*Video* McCain Has Pastor Problems of His Own: Hagee Claims “Hitler Was Fullfilling Gods Will”
May 22, 2008
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
There are quite a few ways you could describe the controversial evangelical figure, Pastor John Hagee, all of them would likely include adjectives along the lines of “radical,” “extreme,” “zealot,” and so on, I am sure you get my drift. Hagee, whom has openly too the Catholic religion as “the greatest whore,” is also a public supporter, ally and endorser of Sen. John McCain, who after this tape gets picked by the mainstream media is going to have some explaining to do.
Obama Says McCain’s Involvement in the ‘Keating 5′ Scandal is Fair Game
May 12, 2008
With the arbitrary attacks and smears being echoed throughout the mainstream media regarding issues such as flag pin and “the pledge of allegiance” begin to fizzle out (hopefully for good, however smears and attacks are the only way the GOP knows how to win), Senator Barack Obama finally has a chance to start campaigning opposed to constanly explaining himself in the media and reporters regarding issues that are for the most part meaningless to the average American.
Final Polls out of North Carolina
May 6, 2008
Here are the latest numbers coming out of North Carolina. As I am sure most of you are aware — the polls are currently open and the turnout is even larger then they had expected. With results set to be released at approximately 8 PM, tonight is shaping up to be very interesting to say the least.
May 6: Insider Advantage has Obama leading in its North Carolina poll, but the race is significantly tighter:
Barack Obama: 47%Hillary Clinton: 43%
Media Uncertain How to Cover Wright/ Obama Split–Colbert Answers
April 30, 2008
Right now there is the same type of back and forth going on in the newsrooms all the way to the living rooms of America regarding whether or not Obama’s “divorce” from former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, is enough of a “split” or disassociation per se, between himself and the man who said on national television Monday morning that “Louis Farrakhan was one of the greatest men to come out of the 20th and 21st century.” This is where the American mainstream media finds themselves regarding Obama, his denunciation of Reverend Jeremiah Wright and how exactly they want to cover the story in terms of “was it enough” and/or “is this even a story any more?”
So let us do what we have done so many times before when America had an important question that needed answering: And that is too look to our trusty W.W.S.C.D bracelets for help. For those of you who are not familiar with what I am talking about, the W.W.S.C.D bracelet simply stands for “What Would Stephen Colbert Do?” And here is the man himself shedding his always brilliant analysis on the situation:
Look no further then the transcript and you will see that the answer to the Reverend Wright dilemma has bee answered:
COLBERT: Well, today, a disgusted Senator Barack Obama broke with his pastor in no uncertain terms saying, “I am outraged by the comments that were made…saddened over the spectacle…they offended me…I find these comments appalling…I am completely opposed to this…it is completely opposed to what I stand for…it not only makes me angry it saddens me…it shocked me…it surprised me…it directly contradicts everything I’ve done during my life…all it was was a bunch of rants that aren’t grounded in truth…I find it objectionable and offensive…Reverend Wright does not speak for me…he does not speak for our campaign…I don’t think anybody could attribute those ideas to me.” A clean break, leaving only one question.NORAH O’DONNELL: Does this put the Wright controversy behind Barack Obama?
COMMENTATOR: I don’t think so.
COLBERT: Oh, thank god. Oh, thank you, Jesus. [Referring to image of Wright] We almost lost you today…We will have more on this Reverend Wright controversy as often as we can.
It’s scary to think of where America’s media be without the guidance of Stephen Colbert, I mean this guy has the insight of Galileo, instinct of Edward R. Murrow, and intelligence of a Tom Brokaw. Making him more or less a “super” pundit, one which all the others looks to daily for leadership.
Video of Hillary Clinton’s Interview With FOX’s Bill O’Reilly
April 30, 2008
Here are the highlights from Bill O’Reilly’s interview with Hillary Clinton that will air as a two hour series beginning tonight at 8 PM est on FOX’s “The O’Reilly Factor.” The Huffington Post got it’s hands on portions of the interview transcript from ABC. Watch Hillary comment on the Wright controversy and much more, then take a look at the transcript which is located directly below the video:
From ABC News:
Hillary Clinton, in her first appearance on “The O’Reilly Factor,” matched Barack Obama’s declared outrage over Rev. Jeremiah Wright, saying she was offended by the pastor’s statements about America.In a two-part interview to air Wednesday and Thursday night at 8 p.m. ET, Clinton said it’s up to voters to decide whether the mounting controversy over Obama’s retired pastor should impact the race.
O’Reilly: “Some people say it’s not a big difference between you and Barack Obama, overall philosophy, overall outlook. It’s a democratic liberal line, he’s more liberal than you, but it’s the same thing. It’s a personality run, which is why before Rev. Wright derailed him, Barack Obama had some momentum because you are a more polarizing personality than he is. Do you agree with that?”
