Obama's leaking balloon

Today at American Thinker, an excellent breakdown of Obama's surrealistic trip to reality, in:

The Obama Aesthetic

Barack Obama's campaign has been all about image. The well-dressed, impeccably groomed, and elegantly articulate speaker was able to speak of hope, change, and unity, and for awhile the public bought it. Capitalizing on the huge store of guilt, compassion, and hope for better racial relations among the vast majority of Americans of all races, Obama posed as the man who might heal the wounds of the past.

The bonhomie lasted for months, as the press corps, no strangers to tObama's haloheir own guilt and hope and leftist inclinations, averted its eyes from those elements of his politics and life story that were discordant with a unifier's mission, and portayed him as almost supernaturally virtuous. Obama long ago learned how to disarm strangers who might find him an unusual or perhaps threatening figure, and as long as the scrutiny didn't get too detailed, the game worked splendidly.

But that was before Hillary Clinton's campaign took him seriously. Before the Clinton war room wizards, past masters of planting stories and themes in friendly media hands, got to work on him.

Read the rest here.

The Unfair Advantage

The end of February, I wrote the following post:

As if politics in America weren’t mean and nasty enough. We have now “progressed” into a new realm.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we now introduce the race, gender and Islamaphobia cards.

As far as I know, we still live in a democratic country. According to the “rules”, we are not only allowed to elect our president, but question the candidate.

But, there are some new rules this year. Or rather, new advantages to be used when it is to the benefit of the candidate.

Don’t like the question? Just pull out one of your “get one free” cards.

We are facing a situation in this election, that is untested. One of the candidates is black, with some obvious connections to Islam and the other is a woman.
The “gender” trial has been faced and moved on rather quietly. In our country, being accused of sexism is a lesser sin. Almost expected, a given.

The other trial, is a whole other story. Except for white supremists, who could give a damn, being accused of racism, feels like a death sentence. And being accused of being an Islamaphobe, could get you killed.

Obama just so happens to hold the 2 best cards in the hand. He is also the most questionable (in my opinion) of the candidates. Or rather, the one who has the most to answer to.

Where does that leave us in regards to our right to a “Free and Fair Election”?
I for one, will continue to question this man and stand my ground.
We live in a democracy. And so long as we have the rights, we need to stand up for them.

If we don’t, we will lose them.
Unfair and unjust PC has no place in politics.

And today, American Thinker gives us the outcome of the above:

American Thinker: The Democrats' cul-de-sac

The current agony of the Democratic Party, which grows more acute every day, is laden with an unspoken truth. As the unending Clinton-Obama struggle drags on, the core unutterable reality for Democrats is simply this: because of the composition of the Party's domestic coalition, its continued electoral viability makes absolutely necessary perpetual capture of 90+% of the black vote.

Because of this grim fact -- of the Party's own making -- the Clinton/Obama fight is over. Obama has won, and every leading Democrat knows it. In short, because of his race, Obama must be awarded the Democratic nomination. So much for the myth of America's first major post-racial candidate.

Under no reasonably foreseeable set of future developments, including the possibility Obama's exposure as a fatally compromised candidate, can Obama be denied the nomination. Doing so would subject the Democratic Party to the unacceptable risk that it would alienate its most dependably monolithic voter bloc. Hence, the daily gnashing of teeth by Party elders and the demand, which grows more hysterical each day, that Clinton concede a contest that at present is nothing more than a hard fought stalemate.

Without keeping focused on the Democrats' self-chosen demographic cul-de-sac, the growing demands for Clinton's withdrawal would be inexplicable, indeed, outrageous.

Imagine the current situation with identities reversed: picture Clinton's having built up a small but, for nomination purposes, inadequate pledged delegate lead by winning states the vast majority of which she had no hope of carrying in November (e.g., Mississippi, Wyoming, South Carolina, Utah[!], Montana etc.); imagine further that Obama were nipping at her heels in pledged delegates because he had won practically every state which the Democrats will, or can reasonably hope to, win in November. Finally, imagine that the media only recently had given serious attention to a potentially major political liability of Clinton's that called into question her electoral viability, and that a large test of that liability's weight was about to unfold in a key state for the Democrats: e.g., Pennsylvania.

Under this hypothetical scenario -- the perfect reverse of what the Party now faces -- does any even slightly knowledgeable observer of the US political scene not on drugs believe that the Party's VIPs and media sycophants would be demanding that Obama retire from the fight "for the good of the Party"? Inconceivable.

