The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for October, 2008

Obama’s aunt Zeituni Onyango: Found in Rundown Housing in Boston

Posted by iusbvision on October 29, 2008

It was reported, but not widely that Barack Obama’s brother George lives in a small shack and survives on just a few dollars a year. I asked how could a millionaire such as Barack Obama allow such a thing. George Obama wants to go to to school to become a mechanic. A Christian has started a small charity to assist George in his goals.

The press found George without much trouble and now they have found his aunt. Much has been talked about the greed of the so called “rich” yet Sarah Palin, who has a modest income, has given much, much more to charity than Joe Biden has and the Biden’s are wealthy by common standards. For the life of me I cannot understand how Barack has allowed members of his family to live in such sad shape. Seeing these two family members of a presidential candidate living in squalor disturbs me and I would appreciate an explanation.

Here is the story from the UK Times of London. The American press did not seem to find this story newsworthy:

Found in a rundown Boston estate: Barack Obama’s aunt Zeituni Onyango

October 30, 2008

by James Bone in Boston, Rob Crilly in Kogelo and Ben Macintyre.

Barack Obama has lived one version of the American Dream that has taken him to the steps of the White House. But a few miles from where the Democratic presidential candidate studied at Harvard, his Kenyan aunt and uncle, immigrants living in modest circumstances in Boston, have a contrasting American story.

Zeituni Onyango, the aunt so affectionately described in Mr Obama’s best-selling memoir Dreams from My Father, lives in a disabled-access flat on a rundown public housing estate in South Boston.

A second relative believed to be the long-lost “Uncle Omar” described in the book was beaten by armed robbers with a “sawed-off rifle” while working in a corner shop in the Dorchester area of the city. He was later evicted from his one-bedroom flat for failing to pay $2,324.20 (£1,488) arrears, according to the Boston Housing Court.

The US press has repeatedly rehearsed Mr Obama’s extraordinary odyssey, but the other side of the family’s American experience has only been revealed in parts. Just across town from where Mr Obama made history as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, some of his closest blood relatives have confronted the harshness of immigrant life in America.

In his book Mr Obama writes that “Uncle Omar” had gone missing after moving to Boston in the 1960s – a quarter-century before Mr Obama first visited his family in Kenya. Aunt Zeituni is now also living in Boston, and recently made a $260 campaign contribution to her nephew’s presidential bid from a work address in the city.

Speaking outside her home in Flaherty Way, South Boston, on Tuesday, Ms Onyango, 56, confirmed she was the “Auntie Zeituni” in Mr Obama’s memoir. She declined to answer most other questions about her relationship with the presidential contender until after the November 4 election. “I can’t talk about it, I just pray for him, that’s all,” she said, adding: “After the 4th, I can talk to anyone.”

A photograph of Ms Onyango was later shown to George Hussein Onyango, Barack Obama’s half-brother in Nairobi, who confirmed that it was their aunt. George Onyango, 26, the youngest child of Barack Obama Sr, said that he had spent weekends with his Aunt Zeituni when he was growing up, and instantly recognised her.

George Onyango said that his aunt had left for the US about eight years ago but sent him e-mails. “She left to find work and I suppose she thought her life would be better there,” he said. “She was kind and caring.”

In his memoir Mr Obama describes the joy of meeting his father’s family during his first visit to Kenya in 1988. Aunt Zeituni, then a computer programmer at Kenya Breweries in Nairobi, is portrayed as a feisty woman who proclaims herself “the champion dancer”. Uncle Omar, by contrast, remains a mysterious figure who left for America and never came back. At one point in the book a half-sister tells Mr Obama that people “like our Uncle Omar, in Boston” move to the West.

“They promise to return after completing school. They say they’ll send for the family once they get settled. At first they write once a week. Then it’s just a month. Then they stop writing completely. No one sees them again.”

Aunt Zeituni and Uncle Omar are the children of Mr Obama’s grandfather Hussein Onyango Obama, by his third wife – the woman Mr Obama calls “Granny” because she raised his father. Mr Obama’s father, Barack Sr, was Onyango Obama’s son by his second wife, Akumu. That makes Zeituni and Omar a half-sister and half-brother of Mr Obama’s father, or Mr Obama’s half-aunt and half-uncle.

While Mr Obama was on his voyage of personal discovery in Africa, his aunt and uncle were engaged in their own journey in his homeland.

The Times could not determine their immigration status and an official at Boston City Hall said that Ms Onyango was a resident of Flaherty Way but not registered to vote on the electoral roll. However, that Ms Onyango made a contribution to the Obama campaign would indicate that she is a US citizen. Records at the Boston City Hall confirmed Zeituni Onyango’s birthdate as May 29, 1952.

It is not clear when Ms Onyango first came to the US. She said: “I have been coming to America ever since 1975. I always come and go.”

She is a frail woman who walks with the aid of a metal stick. Neighbours said that she lived alone in a ground-floor flat normally set aside for people facing physical hardship.

An Associated Press story about poor people buying lottery tickets at cheque-cashing shops, from Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 25, 2003, quotes a Zeituni Onyango whom it describes as out of work and without much money. “It’s like when I feel luck might fall I do that, like manna might come from Heaven. That’s when I buy it,” she told AP.

A staff member at the Boston Housing Authority office, 50 yards from her house, said Ms Onynango had been a volunteer resident health advocate between December 2007 and August this year. She worked six hours a week for a small stipend. Records show she used the housing authority’s address to make her campaign contribution.

Ms Onyango is also listed on the internet as a volunteer with Experience Corps, a programme in which adults over 55 mentor children in their communities. The “former computer systems co-ordinator” tells the group’s online newsletter: “I felt that I should help the children in my community. I love people and enjoy interacting with them . . . Also, I was idle, and this was a chance to get involved.”

A public record search lists an “O. Onyango Obama”, born on June 3, 1944, at 24 Colgate Road whose name matches that of the “Uncle Omar” in Dreams from My Father.

Nelson Ochieng, a cousin of Mr Obama who lives in the Kenyan city of Kisumu, near the family village of Kogelo, said that Omar had changed his first name after moving to the US. “Before he went to America we all knew him as Omar, but he dropped that bit, changing it to Obama Onyango, because he said he preferred his African name,” he said. Gail Greenberger, the landlady who bought the four-storey brick block of flats at a foreclosure sale in 1994, knew her tenant, however, by the name Obama Onyango. “We used to call him ‘Oh-bummer!’. That is how I pronounced Obama in 2000,” she said.

Ms Greenberger said she inherited him with the building but was forced to evict him in 2000 for nonpayment of his rent of about $500 a month. “I remember him being decent but I think he lost his job. When they lose their job, they just stop paying rent. He did not even go to court. He bolted from the apartment,” she said. Records of Boston Housing Court show a “summary process” was executed against Mr Onyango on February 23, 2000, for unpaid rent of $2,324.70.

