Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thank you for taking over the mod job. I feel you have integrity and can be trusted.
Have you confirmed the share structure lately? The last 0/S number we know is 75,891,699 from the Q and brikk's check on 8/20th.
Not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. With the credit markets continuing to improve, we may see the bottom at anytime. More optimistic looking forward now...except for this Obama thing. The talking heads can take a ton of blame for this because they've been trying to talk down this economy for at least a year to get their man elected. We have to remember that the consumer is 2/3rds of this economy. The media scared them and they stopped spending and even hiding their money. Then we had the credit meltdown and now we've got our brief recession. I don't believe we'd have been anywhere near this with balanced reporting. There is no news reporting anymore. It's all politics.
Jobless rate bolts to 14-year high of 6.5 percent
Friday November 7, 9:13 am ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
Jobless rate bolts to 14-year high of 6.5 percent in October; 240,000 jobs cut
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The nation's unemployment rate bolted to a 14-year high of 6.5 percent in October as another 240,000 jobs were cut, stark proof the economy is almost certainly in a recession.
The new snapshot, released Friday by the Labor Department, showed the crucial jobs market deteriorating at an alarmingly rapid pace.
The jobless rate zoomed to 6.5 percent in October from 6.1 percent in September, matching the rate in March 1994.
Unemployment has now surpassed the high seen after the last recession in 2001. The jobless rate peaked at 6.3 percent in June 2003.
October's decline marked the 10th straight month of payroll reductions, and government revisions showed that job losses in August and September turned out to be much deeper. Employers cut 127,000 positions in August, compared with 73,000 previously reported. A whopping 284,000 jobs were axed in September, compared with the 159,000 jobs first reported.
So far this year, a staggering 1.2 million jobs have disappeared. Over half of the decrease occurred in the past three months alone.
About 10.1 million people were unemployed in October, an increase of 2.8 million over the past year. A year ago, the unemployment rate stood at 4.8 percent.
The employment market is much weaker than economists expected. They were forecasting the unemployment rate to climb to 6.3 percent in October and for payrolls to fall by around 200,000.
Job losses were widespread, reflecting the mounting carnage from a trio of crises -- housing, credit and financial.
Factories cut 90,000 jobs, the most since July 2003. Construction companies got rid of 49,000 jobs with heavy losses in home building. Retailers cut payrolls by 38,000. Professional and business services reduced employment by 45,000. Financial activities cut 24,000 jobs, with heavy losses in mortgage banking and at securities firms. Leisure and hospitality axed 16,000 positions.
All those losses more than swamped some gains elsewhere, including in the government, as well as in education and health care.
Racing to assemble his new Democratic Cabinet, President-elect Barack Obama will huddle with economic advisers later on Friday. His team has been in close contact with the Bush administration to pave the way for a smooth hand-off of power.
All the economy's woes -- a housing collapse, mounting foreclosures, hard-to-get credit and financial market upheaval -- will confront Obama when he assumes office early next year. And, the employment situation is likely to get worse.
Many expect the jobless rate to climb to 8 percent, possibly higher, next year. In the 1980-1982 recession, the unemployment rate rose as high as 10.8 percent before inching down.
To provide fresh relief, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats, in a lame-duck session later this month, are pushing to enact another round of economic stimulus of around $100 billion.
Average hourly earnings rose to $18.21 in October, a 0.2 percent increase from the previous month, according to the Labor Department report. Over the past year, wages have grown 3.5 percent, but paychecks aren't stretching that far because high food, energy and other prices has propelled overall inflation at a faster pace.
To prevent the country from sinking into a deep and painful recession, the Federal Reserve last week ratcheted down interest rates to 1 percent and left the door open to further reductions.
The economy has lost its footing in just a few months. It contracted at a 0.3 percent pace in the July-September quarter, signaling the onset of a likely recession. It was the worst showing since 2001 recession, and reflected a massive pullback by consumers.
As U.S. consumers watch jobs disappear, they'll probably retrench even further, spelling more trouble for the sinking economy.
That's why analysts predict the economy is still shrinking in the current October-December quarter and will contract further in the first quarter of next year. All that more than fulfills a classic definition of a recession: two straight quarters of contracting economic activity.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081107/economy.html
America Has Chosen a President
Posted: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 at 5:04 am ET
The election of Sen. Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States came as a bang, not a whimper. The tremors had been perceptible for days, maybe even weeks. On Tuesday, America experienced nothing less than a political and cultural earthquake.
The margin of victory for the Democratic ticket was clear. Americans voted in record numbers and with tangible enthusiasm. By the end of the day, it was clear that Barack Obama would be elected with a majority of the popular vote and a near landslide in the Electoral College. When President-Elect Obama greeted the throngs of his supporters in Chicago's Grant Park, he basked in the glory of electoral energy.
For many of us, the end of the night brought disappointment. In this case, the disappointment is compounded by the sense that the issues that did not allow us to support Sen. Obama are matters of life and death -- not just political issues of heated debate. Furthermore, the margin of victory and sense of a shift in the political landscape point to greater disappointments ahead. We all knew that so much was at stake.
For others, the night was magical and momentous. Young and old cried tears of amazement and victory as America elected its first African-American President -- and elected him overwhelmingly. Just forty years after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, an African-American stood to claim victory as President-Elect of the nation. As Sen. Obama assured the crowd in Chicago and the watching nation, "We will get there. We will get there." No one hearing those words could fail to hear the refrain of plaintive words spoken in Memphis four decades ago. President-Elect Obama would stand upon the mountaintop that Dr. King had foreseen.
That victory is a hallmark moment in history for all Americans -- not just for those who voted for Sen. Obama. As a nation, we will never think of ourselves the same way again. Americans rich and poor, black and white, old and young, will look to an African-American man and know him as President of the United States. The President. The only President. The elected President. Our President.
Every American should be moved by the sight of young African-Americans who -- for the first time -- now believe that they have a purchase in American democracy. Old men and old women, grandsons and granddaughters of slaves and slaveholders, will look to an African-American as President.
Regardless of politics, could anyone remain unmoved by the sight of Jesse Jackson crying alone amidst the crowd in Chicago? This dimension of Election Day transcends politics and touches the heart of the American people.
Yet, the issues and the politics remain. Given the scale of the Democratic victory, the political landscape will be completely reshaped. The fight for the dignity and sanctity of unborn human beings has been set back by a great loss, and by the election of a President who has announced his intention to sign the Freedom of Choice Act into law. The struggle to protect marriage against its destruction by redefinition is now complicated by the election of a President who has declared his aim to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. On issue after issue, we face a longer, harder, and more protracted struggle than ever before.
Still, we must press on as advocates for the unborn, for the elderly, for the infirm, and for the vulnerable. We must redouble our efforts to defend marriage and the integrity of the family. We must be vigilant to protect religious liberty and the freedom of the pulpit. We face awesome battles ahead.
At the same time, we must be honest and recognize that the political maps are being redrawn before our eyes. Will the Republican Party decide that conservative Christians are just too troublesome for the party and see the pro-life movement as a liability? There is the real danger that the Republicans, stung by this defeat, will adopt a libertarian approach to divisive moral issues and show conservative Christians the door.
Others will declare these struggles over, arguing that the election of Sen. Obama means that Americans in general -- and many younger Evangelicals in particular -- are ready to "move on" to other issues. This is no time for surrender or the abandonment of our core principles. We face a much harder struggle ahead, but we have no right to abandon the struggle.
We should look for opportunities to work with the new President and his administration where we can. We must hope that he will lead and govern as the bridge-builder he claimed to be in his campaign. We must confront and oppose the Obama administration where conscience demands, but work together where conscience allows.
Evangelical Christians face another challenge with the election of Sen. Obama, and a failure to rise to this challenge will bring disrepute upon the Gospel, as well as upon ourselves. There must be absolutely no denial of the legitimacy of President-Elect Obama's election and no failure to accord this new President the respect and honor due to anyone elected to that high office. Failure in this responsibility is disobedience to a clear biblical command.
Beyond this, we must commit ourselves to pray for this new President, for his wife and family, for his administration, and for the nation. We are commanded to pray for rulers, and this new President faces challenges that are not only daunting but potentially disastrous. May God grant him wisdom. He and his family will face new challenges and the pressures of this office. May God protect them, give them joy in their family life, and hold them close together.
We must pray that God will protect this nation even as the new President settles into his role as Commander in Chief, and that God will grant peace as he leads the nation through times of trial and international conflict and tension.
We must pray that God would change President-Elect Obama's mind and heart on issues of our crucial concern. May God change his heart and open his eyes to see abortion as the murder of the innocent unborn, to see marriage as an institution to be defended, and to see a host of issues in a new light. We must pray this from this day until the day he leaves office. God is sovereign, after all.
Without doubt, we face hard days ahead. Realistically, we must expect to be frustrated and disappointed. We may find ourselves to be defeated and discouraged. We must keep ever in mind that it is God who raises up nations and pulls them down, and who judges both nations and rulers. We must not act or think as unbelievers, or as those who do not trust God.
America has chosen a President. President-Elect Barack Obama is that choice, and he faces a breathtaking array of challenges and choices in days ahead. This is the time for Christians to begin praying in earnest for our new President. There is no time to lose.
http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2715
Major victories for traditional marriage
David Crary - Associated Press Writer - 11/5/2008 6:10:00 AMBookmark and Share
WASHINGTON - Pro-family forces scored major victories in four states last night with passages of marriage amendments and a ban against homosexual adoption.
Of the 153 measures at stake nationwide, the most momentous was the proposed constitutional amendment in California that would limit marriage to heterosexual couples.
Similar measures had prevailed in 27 states before Tuesday's elections, but none were in California's situation - with thousands of gay couples already married following a state Supreme Court ruling in May.
The opposing sides together raised about $70 million, much of it from out of state, to wage their campaigns. The outcome, either way, will have a huge impact on prospects for spreading same-sex marriage to the 47 states that do not allow it.
Though Democrat Barack Obama won the presidential race in California on his way to wrapping up the White House, the vote on same-sex marriage leaned toward instituting the ban...based on more than 80-percent of the ballots counted. A crucial question was how churchgoing black and Hispanic voters - presumably a pro-Obama constituency - would vote on the ballot measure.
According to exit polls, blacks were far more likely than whites or Hispanics to support the ban. Age also was a key factor - the exit polls showed voters under 30 opposing the ban by a 2-to-1 ratio, while most voters 60 and older supported the ban.
Obama opposed the California amendment and endorses the concept of broader rights for same-sex couples.
