq.”

When McCain responded that “al-Qaida in Iraq” has that name because it is already there, Obama replied that there was “no such thing as al-Qaida in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.”

Slick Willie, meet slicker Barack, who is blissfully unaware that terrorists hate us for what we are, not what we do.

There are many reasons why we liberated Iraq, and John McCain whispering in George Bush’s ear was not one of them. We did not “invade” Iraq. We went in under authority of U.N. Resolution 1441, which gave Saddam Hussein a “final opportunity” to give a full accounting of what happened to the WMD that the mass murderer used against his neighbors and own people, or there would be “serious consequences.” Saddam didn’t, and there were.

We’re sure Obama would rather have used some “aggressive personal diplomacy,” as he so glibly puts it, on Saddam. His policy would be to bomb an ally such as Pakistan while talking to a soon-to-be nuclear adversary such as Iran.

And as long as Obama’s borrowing phraseology from other politicians, we’re surprised he hasn’t paraphrased the words of the late William Borah, whom he rivals in naivete.

On hearing of the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939, the Idaho senator lamented: “Lord, if only I could have talked with Hitler, all this might have been avoided.”

Ah, if only Barack had been able to talk with Saddam . . .

Whether we’re talking about Saddam’s Iraq, al-Qaida, or other states and terrorist groups, the fact is that they were and are linked by a common enemy and goal — they want the U.S. destroyed. They are allies as much as Germany, Japan and Italy were allies in World War II. They may not coordinate every jot and tittle of their efforts, but the enemy of their enemy is their friend.

That there were links was confirmed by Lee Hamilton, vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, who said that the commission did not disagree with the administration’s assertion that there were connections between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

Added Thomas Kean, commission chairman: “There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there.”

Indeed there were. For example, Abdul Rahman Yasin, a member of the al-Qaida cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb, found safe haven in Iraq, and documents recently found in Tikrit indicate that Saddam provided Yasin with both a home and a salary. Why?

Back in 1999, ABC News reported that Saddam had offered bin Laden asylum, citing their “long relationship” and a December 1998 meeting in Afghanistan between Osama and Iraqi intelligence chief Faruq Hijazi. And so on, and so on.

In 1998, the Clinton Justice Department alleged in an indictment against bin Laden that “al-Qaida reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al-Qaida would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al-Qaida would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq.”

As the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes has reported, reams of captured documents show that elite Iraqi military units trained some 8,000 al-Qaida terrorists. They belonged to groups such as Algeria’s GSPC, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Ansar al Islam and the Sudanese Liberation Army, at camps in Samarra, in Ramadi and at Salman Pak, where a Boeing 707 fuselage was used for terrorist training.

Perhaps Obama has an explanation for Iraqi intelligence operative Ahmed Hikmat Shaker helping one of the 9/11 hijackers get to Malaysia and attending the Kuala Lumpur meeting in January 2000 with two of the hijackers, a meeting roundly acknowledged to be the initial 9/11 planning session.

The charge that our liberation of Iraq has caused terrorists to flock to Iraq disproves Obama’s own argument that Iraq is not central to the war on terror. Better they flock to Iraq to be killed by American and Iraqi troops than flock to a Pittsburgh or Detroit to execute plans to kill Americans here.

http://tavistalks.com/events/signatureevents/stateoftheblackunion

Very Interesting Coincidences

 I recently came across some information regarding American-Israeli relations that I thought was worth sharing.  I am not exactly sure what it all means, but I have learned enough in my life to know that there is no such thing as coincidences.

For those of you who know me,

 
I am just trying to keep it “Is-Rael”

 
The following is just a sampling with the real kicker at the end.

 October 30, 1991:

 President Bush (1st one) opened the Madrid Conference, the intended purpose of which was to strip Israel of its land in exchange for peace with the Palestinian Arabs. ON THAT VERY DAY, an extremely rare storm formed on the coast of Nova Scotia , a storm later named ‘The Perfect Storm’ (which the book and movie were about), and record-setting waves pounded the New England coast causing heavy damage to the President’s home in Kennebunkport, Maine .

 August 23, 1992:

 
The Madrid Conference moved to Washington, D.C.  With the same agenda of attempting to wrest land from a sovereign country.  That, of course, would create a state of homelessness for thousands of Jews. ON THAT VERY DAY, Hurricane Andrews produced an estimated $30 billion in damage, leaving 180,000 Floridians homeless.  It was the worst natural disaster to ever hit America, at least up to that time.