Mr Onyango was a business partner in a “convenience store” called the Wells Market at 1760 Dorchester Avenue, now a Hispanic bodega, or grocery. Records list him as the treasurer of the corporation, which was set up without his name in 1992 and involuntarily wound up in 2007 after failing to file annual reports since 1997.

In 1994 Obama Onyango was attacked in an armed robbery at the Wells Market, the Boston Herald reported. According to a police report, two masked black males entered the store around 9.30pm on June 7, 1994, and “did assault and beat the victim, and did rob victim of an undetermined amount of US currency. Suspects were believed to be armed with a ‘sawed-off’ rifle, and did flee the area on foot .”

Asked why the man believed to be “Uncle Omar” went by the name Obama Onyango, Zeituni Onyango said that Obama was his true name. “That is the name his father gave him,” she said. Dershaye Geresu, the Ethiopian-born president of Wells Market Inc, confirmed that Mr Onyango was a “cousin” of Mr Obama.

Lennard Tenende, whose wife Lucy was secretary to the shop, said: “I don’t know where he is. It seems as if he is getting a lot of inquiries, a lot of people trying to find him and find out about his relationship with Obama and he just doesn’t want to be found.” Mr Ochieng said that he believed Mr Onyango ran a chain of stores.

The Obama campaign was repeatedly approached for comment yesterday but had not responded at the time of going to press. It is not clear whether Mr Obama has been in touch with his African relatives living in the US, or even whether he is aware that they are on US soil.

In the preface to the 2004 reissue, he writes: “Most of the characters in this book remain a part of my life, albeit in varying degrees – a function of work, children, geography, and turns of fate.”

“What is family?” he reflects. “Is it just a genetic chain, parents and offspring, people like me?” Twenty years after he first met Aunt Zeituni, and first heard of the elusive Uncle Omar, the man likely to be the next president will have the opportunity for another family reunion, rather closer to home.


How Barack Obama tells of his first meeting with his aunt

‘‘Barack!” I turned to see Auma [his Kenyan cousin] jumping up and down behind another guard who wasn’t letting her pass into the luggage area. I excused myself and rushed over to her, as we laughed and hugged as silly as the first time we’d met. A tall, brown-skinned woman was smiling beside us, and Auma turned and said: “Barack, this is our Auntie Zeituni. Our father’s sister.”

“Welcome home,” Zeituni said kissing me on both cheeks . . .

We went to drop Zeituni off at Kenya Breweries, a large, drab complex where she worked as a computer programmer. Stepping out of the car, she leaned over again to kiss me on the cheek, then wagged her finger at Auma. “You take good care of Barry now,” she said. “Make sure he doesn’t get lost again.”

Once we were back on the highway, I asked Auma what Zeituni had meant about my getting lost. Auma shrugged.

“It’s a common expression,” she said. “Usually it means that the person hasn’t seen you in a while. ‘You’ve been lost,’ they’ll say. Or, ‘Don’t get lost’. Sometimes it has a more serious meaning. Let’s say a husband or son moves to the city, or to the West, like our Uncle Omar in Boston. They promise to return after completing school. They say they’ll send for the family once they get settled. At first they write once a week. Then it’s just once a month. Then they stop writing completely. No one sees them again. They’ve been lost, you see. Even if people know where they are.”

Extracted from Dreams from My Father by Barack Obama, pp305-307 (Canongate) commented on this story the following day HERE.

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

AWESOME VIDEO:Obama for Beginners

Posted by iusbvision on October 28, 2008

Special Thanks to for the video link.

The global-poverty initiative may come a surprise even for people who have paid attention to the race. Accuracy in Media covered it in February, when Democrats tried to move it out of committee:

A nice-sounding bill called the “Global Poverty Act,” sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

The bill, which is item number four on the committee’s business meeting agenda, passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn’t realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.

That’s the origin of the $845 billion figure. We spend about $3 trillion a year already on the entire federal budget, and that will add another $70 billion of funding for other governments on our already-bloated government. Most Americans figure we spend too much as it is — and that’s on ourselves.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | 1 Comment »

Matt the Teacher

Posted by iusbvision on October 27, 2008

Perhaps Barack Obama could learn a few things from the youth of today.

I recently had a great idea for my students. Under the pressure from my administrators to encourage positive experiences and, therefore, reenrollment for following semesters, Mr. Obama gave me the much needed inspiration I had been seeking. Thus, my plan began.

As I handed back some student essays that received a wide range of scores and critical comments from yours truly, I made the following proclamation:

“We need to change direction. I believe the middle of the class is our most important demographic, and for too long it has gone ignored by teachers and administrators who reward the smartest one percent of students. So I am proposing a grade break to 95% of my students to help jump start our education. We need to close the incentive programs for the smartest few such as scholarships and internships. It’s time to get our education program back on track and put the middle of class first again.

“No longer will the bright and studious lead class discussions and tutoring programs in an effort to bring others along through learning growth. Learning occurs from the bottom up, and we need to realize the days of trickle down intelligence is over.

“In my plan those students who are at the “A” level will have their grades reduced by ten percent. Clearly those top students have advantages such as parental discipline or personal responsibility that are simply unfair to the rest of the class. Therefore, they need to relinquish their fair share of points for the good of the whole student body. Those students who are below the “A” level will receive a portion of those appropriated points. Most benefiting from this program are those at the “D” level or lower, who despite clearly not studying that much in the first place, will receive the full ten point bonus, thus bumping them up to the middle of the class.”

One puzzled student decided to interject, “So you’re saying if I study hard and get good grades, you’re going to give my points to someone who didn’t study as hard as I did?”

“It’s not that I want to punish your success,” I said. “I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you has a chance at success, too. I think that when you spread the grades around, it’s good for everybody.”

“But I don’t want to do that,” the student added. “If someone is struggling I’ll be happy to help them on my own. I don’t need you to take my grades away.”

“C’mon,” I replied. “It’s time to have school spirit … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get our school out of the rut.”

After a few more minutes of stringing this plot along, the students began to realize I was not serious about my proposal and would never consider the insanity of grade distribution.

As we concluded our discussion, one relieved young lady looked up at me from the middle of the room and meekly offered her own sensible proposal:

“Mr. S, I’m not a violent person, and this may not be nice to say. But, if you were to actually do that, I would have to punch you in the face.”

Now that is an “A” idea.

By Matt Spivey

Posted in Campaign 2008 | 1 Comment »


Posted by iusbvision on October 27, 2008

Via Matt Drudge.

Below is a 2001 Radio interview where Obama talks about how the Supreme Court should have been used (abused) to subvert the Constitution and have government forcibly redistribute wealth.