With 90-perrcent of the polls reporting, the YES forces lead the NO camp by a 52 to 48 percent margin.
Amendments to ban gay marriage were approved in Arizona and Florida. And homosexual forces also suffered defeat in Arkansas, where voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.
It was not a good night for the pro-life movement in Colorado, South Dakota, and Washington state.
A first-of-its-kind measure in Colorado, which was defeated soundly, would have defined life as beginning at conception. Its opponents said the proposal could lead to the outlawing of some types of birth control as well as abortion.
A South Dakota measure would have banned abortions except in cases of rape, incest and serious health threat to the mother. A tougher version, without the rape and incest exceptions, lost in 2006. Pro-life activists thought the modifications would win approval, but the margin of defeat was similar, about 55 percent to 45 percent of the vote.
In Washington, voters gave solid approval to an initiative modeled after Oregon's "Death with Dignity" law, which allows a terminally ill person to be prescribed lethal medication they can administer to themselves. Since Oregon's law took effect in 1997, more than 340 people - mostly ailing with cancer - have used it to end their lives.
Amid deep economic uncertainty, proposals to cut state income taxes were defeated decisively in North Dakota and Massachusetts.
In San Francisco, an eye-catching local measure - to bar arrests for prostitution - was soundly rejected. Police and political leaders said it would hamper the fight against sex trafficking.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=311426
Disappointing Night for Pro-Life Americans
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor
(CNSNews.com) – Advancing a culture of life never was a short-term project, and it will continue despite Barack Obama’s “extreme” position on abortion, a pro-life group said on Wednesday.
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, congratulated Obama on his election victory. She also reminded him that during the course of his campaign, he and his surrogates “argued for ‘common ground’ on abortion rights.”
Yoest noted that Obama promised Planned Parenthood that his first act as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), a proposed law that would nullify virtually all federal and state limitations on abortion, including partial-birth abortion.
“In contrast to his moderate rhetoric, his support for FOCA -- which would eradicate every state and federal law regulating abortion -- is extreme,” Yoest said. “His support for FOCA stands in contradiction to the common-ground, common-sense abortion regulations that the majority of Americans support and that this radical legislation would
eliminate.”
Yoest said it’s clear that the pro-life message is “steadily gaining ground,” even though challenges remain.
"We will continue working in the days ahead to educate Americans about the threat to common sense that FOCA poses. And we will make common cause with defenders of life in both the Democrat and Republican parties, fully committed to the ultimate goal of seeing both parties dedicated to the defense of life,” Yoest said.
"We continue to hold as self-evident the truth that all were endowed with the unalienable right to life, and that governments are instituted to secure this first right. We look forward to fully realizing this truth in our day."
Americans United for Life (AUL) says it is dedicated to a nation in which every human being is welcomed in life and protected in law.
Election Day brought several other disappointments for pro-life Americans: A South Dakota ballot measure that would have outlawed most abortions in the state was defeated, and Colorado voters rejected a measure that would have defined a fertilized egg as a human being.
In California, a measure requiring parental notification before terminating a minor’s pregnancy was defeated.
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=38820
They've talked about doing something on that highway for years. The Nevada side is great now. I guess they figure it would benefit Nevada more so why waste California money. I took the dirt shoulder just a couple years ago to avoid a head-on south of the Needles summit.
edited:
It is our job as Christians to not defend or support policies (or people) that go against biblical principles. How did Christians vote for Obama when he is staunchly anti-life? He said one of his first acts would be to end all federal and state restrictions on abortion. Remember what Clinton's first act was? Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the military. What a sad time.
Remember this Obama statement:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”
I know the Vegas...Laughlin...Needles corridor very well! Driving 95 is always an adventure...especially the narrow California side.
Take care we have a lot to discuss in the coming months. I'll be around...
Michael Reagan Slams Palin Critics
Thursday, November 6, 2008 2:04 PM
By: Rick Pedraza
Michael Reagan says that despite reports in the media about bad blood between the Sarah Palin and John McCain camps, Palin is not the reason McCain lost the presidential election to Barack Obama.
The radio talk show host, Newsmax columnist and son of President Ronald Reagan, says several of McCain’s top aides, who have been making a lot of noise of late, are wrong in accusing Palin of causing the GOP candidate’s defeat.
“Palin is not the reason that John McCain lost,” Reagan tells Newsmax. “The reason John McCain lost is because of George Bush and his lack of leadership in Washington, D.C. with his own party — his lack of leadership in reaching out to conservatives members of his own party to get their help and be able to talk with them to move this government forward.”
VIDEO: Michael Reagan Slams Palin Critics
Reagan says responsibility for McCain’s loss — as well as the overall trouncing of the GOP Tuesday night — lies more with President George W. Bush.
“This goes on George Bush, not on Sarah Palin,” Reagan points out. “She should not be blamed. If anything, she helped the McCain candidacy by, in fact, bringing the base together to support someone on that ticket. I’m mad that they did not allow Sarah Palin to be Sarah Palin maybe as much as she should have.”
Reagan says he was not surprised by the results of the election and admits he expected it: “I think most of us really did expect Barack Obama to win the presidency over John McCain.”
Reagan, who says “it’s great” that America elected its first black president, disagrees with the policies Obama spoke of during the campaign and hopes much of what Obama campaigned on will turn out to be a lie just to get elected.
“The Democrats have been saying for a long time that Bush lied and people died. And we’ve been fighting back saying, ‘no, Bush didn’t lie,’” Reagan says.
“In the case of Barack Obama, I hope during the whole campaign, all the things he promised to do I hope was a lie. I’d hate to actually see him put these things into place… and I’ll fight tooth and nail to stop him from putting these things in place.
“But, do I think it’s good for America that a black man was elected president of the United States? Absolutely. I just disagree with his policies.”
Reagan says that with the most left-wing president in history, coupled together with hard-core liberals controlling Congress, America is on the fast track to socialism.
“If Barack Obama is allowed to institute all the things he talked about, we are in to socialism. But let’s be honest, the Republicans under George Bush have been ‘socialism lite,’” Reagan explains.
“If you really look at what’s been going on in Washington — a $700 billion dollar bailout, nationalizing of this, nationalizing of that — [you find] we have gotten away from where Ronald Reagan was. We have gotten away from the roots of the Republican Party. We [the Republican Party] have moved toward socialism. Maybe that’s why we recognize it in Barack Obama.”
Reagan says the Republican Party needs to get back to its roots and rebuild the party from the bottom up.
“It’s time for [the GOP leadership] to leave and allow a new group of conservative leaders to go to the top of this party and lead this party into the future under the banner of Ronald Reagan and true conservative politics. Not the conservative banner, if you will, of George Bush, who is more like Rockefeller than Reagan.”
Reagan says with a Democratic president, House and Senate, bringing back the Fairness Doctrine — which can be used as an insidious effort to muzzle conservative radio talk show hosts like him — concerns him greatly, but is all but a done deal.
“The Republicans can’t stop them,” Reagan says. “The Republicans can’t stop them at all. You’re talking about 176 people in the House, and barely any of us can breathe in the Senate of the United States with the great gap between Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. No, if they [the Democrats] want to pass it, they will pass it. And the president of the United States will, in fact, sign it.”
Reagan’s great worry is not Barack Obama as much as it is Harry Reid [D-Nev.] and Nancy Pelosi [D-Calif.] controlling the House and Senate.
“Everything that they’ve ever wanted to do to get back at conservatives they have in line to pass,” Reagan says. “They now have a president after January 20 of next year who will most likely sign these laws into law, which will hurt us, in our business, to be able to speak out against the policies of the leftist, radical government that’s going to be taking over. And it’s been radical for a long time with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank [D-Mass.], Maxine Waters [D-Calif.], Christopher Dodd [D-Conn.], and what have you. Now they have a president who will, in fact, rubber stamp their radicalism. That worries me.”
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/reagan_palin_critics/2008/11/06/148508.html
That would be a post-election shocker, wouldn't it! I can see the headlines now. Obama not U.S. citizen! Obama Illegal Immigrant! Obama actually Indonesian citizen.
I know that area a little. Spent a lot of time between Blythe and Parker. And other areas in AZ. One of my favorite states.
Let's not talk about the Eagles and other birds that are killed. It's all for the greater good...lol!
yep, looks like not only did we vote in the most left-wing family we could but also the most racially divisive. I'm still hopeful another Reagan will arise out of this. But in the meantime...
For how many years have the conservatives been trying to open up more drilling areas? For how many years have we been trying to build new nuclear plants? (30yrs) Instead we want to cover the country with a blight of wind turbines? But I guess that's ok for the environmentalists.
And this is going to be our first lady? This is exactly why you shouldn't vote without knowing who you are voting for. Is it time for mid-term elections yet?...lol
mick, your orange county link is not working.
Like Obama said “If somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can,” Obama says on the recording. “It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.”
I know OPEC won't stand for that but their recent cut is doing nothing right now. Will they cut again and risk further declines in demand? They're not stupid. Greedy but not stupid.
And Pennsylvania still voted for him.
And I believe yesterday was the biggest post-election day drop in history. It was very obvious to me that the market rallied on election day because the polls had tightened and I think wall street was hopeful McCain would win. When that didn't happen, we cratered.
Worst post-election market meltdown in history! We had the big rally on election day as I think many on wall street saw that McCain had a chance to pull this off. After he didn't, the market saw this as a long, very long, 4 years. If we lost 20% during the Carter Administration, how much will we lose now? Over 10 percent already. What a mistake for those that voted for Obama. Of course, with all the investigation going on into his Acorn ties and criminal contributions to his campaign, maybe he'll get impeached early on. There certainly was voter fraud and multiple cases of the same person donating amounts under $200 to Obama's campaign. In some cases, fictitious names donated 10-20K in less than $200 amounts. Under $200 amounts don't have to be tracked. What a mess.
And how the heck did we (we the people...not me!), vote in a president who thinks the Constitution is fundamentally flawed? Is he just going to lie through his teeth when he takes the oath? We can see what the market thinks of Obama the past 2 days. Brutal...
That would be the end of the Democratic Party if they tried a stunt like that imo.
I've been following that issue for a while now. One of many.
His paternal grandmother said that she was there in Kenya when Obama was born. I've yet to see a vault copy of his birth certificate. How this guy got elected in beyond me.
A mixture of good and bad. At least a few more states banned gay marriage...even in California! Colorado life at conception prop did not however. We all know what God's answer to that is though!
