se of doing things meant to benefit America; rather, its members take pride in seeking a goal that runs directly counter to the economic welfare and physical security of almost all other U.S citizens by seeking to keep them involved in a religious war in which no U.S. national interest is at stake.Now, there are a few other similar anti-American lobbies – those for Armenia, Lebanon, Greece, etc. – but AIPAC is clearly primus inter pares in this dastardly group. And given that every AIPAC success is a net loss for U.S. security and the U.S. Treasury, it seems odd that our so-called political leaders take orders and funds from this fundamentally anti-U.S. organization. Odd or not, however, that is the reality. Senators Obama and McCain have become AIPAC poster boys, each strengthening his support for Israel over the course of the current presidential campaign. Obama's position, in fact, has changed so drastically in a pro-Israel direction that the Illinois senator appears to have no mind of his own on this issue. He has simply and obsequiously adopted the Democrats' traditional abject subservience to their small but powerful pro-Israel constituency. McCain is an Israel-firster of the deepest hue. Coached by Joe Lieberman – who argues there is a U.S. duty to ensure God's promise to Abraham about Israel is kept – McCain is now considering Republican Congressman Eric Cantor for his running mate. Rep. Cantor, needless to say, is eager to spend American blood and treasure to secure Israel. Speaking in Israel, Cantor pushed the same false assertion that is the staple of U.S. leaders in both parties. "What befalls Jerusalem," Cantor said, "threatens the security of the United States and its allies worldwide. That's because Jerusalem and Israel are Ground Zero in the global battle between tyranny and democracy, radicalism and moderation, terrorism and freedom." This, of course, is nonsense of a high order, and Lieberman and Cantor know it. Both men are committed to Israel as a religious idea, not because it has anything to do with U.S. security. According to Lieberman, "The rabbis say in the Talmud that a lot of rabbinic law is to put a fence around the Torah so you don't get near to violating it. Well, McCain has a series of very clear-headed policies toward terrorism and Islamic extremism [that put] extra layers behind his support for Israel." He also told a conference of Christians United for Israel that he was pleased they recognized it was America's duty to defend Israel, blithely lying to them that "President Washington and the Founding Fathers" would support America fighting Israel's wars. Cantor, playing to both the Israel-firsters and their U.S. evangelical allies, also has made clear where his primary loyalty lies:"Jerusalem is not merely the capital of Israel but the spiritual capital of Jews and Christians everywhere. It's the site of the First and Second Temples, which housed the Holy of Holies, and it's the direction in which we Jews face when we pray. This glorious City of David is bound to the Jewish people by an undeniable 3,000-year historical link." My own view is that if God promised Palestine to the Israelis, God is perfectly capable of keeping that promise, and America is no way committed to expend the lives of its soldier-children in a war over conflicting interpretations of God's word. The Israelis and the Muslims should be perfectly free to fight over whether Yahweh and Abraham or Allah and Mohammed are right, and Americans should be perfectly free to draw the correct conclusion, that the United States does not have a dog in this fight. In addition, there is a genuine constitutional question of church-state separation on this issue. Why should American taxpayers have their earnings and children's lives spent to defend a theocracy in Israel or, for that matter, to protect an Islamic theocracy in Saudi Arabia.? (Imagine the howls of protest and torrents of church-state separation rhetoric from the media and both parties if a congressman introduced a bill calling for the U.S. to designate that an amount equivalent to what's spent to protect Israel and Saudi Arabia be sent to the Vatican – a nation-state like Israel and Saudi Arabia – to improve its defenses against the now well-articulated threat from al-Qaeda and other Islamists.) Objectively, three realities are clear:---- (1) U.S. survival is not at stake in the Israeli-Muslim war; ----(2) the taxes of Americans should not be spent to defend theocratic states; and ----(3) holy books are insane tools to use as guides for U.S. foreign policy. In America, however, these realities lie unspoken because of the lobbying efforts of AIPAC and the pro-Israel mantras of the politicians it purchases with campaign contributions and promises of media exposure, including McCain and Obama. By their consistent anti-American actions, AIPAC and the U.S. politicians who do its bidding have fully validated the words of the real George Washington – not the figment of Washington painted by Joe Lieberman. "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence," President Washington wrote in 1796, "the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government."