This is a 2001 radio interview with Barack Obama where he discusses how the subversion of the Constitution can be used to allow government to forcibly redistribute wealth in America. Every country that has tried this nonsense has resulted in a big mess. Much of Western Europe and Eastern Europe are history’s testimony of this simple truth, but those who buy into Marxism just never learn from history and are often busy rewriting it. Often people this far to the left try to hide it, but now some are opening up since they are so confident in their victory on the upcoming election.

The far left blogs say that using terms such as Marxist, socialist or communist are smears, but the simple truth is that the views that Obama expresses in this interview reflect classic textbook Marxist philosophy. They call the term “Marxist” a smear because they are trying to confuse people and rewrite “the American Way” in a manner that is consistent with the Communist Manifesto.

At too many universities, instead of being taught the classics, Marxism is pounded over and over in liberal arts education, but much of the time it is taught as “academic truth” and the students are often not fully aware that a great deal of other philosophy exists and they are not always informed thatw hat is being taught is Marxist philosophy.  

Obama’s peer group when he worked at the University of Chicago was this Marxist group of academics including the now infamous William Ayers and other self professed Maoists. Don’t know hat a Maoist is students, well take a look HERE. People in these peer groups consider Marxism as the only academic truth, in spite of the fact that attempts to practice it have resulted in economic stagnation to human disaster.

Think about it liberal arts majors, how much reading of Aristotle’s books of Rhetoric and Ethics have you actually had to put in your hands and go over? Or Cicero on politics? Or the very writings of this nations Founders?……yet almost very semester in my classes I get substantial amounts of Marxist theory, and odds are so do you.

The simple truth is that many normal citizens have no idea how subversive much of academia has become. Many citizens actually think that socialists and communists are not allowed to teach on college campuses. My upcoming book on on academia will have chapters on this very subject.

Any serious student of politics can see that Obama’s campaign play book is “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky. Oh wait…. most poli-sci and communications students are not asked to read that book…. you might want to pick it up and give it a read and ask yourself just why that is.

Anyway, on to the radio interview for you to hear for yourself. I find it interesting that Obama doesn’t seem to recognize the limits on Congress that are expressed in Article I Section VIII of the Constitution. Obama also seems to believe that the only things that the government CAN’T do is what is in the Bill of Rights. This is completely against what the Founders believed in. In fact many people who opposed the Constitution such as the great Patrick Henry believed that others would come who would interpret the Constitution to mean that the rights penned are the only ones you have and can be repealed by government…. just like Obama indicates in this interview. 

“Social justice” through “redistrobutive change” is textbook Marxism/socialism/communism.

Obama: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.

To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. …

I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know, the institution just isn’t structured that way. and Michelle Malkin comment HERE.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | 8 Comments »

A Reporter Finally Manages to Find William Ayers

Posted by iusbvision on October 25, 2008

Of course dozens of reporters went through every aspect of Joe the Plumbers life, including illegal access of government computers and databases…..

Finally someone has gotten around to having a chat with Ayers …

By the way, be sure to notice the Commubist Red Star T-Shirt Ayers is wearing…. yet Obama says that even though he worked for Ayers from 1994-2002 he didn’t know what his past was… then it was well he knew but he thought Ayers was reformed.

Does this man seem reformed to you??

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Barack Obama’s Career Path Toward an American? Presidency…

Posted by iusbvision on October 25, 2008

By Arlen Williams

A documented narrative for those coping with “mainstream media”

Barack Obama, according to his own book and the testimony of relatives and their friends, was raised in quite a radical family. His adolescent mother developed an affinity with a Marxist teacher and became an agnostic or atheist. She met Barack Obama Sr. in a Russian language class. Yes, a Russian language class, circa 1960.

With no father in his home in Hawaii, he was mentored throughout his teens by Frank Marshall Davis, a man famous in communist circles, with a large FBI file. Davis also wrote an autobiography, “Sex Rebel,” which demonstrates numerous of his perversions, including pedophilia. Nothing new there, “sexual revolution” was a part of the Russia’s Marxist revolution: sex is divorced from reproduction, marriage, and child rearing; abortion becomes sublime. Sexual involvement is “liberated” into mutual use.

From there, Barack was on to New York and Columbia University (Bill Ayers was a neighbor there, too) and then Chicago (where Ayers returned). Obama writes of attending socialist conferences and reading Marxist books around this time. He was trained in and taught the insurgent methods of “Rules for Radicals” drafted by cynical, “transformational Marxist,” Saul Alinsky. Thesis: lie, cheat, steal, etc., while making those who uphold American principles live up to impossibly high standards of institutional altruism, so that we and our liberal government fail in ridicule, paving the way for the “egalitarian state.” Preach “change” and gradually build an activist army of the proletariat, motivated by (short sighted) self interest, for a crescendoing revolt. And funny thing, Alinsky’s book tosses an acknowledgment to Lucifer, “the very first radical,” a refreshing lapse into candor.

In Chicago, Obama met his wife Michelle at the Sidley & Austin law firm, where Ayers’ terrorist wife Bernardine Dohrn worked, too. And in Chicago, they joined Jeremiah Wright’s church, investing two decades and significant indoctrination of their daughters there. That is, until Wright turned his criticism from merely “God damn America,” toward the one, Obama. This congregation espouses Black Liberation Theology, an institutionalization of ethnocentric bitterness and a variant of Liberation Theology, which had been conceived in South America as an attempt to sell Marxism to Christians through the clergy, misapplying portions of the Bible. Concurrently, Obama has repeatedly exhorted, “our individual salvation depends on collective salvation.” While that would have been less than Good News to Christ’s Apostles, Marx may have found it catchy.

Obama also shared an office for apparently three years with Ayers and fellow SDS member Michael Klonsky (a self-described Maoist communist) while taking Annenberg millions and devoting much of it to ACORN and other insurgent “community organizations.” The goal? “Raise political consciousness” among chiefly black school kids. (Historically, an SDS and Weathermen objective has been to piggyback upon any black revolt in America, for their Marxist ends.) What “political consciousness?” One attractive to Ayers, a self-proclaimed anarchistic Marxist. Ayers secured the purse, thus presumably played a responsible role in setting up young Mr. Obama as chairman. They apparently formed a small circle of Chicago’s education radicals.

In an overlapping circle, Obama became a member of the Marxist “New Party” in the 1990’s while maintaining membership in the Democratic Party. He also gained an odd circle of radical Islamist, anti-Israel friends, including Khalid al Mansour and Rasheid Khalidi, has connected with the radical Musllim Brotherhood, and Louis Farrakhan credits Obama with a key role in organizing his 1995 “Million Man March.”