Psalm 51:5, 139-13-15 and Jeremiah 1:5 (Life begins at conception)
Or Leviticus 18:22 (homosexuality)
California voters approve gay-marriage ban
By LISA LEFF
Associated Press Writer
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Voters put a stop to same-sex marriage in California, dealing a crushing defeat to gay-rights activists in a state they hoped would be a vanguard and putting in doubt as many as 18,000 same-sex marriages conducted since a court ruling made them legal this year.
The gay-rights movement had a rough election elsewhere as well Tuesday. Amendments to ban gay marriage were approved in Arizona and Florida, and Arkansas voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear that gays and lesbians were their main target.
But California, the nation's most populous state, had been the big prize. Spending for and against Proposition 8 reached $74 million, the most expensive social-issues campaign in U.S. history and the most expensive campaign this year outside the race for the White House. Activists on both sides of the issue saw the measure as critical to building momentum for their causes.
"People believe in the institution of marriage," Frank Schubert, co-manager of the Yes on 8 campaign, said after declaring victory early Wednesday. "It's one institution that crosses ethnic divides, that crosses partisan divides. ... People have stood up because they care about marriage and they care a great deal."
With almost all precincts reporting, election returns showed the measure winning with 52 percent of the vote. An estimated 2 million to 3 million provisional and absentee ballots remained to be tallied, but based on trends and the locations of the votes still outstanding, the margin of support in favor of the initiative was secure.
Leaders of the No on 8 campaign said they were not ready to concede.
"Because Prop 8 involves the sensitive matter of individual rights, we believe it is important to wait until we receive further information about the outcome," Geoff Kors, director of Equality California, said in a statement Wednesday.
Exit polls for The Associated Press found that Proposition 8 received critical support from black voters who flocked to the polls to support Barack Obama for president. About seven in 10 blacks voted in favor of the ban, while Latinos also supported it and whites were split.
Californians overwhelmingly passed a ban on same-sex marriage in 2000, but gay-rights supporters had hoped public opinion on the issue had shifted enough for this year's measure to be rejected.
"We pick ourselves up and trudge on," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been enormous movement in favor of full equality in eight short years. That is the direction this is heading, and if it's not today or it's not tomorrow, it will be soon."
The constitutional amendment limits marriage to heterosexual couples, nullifying the California Supreme Court decision that had made same-sex marriages legal in the state since June.
Similar bans had prevailed in 27 states before Tuesday's elections, but none were in California's situation - with about 18,000 gay couples already married. The state attorney general, Jerry Brown, has said those marriages will remain valid, although legal challenges are possible.
Despite intense disappointment, some newlyweds chose to look on the positive side, taking comfort that millions of Californians had voted to validate their relationships.
"I'm really OK," said Diana Correia, of Berkeley, who married her partner of 18 years, Cynthia Correia, on Sunday in front of the couple's two children and 80 relatives and friends. "I hope the marriage holds, but we are already married in our hearts, so nobody can take that away."
Jake Rowe, 27, and James Eslick, 29, were in the midst of getting married at Sacramento City Hall on Wednesday morning when someone from the clerk's office stopped the wedding. But not all county clerks stopped sanctioning same-sex marriages Wednesday.
Grace Chavez, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County registrar's office in Norwalk, said weddings for gay couples were being performed in first floor chapel. But in San Francisco, county clerk Karen Hong Lee said gay couples were asked to wait until the office received guidance from state officials.
Kate Folmar, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said initiatives typically take effect the day after an election, although the results from Tuesday's races will not be certified until Dec. 13.
Dana Simas, a spokeswoman for Brown, said the attorney general's office has yet to decide whether same-sex marriages conducted after Election Day would be valid.
Gay-rights legal groups filed a petition Wednesday asking the Supreme Court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the grounds that voters did not have the authority to make such a dramatic change in state law without approval from the Legislature. The court refused to hear a similar petition in June, when gay-rights activists tried to knock the measure off the ballot.
Tuesday's vote drops the number of states that allow gay marriage to one, though it will soon rise again to two.
A ruling by Massachusetts' highest court made same-sex marriage legal there in 2004. A ruling last month by the Connecticut Supreme Court will make gay marriage legal there beginning next week. All other states specifically forbid it except for New York, which recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, and Rhode Island, where state law is silent on the subject.
Elsewhere, voters in Colorado and South Dakota rejected measures that could have led to sweeping bans of abortion, and Washington became only the second state - after Oregon - to offer terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide.
A first-of-its-kind measure in Colorado, which was defeated soundly, would have defined life as beginning at conception. Its opponents said the proposal could lead to the outlawing of some types of birth control as well as abortion.
The South Dakota measure would have banned abortions except in cases of rape, incest and serious health threat to the mother. A tougher version, without the rape and incest exceptions, lost in 2006. Anti-abortion activists thought the modifications would win approval, but the margin of defeat was similar, about 55 percent to 45 percent of the vote.
"The lesson here is that Americans, in states across the country, clearly support women's ability to access abortion care without government interference," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation.
In Washington, voters gave solid approval to an initiative modeled after Oregon's "Death with Dignity" law, which allows a terminally ill person to be prescribed lethal medication they can administer to themselves. Since Oregon's law took effect in 1997, more than 340 people - mostly ailing with cancer - have used it to end their lives.
The marijuana reform movement won two prized victories, with Massachusetts voters decriminalizing possession of small amounts of the drug and Michigan joining 12 other states in allowing use of pot for medical purposes.
Henceforth, people caught in Massachusetts with an ounce or less of pot will no longer face criminal penalties. Instead, they'll forfeit the marijuana and pay a $100 civil fine.
The Michigan measure will allow severely ill patients to register with the state and legally buy, grow and use small amounts of marijuana to relieve pain, nausea, appetite loss and other symptoms.
Nebraska voters, meanwhile, approved a ban on race- and gender-based affirmative action, similar to measures previously approved in California, Michigan and Washington. Returns in Colorado on a similar measure were too close to call.
Ward Connerly, the California activist-businessman who has led the crusade against affirmative action, said Obama's victory proved his point. "We have overcome the scourge of race," Connerly said.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BALLOT_MEASURES?SITE=NCAGW&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
The liberal mainstream media is already trying to spin why the market cratered today. Wall street is not stupid. Investors know what taxes and regulation does for the economy and investments. We were doing just fine until the Democrats took control of Congress two years ago. When will people learn?
I totally agree. I have no idea how someone with his views and associations was even able to make it past the first round. What do people thing happens when you say tax a business more? The business has to either raise the price or fire some workers. Unfortunately, people just aren't informed and all they heard was change. They have no clue what this man is about to do.
Our only hope is that we know what happened after 4 years of Carter. I look at it this way. After 4 years of Obama, it will either be the end of America as we know it or it will be the end of the Democratic party because of how poor the economy will be. After double digit inflation (12%) and 20% interest rates from the Carter administration, we were blessed with one of our greatest presidents ever, Reagan. That's my hope come 2012/2013 (maybe 2010 for congress). Who will be the next Reagan? Could it be Palin? Duncan Hunter? Sam Brownback? Tom Tancredo? ???
After a huge meltdown in the market which I felt initially was the credit crunch, but later became an Obama meltdown, which way will it go now? I think yesterday was a rally because it looked like McCain had a chance. Now that we have our socialist heading to the Whitehouse, which way will the market go for the next 4 years? Under Carter, it was down 20% by the time he left. With all the weight of more income taxes, much higher capital gains taxes, the expiration of President Bush's tax cuts, payroll tax increases, and the hundreds of other tax increases that Obama has proposed, it will not be good for growth. Add to that the weight of new taxes and regulation on businesses, and it could be a miserable 4 years. The only chance we have is that the market sold off so hard in advance of his election that it eventually has to recover some (maybe). Hard to get excited about anything other than CD's right now.
Unemployment: 8%
Inflation: 12%
Interest Rates: 20%
Fairness Doctrine
Defense Cuts
Foreign Policy Appeasement
Remember those times?
Remember the last time we had a true liberal in the White House?
We will now have the most liberal member of Congress in the Whitehouse come January 20th. More liberal than Sen. Edward Kennedy
With a liberal Congress and a socialist president, how bad will it get this time around?
On the bright side, the American people got so fed up with Carter's presidency that we got 8 wonderful years of Reagan! That's where my hope is today. Either this will be the end of America as we know it or it will be the end of the Democratic party after they screw up the next 4 years more than Carter's clan did.
Where will the next Reagan come from?
We sure could use another Reagan right now!!! We thought Carter was bad. Imagine 4 years of Obama. Maybe another Reagan would emerge but I'd rather not have this country suffer for 4 years. McCain is not a Reagan conservative but he will certainly defend this country, defend life and believe in the American people a lot more than Obama will. Let's hope and prayer that we don't have to find out how bad it could become!
TIME TO RECAPTURE OUR DESTINY - ACCEPTANCE OF REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT AT THE 1980 REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION IN DETROIT, MICHIGAN (July 17, 1980)
See also: Edwin Meese on 1980 Election (RealPlayer footage)
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice President-to-be, this convention, my fellow citizens of this great nation:
With a deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust, I accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States. I do so with deep gratitude, and I think also I might interject on behalf of all of us, our thanks to Detroit and the people of Michigan and to this city for the warm hospitality they have shown. And I thank you for your wholehearted response to my recommendation in regard to George Bush as a candidate for vice president.
I am very proud of our party tonight. This convention has shown to all America a party united, with positive programs for solving the nation's problems -- a party ready to build a new consensus with all those across the land who share a community of values embodied in these words: family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom.
I know we have had a quarrel or two, but only as to the method of attaining a goal. There was no argument about the goal. As president, I will establish a liaison with the 50 governors to encourage them to eliminate, where it exists, discrimination against women. I will monitor federal laws to ensure their implementation and to add statutes if they are needed.
More than anything else, I want my candidacy to unify our country; to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values.
Never before in our history have Americans been called upon to face three grave threats to our very existence, any one of which could destroy us. We face a disintegrating economy, a weakened defense and an energy policy based on the sharing of scarcity.
The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic Party leadership -- in the White House and in Congress -- for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. They tell us they have done the most that humanly could be done. They say that the United States has had its day in the sun; that our nation has passed its zenith. They expect you to tell your children that the American people no longer have the will to cope with their problems; that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.
My fellow citizens, I utterly reject that view. The American people, the most generous on earth, who created the highest standard of living, are not going to accept the notion that we can only make a better world for others by moving backwards ourselves. Those who believe we can have no business leading the nation.
I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nation's highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it.