 
January 16, 1994:

President Clinton meets with the Syrian President in order to develop a strategy that would force Israel to give up the Golan Heights.  LESS THAN 24 HOURS LATER. A powerful 6.9 earthquake rocks southern California. Which left countless Americans homeless.

March 1, 1997:

Arafat begins a one-month tour of America and President Clinton publicly rebukes Israel for not surrendering land for peace. ON THE VERY DAY that Arafat lands in America, powerful tornadoes devastate huge sections of the country while ripping across Texas , Arkansas , Mississippi , Kentucky , and Tennessee .  Days later, as Arafat is still touring, storms hit the Dakotas, causing the worst flooding of the century.  Weeks of storms rage throughout the Midwest until Arafat completes his tour. The day he leaves the U.S., the storms suddenly begin to settle down, and end within a few days.

January 21, 1998:

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu meets with Clinton and is coldly received as President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeline Albright refuse to lunch with him. ON THAT VERY DAY , just hours later, the Monica Lewinski scandal erupts and will consume the major portion of Clinton’s time for the remainder of his tenure.

Others include:

The World Trade Center Bombing of 1993, on the day that Secretary Albright leaves on a trip to visit 8 Arab/Muslim countries to develop a strategy against Israel .

The Northridge Earthquake in 1994, on the day that President Clinton and Syrian President Assad demand that Israel turn the Golan Heights over to Syria.

Ravaging tornadoes hit the Mid-West on the day in 2002 that Bush negotiates Arafat’s release from Israeli capture.

In 2002 that Bush refuses to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem and refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the Capital.  Hurricane Lili hits the United States at the same time

But here, ladies and gents, is the kicker.

August of 2005 was the month when Sharon expelled the Jews of Gaza from their homes.  Just about 10,000 Jews were made homeless, in accordance with the demands of the American President and his Secretary of State.  The operation was being concluded on August 29. THAT VERY DAY, America was hit by THE WORST natural disaster to have ever occurred in America.  Hurricane Katrina hit the New Orleans area and just about 500,000 people were made homeless.

10,000 Jews out of a population of 6 million is a percentage of .00167.

500,000 Americans out of a population of 300 million is a percentage of .00167.

Election 2008: Michelle Obama didn’t seem to think there was anything in her country to be proud of until her husband’s presidential campaign took off. Maybe she should drop the politics and open a newspaper or read a blog.
Barack Obama tried to play down his wife’s statement, but it’s not the sort of remark that can be spun away. To say that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country,” and trying to justify it as pride in a political campaign, carries a casually stark assumption that there’s nothing within this country that’s really worth praising.
What do you think?

document.write(”);

It’s eight months from March to November, which is plenty of time for Obama to acquire some ballast in addition to his lofty but gaseous rhetoric. But it is also plenty of time for Democrats to develop buyer’s remorse. On MSNBC last night, host Chris Matthews had a telling interview with Kirk Watson, a state senator from Texas who is a strong Obama supporter. It’s worth actually watching the video, which is here, but here’s a partial transcript, provided by National Review’s Kathryn Lopez:

Matthews: “You are a big Barack supporter, right, Senator?”

Watson: “I am. Yes, I am.”

Matthews: “Well, name some of his legislative accomplishments. No, Senator, I want you to name some of Barack Obama’s legislative accomplishments tonight if you can.”

Watson: “Well, you know, what I will talk about is more about what he is offering the American people right now.”

Matthews: “No. No. What has he accomplished, sir? You say you support him. Sir, you have to give me his accomplishments. You’ve supported him for president. You are on national television. Name his legislative accomplishments, Barack Obama, sir.”

Watson: “Well, I’m not going to be able to name you specific items of legislative accomplishments.”

Matthews: “Can you name any? Can you name anything he’s accomplished as a congressman?”

Watson: “No, I’m not going to be able to do that tonight.”

Matthews: “Well, that is a problem isn’t it?”

At social gatherings in recent days, we’ve talked with more than one Democrat who support Mrs. Clinton but have strong enough misgivings about Obama–both because of his evident substancelessness and because of the weirdness of his supporters–that they say if he gets the nomination, they will seriously consider voting for John McCain.

<a href=”http://www.Top100Blog.com/”>TOP 100 WEBLOGS</a>