  One of the ongoing narratives in the Obama rise is the way he's navigated relations with old guard civil rights leaders. The Rev. Jesse Jackson tells Essence magazine he was "embarrassed" that he got caught on camera using the N word and whispering that he was so annoyed at Barack Obama for "talking down to black people" that he'd like the castrate the senator. (Did anyone ever call the reverend on using the defense that -- even though he was miked for a TV interview, and sitting in a TV studio, in front of a camera -- he thought it was a private conversation?)Jackson is gracious in the interview about the fact he won't have any "particular role" at the Democratic convention -- obviously no accident, as Obama has shown an unwavering desire to break free from the Jackson-Sharpton baggage. "I have spoken at the last six Democratic conventions, so I wanted to certainly make room for more speakers and broader participation," Jackson said, implying this was his choice. "... I think we have an outstanding candidate."Full Essence interview here.
I’m starting to lose track of how many wars John McCain wants us embroiled in.  He’s certainly singing a bellicose tune these days, and now you can join in with him to the melody of I’m Popeye The Sailor Man:McCain’s Bellicose Tune (Sing to I’m Popeye The Sailor Man)By Madeleine Begun KaneI’m tougher than nails, I am.I stand up for Uncle Sam.The other guy’s weak,While I’m still at my peak,Cuz I’m tougher than nails, I am!I’m one tough contenderWhich hates all pretendersWot never has grown a pair.I stiffs ‘em and bluffs ‘emAnd always out-roughs ‘em.Obama won’t get nowhere!That foolhardy boy’s incurred my wrath.It’s “Wham” and it’s “Bam,” un’erstan’?It’s risky behaviorTo challenge this Savior.McCain is the White House Man!I carry a giant stick.I’m fast with a verbal kick.Don’t vote for that ladOr I’ll really get mad.Beware of my giant stick!Obama is just a wuss,A sweet-talking fraidy-puss.He looks kind of foreign,Perhaps Ecuador’an.Don’t vote for that callow wuss!Technorati Tags: McCain Song Parody, Campaign Satire, Election Humor, White House Song, Obama Song Parody
Warning - visiting this web site may harm your computer!  Suggestions:Return to the previous page and pick another result.Try another search to find what you're looking for.Or you can continue to index.php/2008/08/14/obama-casse-la-barack/ at your own risk. For detailed information about the problems we found, visit 's Safe Browsing diagnostic page for this site.For more information about how to protect yourself from harmful software online, you can visit StopBadware.org.If you are the owner of this web site, you can request a review of your site using 's Webmaster Tools. More information about the review process is available in 's Webmaster Help Center.
  Just saw this.  Haven’t had time to research every claim but most appear to be true.  Why isn’t the media bringing up any of this?    I’m a lesbian with a lesbian spouse and a child.  Nothing is more important to me than my family.   I do not want John McCain to win.   He does not value my family and I don’t value him or his trophy, husband-stealing, filthy rich wife.  In fact, with all of the crap about Obama’s wife, why hasn’t the media jumped on Ms. McCain’s former drug addiction and theft?   Can you imagine a First Lady who admits that she stole drugs from her own nonprofit medical relief organization to feed her drug addiction?   Here are the first few paragraphs from an old article on this at Salon:   news/feature/1999/10/18/drugs/
Those acquainted with me pre-  E!! know I was a Fred Thompson supporter before he dropped out of the presidential race.  I believed then (and still think) he was the most reliably Conservative of all the GOP candidates in all the areas that matter most. One of my favorite things about Fred was that he wasn’t overtly enthusiastic about getting The Job.  This annoyed a lot of people and probably cost him a spot in the top 3, but I considered his reserve - i.e. his lack of zeal for politicking - a big plus.  It was (and will continue to be) my contention that our pick should always be the man most qualified to lead but least lustful for power and the public eye.Thompson’s analysis on the Russian invasion of Georgia and other international issues today is just excellent.  Be sure to read his conclusion, with which I thoroughly agree and would add:  the White House driveway is a dangerous place for Obama to practice his driving skills. 