We need rebirth of the American tradition of leadership at every level of government and in private life as well. The United States of America is unique in world history because it has a genius for leaders -- many leaders, on many levels. But back in 1976, Mr. Carter said, "Trust me." And a lot of people did. Now, many of those people are out of work. Many have seen their savings eaten away by inflation. Many others on fixed incomes, especially the elderly, have watched helplessly as the cruel tax of inflation wasted away their purchasing power. And, today, a great many who trusted Mr. Carter wonder if we can survive the Carter policies of national defense.
"Trust me" government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what's best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs -- in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact.
Three hundred and sixty years ago, in 1620, a group of families dared to cross a mighty ocean to build a future for themselves in a new world. When they arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts, they formed what they called a "compact," an agreement among themselves to build a community and abide by its laws.
The single act -- the voluntary binding together of free people to live under the law -- set the pattern for what was to come.
A century and a half later, the descendants of those people pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to found this nation. Some forfeited their fortunes and their lives; none sacrificed honor.
Four score and seven years later, Abraham Lincoln called upon the people of all America to renew their dedication and their commitment to a government of, for and by the people.
Isn't it once again time to renew our compact of freedom; to pledge to each other all that is best in our lives; all that gives meaning to them -- for the sake of this, our beloved and blessed land?
Together, let us make this a new beginning. Let us make a commitment to care for the needy; to teach our children the values and the virtues handed down to us by our families; to have the courage to defend those values and the willingness to sacrifice for them.
Let us pledge to restore, in our time, the American spirit of voluntary service, of cooperation, of private and community initiative; a spirit that flows like a deep and mighty river through the history of our nation.
As your nominee, I pledge to restore to the federal government the capacity to do the people's work without dominating their lives. I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely; its ability to act tempered by prudence and its willingness to do good balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.
The first Republican president once said, "While the people retain their virtue and their vigilance, no administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can seriously injure the government in the short space of four years."
If Mr. Lincoln could see what's happened in these last three and a half years, he might hedge a little on that statement. But with the virtues that our legacy as a free people and with the vigilance that sustains liberty, we still have time to use our renewed compact to overcome the injuries that have been done to America these past three and a half years.
First, we must overcome something the present administration has cooked up: a new and altogether indigestible economic stew, one part inflation, one part high unemployment, one part recession, one part runaway taxes, one party deficit spending and seasoned by an energy crisis. It's an economic stew that has turned the national stomach.
Ours are not problems of abstract economic theory. Those are problems of flesh and blood; problems that cause pain and destroy the moral fiber of real people who should not suffer the further indignity of being told by the government that it is all somehow their fault. We do not have inflation because -- as Mr. Carter says -- we have lived too well.
The head of a government which has utterly refused to live within its means and which has, in the last few days, told us that this year's deficit will be $60 billion, dares to point the finger of blame at business and labor, both of which have been engaged in a losing struggle just trying to stay even.
High taxes, we are told, are somehow good for us, as if, when government spends our money it isn't inflationary, but when we spend it, it is.
Those who preside over the worst energy shortage in our history tell us to use less, so that we will run out of oil, gasoline, and natural gas a little more slowly. Conservation is desirable, of course, for we must not waste energy. But conservation is not the sole answer to our energy needs.
America must get to work producing more energy. The Republican program for solving economic problems is based on growth and productivity.
Large amounts of oil and natural gas lay beneath our land and off our shores, untouched because the present administration seems to believe the American people would rather see more regulation, taxes and controls than more energy.
Coal offers great potential. So does nuclear energy produced under rigorous safety standards. It could supply electricity for thousands of industries and millions of jobs and homes. It must not be thwarted by a tiny minority opposed to economic growth which often finds friendly ears in regulatory agencies for its obstructionist campaigns.
Make no mistake. We will not permit the safety of our people or our environment heritage to be jeopardized, but we are going to reaffirm that the economic prosperity of our people is a fundamental part of our environment.
Our problems are both acute and chronic, yet all we hear from those in positions of leadership are the same tired proposals for more government tinkering, more meddling and more control -- all of which led us to this state in the first place.
Can anyone look at the record of this administration and say, "Well done"? Can anyone compare the state of our economy when the Carter Administration took office with where we are today and say, "Keep up the good work"? Can anyone look at our reduced standing in the world today and say, "Let's have four more years of this"?
I believe the American people are going to answer these questions the first week of November and their answer will be, "No -- we've had enough." And, then it will be up to us -- beginning next January 20 -- to offer an administration and congressional leadership of competence and more than a little courage.
We must have the clarity of vision to see the difference between what is essential and what is merely desirable, and then the courage to bring our government back under control and make it acceptable to the people.
It is essential that we maintain both the forward momentum of economic growth and the strength of the safety net beneath those in society who need help. We also believe it is essential that the integrity of all aspects of Social Security are preserved.
Beyond these essentials, I believe it is clear our federal government is overgrown and overweight. Indeed, it is time for our government to go on a diet. Therefore, my first act as chief executive will be to impose an immediate and thorough freeze on federal hiring. Then, we are going to enlist the very best minds from business, labor and whatever quarter to conduct a detailed review of every department, bureau and agency that lives by federal appropriations. We are also going to enlist the help and ideas of many dedicated and hard working government employees at all levels who want a more efficient government as much as the rest of us do. I know that many are demoralized by the confusion and waste they confront in their work as a result of failed and failing policies.
Our instructions to the groups we enlist will be simple and direct. We will remind them that government programs exist at the sufferance of the American taxpayer and are paid for with money earned by working men and women. Any program that represents a waste of their money -- a theft from their pocketbooks -- must have that waste eliminated or the program must go -- by executive order where possible; by congressional action where necessary. Everything that can be run more effectively by state and local government we shall turn over to state and local government, along with the funding sources to pay for it. We are going to put an end to the money merry-go-round where our money becomes Washington's money, to be spent by the states and cities exactly the way the federal bureaucrats tell them to.
I will not accept the excuse that the federal government has grown so big and powerful that it is beyond the control of any president, any administration or Congress. We are going to put an end to the notion that the American taxpayer exists to fund the federal government. The federal government exists to serve the American people. On January 20, we are going to re-establish that truth.
Also on that date we are going to initiate action to get substantial relief for our taxpaying citizens and action to put people back to work. None of this will be based on any new form of monetary tinkering or fiscal sleight-of-hand. We will simply apply to government the common sense we all use in our daily lives.
Work and family are at the center of our lives, the foundation of our dignity as a free people. When we deprive people of what they have earned, or take away their jobs, we destroy their dignity and undermine their families. We cannot support our families unless there are jobs, and we cannot have jobs unless people have both money to invest and the faith to invest it.
There are concepts that stem from an economic system that for more than 200 years has helped us master a continent, create a previously undreamed of prosperity for our people and has fed millions of others around the globe. That system will continue to serve us in the future if our government will stop ignoring the basic values on which it was built and stop betraying the trust and good will of the American workers who keep it going.
The American people are carrying the heaviest peacetime tax burden in our nation's history -- and it will grow even heavier, under present law, next January. We are taxing ourselves into economic exhaustion and stagnation, crushing our ability and incentive to save, invest and produce.
This must stop. We must halt this fiscal self-destruction and restore sanity to our economic system.
I have long advocated a 30 percent reduction in income tax rates over a period of three years. This phased tax reduction would begin with a 10 percent "down payment" tax cut in 1981, which the Republicans and Congress and I have already proposed.
A phased reduction of tax rates would go a long way toward easing the heavy burden on the American people. But we should not stop here.
Within the context of economic conditions and appropriate budget priorities during each fiscal year of my presidency, I would strive to go further. This would include improvement in business depreciation taxes so we can stimulate investment in order to get plants and equipment replaced, put more Americans back to work and put our nation back on the road to being competitive in world commerce. We will also work to reduce the cost of government as a percentage of our gross national product.
The first task of national leadership is to set honest and realistic priorities in our policies and our budget and I pledge that my administration will do that.
When I talk of tax cuts, I am reminded that every major tax cut in this century has strengthened the economy, generated renewed productivity and ended up yielding new revenues for the government by creating new investment, new jobs and more commerce among our people.
The present administration has been forced by us Republicans to play follow-the-leader with regard to a tax cut. But, in this election year we must take with the proverbial "grain of salt" any tax cut proposed by those who have given us the greatest tax increase in our history. When those in leadership give us tax increases and tell us we must also do with less, have they thought about those who have always had less -- especially the minorities? This is like telling them that just as they step on the first rung of the ladder of opportunity, the ladder is being pulled out from under them. That may be the Democratic leadership's message to the minorities, but it won't be ours. Our message will be: we have to move ahead, but we're not going to leave anyone behind. Thanks to the economic policies of the Democratic Party, millions of Americans find themselves out of work. Millions more have never even had a fair chance to learn new skills, hold a decent job, or secure for themselves and their families a share in the prosperity of this nation.
It is time to put America back to work; to make our cities and towns resound with the confident voices of men and women of all races, nationalities and faiths bringing home to their families a decent paycheck they can cash for honest money.
For those without skills, we'll find a way to help them get skills.
For those without job opportunities, we'll stimulate new opportunities, particularly in the inner cities where they live.
For those who have abandoned hope, we'll restore hope and we'll welcome them into a great national crusade to make America great again!
When we move from domestic affairs and cast our eyes abroad, we see an equally sorry chapter on the record of the present administration.
As Soviet combat brigade trains in Cuba, just 90 miles from our shores.
A Soviet army of invasion occupies Afghanistan, further threatening our vital interests in the Middle East.
America's defense strength is at its lowest ebb in a generation, while the Soviet Union is vastly outspending us in both strategic and conventional arms.
Our European allies, looking nervously at the growing menace from the East, turn to us for leadership and fail to find it.
And, incredibly, more than 50 of our fellow Americans have been held captive for over eight months by a dictatorial foreign power that holds us up to ridicule before the world.
Adversaries large and small test our will and seek to confound our resolve, but we are given weakness when we need strength; vacillation when the times demand firmness.
The Carter Administration lives in the world of make-believe. Every day, drawing up a response to that day's problems, troubles, regardless of what happened yesterday and what will happen tomorrow.
The rest of us, however, live in the real world. It is here that disasters are overtaking our nation without any real response from Washington.
This is make-believe, self-deceit and -- above all -- transparent hypocrisy.
For example, Mr. Carter says he supports the volunteer army, but he lets military pay and benefits slip so low that many of our enlisted personnel are actually eligible for food stamps. Re-enlistment rates drop and, just recently, after he fought all week against a proposal to increase the pay of our men and women in uniform, he helicoptered to our carrier, the U.S.S. Nimitz, which was returning from long months of duty. He told the crew that he advocated better pay for them and their comrades! Where does he really stand, now that he's back on shore?