Here’s the transcript courtesy of ABC/Huffington Post:
- O’Reilly: “Perceived as a nicer guy.”
- Hillary: “Well, I’ve been around a long time. I bear a lot of the scars, ideological and political battles, I stand up for what I believe in.”
SOT-3321 - TRT: :37 - oc: in today.
(Hillary / O’Reilly interview - subject: Rev. Wright)
- O’Reilly: “Can you believe this Rev. Wright guy? Can you believe this guy?”
- Hillary: “Well, I’m going to leave it up to voters to decide.”
- O’Reilly: “Well, what do you think as an American?”
- Hillary: “Well, what I said when I was asked directly is that I would not have stayed in the church.
- O’Reilly: “You’re an American citizen, I’m an American citizen, He’s an American citizen, Rev. Wright. What do you think when you hear a fellow American citizen say that kind of stuff about America.”
- Hillary: “Well, I take offense. I think it’s offensive and outrageous. I’m going to express my opinion, others can express theirs. It is part of just, you know, an atmosphere we’re in today.”
"Dubya Does Comedy": White House Correspondents Dinner Highlights
April 27, 2008
The Associated Press is reporting on last nights annual White House Correspondents’ dinner, and it sounds like our fearless leader, President George W. Bush, was a bag full of fun, telling jokes, laughing it up, and ass slapping with Karl Rove and Cheney (OK, I made that last part up.) Bush poked fun at his potential successors during the Saturday night shindig, expressing surprise that none of them were in the audience:
Sen. McCain’s not here,” Bush said of GOP nominee-in-waiting - John McCain. “He probably wanted to distance himself from me a little bit. You know, he’s not alone. Jenna’s moving out too.”
Dubya then took his good old fashioned Texas ribbing and aimed it left, seizing the opportunity Bush, with the excitement of a chubby 9 year old boy about to get a piece of chocolate cake, began joking about the scandals that have dogged the campaigns of the two remaining Democratic candidates:
“Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, in explaining their absence: “Hillary Clinton couldn’t get in because of sniper fire and Senator Obama’s at church.”
The president admitted to being “a little wistful” in his final appearance at the dinner, showing video clips of his routines from previous years. He finished by conducting the U.S. Marine Band in a medley of patriotic marches. Bush was followed by Craig Ferguson, the host of CBS’ “Late Late Show.”
The Scottish-born Ferguson found middle ground between the tepid impersonations of last year’s entertainer, Rich Little, and the merciless satire that Comedy Centrals Stephen Colbert delivered in 2006.
Ferguson, who became a U.S. citizen in February, asked Bush what he was going to do after leaving office, then suggested, “You could look for a job with more vacation time.” The president has drawn criticism for the amount of time he has spent away from the White House during his presidency. Vice President Dick Cheney, Ferguson said,
“is already moving out of his residence. It takes longer than you think to pack up an entire dungeon.”
The guest list for the dinner included plenty of VIPs from outside the Beltway: Actors Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner, John Cusack, Pamela Anderson and Claire Danes, singers Ashlee Simpson and the Jonas Brothers and author Salman Rushdie were among the invitees. Washington’s power elite was still well represented, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in attendance.
Hillary Continues the Attacks: Where’s the "Peter Paul" Coverage?
April 23, 2008
It is apparent that Hillary Clinton’s strategy is to slash and burn her way through the remaining contests, much like she did in the six week run-up to the Pennsylvania Primary. Through an oblivious “smear campaign” levied against Barack Obama, Clinton has singlehandedly weakened the Democratic party as a whole in a critical fashion, one which will be abundantly clear come general election time and the campaign the republicans put together to combat Barack Obama. Throughout Clinton’s mud flinging Obama has seemingly chosen to remain on high ground, thus reinforcing his message of him being the candidate of change, one who is ushering out the “gotcha” style of politics both Hillary and John McCain represent.
However it gets to point where you just have to say enough is enough. It comes a time where it’s no longer about a pre-planned political strategy, it morphs from tactic, to personal insult, and in this case that insult has escalated too levels I can not imagine anyone saw coming, at least from one Democrat levied against another. That is what brings me to the point of this piece, in fact it’s a “two parter”, the first is more or less a question, and that is where the hell is the media in their 24/7 coverage of Hillary’s ongoing campaign finance fraud case, which is underway in California. The second half of my point is simple — Obama should utilize this case. Is it dirty politics? Yes. Is is below him? Yes. That said, does he need to hit back, showing that he not only can take a punch, but throw a mean one right back? Hell Yes.