  John Edwards was being considered for the Attorney General post in an Obama administration, but now it’s obvious Edwards won’t get the nod. Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said that Edwards wasn’t qualified for the job, any way…”He can only screw people one at a time.”
“I don’t like your cowboy bootsTo me they don’t tell the truthI feel like mine do, I’m from the MidwestYou’re from New York.”-The Formati went to dave matthews on saturday. just like the majority of the 20-35 demographic in the chicagoland and greater wisconsin area. i heard a lot about brett favre, i heard a lot about the jets, i heard a lot of dave matthew’s scratchy voice sing about love. i used to want to get out of the midwest. like maybe i was too smart to live here. why would anyone not live on a coast if they had the chance to live somewhere else? why is the midwest as populated as it is, if it’s not for a bunch of retarded people choosing to live here? am i really surrounded by dumbasses? i of course, am really hyper-intelligent. so why do i stay? two years ago i got a job offer in california working for access hollywood, and i decided against it. i realized that i find chicago to be my favorite place on earth- even if i am surrounded by midwesterners. fuck the pacific, i’ll see you on vacations. fuck the atlantic, you never did much for me anyway. when i was at dave, i decided to get a hot dog. while i was in there i got an email on my blackberry pearl no big deal. the email happened to be a comment that someone posted right here on my “blog.” as some people know, i have a problem with the book “why men love bitches” for many reasons. so i wrote about it awhile ago. apparently sends a lot of people my way, and that post has been read numerous times by a lot of unknowns, or random people searching for the dumb book. anyway, this lovely little girl who’s email address suggests she is 19, decided to speak her glorious, intelligent mind with this:“WHY MEN LOVE BITCHES is a great book and thats why the author is a best seller.”i will leave this comment at that. if you can’t figure out why this is not an argument and why this statement should never be uttered outloud, or written down anywhere, even if it’s in your diary, and only you hold the key, then you must be from the midwest. i’m sorry random girl that i don’t know, who only innocently dropped by to pay me a comment. you are a dumbass. so don’t bother coming back to fight me, you’ve only proven your horrible argumentive skills and i don’t want to hurt you anymore. (plus, fighting over the internet is like playing in the special olympics, even if you win, you’re still retarded. i like more face to face combat.)last night i got to use my mad argumentive skills for the first time in a while. you see i am really good at making people feel like shit. it’s like a gift from god or something. anyway, i choose not to back people into walls, because normally the people i surround myself with, i love, and therefore don’t need to give them tears at night. but in some cases, where i am attacked first, or where i just feel the need to be a bitch and call out some random that i don’t really know too well on something dub they said, i get to fight. not fight fight, but state a couple things that make people so angry they have to run away from me so i can’t see their tears. i’m pretty observant, i know what to use against you. last night was one of these nights. a woman i used to know, came at me with knives, and i shut her down without lifting a finger. sometimes i am so proud of myself. i’m like my biggest fan. anyway, i want everyone who thinks that barack obama should be the next president, give me a good argument why. i don’t care where your political views are, and it doesn’t matter where mine are, but this is my year old battle. i haven’t met anyone, anywhere, who could give me a good argument on why mr. nice guy with blinding teeth can actually lead our nation. alright go.
  Dumb idea.  Anyone who really believes this will promote "party unity" is either extremely naive or has no idea what the Clintons are all about--themselves. I swear that Hillary Clinton is like those people in the South who still want to fly the Confederate flag out of "respect" to their ancestors who fought in the Civil War. You fucking lost. Get over it already. This Democratic Convention is not about Hillary Clinton and how great she did in the primaries. This Democratic Convention is not about Hillary Clinton getting 17 million votes. This Democratic Convention is not about catharsis. This Democratic Convention is about a new vision for America. This Democratic Convention is about looking to the future, not getting mired in the past. This Democratic Convention is about hope and change. This Democratic Convention is about our nominee fo