I'll tell you where I stand. I do not favor a peacetime draft or registration, but I do favor pay and benefit levels that will attract and keep highly motivated men and women in our volunteer forces and an active reserve trained and ready for an instant call in case of an emergency.
There may be a sailor at the helm of the ship of state, but the ship has no rudder. Critical decisions are made at times almost in comic fashion, but who can laugh? Who was not embarrassed when the administration handed a major propaganda victory in the United Nations to the enemies of Israel, our staunch Middle East ally for three decades, and then claim that the American vote was a "mistake," the result of a "failure of communication" between the president, his secretary of state, and his U.N. ambassador?
Who does not feel a growing sense of unease as our allies, facing repeated instances of an amateurish and confused administration, reluctantly conclude that America is unwilling or unable to fulfill its obligations as the leader of the free world?
Who does not feel rising alarm when the question in any discussion of foreign policy is no longer, "Should we do something?” but, "Do we have the capacity to do anything?"
The administration which has brought us to this state is seeking your endorsement for four more years of weakness, indecision, mediocrity and incompetence. No American should vote until he or she has asked, is the United States stronger and more respected now than it was three and a half years ago? Is the world today a safer place in which to live?
It is the responsibility of the president of the United States, in working for peace, to ensure that the safety of our people cannot successfully be threatened by a hostile foreign power. As president, fulfilling that responsibility will be my number one priority.
We are not a warlike people. Quite the opposite. We always seek to live in peace. We resort to force infrequently and with great reluctance -- and only after we have determined that it is absolutely necessary. We are awed -- and rightly so -- by the forces of destruction at loose in the world in this nuclear era. But neither can we be naive or foolish. Four times in my lifetime America has gone to war, bleeding the lives of its young men into the sands of beachheads, the fields of Europe and the jungles and rice paddies of Asia. We know only too well that war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong, but when they are weak. It is then that tyrants are tempted.
We simply cannot learn these lessons the hard way again without risking our destruction.
Of all the objectives we seek, first and foremost is the establishment of lasting world peace. We must always stand ready to negotiate in good faith, ready to pursue any reasonable avenue that holds forth the promise of lessening tensions and furthering the prospects of peace. But let our friends and those who may wish us ill take note: the United States has an obligation to its citizens and to the people of the world never to let those who would destroy freedom dictate the future course of human life on this planet. I would regard my election as proof that we have renewed our resolve to preserve world peace and freedom. This nation will once again be strong enough to do that.
This evening marks the last step -- save one -- of a campaign that has taken Nancy and me from one end of this great land to the other, over many months and thousands of miles. There are those who question the way we choose a president; who say that our process imposes difficult and exhausting burdens on those who seek the office. I have not found it so.
It is impossible to capture in words the splendor of this vast continent which God has granted as our portion of this creation. There are no words to express the extraordinary strength and character of this breed of people we call Americans.
Everywhere we have met thousands of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans from all economic conditions and walks of life bound together in that community of shared values of family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom. They are concerned, yes, but they are not frightened. They are disturbed but not dismayed. They are the kind of men and women Tom Paine had in mind when he wrote -- during the darkest days of the American Revolution -- "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."
Nearly 150 years after Tom Paine wrote those words, an American president told the generation of the Great Depression that it had a "rendezvous with destiny." I believe that this generation of Americans today has a rendezvous with destiny.
Tonight, let us dedicate ourselves to renewing the American compact. I ask you not simply to "Trust me," but to trust your values -- our values -- and to hold me responsible for living up to them. I ask you to trust that American spirit which knows no ethnic, religious, social, political, regional or economic boundaries -- the spirit that burned with zeal in the hearts of millions of immigrants from every corner of the Earth who came here in search of freedom.
Some say that spirit no longer exists. But I have seen it -- I have felt it -- all across the land, in the big cities, the small towns and in rural America. The American spirit is still there, ready to blaze into life if you and I are willing to do what has to be done; the practical, down-to-earth things that will stimulate our economy, increase productivity and put America back to work. The time is now to resolve that the basis of a firm and principled foreign policy is one that takes the world as it is and seeks to change it by leadership and example; not by harangue, harassment or wishful thinking.
The time is now to say that while we shall seek new friendships and expand and improve others, we shall not do so by breaking our word or casting aside old friends and allies.
And, the time is now to redeem promises once made to the American people by another candidate, in another time and another place. He said, "For three long years I have been going up and down this country preaching that government -- federal, state, and local -- costs too much. I shall not stop that preaching. As an immediate program of action, we must abolish useless offices. We must eliminate unnecessary functions of government...we must consolidate subdivisions of government and, like the private citizen, give up luxuries which we can no longer afford.
"I propose to you, my friends, and through you that government of all kinds, big and little, be made solvent and that the example be set by the president of the United State and his Cabinet."
So said Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his acceptance speech to the Democratic National Convention in July 1932.
The time is now, my fellow Americans, to recapture our destiny, to take it into our own hands. But, to do this will take many of us, working together. I ask you tonight to volunteer your help in this cause so we can carry our message throughout the land.
Yes, isn't now the time that we, the people, carried out these unkept promises? Let us pledge to each other and to all America on this July day 48 years later, we intend to do just that.
I have thought of something that is not part of my speech and I'm worried over whether I should do it.
Can we doubt that only a Divine Providence placed this land -- this island of freedom -- here as a refuge for all those people in the world who yearn to breathe freely: Jews and Christians enduring persecution behind the Iron Curtain, the boat people of Southeast Asia, of Cuba and Haiti, the victims of drought and famine in Africa, the freedom fighters of Afghanistan and our own countrymen held in savage captivity.
I'll confess that I've been a little afraid to suggest what I'm going to suggest -- I'm more afraid not to -- that we begin our crusade joined together in a moment of silent prayer. God bless America.
http://reagansheritage.org/html/reagan07_17_80.shtml
We sure could use a little Ronald Reagan right now! Well, here ya go!
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS (January 20, 1981)
Senator Hatfield, Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. President, Vice President Bush, Vice President Mondale, Senator Baker, Speaker O'Neill, Reverend Moomaw, and my fellow citizens:
To a few of us here today, this is a solemn and most momentous occasion, and yet in the history of our nation it is a commonplace occurrence. The orderly transfer of authority as called for in the Constitution routinely takes place, as it has for almost two centuries, and few of us stop to think how unique we really are. In the eyes of many in the world, this every-four-year ceremony we accept as normal is nothing less than a miracle.
Mr. President, I want our fellow citizens to know how much you did to carry on this tradition. By your gracious cooperation in the transition process, you have shown a watching world that we are a united people pledged to maintaining a political system which guarantees individual liberty to a greater degree than any other, and I thank you and your people for all your help in maintaining the continuity which is the bulwark of our Republic.
The business of our nation goes forward. These United States are confronted with an economic affliction of great proportions. We suffer from the longest and one of the worst sustained inflations in our national history. It distorts our economic decisions, penalizes thrift, and crushes the struggling young and the fixed-income elderly alike. It threatens to shatter the lives of millions of our people.
Idle industries have cast workers into unemployment, human misery, and personal indignity. Those who do work are denied a fair return for their labor by a tax system which penalizes successful achievement and keeps us from maintaining full productivity.
But great as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. For decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.
You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation? We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. And let there be no misunderstanding: We are going to begin to act, beginning today.
The economic ills we suffer have come upon us over several decades. They will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away. They will go away because we as Americans have the capacity now, as we've had in the past, to do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.
We hear much of special interest groups. Well, our concern must be for a special interest group that has been too long neglected. It knows no sectional boundaries or ethnic and racial divisions, and it crosses political party lines. It is made up of men and women who raise our food, patrol our streets, man our mines and factories, teach our children, keep our homes, and heal us when we're sick -- professionals, industrialists, shopkeepers, clerks, cabbies, and truck drivers. They are, in short, “We the people,” this breed called Americans.
Well, this administration's objective will be a healthy, vigorous, growing economy that provides equal opportunities for all Americans with no barriers born of bigotry or discrimination. Putting America back to work means putting all Americans back to work. Ending inflation means freeing all Americans from the terror of runaway living costs. All must share in the productive work of this “new beginning,” and all must share in the bounty of a revived economy. With the idealism and fair play which are the core of our system and our strength, we can have a strong and prosperous America, at peace with itself and the world.
So, as we begin, let us take inventory. We are a nation that has a government -- not the other way around. And this makes us special among the nations of the Earth. Our government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government, which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed.
It is my intention to curb the size and influence of the federal establishment and to demand recognition of the distinction between the powers granted to the federal government and those reserved to the states or to the people. All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create the states; the states created the federal government.
Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it's not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work -- work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it.
If we look to the answer as to why for so many years we achieved so much, prospered as no other people on Earth, it was because here in this land we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before. Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on Earth. The price for this freedom at times has been high, but we have never been unwilling to pay that price.
It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government. It is time for us to realize that we're too great a nation to limit ourselves to small dreams. We're not, as some would have us believe, doomed to an inevitable decline. I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing. So, with all the creative energy at our command, let us begin an era of national renewal. Let us renew our determination, our courage, and our strength. And let us renew our faith and our hope.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are not heroes, they just don't know where to look. You can see heroes every day going in and out of factory gates. Others, a handful in number, produce enough food to feed all of us and then the world beyond. You meet heroes across a counter, and they're on both sides of that counter. There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves and faith in an idea who create new jobs, new wealth and opportunity. They're individuals and families whose taxes support the government and whose voluntary gifts support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their patriotism is quiet, but deep. Their values sustain our national life.
Now, I have used the words “they'” and “their” in speaking of these heroes. I could say “you” and “your,” because I'm addressing the heroes of whom I speak -- you, the citizens of this blessed land. Your dreams, your hopes, your goals are going to be the dreams, the hopes, and the goals of this administration, so help me God.
We shall reflect the compassion that is so much a part of your makeup. How can we love our country and not love our countrymen; and loving them, reach out a hand when they fall, heal them when they're sick, and provide opportunity to make them self-sufficient so they will be equal in fact and not just in theory?
Can we solve the problems confronting us? Well, the answer is an unequivocal and emphatic “yes.” To paraphrase Winston Churchill, I did not take the oath I've just taken with the intention of presiding over the dissolution of the world's strongest economy.
In the days ahead I will propose removing the roadblocks that have slowed our economy and reduced productivity. Steps will be taken aimed at restoring the balance between the various levels of government. Progress may be slow, measured in inches and feet, not miles, but we will progress. It is time to reawaken this industrial giant, to get government back within its means, and to lighten our punitive tax burden. And these will be our first priorities, and on these principles there will be no compromise.