And what has Obama been doing as Senator besides running for President? Well, he donated $1M to, and in 2006 visited Kenya to campaign for, Raila Odinga, a Kenyan out of prison for communist insurgency, who allied himself with radical Islamists and their establishment of brutally oppressive Sharia law in that nation. Odinga lost and led the kind of protest that killed 1,500 Kenyans, mostly Christians, mostly by Muslims. Rape, too. Churches were burned. The thuggery worked and Obama’s man was named Prime Minister. “Change.”

Many Americans are hearing about Obama’s redistributionist and welfare/workfare plans, but do not know he is committed in the direction of conscription to state service and to planning his presidential agenda in meetings with ACORN. He is also committed to the “Freedom of Choice Act,” which would nullify all laws against partial birth abortion and those for parental notification, and any other restriction of abortion. So much for “Life, Liberty, and Property.”

These are some key elements of the Marxist/fascist career development of the one poised to become, of all things, United States President.

Is that the one you want to stomach for America?



Posted in Campaign 2008, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Media Obsessing on Palin’s Clothes – The Sexism from the Media Continues

Posted by iusbvision on October 25, 2008

By the way – Palin is not a millionaire and did not have a full campaign wardrobe ready to pull out of the closet. Notice that no one asks who does Michelle Obama’s hair and how much that costs. The fact is that women have to look good on TV. Put Katie Couric out on CBS with no makeup, imperfect hair and cheap clothes and see what happens. Bill O’Reilly could get away with it, Alan Colmes gets away with it every night, but not Katie or any other women who are on TV a lot.

Posted in Other Links | 1 Comment »

Obama Campaign Taking Illegal Foreign Campaign Contributions

Posted by iusbvision on October 25, 2008

UPDATE: By the way, while the media obsesses over the RNC spending 150G on Sarah Palin’s clothes for the campaign which are planned to be auctioned off for CHARITY after the election… they aren’t obsessing over the Obama campaign spending $293,000 an HOUR in the month of October.

China, Gaza etc….

After press reports that Hamas and the Chinese were funneling campaign money into Obama’s campaign, bloggers started opening accounts with forign banks to see if they could use those accounts to make contributions with.

McCain’s site rejected the attempts and with Obama’s they sailed right on through.

ACE, Powerline, and Hotair all have been doing this and here are the results via

I’m ripping the content straight from Powerline. Ace actually had the story last night, but it was only a single source; PL claims in an update that other readers have replicated the experiment. Quote:

I went to the Obama campaign website and entered the following:

Name: John Galt
Address: 1957 Ayn Rand Lane
City: Galts Gulch
State: CO
Zip: 99999

Then I checked the box next to $15 and entered my actual credit card number and expiration date (it didn’t ask for the 3-didgit code on the back of the card) and it took me to the next page and… “Your donation has been processed. Thank you for your generous gift.”

This simply should not, and could not, happen in any business or any campaign that is honestly trying to vet it’s donors. Also, I don’t see how this could possibly happen without the collusion of the credit card companies. They simply wouldn’t allow any business to process, potentially, hundreds of millions in credit card transactions where the name on the card doesn’t match the purchasers name.

In short, with the system set up as it is by the Obama camp, an individual could donate unlimited amounts of money by simply making up fake names and addresses. And Obama is doing his best to facilitate this fraud. This is truly scandalous.

The same guy claims to have tried to donate the same way on McCain’s website and had his card rejected. I’m skeptical that The One would be quite this blatant about things, but (a) at the Corner, Mark Steynnotes that the only way to get his own online merchandising vendor to bypass a name check when processing credit card information would be to modify certain security settings, and (b) this wouldn’t be the first time Team Barry’s website had dragged its feet on online donation security measures. From Ken Timmerman’s much-linked piece at Newsmaxlast month: “Unlike McCain’s or Sen. Hillary Clinton’s online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton’s presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted.” Meanwhile, in response to his earlier post on this, Geraghtyreceives this e-mail from an Obama supporter:

Back in August or September (not sure which) Obama’s site definitely would not take my money because I was entering my school address instead of my permanent (parent’s) one. I remember being slightly annoyed at the time. I just tried it to donate again using my school address and it went through no problem. That’s more than a bit disappointing.

Hopefully, the suspect funds will be returned. Almost 2 million was refunded just last month.

There’s definitely no excuse for this though.

Any readers willing and able to help confirm or debunk? Knowledge of online vending a plus! Also a plus: Tolerance for being called a hater or racist for questioning the security measures of a guy who famously hasn’t released any information about his many, many, many small donors. If you succeed, your reward will be watching the media pounce on this story — to find out who “John Galt” is, so that they can give him a beating Joe-the-Plumber-style.

Update: A reader tells Steynthat his donation as “JarackBoe BOamabiden” was accepted.

Update: Lots more info at Ace’s from readers who are replicating the experiment. Question: Is it possible that the website’s showing a “transaction confirmed” message before the transaction’s actually confirmed, and all these donations are being rejected later?

Update: Reader “Dale in Atlanta” says he tried it with a fake name and the transaction showed up on his credit card immediately — but marked “pending.” We’ll find out later today if it clears.

Update:Just across from the RNC:

The Republican National Committee (RNC) today filed a supplement to its complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against the Obama for America campaign addressing its acceptance of foreign national and excessive contributions, donations from unknown sources, and demonstrated lack of oversight or concern for compliance with the law. The complaint demonstrates that the Obama campaign has failed to comply with federal campaign finance law in its fundraising. RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross released the following statement today concerning the supplement to the complaint:

“Based on numerous press accounts that have come to light since our initial filing in early October, it is clear that the Obama for America campaign is operating outside of the law. The complete and total lack of any control mechanisms within the Obama campaign’s fundraising operation has undermined any confidence in their ability to curtail excessive, foreign, and fraudulent contributions and demands immediate attention from the Federal Election Commission (FEC).”

Update: Here’s something a reader sent me, for what it’s worth:

I recently set up credit card processing for my startup company and the way it works is the vender (ie me, or Obama’s campaign) selects whether the info must match what is on the card. If they opt not to they accept the risk of being flagged after too many fradulent charges are reported by them to the credit card companies. Since these people are (presumably) using their actual credit card and just giving a different name to avoid the donation limits I doubt they’ll file complaints about the charges with their card company.

So the only time you would ever do this is if you know your clients really well. The only reason I can think of for Obama’s campaign to do this is to avoid the donations cap. The fact that this isn’t all over the media is truly a shame.

Update: Unbelievable. Suddenly, after multiple blog readers had their phony donations accepted and this story started percolating on right-wing blogs, the security system is magically back in place.

Update: I don’t know what happened to the guy in the last update but Flip says he successfully donated five bucks at 2:05 p.m. with the following info:

Name: Nodda Realperson
Address: 1000 This Is a Bogus Street
City/State: Neighborhood of Makebelieve, CA
Employer: Barack Obama
Occupation: Cow-Eyed Disciple

A friend e-mails to ask if anyone’s tried this with a foreign credit card to see if there’s any difference. Anyone got one?