The case I am referring too dubbed, Peter Paul v. Clinton, involves Peter Franklin Paul, a Hollywood entrepreneur, former trial attorney, and big time campaign fund raiser and now the the plaintiff in the landmark civil fraud suit against Bill and Hillary Clinton which Paul is making a better then strong case proving Hillary hid her role with then President Bill Clinton in illegally soliciting and coordinating Paul’s $1.6 million plus expenditure-donation to her campaign which resulted in the criminal prosecution by the Department Of Justice of Clinton’s finance director David Rosen:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Assistant Attorney General Christopher A. Wray announced today the unsealing of a four-count indictment charging David Rosen, the former National Finance Director for a candidate for United States Senate in the 2000 campaign, with causing false campaign finance reports to be filed with the Federal Election Commission, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 and 2.
The indictment was returned by a federal grand jury in the Central District of California and unsealed today. The indictment alleges that Rosen, an experienced professional political fund raiser, was responsible for all fundraising, planning and costs for an Aug. 12, 2000 fund raising event in Los Angeles, California for the purpose of raising money for a joint fund raising committee which benefited, in part, the campaign of Rosen’s Senate candidate.
While the event is alleged to have cost over $1.2 million, paid for with over $1.1 million of in-kind” contributions, the indictment charges that Rosen reported the in-kind contributions to be only around $400,000, knowing this figure to be false. The indictment charges that Rosen provided some documents to the joint fundraising committee’s FEC compliance officer, but withheld true costs that were known to him and provided false documents to substantiate the lower figure.
And it was Hillary Clinton’s direct involvement in the obstruction of the Department of Justice’s investigation and prosecution that has resulted in the Senate Ethics Committee Investigations of her role in the matter, along with a handful of very serious and ongoing felony violations of Federal Law. Moreover Peter Paul’s lawsuit, filed in California Superior Court, that Peter Paul made his contributions with the understanding that he would receive a laundry list of gifts, and opportunities in return for his “work.” Specifically, he alleges, he was promised:
- The president’s support for a Kennedy Center Honor for a business partner.
- The president’s support for a Presidential Medal of Freedom for his business partner.
- A reception at the White House for his business partner.
- An official visit to his business office by the president.
- A stay in the Lincoln bedroom.
- A weekend at Camp David.
- An invitation to the president’s last official State Dinner at the White House.
- The president’s participation in the global broadcast of the Hollywood Christmas Parade, which his company produced.
I really wish it never came to this, and it wouldn’t have if Hillary just let up in her relentless smears of Barack Obama, but the fact Hillary is in more trouble financially speaking (that is currently playing out in the appropriate forums) then one could imagine. You don’t believe me? Please, I beg you to take a quick look at these documents courtesy of Judicial Watch, and independently aligned, bipartisan watchdog group:
You have all of this, combined with the ongoing “Peter Paul” case currently being battled out in court, yet news along the lines of Reverend Wright, and lapel flag pins absolutely dominate the mainstream media’s primary coverage. They have remained mute regarding the serious charges currently facing Hillary in a California courtroom, and that’s fine, but then she really should have watched her attacks on Obama, especially knowing what was taking place on the wings of her campaign.
Unfortunately I do not expect Obama to use this against her, maybe he is better man then me, but I really think it’s getting to the point that between Hillary, McCain and the media, Obama as a candidate, and a person, is slowly being churned into the “status quo” politician so many of us know he’s really not. However I still find it absolutely absurd that the media has not whispered a peep about the “Peter Paul” case, if they were not going to carry negative coverage that would be one thing, but that’s not the case — just look at what they are doing to Obama.
Who is the media darling again? McCain (they love him), Hillary (this piece makes their stance on her pretty clear) or Barack Obama (Rev. Wright, “bitter-gate”, flag pin lapel, elitist, Muslim, out of touch, Karl Marx, et cetera.) I think the answer is clear on this one, and it’s that Obama is clearly does not receive the sweetheart treatment out of this bunch.
McCain’s Physical Run-In With Fellow Senator Makes Front Page News
April 20, 2008
This mornings edition of the Washington Post headlines were led by a front page story regarding the infamous temper of Sen. John McCain, this included a first-hand account of Senator McCain’s physical “dust up” with fellow Republican, Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa. The detailed story paints a picture I am sure McCain would rather have out of the public’s spectrum, and for very good reason. The Post writes:
But when McCain leaned toward Charles E. Grassley and slowly said, “My friend . . .” it seemed clear that ugliness was looming: While the plural “my friends” was usually a warm salutation from McCain, “my friend” was often a prelude to his most caustic attacks. Grassley, an Iowa Republican with a reputation as an unwavering legislator, calmly held his ground. McCain became angrier, his fist pumping even faster.
It was early 1992, and the occasion was an informal gathering of a select committee investigating lingering issues about Vietnam War prisoners and those missing in action, most notably whether any American servicemen were still being held by the Vietnamese. It is unclear precisely what issue set off McCain that day. But at some point, he mocked Grassley to his face and used a profanity to describe him. Grassley stood and, according to two participants at the meeting, told McCain, “I don’t have to take this. I think you should apologize.”