On the eve of our struggle for independence a man who might have been one of the greatest among the Founding Fathers, Dr. Joseph Warren, president of the Massachusetts Congress, said to his fellow Americans, "Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of….On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important questions upon which rests the happiness and the liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves."
Well, I believe we, the Americans of today, are ready to act worthy of ourselves, ready to do what must be done to ensure happiness and liberty for ourselves, our children, and our children's children. And as we renew ourselves here in our own land, we will be seen as having greater strength throughout the world. We will again be the exemplar of freedom and a beacon of hope for those who do not now have freedom.
To those neighbors and allies who share our freedom, we will strengthen our historic ties and assure them of our support and firm commitment. We will match loyalty with loyalty. We will strive for mutually beneficial relations. We will not use our friendship to impose on their sovereignty, for our own sovereignty is not for sale.
As for the enemies of freedom, those who are potential adversaries, they will be reminded that peace is the highest aspiration of the American people. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it; we will not surrender for it, now or ever.
Our forbearance should never be misunderstood. Our reluctance for conflict should not be misjudged as a failure of will. When action is required to preserve our national security, we will act. We will maintain sufficient strength to prevail if need be, knowing that if we do so we have the best chance of never having to use that strength.
Above all, we must realize that no arsenal or no weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have. It is a weapon that we as Americans do have. Let that be understood by those who practice terrorism and prey upon their neighbors.
I'm told that tens of thousands of prayer meetings are being held on this day, and for that I'm deeply grateful. We are a nation under God, and I believe God intended for us to be free. It would be fitting and good, I think, if on each Inaugural Day in future years it should be declared a day of prayer.
This is the first time in our history that this ceremony has been held, as you've been told, on this West Front of the Capitol. Standing here, one faces a magnificent vista, opening up on this city's special beauty and history. At the end of this open mall are those shrines to the giants on whose shoulders we stand.
Directly in front of me, the monument to a monumental man, George Washington, father of our country. A man of humility who came to greatness reluctantly. He led America out of revolutionary victory into infant nationhood. Off to one side, the stately memorial to Thomas Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence flames with his eloquence. And then, beyond the Reflecting Pool, the dignified columns of the Lincoln Memorial. Whoever would understand in his heart the meaning of America will find it in the life of Abraham Lincoln.
Beyond those monuments to heroism is the Potomac River, and on the far shore the sloping hills of Arlington National Cemetery, with its row upon row of simple white markers bearing crosses or Stars of David. They add up to only a tiny fraction of the price that has been paid for our freedom.
Each one of those markers is a monument to the kind of hero I spoke of earlier. Their lives ended in places called Belleau Wood, The Argonne, Omaha Beach, Salerno, and halfway around the world on Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Pork Chop Hill, the Chosin Reservoir, and in a hundred rice paddies and jungles of a place called Vietnam.
Under one such marker lies a young man, Martin Treptow, who left his job in a small town barbershop in 1917 to go to France with the famed Rainbow Division. There, on the western front, he was killed trying to carry a message between battalions under heavy artillery fire.
We're told that on his body was found a diary. On the flyleaf under the heading, “My Pledge,” he had written these words: “America must win this war. Therefore I will work, I will save, I will sacrifice, I will endure, I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the issue of the whole struggle depended on me alone.”
The crisis we are facing today does not require of us the kind of sacrifice that Martin Treptow and so many thousands of others were called upon to make. It does require, however, our best effort and our willingness to believe in ourselves and to believe in our capacity to perform great deeds, to believe that together with God's help we can and will resolve the problems which now confront us.
And after all, why shouldn't we believe that? We are Americans.
God bless you, and thank you.
Note: The President spoke at noon from a platform erected at the West Front of the Capitol. Immediately before the address, the oath of office was administered by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger.
In his opening remarks, the President referred to Rev. Donn D. Moomaw, senior pastor, Bel Air Presbyterian Church, Los Angeles, Calif.
The address was broadcast live on radio and television.
http://reagansheritage.org/html/reagan01_20_81.shtml
Time for this bum to get tossed by a real hero!
Beleaguered Murtha Stalls in Pennsylvania
Monday, November 3, 2008 4:42 PM
By: Nat Helms
On the eve of the election, Pennsylvania polls show 17-term Democratic U.S. Rep. John P. Murtha in a statistical tie with upstart Republican challenger William Russell.
Russell has closed within percentage points of the perennial winner in the most recent Susquehanna Poll, well within the poll’s 5-point margin of error.
Murtha, who is under fire for calling his constituents racists and rednecks and referring to a Marine hero as a “cold-blooded murderer,” is scrambling to retain his seat in the 12th Congressional District. Underscoring his desperation was a recent e-mail from campaign fundraiser Susan O’Neill asking supporters to help the 76-year-old Democrat stay in the race.
“We need to raise another $1 million to compete,” O’Neill wrote last week. “We need money immediately.”
Murtha’s race appeared to tighten after he called his western Pennsylvania district a “racist area” several weeks ago. He apologized by explaining that the region was “really redneck” until recently.
Peg Luksik, Russell’s campaign manager, said, “People don’t like being made into a punch line. Who wants to be called ‘the redneck from western Pennsylvania’ when they go somewhere?”
Murtha, chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee on Defense, has made a career of unabashedly pursuing pork-barrel projects for his coal-rich, job-poor district. He was running on a similar platform until his recent comments sparked criticism and the perennial incumbent fell from grace, Luksik said.
Challenger Russell is a 46-year-old retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and Gulf War veteran who settled in Murtha’s district after ending his 20-year military career. In an eerie replay of retired Naval officer John McCain’s first bid for political office in Arizona, Murtha attacked Russell as an outsider sent to Pennsylvania to unseat him.
Like McCain, Russell explained that he had never lived anywhere for very long, as he had spent much of his adult life defending his country. The issue quickly dropped.
In May 2006, Murtha called a squad of Marines “cold-blooded killers” on international television for their role in the affair at Haditha, Iraq, in November 2005. Murtha accused officers of covering up the incident. Two of the Marines, including a young Marine from Murtha’s home district, have sued him in federal court for slander.
Veterans in Pennsylvania were aghast that Murtha, himself a former Marine, would turn on his colleagues in such a fashion. Their vocal opposition to his remarks touched off the movement that helped push Russell into the forefront of Pennsylvania politics.
Russell took the high ground after Murtha called his constituents and their neighbors racists and rednecks.
“What Mr. Murtha did was attribute the lowest possible motivations to our voters,” Russell explained in a letter to supporters. “The people in this area tend to vote their values. To say that they are racist because they won’t vote for Obama overlooks the fact that Sen. Obama has an almost radical pro-abortion platform, as well as a very anti-gun platform. This shows that Murtha has clearly lost touch with the voters.”
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/murtha_pennsylvania_/2008/11/03/147223.html
AP Warns: McCain Could Win Electoral College
Monday, November 3, 2008 4:55 PM
WASHINGTON — It's a nightmare scenario for Democrats — their nominee Barack Obama winning the popular vote while Republican John McCain ekes out an Electoral College victory. Sure, McCain trails in every recent national poll. Sure, surveys show that Obama leads in the race to reach the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.
Sure, chances of Republicans retaining the White House are remote.
But some last-minute state polls show the GOP nominee closing the gap in key states — Republican turf of Virginia, Florida and Ohio among them, and Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania, too.
If the tightening polls are correct and undecided voters in those states break McCain's way — both big ifs — that could make for a repeat of the 2000 heartbreaker for Democrats that gave Republicans the White House.
In 2000, Democrat Al Gore narrowly won the popular vote by 537,179 votes. But George W. Bush won the state-by-state electoral balloting that determines the presidency, 271 to 266. The outcome wasn't clear until a 36-day recount awarded Florida, then worth 25 electoral votes, to Bush by just a 537-vote margin.
Before the 2000 election, political insiders had speculated just the opposite, that perhaps Bush would win the popular vote but lose the presidency to Gore.
One day before the 2008 election, Obama sat atop every national poll. (a lie! Not true at all)
Enthusiastic by all measures, the Illinois senator's Democratic base was expected to run up the score in liberal bastions of party strongholds such as New York and California.
But the race appeared to be naturally tightening in top battlegrounds that each candidate likely will need to help them reach the magic number in the Electoral College, electoral-rich Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia among them.
To win, McCain must hold on to most states that went to Bush in 2004, or pick up one or more that went to Democrat John Kerry four years ago to make up for any losses. McCain's biggest target for a pickup is Pennsylvania, which offers 21 votes and where several public polls show Obama's lead shrinking from double digits to single digits.
McCain faces a steep hurdle. Obama leads or is tied in a dozen or so Bush-won states, and has the advantage in most Kerry-won states.
The Republican's campaign argues that as national surveys tighten, McCain's standing in key states also rises and that, combined with get-out-the-vote efforts, will lift McCain to victory in Bush states and, perhaps, others.
"What we're in for is a slam-bang finish. ... He's been counted out before and won these kinds of states, and we're in the process of winning them right now," Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, said Sunday.
Obama's team is awash in confidence.
"We think we have a decisive edge right now" in states Bush won four years ago, said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager.
There's still another possibility, perhaps more improbable than the first — that McCain wins the popular vote while Obama clinches the White House.
True, Democrats have been fired up all year.
True, Republicans haven't been.
True, Obama and McCain have been faring about even among independent voters.
But there are signs that the GOP's conservative base has rallied in the final stretch and these voters usually turn out in droves, even if lukewarm on the candidate.
Then there's the question of a tie in the Electoral College. In that case, members of the next House would select the winner.
If Obama carries every state that Democrat John Kerry won in 2004, plus Iowa, New Mexico and Nevada, then he and McCain each would have 269 electoral votes. A tie also would result if McCain takes New Hampshire from the Democrats' column but loses Iowa, New Mexico and another state that Bush won, Colorado.
In an election year that's defied conventional wisdom time and again, anything can happen.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/mccain_electoral_college/2008/11/03/147235.html
What a socialistic disaster Obama would be. There's a reason that all the polls have tightened and indicate a toss-up. I think the undecided will vote McCain when they actually get in that booth and realize the gravity of their vote.
Coal Officials Blast Obama Over Remarks
Monday, November 3, 2008 8:36 PM
By: Dave Eberhart
The president of the Ohio Coal Association (OCA) today blasted Barrack Obama over his newly emerging position on how the coal industry will languish while he is in the White House.