Update: Commenter “Bombast” says his foreign credit card worked like a charm:

I have a credit card issued by a bank in Hong Kong.

I’ve just made 5 donations of $5 each using the card. I listed fake addresses in North Korea, Iran, Gaza, Venezuela and Kenya. The names and addresses were made up, each was different, I listed real Yahoo email addresses that forward to me.

Fake Name
Not A. Realperson
Finance Violation
Fraudulent Charge
Over Donation Limit

All 5 went through without a problem. I’m already being solicited for more money.

Update: One of Jonah Goldberg’s readers says he tried this at McCain’s website and was rejected.

Update:Patrick Ruffini was Bush’s web guy in 2004 and specializes in online campaign finance, so he knows what he’s talking about here. Verdict: Fraud.

The issue centers around the Address Verification Service (or AVS) that credit card processors use to sniff out phony transactions. I was able to contribute money using an address other than the one on file with my bank account (I used an address I control, just not the one on my account), showing that the Obama campaign deliberately disabled AVS for its online donors…

The end result? “Donors” like “Doodad Pro” can submit tons of donations totaling well above the $2,300 limit using different bogus addresses (this does clarify how donations from “Palestine”, or PA, got through). And the campaign has no way to reliably de-dupe these donations, besides looking at the last four digits of the credit card number, which with 3.1 million donors is an identifier that could be shared by literally hundreds of donors, and is not as easy to eyeball like a common name or address would be. The ability to contribute with a false address, when the technology to prevent it not only exists but comes standard, is a green light for fraud.

Posted in Other Links | 1 Comment »

Abe Lincoln Quote of the Decade!

Posted by iusbvision on October 24, 2008

This post is stickied – please scroll down for the latest updates.

[This sums up the election perfectly. – Editor]

“We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name – liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names – liberty and tyranny.” The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume VII, “Address at Sanitary Fair, Baltimore, Maryland” (April 18, 1864), p. 301-302.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

One Honest Democrat Journalist Finally Tells the Truth About Who Caused the Mortgage Crisis.

Posted by iusbvision on October 23, 2008

[Mr. Card makes the same case about the mortgage crisis that we did last month. All you doubters sending us the hate mail are eating crow on this one. This report is so accurate it is as if he obtained the information from the IUSB Vision. A journalist gets the story RIGHT and THATS news….pathetic state of affairs journalism is in isn’t it? – Editor]

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?
By Orson Scott Card

Editor’s note: Orson Scott Card is a Democrat and a newspaper columnist, and in this opinion piece he takes on both while lamenting the current state of journalism.

An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President’s Men and thinking: That’s journalism.  You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn’t come out of nowhere.  It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people.  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan?  It’s a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups.  But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can’t repay?  They get into a house, yes, but when they can’t make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it.  One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules.  The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans.  (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me.  It’s as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn’t there a story here?  Doesn’t journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout?  Aren’t you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal.  “Housing-gate,” no doubt.  Or “Fannie-gate.”

Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a essay entitled “Do Facts Matter?” (] ): “Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago.  So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President.  So did Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury.”

These are facts.  This financial crisis was completely preventable.  The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was … the Democratic Party.  The party that tried to prevent it was … the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie.  Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What?  It’s not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let’s follow the money … right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Freddie Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate’s campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an “adviser” to the Obama campaign — because that campaign had sought his advice — you actually let Obama’s people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn’t listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents.  Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link.  (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth.  That’s what you claim you do, when you accept people’s money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans.  You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that’s what honorable people do.  Honest people tell the truth even when they don’t like the probable consequences.  That’s what honesty means .  That’s how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one.  He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards’s own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all?  Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women.  Who listens to NOW anymore?  We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That’s where you are right now.

It’s not too late.  You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation’s prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama’s door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis.  You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe — and vote as if — President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats — including Barack Obama — and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans — then you are not journalists by any standard.

You’re just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it’s time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a news paper in our city.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis | 3 Comments »

Obama Brazenly Lied in Debate Again – Elite Media MUM.

Posted by iusbvision on October 16, 2008

First lets take the fact that Obama lied when he said that he isn’t running a negative campaign.

Believe it or not, MSNBC got this story correct and has been one of the first to do so.

In the video they discuss how the media istalking about how the McCain campaign is running such a negative campaign, but the facts are that Obama has run more negative ads and has spent more money on negative advertising than anyone in the history of politics. That is not spin folks, that is just a plain fact. The Washington Post reported the study from the University of Wisconsin and tried as hard as they could to mitigate it but the facts are the facts. Obama is outspending McCain and is able to do so because he reversed himself on his promise to comply with federal campaign spending limits at the last moment. Obama is outspending McCain 3 to 1. Hat Tip for the video link.


1,342 to 8

No, that is not the accumulated score of the Rays-Sox series, though it feels that way in the Nation.

Rather that staggering figure is the sum total of how many ads Obama has aired on Washington, D.C. network TV in the first three weeks of September compared to how many spots McCain aired in the same market and period.

Yowza, as they say in New England.

Jeanne Cummings has much more here about Obama’s massive ad advantage. 


You hear on the elite media that someone in the crowd in a McCain rally said “kill him” in reference to Obama… come to find out that it didn’t happen. The Secret Service went over the video and interviewed witnesses and have said that the claim that someone said this is unfounded… in fact …the ONLY person who claims to have heard is it a reporter…. oh what a surprise…

Posted: October 15
Updated: Today at 10:14 AM
Secret Service says “Kill him” allegation unfounded
By Andrew M. Seder
Staff Writer

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackettwas addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him.”

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermannreported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.

Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

“We have yet to find someone to back up the story,” Slavoski said. “We had people all over and we have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.”

Michelle Malkin comments on the Secret Story HERE.  

More Ad Lies from Obama.

The Obama ad that says that McCain wants to tax your health care benefits is a plain lie. You can go to and read the plan for yourself and it also has links to third party studies of the health care plan.

The latest lie I saw was an Obama attack ad linking McCain to the mortgage crisis because McCain is close to the Sec. of Commerce. Folks, the Sec. of  Commerce has next to nothing to do with the mortgage industry. The Commerce Department focuses mostly on trade import and export issues.

Obama lied about his history with ACORN, how he has given them money and this has been well reported and yet he still lied about it.

Obama brazenly lied about the born alive bill that was discussed last night. We had planned to write about this in detail today, but It looks like Ed Morrissey over at must have done an all nighter because he has all of the evidence put together one one excellent post.

