With all of our problems, do we really want a President who’s loyalty to his fellow citizens can be thrown in doubt? Our Founding Fathers were particularly concerned about foreign influence and the loyalty of the executive. That is why the Constitution designates the Presidency as requiring native citizenship.

Ayers is not in the past, he has malevolent goals now — “we did not do enough”. And putting a light on the cockroaches that surround Obama

– outreach advisor to muslims forced to resign

– An undeclared $3.5 million (£1.8 million) payment from a Iraqi-British businessman has landed Barack Obama’s former fundraiser behind bars.

–Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission (FEC), confirmed to investigative reporters that donations from foreigners are illegal and donations from individuals cannot exceed $ 2,300 for a single election. The $ 29,500 donation from the Palestinians clearly violates the law on both fronts.

This is how Republics perish, read our Founding Father’s words.

That’s why we are talking about Ayers.

I don’t think it’s a matter of cluelessness with Obama, I suspect it’s more of a ‘Chicago machine’ mindset. In that city you either do things exactly the way your told to or else. Most people can’t comprehend that level of corruption unless they’ve read enough history to know who ‘Boss Tweed’ was. Obama’s behavior is the result of existing within a zone of ABSOLUTE POWER. While he may not be the master of that power, he ‘grew up’ politically enfolded in it.

Obama is a ‘made man’ of the Chicago machine. As long as he’s useful, he’s untouchable. As long he holds the promise of becoming a conduit of power to the machine and does not threaten it’s existence he’s free to do as he will.

That’s the main part of the conflict unfolding: the Clinton machine vs the Chicago machine. Since it’s transpiring in America, it’ll just be political careers ending and beginning. If it were Moscow, there’d be Benz’s full of ex-Spetznaz toting AK’s, engaging in conflict resolution, Moscow-style. Fortunately, events in Denver won’t reach that level of excitement.

I will agree with you on the ruthlessness issue though…I suspect that comes the Alinsky side of his political pedigree. Marxists have a tendency to not leave any intact rivals in their wake.

Actually, it’s better than that: http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/TimothyCarney/T_Boone_Pickens_wants_your_water.html

Sorta like the bad olde days when the Railroad trusts romped all over the Western US…

All we need now is a 21st century Jesse James to make Picken’s life miserable and the stage will be set. Hmmm…I wonder which politician [shareholder...] is running cover for him?

—– Original Message —–
From: buddy larsen
To: feedback@foxbusiness.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: Hi, Ms Claman, re your interview w/ Austan Goolsbee

Hi Ms. Claman,

Just now watched your interview with Obama’s tax expert Austan Goolsbee, and wanted to mention that the $250k he kept implying is an individual threshold for various hefty tax increases, is in the actual Obama plan as a “family” limit –meaning $250k by both earners, if both spouses have paid jobs.

He even embroidered, smiling “not very many people make over that” or somesuch.

Grrrrr…..No, but many many COUPLEs do. Big, big difference –which I would not be making this effort to correct, except that the Obama team is doing exactly the same thing everywhere, clearly conspiring to fool us rubes who never get the wise-up.

Further, his statement –oft repeated –that the plan is a “net tax cut” is another howling fibberooski. The plan has a trick where direct payments to favored individuals (in return for certain approved behaviors) are run through IRS rather than HHS, and called a “refundable tax credit”.

What this means is, these payments get subtracted from IRS receipts.

This is how the plan can be sold as a “net tax cut”.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The ”credits” are paid by the government.

The money will be collected by taxation.

So, new taxes, only juggled off the plan (tho as Enron learned, impossible to juggle off the actual ledger).

Grrrrrr….it ain’t the $ so much as the deceit!

Anyhoo, here’s a WSJ quickie on it, from August 19, by Peter Farrara:

http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB121910303529751345.html

Thanks!

buddy larsen

I still don’t like socialists/Marxists who call themselves “progressives” in public, but privately admit to each other what I, in my time, openly and honestly told people outside of the fellow-traveling circles: we are socialists who believe in Marxist analysis and are serious about the works of the the Frankfurt School Marxists.

I’m a more honest person that Obama is. Not bragging – just a fact. I’ve already judged him unfit for command. No one is going to change my mind about this.