Mike Carey issued the following statement in response to just-released remarks from Senator Barack Obama about the nation’s coal industry.
“Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America’s coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it.
“These undisputed, audio-taped remarks, which include comments from Senator Obama like ‘I haven’t been some coal booster’ and ‘if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them’ are extraordinarily misguided.
“It’s evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state’s voters.
“Senator Obama has revealed himself to be nothing more than a short-sighted, inexperienced politician willing to say anything to get a vote. But today, the nation’s coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to ‘bankrupt’ our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.
“In addition to providing an affordable, reliable source of low-cost electricity, domestic coal holds the key to our nation’s long-term energy security – a goal that cannot be overlooked during this time of international instability and economic uncertainty.
“Few policy areas are more important to our economic future than energy issues. As voters head to the polls tomorrow, it is essential they remember that access to reliable, affordable, domestic energy supplies is essential to economic growth and stability.”
The San Francisco Chronicle story published on Jan. 18 based upon a taped Jan. 17 interview with Obama. That story did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry, which can hear on the newly uncovered audio.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_coal/2008/11/03/147297.html
William Ayers-Barack Obama
Background: William Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, a radical leftist group that from 1969 to the mid-'70s conducted several bombings of government institutions. Ayers served on the group's Central Committee. The Weather Underground bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, military installations, and police stations. In all, seven people were killed. In 1981, two police officers and one security guard were killed by members of the Weather Underground in the robbery of a Brinks truck in New York state. After Ayers married Bernardine Dohrn, also a member of the Weather Underground (who was described by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover as "the most dangerous woman in America"), they settled in Chicago.
Fact: Bernardine Dohrn had this to say in response to the Charles Manson murders, which she romanticized as a revolutionary coup at a Flint, Mich., Weatherman War Council in December 1969: "Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!" Dohrn later stated this was meant as a "joke."
Fact: In 1969, Bernardine Dohrn and other members of the Weather Underground traveled to Cuba and met with representatives of the North Vietnam and Cuban governments.
Fact: In 1970, Ayers explained what the Weather Underground was all about: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home; kill your parents; that's where it's really at."
Fact: Both Ayers and Dohrn lived on the run from authorities from approximately 1970 to 1980. The case against Ayers and Dohrn was dropped due to illegal wiretaps and prosecutor misconduct. The FBI was conducting "black bag jobs," or illegal break-ins, in their pursuit of the Weather Underground. Some of these black bag jobs were authorized by Mark Felt, later to be known as "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame.
Fact: Shortly after turning themselves in, Dohrn and Ayers became legal guardians of the son of former members of the Weather Underground, Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, after they were convicted of murder for their roles in a 1981 armored car robbery. Two police officers and one Brinks guard were killed in the robbery.
Fact: Starting in the mid-'90s, Ayers and Obama served on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Project. They served together on the board for approximately seven years. Ayers and Obama were tasked with the oversight of a $100 million budget. The board, under Obama's chairmanship the Annenberg project gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bill Ayers' projects promoting alternative schools.
["Anderson Cooper 360," CNN, Oct. 6, 2008]
Fact: From 1984 to 1988, Bernardine Dohrn was employed by the prestigious Chicago law firm Sidley Austin. She was hired by Howard Trienens, the head of the firm at that time and someone who knew Thomas G. Ayers, Bill's father. However, Dohrn's criminal record has prevented her from being admitted to either the New York or Illinois bar. "Dohrn didn't get a [law] license because she's stubborn . . . She wouldn't say she's sorry."
[Chicago Tribune, May 18, 2008]
Fact: In 1991, Dohrn was hired by Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago, as an adjunct professor of law, with the title "clinical associate professor of law." Thomas Ayers was a long-time member of the Northwestern Board of Trustees, and was named life trustee in 1987.
[Source: Feb. 7, 2008 speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC]
Fact: In 1994, Dohrn was quoted on her political beliefs: "I still see myself as a radical."
[Chepesiuk, Ron, "Sixties Radicals, Then and Now: Candid Conversations
With Those Who Shaped the Era," McFarland & Company, Inc]
Fact: In 1995, Obama's first autobiography is released. In it he writes of his years in college, associating with radicals. "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets . . . When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society's stifling constraints. We weren't indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated."
[Obama, Barack, "Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,
Random House, Pages 100-101]
Fact: In 1995, Ayers and Dorn opened their Chicago Hyde Park home to host a political coming-out party for Barack Obama, when he ran for the state Senate. Someone who was at this party for Obama wrote that Ayers and Dohrn were launching him, "introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread."
[Politico.com, Feb. 22, 2008]
Fact: From 1999-2002, Ayers and Obama served together on a second charitable foundation, The Woods Fund. While at the Woods Fund, they gave money to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church, which Obama attended, and a children and family center, where Dohrn worked.
["Anderson Cooper 360," CNN, Oct. 6, 2008]
Fact: In a 1996 interview, one year after hosting Barack Obama's coming-out party in their home, Ayers and Dohrn were profiled by "The NewsHour" on PBS. Ayers was asked, "Looking back, would you do it differently now?" He stated, "I doubt it . . . probably not."
Fact: Question to Obama in 2000, during his run for the U.S. Congress: "What is your argument, based on the one term that you served in the [Illinois] Senate so far, that makes you prepared for the Congress?"
Answer: "I would argue . . . my experience previous to elected office equips me for the job . . . I've chaired major philanthropic efforts in the city, like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that gave $50 million to prompt school reform efforts throughout the city."
[
Rev. Wright Makes Final Appearance
Monday, November 3, 2008 1:13 PM
By: Jim Meyers
Barack Obama’s controversial pastor has made a final appearance in the election, thanks to Republican groups that have launched last-minute ads highlighting Obama’s longtime relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
In one ad sponsored by the National Republican Trust PAC (GOPtrust.com), a voice intones: “For 20 years Barack Obama followed a preacher of hate and said nothing as Wright raged against our country.”
A clip shows Rev. Wright preaching: “Not God bless America, God damn America,” and referring to the “U.S. of KKKA!”
This quote, a statement Obama made to ABC News, appears on the screen: “I don’t think my church is particularly controversial.”
The voice-over continues: “He built his power base in Wright’s church. Wright was his mentor, adviser and close friend. For 20 years Obama never complained until he ran for president.
“Barack Obama. Too radical. Too risky.”
Another ad sponsored by the Republican Federal Committee of Pennsylvania declares: “If you think you could ever vote for Barack Obama, consider this: Obama chose as his spiritual leader this man.”
The ad shows Wright making the same anti-U.S. statements as the narrator continues: “He also picked Wright to baptize his children.
“Barack Obama. He chose as a pastor a man who blamed the U.S. for the 9/11 attacks.
“Does that sound like someone who should be president?”
Obama made a public split with the Rev. Wright, but critics suggest it was done as a political move.
Reportedly, Obama was on the campaign trail Sunday with the Rev. Otis Moss, who replaced Wright as pastor at Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ.
Moss is also highly controversial. He has called Biblical patriarch Abraham a “pimp” and made other statements many would consider offensive.
After Obama held a press conference earlier this year when he called Wright’s comments “divisive and destructive,” a questioner noted that Rev. Moss has defended Wright and asked if Obama would continue attending the church.
“Well, the new pastor, the young pastor, Reverend Otis Moss, is a wonderful young pastor,” Obama responded. “And as I said, I still very much value the Trinity community.”
Moss, the 37-year-old “hip-hop pastor,” as he’s called by congregants, became the head of Trinity in June, after serving as an assistant pastor there for two years.
But a videotape of a sermon he delivered at Wright’s church shows this “wonderful young pastor” referring to “ghetto prophets” and “thug theology,” calling the late rapper Tupac Shakur a “prophet,” and reciting at length lyrics to Shakur’s song “Thugz Mansion.”
Moss also stated in his sermon:
# “Jesus has a soft spot for thugs.”
# “God is always using thugs to do God’s work.”
# “Everyone has a little bit of thug in them.”
# Noah was a “thug” who “was drinking much gin and juice and got drunk on the eve of reconstruction.”
# Abraham “pimped his own wife.”
# Jacob was a “hustler” who “stole his own brother’s birthright.”
# Moses was a “thug” and “if he got mad would give you a royal beatdown.”
# Sampson was a “thug” and a “player.”
# David was a “thug,” a “shot caller,” and a “player,” and a man after God’s own heart.
# “Jesus is on the cross being lynched between two thugs. The moment of execution, the moment of murder, Jesus, the son of God, is hanging out with thugs.”
In an interview with National Public Radio, Moss refused to distance himself from claims by Wright that the U.S. government was involved in distributing illegal drugs to minorities.
He said: “I think we need to be very, very honest in terms of that our government has the ability to place a Hubble Telescope in the sky, but yet we haven’t had the political will to shut down drugs coming into our community. And from that perspective, I think that’s something we can look at in terms of policy.”
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_wright_connection/2008/11/03/147105.html
IBD-TIPP Poll: McCain and Obama Statistically Tied
John McCain is trailing presidential rival Barack Obama by just two points heading into Election Day, according to a new tracking poll released Sunday by Investors Business Daily.
Overall, McCain trails Obama by 2.1 percentage points — 46.7 percent to 44.6 percent, with 8.7 percent not sure — in the tracking poll released Sunday by IBD and its polling partner, the TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics (TIPP).
The latest numbers continue a tightening trend that shows McCain steadily gaining while Obama’s support around 47 percent of respondents is holding firm.
Independents who'd been leaning to Obama shifted to McCain to leave that key group a tossup, according to the IBD pollsters. McCain also pulled even in the Midwest, and moved back strongly into the lead with men. He is padding his gains among Protestants and Catholics, and is favored for the first time by high school graduates.
The newest poll shows that McCain has made steady gains in the West, up from 37 percent of respondents to 44 percent. He still leads Obama in the South, 50 percent to 45 percent, and he is tied in the Midwest, 45 percent to 45 percent, with 12 percent still not sure.
In terms of age group, McCain still is virtually tied with Obama with respondents in the categories between 25 years of age and 64. Some 9 percent are still undecided. He leads among voters 65 and over by 2 points, 45 percent to 43 percent. Obama has a commanding lead only among the young respondents, those 18 to 24. But that group's reliability on Election Day varies tremendously.
Among party faithful, the poll shows that McCain is holding onto Republicans by an overwhelming margin — he has 89 percent locked up — and is winning now among self-described independents, 45 to 43 percent.
McCain also has a 15-point lead over Obama among voters who earn at least $75,000 a year, and now holds a 54 percent to 40 percent edge among male voters, up from a 4-point lead just several weeks ago.