Ed Morrissey at

The first was subtle, and unless you paid attention to the split screen, you may have missed it.  John McCain, after being asked about William Ayers, noted that Obama had launched his campaign in Ayers’ living room:

MCCAIN: Well, again, while you were on the board of the Woods Foundation, you and Mr. Ayers, together, you sent $230,000 to ACORN. So — and you launched your political campaign in Mr. Ayers’ living room.

OBAMA: That’s absolutely not true.

MCCAIN: And the facts are facts and records are records.

OBAMA: And that’s not the facts.

Unfortunately for Obama, those arethe facts, both about Ayers and ACORN.  Obama paid ACORN over $800,000 this summer for GOTV efforts, which Obama now denies, although he did finally admit that he represented ACORN as an attorney in a lending-practices case.  Obama did launch his career at a party hosted by Ayers, which is such a matter of public record that I’m frankly surprised he bothered to deny it.

The next big lie came during the debate on abortion.  McCain pointed out Obama’s radical positions on the issue, including his repeated opposition to the Illinois version of the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act.  Obama responded with a series of lies:

There was a bill that was put forward before the Illinois Senate that said you have to provide lifesaving treatment and that would have helped to undermine Roe v. Wade. The fact is that there was already a law on the books in Illinois that required providing lifesaving treatment, which is why not only myself but pro-choice Republicans and Democrats voted against it.

During that period, the Attorney General reported that the practice of abandoning infants born alive during late-term abortions was not covered by the law.  Jill Stanek and others testified to the practice, and the Illinois Senate heard testimony that suggested that as many as 20% of all late-term abortions resulted in a live birth.  Obama lied about the circumstances of the bill; the reason it was being proposed was because existing law was ineffective at protecting infants born alive.

And the Illinois Medical Society, the organization of doctors in Illinois, voted against it. Their Hippocratic Oath would have required them to provide care, and there was already a law in the books.

There wasn’t a law on the books, and who would be surprised that the people performing the abortions and leaving the children to die wouldn’t want more oversight to prevent that practice? [Not even NARAL opposed this legislation]

You can read my previous posts on the subject:

  • Infanticide, revisited
  • Yes, we can … elect a guy who votes for infanticide
  • There are a lot of things above Obama’s “pay grade”
  • Team Obama acknowledges infanticide lie
  • Obama camp: He only voted against that born-alive abortion bill because it might actually have an effect
  • Obama’s support for infanticide breaks into mainstream media
  • Obama: Bill unnecessarily burdened doctors with … babies; Update: AOL Hot Seat poll added
  • McCarthy: Obama’s moral failing on infanticide
  • Obama’s ad lies about infanticide vote
  • in an attempt to hide his radical position on abortion. [and there is no elite media to fact check it any more]

    Obama voted against the bill that would have protected infants born alive even after the “neutrality clause” he demanded was added to protect abortion in Illinois.  That is the truth in this case, and Obama lied last night to the American people

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    MALKIN: Reason #99,999,988 to homeschool: Obama-fied textbooks

    Posted by iusbvision on October 14, 2008

    …And Reason number 2 billion to love Michelle Malkin :-)

     Reason #99,999,988 to homeschool: Obama-fied textbooks

    By Michelle Malkin  •  October 14, 2008 11:54 AM

    15 pages devoted to The One in a kids’ textbook used in the Racine, WI schools.

    Will they be required to learn the goose steps and children’s anthem, too?


    Commenter BrianNY on the Obama Alphabet:

    A is for ACORN
    B is for Barack
    C is for Community Activist…

    From Wisconsin:
    My 8th grade son is in an advanced English class at a public middle school here in Racine, Wisconsin. I just found out that my son’s new (copyright 2008) Wisconsin – McDougal Littell Literature book has 15 pages covering Barack Obama.

    I was shocked – No John McCain, no Hillary Clinton, no George Bush – Just Barack Obama. I’m wondering how it is that Obama’s story gets put into an 8th grade literature book? It would be one thing, if it was just the tidbit about his boyhood days, but 15 pages, and they talk about his “Life of Service”. Honestly, what has Obama really done to be included in this book? Not only that, but on page 847 there is a photo of Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention with at least 8 Obama signs in the background! Front & center is an sign.

    Now I understand that many teachers are liberals, but does the school have the right to shove Obama down our kid’s throats? All the kids grouped together and read the story. After that, they discussed it… I guess it appears that Obama is planning ahead. If he doesn’t get his coveted Presidency, Obama is going to make sure, that the younger generations know all about him, and his “life of service”.

    If you would like to see the 15 page story on Obama, it appears that you can order this book online. There is a note in the book that says, For more on Barack Obama, visit the Literature Center at The book is: Wisconsin – 8th grade – McDougal Littell Literature – copyright 2008. The Obama story starts on page 830. I hope you will take the time to look at this book. I’m really angry about this – In fact, I would love to rip the pages right out of this book.

    By the way, you might find this interesting: I did a little checking on McDougal Littell, and it appears that MCDOUGAL, ALFRED L CHICAGO , IL 60611 – N/A/RETIRED has been making contributions to Barack Obama’s campaign!

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | 2 Comments »

    VIDEO: Obama Supporters Show Us Their Genius

    Posted by iusbvision on October 14, 2008

    So what happens when you take McCain’s policy positions, they they are Obama’s and ask Obama supporters about them? Watch the video and see.

    Moonbat threatens life of President on C-Span

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    Obama Ally ACORN Under Vote Fraud Investigation in 13 States – A Roundup

    Posted by iusbvision on October 13, 2008

    It is illegal for ACORN to engage in partisan activities. Here are interviews with ACORN employees who say that they were told to canvas for Democrats like Claire McCaskill  

    ESPN Jokes about ACORN Vote Fraud  

    Democrat Ohio Secretery of State Jennifer Brunner fighting in court to keep ACORN fradulent voter registrations ON the books!

    “ACORN raped and abused our voter roles in a reckless and irresponsible way”

    CNN on ACORN Vote Fraud here in Indiana (H/T for the video link)

    Cleaveland Ohio says ACORN Vote fraud so bad that there is no way they can stop it in time. Lack of elite media coverage.

    Obama’s long history working for ACORN. The Vote Fraud and the intimidation tactics, the illegal use of taxpayer money or taxpayer insured money for partisan actibities.

    Obama speech: “ACORN and friends will shape his presidential agenda”

    New Your Times on Obama’s history with ACORN, even why trying to play it down, some of the facts are in the story.

    In 1992, Mr. Obama was personally involved in voter registration efforts when he served as director of Project Vote in Chicago, helping to register 150,000 voters on the South Side. His success was widely written about at the time and credited with helping to elect Senator Carol Moseley Braun, the first African-American woman in the Senate.

    Mr. LaBolt emphasized that Project Vote and Acorn were not as intertwined at that time as they are today, when a significant part of Project Vote’s revenues flow to Acorn and various of its affiliates as payment for services.