Rather than slink from the field, Obama would be rushing forward as the Party's savior, to rescue it from a candidate whose appeal is perversely concentrated in states which Democrats cannot win, and who may turn out to be terminally flawed by a recent revelation that is about to receive further critical testing in Pennsylvania. Calls for Obama's withdrawal from the fight by Clinton under these circumstances would be met with jeers and derision.

Why is it all so different in the real world set of facts? Why are the media and Party peasants, torches and pitchforks in hand, gathered at Clinton's door, and growing more menacing each day? The answer is race, race and race. Barack Obama, who risibly claims to be America's post-racial candidate, will one day be viewed as the most overtly racial candidate in the history of American presidential politics.

Are we ready to give in? (Label: Obama)

Obama
The creation of the United States of America was a long struggle, built on the backs of our ancestors. They came to the "new World" with hopes and dreams of change.
They left their homeland to escape harsh living conditions. But, they knew that starting here would not be easy and it wasn't.

They had to fight to create their new homeland. A homeland made up of people from all parts of the world, who wanted to create a homeland, of one. Americans.

Our fight for independence and freedom took the blood of our ancestors. And now, we are heading in a dangerous direction.

Beginnings:
The roots of American Independence started with the early English settlers. The majority came for religious and political freedom and already did not like English laws. The settlers were rebellious in spirit and wanted to start a new life. Over the next few decades the colonies formed their own government. Continue...

The Revolutionary War:
The first gun shots of the Revolutionary War were at the battles of Lexington and Concord. The English planned a surprise attack on the colonists, but their efforts failed and neither side won. Then, at the battle of Fort Ticonderoga, the colonists surprised England. Continue...

The Aftermath:
The Revolutionary War did not end with the Battle of Yorktown. The war did not stop until about a year later. King George III wanted to keep fighting, but the British Parliament wanted to make peace. They decided to hold peace talks with the Americans in Paris,which began in April 1782. The Americans at the peace talks were John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin. The result was the Treaty of Paris - a document which gave the United States its independence. Continue...

Would our ancestors approve of the country we have become?

Our country was fought and founded on the principle of freedom. The freedom of speech that was fought for, has been slowly degraded. Our freedom to question those who wish to lead our country has been taken away by political correctness.

If our presidential candidate does not love our country. Can we trust him? What kind of change does Obama intend to make? Based on what we have been learning about him, we are in for a hell of a ride.



Looking upon Iran as a victim? Being willing to negotiate with terrorists? What does he plan to use as a negotiation tool? Does Obama even have a clue who he is willing to negotiate with?

Oh yes, the Jihadis would vote for him in a minute, if they could. Obama's ignorance will open the door right up for them.

It took many years of appeasement to get to 9/11. The pump is priming for the next one.

Obama defends his Christian religion, denies apostasy

So today, Obama defends his religion.

AP: The Democratic presidential candidate told a town hall meeting Sunday in Nelsonvile, Ohio, in the state's rural southeast, that he is a devout Christian who prays to Jesus every night.
......
Obama said misinformation — including long-standing suggestions that he is a Muslim — is being spread by his opponents.
.....

But, based on the following information from Daniel Pipes:

* "Interviews with dozens of former classmates, teachers, neighbors and friends show that Obama was not a regular practicing Muslim when he was in Indonesia" – implying he was an irregularly practicing Muslim.

* "Obama occasionally followed his stepfather to the mosque for Friday prayers, a few neighbors said" – confirming that he did pray in the mosque.

* "Obama's 3rd-grade teacher at the Catholic school, who lived near the family [said that] ‘Rarely, Barry went to the mosque with Lolo'" – confirming that Obama attended mosque services.

All this matters, for if Obama once was a Muslim, he is now what Islamic law calls a murtadd (apostate), an ex-Muslim converted to another religion who must be executed.

Were he elected president of the United States, this status, clearly, would have large potential implications for his relationship with the Muslim world.

Obama has a much bigger issue to address. Does he deny that it exists?

Not all Muslims are "sweetness and light". Not all Muslims accept Christianity. In particular, a "Muslim" practicing Christianity AND leading "The Great Satan"

Obama needs to come to reality with regards to this issue. Brushing it under his "Christianity Rug", will not make it go away.