The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percent. IBD said its polling partner, TIPP, has been the most accurate pollster during the 2004 election season.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/ibd_poll/2008/11/02/146841.html
Poll: Obama Fails to Gain Among Churchgoers
Sunday, November 2, 2008 4:46 PM
The unprecedented effort that Democrat Barack Obama put into courting the white churchgoing public has apparently failed, according to a new Gallup Poll.
The poll shows that Obama is backed by just 28 percent of white voters who attend church at least once a week — a group that makes up roughly a third of all voters. That’s actually one point less than John Kerry and Al Gore received during the previous two elections.
“There has been remarkably little change among whites in the religion gap,” John Green, of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, told Politico.
Evangelical bloggers and pro-life Web sites said they weren’t surprised by the findings.
“Obama has talked about reducing abortions, but the most active Catholic and evangelical voters didn't buy the rhetoric it appears,” wrote Steven Ertelt, an editor with Lifenews.com.
“They apparently got the message that Obama supports unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy, wants abortions paid for with taxpayer funds, and favors a bill that would overturn pro-life laws and measures that reduce abortions nationwide,” Ertelt wrote.
Obama’s inability to bridge this important fault line in American politics is especially notable because no Democratic nominee in the last 30 years has made more of an effort to court religious voters. Only Jimmy Carter, a Southern evangelical, has been able to contest the Republican hold on weekly church-going voters in a two-man race.
But in 1976, as the United States was still reeling from Vietnam and the 1960s culture wars, Carter actually de-emphasized his faith.
Four years later, the Reagan Revolution began and ever since, Republicans have held a strong lock on white evangelicals and church-going Catholics. The latest polls also indicate that Republican John McCain has gain supporters among young Jews, who in larger numbers describe themselves as religious compared to their elders.
Social conservatives told Politico and other Web sites that the event that crippled any chance of gains for Obama was the mid-August event at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif.
Asked when a fetus gains human rights, Obama said it was “above my pay grade” while McCain quickly replied, “At the moment of conception.”
For social conservative leader Richard Land, Obama’s response encapsulated why Democrats have failed to make inroads with highly religious white voters.
“It’s abortion,” Richard Land, a social conservative said after hearing the Gallup results. “I think pro-choice people in this culture have absolutely no idea of the depth and intensity of the moral outrage of the people who are pro-life. They think that conservatives use it only as a wedge issue.”
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_gallup_religious/2008/11/02/146847.html
Zogby Shocker: McCain Leads Obama In Latest Poll
Saturday, November 1, 2008 1:16 PM
By: Newsmax staff
Dick Morris tells Newsmax that Friday night's polling for Zogby of 1,000 likely voters shows a huge shift for John McCain.
Zogby's poll, conducted on Friday night only, has McCain at 48 percent and Obama, at 47 percent.
Zogby's overall poll has Obama with a lead, but that's based on a three-day average that includes Wednesday and Thursday polling data.
"There is a seismic shift for McCain," Morris told Newsmax. "It could turn into an earthquake this weekend."
"I think a large of the credit goes to GOPTrust.com for its courageous use of the Rev. Wright ad and the many tens of thousands who have donated almost $9 million before election day," Morris said.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Zogby_latest_McCain_leads/2008/11/01/146659.html
Obama-Farrakhan Ties Are Close, Ex-Farrakhan Aide Says
Saturday, November 1, 2008 2:59 PM
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman
A former top deputy to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan tells Newsmax that Barack Obama’s ties to the black nationalist movement in Chicago run deep, and that for many years the two men have had “an open line between them” to discuss policy and strategy, either directly or through intermediaries.
“Remember that for years, if you were a politician in Chicago, you had to have some type of relationship with Louis Farrakhan. You had to. If you didn’t, you would be ostracized out of black Chicago,” said Dr. Vibert White Jr., who spent most of his adult life as a member and ultimately top officer of the Nation of Islam.
White broke with the group in 1995 and is now a professor of African-American history at the University of Central Florida in Orlando.
White said Obama was “part of the Chicago scene” where Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. and radicals would go to each other’s events and support each other’s causes.
“Even though Chicago is the third-largest city in the country, within the black community, the political and militant nationalist community is very small. So it wouldn’t be uncommon for [Obama and Farrakhan] to show up at events together, or at least be there and communicate with each other,” White told Newsmax.
The Anti-Defamation League has denounced Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam as a “hate group.”
Farrakhan has called Jews “bloodsuckers,” “satanic” and accused them of running the slave trade. He has labeled gays as “degenerates.” In a 2006 speech, the ADL again condemned Farrakhan when he said: “These false Jews promote the filth of Hollywood that is seeding the American people and the people of the world and bringing you down in moral strength. … It's the wicked Jews the false Jews that are promoting lesbianism, homosexuality. It's wicked Jews, false Jews that make it a crime for you to preach the word of God, then they call you homophobic!"
Obama was careful to “denounce” Farrakhan’s comments – but not the man -- during the Democratic primary season earlier this year, but only after Hillary Clinton called him out for benefiting from Farrakhan’s support.
Farrakhan endorsed Obama in a videotaped speech to his followers at Mosque Miryam in Chicago in February. “You are the instruments that God is gonna use to bring about universal change, and that is why Barack has captured the youth,” Farrakhan said.
He told the crowd that Obama was the new “messiah.” See Video: Farrakhan Endorses Obama, Calls Him Messiah.
Once the news media and the Clinton campaign got hold of those comments from Farrakhan, demands mounted from all sides that Obama “renounce” Farrakhan.
But as he has done repeatedly throughout this campaign, Obama was careful to parse his words.
“You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments,” he said during one appearance on “Meet the Press.” “I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible.”
Obama hastened to point out that Farrakhan had been praising him as “an African-American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we’re not doing anything, I assure you, formally or informally with Minister Farrakhan.”
But Obama, once again, was less than candid.
In 1995, according to a profile of Obama that appeared in the Chicago Reader newspaper, Obama “took time off from attending campaign coffees to attend October’s Million Man March in Washington, D.C.”
At the time, Obama was running for the Illinois Senate from Chicago’s South Side, a seat he won after getting surrogates to challenge the signatures on nominating petitions for his chief rival, the incumbent Alice Palmer.
The march, which fell far short of attracting the million men it advertised, was organized by Farrakhan and by Obama’s then-pastor, the anti-white black nationalist Wright.
Obama spoke at length with the Chicago Reader upon his return from the Million Man March. “What I saw was a powerful demonstration of an impulse and need for African-American men to come together to recognize each other and affirm our rightful place in the society," he said.
“These are mean, cruel times, exemplified by a ‘lock ’em up, take no prisoners’ mentality that dominates the Republican-led Congress,” Obama said.
“Historically, African-Americans have turned inward and towards black nationalism whenever they have a sense, as we do now, that the mainstream has rebuffed us, and that white Americans couldn't care less about the profound problems African-Americans are facing."
“Black nationalism” is a current of thought and political action in the African-American community that has been championed by the likes of Farrakhan, Wright, Malcolm X, the Black Panthers and Khalid al-Mansour. Obama discussed his attraction to black nationalism at length in his 1995 memoir “Dreams of My Father.”
Obama further parsed his words in a Feb. 25, 2008, presentation to a Jewish community meeting in Cleveland, Ohio, where he insisted that Wright “does not have a close relationship with Louis Farrakhan.”
And yet, just months earlier, Wright’s Trumpet magazine gave Farrakhan its Lifetime Achievement Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award, saying that Farrakhan “truly epitomized greatness.”
That award was the fruit of a long and deep relationship between the two men, White told Newsmax. In 1984, Wright accompanied Farrakhan on his much-criticized trip to meet Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, at a time when Gadhafi was considered an enemy of the United States.
Wright also accompanied Farrakhan and Jackson to Syria in 1986, where they successfully negotiated with Syrian strongman for the release of downed American pilot Robert O. Goodman.
Obama’s Speaking Style
In addition to the ideological affinity Obama expressed for the black nationalist movement, White believes that Obama owes much of his success as a public orator to speaking techniques that Farrakhan developed over the years, and exploited for years to great success.
“If you listen to the rhetoric and you take away Obama’s political jargon, you hear a religious tenor to it that is very much Nation of Islam-like. I don’t know if anyone has ever touched on it, but Obama’s speaking style is very Malcolm-like, very Farrakhan-like,” White said.
Any American who has listened to early radio or television interviews of Obama can hear how dramatically Obama’s speaking style has changed since he became a United States senator.
In clips dating from 2001 and even early 2004, Obama speaks haltingly and in long, rambling sentences packed with legalese and dense pseudo-academic rhetoric. But not today.
“As a former minister of the Nation of Islam, I know how they speak,” White told Newsmax. “I don’t know who was training Obama. But that style is not a ministerial style like in the Christian church. It’s a Nation of Islam style.”
White began in the late 1970s as a foot soldier in the Fruit of Islam, the military branch of Farrakhan’s Black Muslim group, then rose to become a minister of the Nation of Islam and a top deputy to Farrakhan himself.
Known initially as Brother Vibert L.X., and later as Minister V.L. Muhammad, he parted ways with Farrakhan not long after the Million Man March, after nearly 25 years within the organization.
White’s 2002 book “Inside the Nation of Islam” prompted death threats by Farrakhan loyalists, so he left Illinois and moved to Florida to teach at the University of Central Florida.
He told Newsmax that Obama’s remarkable speaking style, even his manner of standing at a podium to appear larger than life, is directly copied from Farrakhan.
“If the Nation of Islam can’t do anything else, it can train people how to speak. And nobody can outspeak a Muslim minister,” he said.
Earlier this year, a pro-Clinton blog run by former CIA officer Larry Johnson unearthed a 2004 photograph showing Michelle Obama and Farrakahn’s wife, Mother Khadijah Farrakhan, at an event hosted by Jackson’s Citizenship Education Foundation.
Newsmax queried Obama’s U.S. Senate office, his Chicago office and his campaign press office about his ties to Farrakhan, but did not receive a reply.
Ever since he appeared before the annual policy conference of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee in June, Obama has attempted to convince the Jewish community that he is pro-Israel.
But his longstanding ties to Farrakhan, Wright and Palestinian activist Rashid Khalidi, among others, have disturbed many Jewish community leaders.
Sen. John McCain publicly chastised The Los Angeles Times on Thursday for not releasing a videotape the newspaper said it possessed of a 2003 dinner for Khalidi, where Obama reportedly accused Israel of carrying out a “genocide” against the Palestinians.
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/farrakhan_obama_islam/2008/11/01/146685.html