    But according to Sam Graham-Felsen, who blogs on the Obama campaign’s Web site, Mr. Obama himself linked his 1992 work to Acorn in a meeting with Acorn’s leaders in November.

    “Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drives in Illinois, Acorn was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work,” Mr. Obama said, according to a post Mr. Graham-Felsen made in February.


    The John McCain Ad on Obama and ACORN. While not all political ads are totally accurate, this ad is spot on accurate. The Obama campaign is lying about Obama’s long history with ACORN.

    ACORN intimidation tactics and How the Democrats tried to give ACORN BILLIONS in the bailout bill. Republicans got that part of the bill thrown out.

    Article from the Wall Street Journal that explains how federal money goes to partisan Obama supporters such as ACORN.

    An amalgamation of news clips about ACORN. Author of a book on vote fraud explains how ACORN operates. Obama was ACORN’s attorney in many of their lawsuits. etc. The clips are seperated by humorous political pictures of Obama. Former Ohio Secretery of State Ken Blackwell comments towards the end of the video.  


    The Cleveland Leader Calls out Obama’s lies on his history with ACORN:

    Obama Campaign Involved in More Cover-Ups in ACORN Scandal

    On Thursday we revealed the connection between Barack Obama and Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), and uncovered a 2004 article that discussed his involvement with the organization which had recently been removed from the web. Today, the cover-ups continue and language on Obama’s website has been altered in order to make it look like he has been telling the truth about his ACORN associations all along.

    Fortunately, we and many others online know how to do a screen capture and how to use a little something called Google Cache.

    As of yesterday, stated:

    Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.

    Sometime on Friday, the website was altered, and the text was changed to state:

    Fact: ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee.

    The mere fact that his campaign has now changed the language of the site shows that they have conceded the fact that their original remark was a bold-face lie. As a lawyer Sen. Obama should know the importance of language.

    The original statement implied that he had no working connection with ACORN, whereas the new statement now insists that he has never been employed or hired by ACORN.

    It is good to see the truth finally come out now, but why were they trying to hide his association with ACORN, and what else is Obama lying to us about? Perhaps the biggest question now is how and why they got the Social Policy article stricken from most of the world wide web in the What are they trying to hide? as it was on October 9, 2008: as it shows in Google’s cache, last updated Oct. 6, 2008: as it now shows, effective Oct. 10, 2008 :

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | 4 Comments »

    Drivers licenses for illegal immigrants & other positions Obama held during the primary election.

    Posted by iusbvision on October 13, 2008

    It seems like everyone has stopped paying attention to the positions and statements that Obama made in the primary election. In most elections the elite media would go back and fact-check everyone, compare speeches and do all of the things that you would expect a wealthy press corps to do. Those days seem long gone.

    Here are the issues, statements, reversals and fibs from the primary campaign with a couple of exceptions such as the ACORN lie and the Ayers lies which are more recent. I wish I could say this list is comprehensive, but it is likely we missed some.

    How he was for immediate pull out of Iraq, how he said in the “youtube debate” that he would meet at the presidential level with nuts around the world without precognition, how he promised to renegotiate NAFTA while sending his foreign policy consultant to Canada to tell them he wasn’t serious and it was just campaign rhetoric, the reversals on gun control, campaign financing, more campaign financing, what happened to the “self reliance tour’, negative attacks, more NAFTA & faith based programs reversals, union intimidation, sending surrogates to attack Cindy McCain while he says that the wives are off limits, campaign launches multi-pronged attack against McCain’s military service over July 4th weekendwhile Obama says that no one should attack military service, sexist attacks, more sexist attackshow he lets his own brother live in a tiny shack on $12 a year, reversals, the New York Times chastises Obama for even MORE reversals & accused of being a man with ‘seasonal principles’, equal pay for women hypocrisy, more pay for women hypocrisy, lying abouit oil leases and drilling, Obama didn’t stand up against his own party,  reversed himself on the terror surveillance program, Obama stated his support for higher gas prices, flip flopped twice on offshore drilling in 48 hours, Iraq timetable, purging his lies about the surge from his web site,  taking money from PACS and special interests, taking money from the mortgage industry, lying about clean coal technology, Obama’s lie that he had nothing to do with ACORN, abusing law enforcemnet to stop free speech, more taking money from Wall Street Interests (even though Obama promised not to take money from these people, he has taken THE MOST money from these people).

    Another important issue that came up in the primary debates is the issue of drivers licenses for illegal aliens. Obama was clear in his support for it and Hillary was sympathetic to at at first but finally concluded that it was a bad idea; with motor voter and other laws today, the risk of vote fraud and other security problems arise when illegals are given a drivers license.

    This is what Dick Morris had to say about it.

    Did you know 13 of the 19 hijackers had obtained valid driver’s licenses? Armed with these licenses, eight of the hijackers even registered to vote.

    Obama strongly supports giving illegal aliens in America driver’s licenses. He said as much during two Democratic debates earlier this year.

    The head of Homeland Security said such thinking was dangerous for national security. Even Hillary Clinton backed away from Obama’s radical driver’s license plan.

    Obama has been a major proponent of driver’s licenses for illegals since his days as an Illinois state senator.

     This is an issue that the McCain Campaign should bring back up.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    VIDEO: Obama Campaign Inspires Hate

    Posted by iusbvision on October 13, 2008

    UPDATE: Michelle Malkin updates us on all the leftist hate that the elite media is ignoring HERE.

    Warning adult language.

    McCain said that Obama is a decent guy and all sorts of nice things about him. McCain says that he admires Obama for his accomplishments as well. Of course Obama has a little problem with not telling the truth as we have catalogued in detail lately and I wish McCain would hit Obama up on this because I am sick of politicians who will brazenly lie.

    NOTE – Media Hypocricy Alert: The elite media is associating McCain with things that a couple of people shouted out in a crowd of 10,000, who McCain rebuked on the spot; yet to associate Obama with true radical haters like Rev. Wright, Pfleger, Ayers, Rudd, and Klonsky who Obama had multi-year close relationships with is racist and unfair…. at least according to them.

    Keep in mind as well that the couple of people sho shouted out bad things very well could have been plants. If you think it sounds crazy think again. Plants got into the Republican Convention on multiple nights and said horrible things. In Congressional hearings plants get it and do horrible things. Some nutty Code Pink people even tried to get their paint covered hands on Condi Rice at a hearing. Some even have gotten into the State of the Union Address.

    Former National Organization for Women President Tammy Bruce said today that when she was a leftist they would send in plants to Republicans events to start trouble.

    Compare this with the four people who showed up to an event wearing T-Shirt’s that said “Sarah Palin is a C*NT” … well of course the elite media has no time to tell us about that now are they. Look at the hate spread against Sarah Palin including high ranking members of Obama’s campaign who said that Palin should go home and take care of her kids among other things.