McCain refused and stood to face Grassley. “There was some shouting and shoving between them, but no punches,” recalls a spectator, who said that Nebraska Democrat Bob Kerrey helped break up the altercation.
This was not the only time McCain’s short fuse of a temper ignited during a seemingly professional setting, and it’s this which many feel, including a plethora of elected republican’s who have served with McCain, is a major deterrent in making the decision which would ultimately put this man in charge of the entire country:
Former senator Bob Smith, a New Hampshire Republican, expresses worries about McCain: “His temper would place this country at risk in international affairs, and the world perhaps in danger. In my mind, it should disqualify him.”
Will this become a major issue in the general election? Possibly, however the Democrats will have to go out of their way to make it one because if we have learned one thing over the past couple of years, more so during the current primary process, is that the mainstream media will give McCain a pass every time on issues that they wouldn’t otherwise be so gracious with.
That said we all know that combined with the media’s softball reporting regarding anything negative associated with McCain is the fact that the right will simply try to paint the democrats as “wimps,” a narrative they successfully tagged John Kerry with back in 2004 and Al Gore back in 2000. With all of these factors the Democrats will have to focus in on, and really strive to both show McCain for what he really is –a spastic bully– while at the same time showing backbone of their own, refusing to be painted as “soft” or “wimpy” by the now infamous right wing attack machine. It will no doubt be quite interesting to watch play out.
New Pentagon Transcripts Give Detailed U.S. Abuse of Prisoner Reports
April 17, 2008
WASHINGTON- The Associated Press is reporting that a story that is surely going to cause a lot of conversation about just how out of control this administration really was, and still is. Military interrogators assaulted Afghan detainees in 2003, using investigation methods they learned during self-defense training, Pentagon documents released Wednesday show. Detainees at the Gardez Detention Facility in southeastern Afghanistan reported being made to kneel outside in wet clothing and being kicked and punched in the kidneys, nose and knees if they moved, according to the documents.
A 2006 Army review concluded that the detainees were not abused but that the incident revealed “misconduct that warrants further action.”
The documents, which were turned over Wednesday evening to the American Civil Liberties Union, focus on the 2003 death of Afghan detainee Jamal Nasser, who died in U.S. custody at the Gardez facility.
The documents detail interrogation techniques used on eight detainees, including Nasser, who were suspected of weapons trafficking.
The Army review found that abuse did not cause Nasser’s death. But the documents include interviews with some interrogators who acknowledged slapping the detainees _ a technique they learned during survival training at the Army’s SERE school. SERE stands for Survive, Evade, Resist and Escape.
“You say you gave permission for (redacted) to hit detainees during interrogations; did you have a memorandum or order from your higher headquarters authorizing that?” a military criminal investigator asked one of the interrogators, according to a November 2004 transcript among the more than 300 pages of documents.
“No, I did not have a memorandum and had not seen one,” the interrogator answered, according to the transcript. “I used tactics that were used in SERE.”
The investigator continued: “Did you see (redacted) hit detainees during the interviews?”
“Yes, open or closed slaps, not punches,” the interrogator answered.
In another interview that day, according to the documents, the Army investigator asks whether “you ever heard of a tactic of pouring cold water or a water and snow mix on persons captured?”
“They do spray cold water on prisoners,” the interrogator answered, referring to SERE lessons. That interrogator was unaware, however, of men in his unit pouring cold water over the detainees, as the Afghans later complained.
ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said such interrogation techniques are taught at SERE schools only to show soldiers how to withstand them from enemy captors. She called the methods, when used together, a form of torture.
“They were intended to be defensive methods, not offensive methods,” Singh said. “This raises serious questions about the interrogation methods that were being applied in Afghanistan.”
SERE methods were also used on detainees by military interrogators in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Singh said.
The Pentagon and the Army did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday evening.
The 2004 criminal inquiry of Nasser’s death was among a string of probes into alleged abuse of prisoners in U.S. jails in Afghanistan.
Trying to deflect the kind of scandal that followed the abuse of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan ordered a review of their secretive network of about 20 jails at bases across Afghanistan.
Nasser was among eight detainees who were held at Gardez for between 18 and 20 days. The Army concluded he died of a stomach ailment.
Watch as Bush Thanks the Pope For His; "Awesome Speech."
April 16, 2008
George W. Bush manages to show once again why he is looked at as such a joke in the eyes of many American’s and more importantly the rest of the world. Pope Benedict XVI became only the second Pope to visit the White House, and he gave a speech about the purpose of his trip and the importance of democracy being informed by moral values. In attendance was, of course, Bush. The President must have been extremely impressed by the Pope’s words because right after Pope Benedict concluded his remarks, Bush leaned over and said:
“Thank you, your holiness. Awesome speech.”