    Look at the hate being spread against Sarah Palin, look at Obama going to the DailyKOS Convention and that site spreads more hate and anti-semitism than almost any other.

    I find it amusing that the Obama Campaign says that Sarah Palin inspires hate… after watching that video, maybe the media ought to think of who it is that has been hanging out with the hate mongers…..

    Well if they don’t remember here is a reminder…

    So in 2001 when Ayers was obama’s boss at woods for several years he wrote his book bragging about the bombings and said he didn’t do enough.. but maybe this picture and article from Chicago Magazine will do it for you.

    “Barack Obama was much older than 8 when William Ayers was photographed stepping on a US flag in 2001, for an article in which Ayers said he had “No Regrets” for his violent actions in the Weather Underground.” – LGF

    The article in Chicago Magazine is titled “No Regrets”

    So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ”I don’t want to discount the possibility,” he said.

    When Obama started making good money as his political career took off convicted felon Tony Rezco helped him obtain a house just a short walk from the home of Ayers and Louis Farrakhan. We published an article in March pointing out the numerous radicals and nut cases that Obama has chosen to associate himself with. This included Father Pfleger whose hateful rhetoric, anti-American rhetoric and proud association with Louis Farrakhan is well known. Obama used his influence to send a $225,000 grant to Pfleger and Pfleger contributed to Obama’s campaign. Obama said in his books that Rev Wright and Pfleger were his spiritual advisors for 20 years. Of course Pfleger got thrown under the bus by Obama too.

    But words just don’t convey the full meaning of the truth – so here we have two video’s of Father Pfleger and one defends Louis Farrakhan

    This is from Rev. Wrights DVD’s of sermons from his church that Barack Obama attended for 20 years and claims he never saw Rev. Wright speak like this and had no idea Wright had such views…. Do you believe that for a minute?

    The list goes on:

    “Michael Klonsky, whose disgust for mainstream politics led him to launch a new, Maoist Communist Party in the 1970s, today supports Barack Obama so enthusiastically that until recently he was blogging on the Illinois senator’s campaign website.” Michael Rudd, Carl Davidson, Tom Heyden, and Mark Rudd are all professed Maoists, collaborated with Ayres in the 1970’s and now run “Progressives for Obama”.

    MINI UPDATE:Speaking of Mark Rudd he is in this video & Obama Knew Ayres when he did this interview with Connie Chung in 1998 and after all this Obama didn’t know??

    This isn’t the occasional bad judgement or coincidence, these were ongoing relationships with a list of people who hate the traditional American way of life. It speaks a great deal that these are the kinds of people that Obama feels comfortable with, and that he would throw them under the bus when politically convenient.

    The AP and the NYT don’t want you to know this or Obama’s long history with ACORN..

    For more evidence about Obama’s history with ACORN and the mortgage crisis click HERE.

    Chuck Norton

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    4-3 Connecticut Court Finds Right to Gay Marriage in Constitution that Eluded Everyone Else for 200 years!

    Posted by iusbvision on October 12, 2008

    This is the silliest of the silly and this is why activist judges have to be kept off the bench. There has never been a right to heterosexual marriage so how can there be a right to gay marriage? If I have a right to marry than someone MUST marry me or my rights are violated. What is next, the right to have a boyfriend or girlfriend?

    Trial Attorney Bill Dyer has the analysis from

    Posted by: Bill Dyer

    (Guest Post by Bill Dyer a/k/a Beldar)

    In Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health, over the protests of three members of the court (as expressed in three dissenting opinions), a four-member majority of the Connecticut Supreme Court has overturned as “unconstitutional” a statutory system whose long-standing components were passed by Connecticut’s lawmakers and signed into law by its governors over many years, and has instead decreed that henceforth in Connecticut, “same sex couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry.” Here’s the majority’s own summary of its reasoning:

    We conclude that, in light of the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody, the segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm. We also conclude that (1) our state scheme discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, (2) for the same reasons that classifications predicated on gender are considered quasi-suspect for purposes of the equal protection provisions of the United States constitution, sexual orientation constitutes a quasi-suspect classification for purposes of the equal protection provisions of the state constitution, and, therefore, our statutes discriminating against gay persons are subject to heightened or intermediate judicial scrutiny, and (3) the state has failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same sex couples from the institution of marriage.

    [How about this you pinhead judges, a marraige is a religious ceremony that has a contractual agreement with each other and the state. The legislative majority decides contract law by the consent of the people. Now four judges have decided that the people of Connecticut must enter that contract and issue a marraige license against their own will; not based on a characteristic, but based on the behavior of those demanding the license.  – IUSB Vision Editor]

    Because the court relied upon its interpretation of the equal protection provision in the Connecticut state constitution rather than upon the comparable provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, there is effectively no chance that the U.S. Supreme Court will review today’s decision. That decision is now the law of Connecticut, subject only to being overturned by the Connecticut Supreme Court itself or by an amendment to the state constitution.

    The judges who made up the majority in this ruling are precisely the kinds of judges whom Barack Obama and Joe Biden want to appoint the the federal bench. That’s why Obama and Biden voted against confirmation of both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito. Instead, they want judges who will make law from the bench — and especially laws on the most controversial subjects (like gay marriage) that couldn’t possibly gather a majority vote in Congress and a presidential signature. It’s worse than meaningless, but rather a complete fraud, for Obama and Biden to tell voters that they oppose gay marriage when they will appoint judges who will bring about gay marriage by judicial decree.

    This decision will alarm and dismay two partially overlapping groups of people: (a) those who believe that recognition of single-sex marriage will ultimately destroy the traditional institution of marriage and foster other bad effects in society, and (b) those who decry unrestrained judicial activism as a tyrannical seizure of political power by rogue judges in a manner that undercuts the legislative and executive branches of government, thereby rendering impotent the political decisions made by democratic majorities.

    As a matter of constitutional law and basic principles of civil government, this is another well-intentioned but awful decision — one that may, ironically, end up frustrating rather than advancing the ultimate goal of its proponents. Using courts to cram this sort of policy down people’s throats — without majority support, and in fact in defiance of majority opinion — is a very bad plan.

    Those who follow, or much care about, the constitutional law here will quickly note that the Connecticut Supreme Court has played fast and loose with its equal protection clause. In equal protection analysis, the outcome is almost always determined by the framework in which the courts choose to analyze a government classification. If the government is classifying people on the basis of race, for example, long-standing precedent from both federal and state courts typically use a “strict scrutiny” approach, under which the government must offer up a “compelling purpose” to support its decision to treat people differently from one another because of their respective races.

    Classifications based on other distinctions, however, traditionally were treated as valid so long as they have a “rational basis” — a vastly easier standard to satisfy. The state discriminates, for example, against the sightless when it requires people who get drivers licenses to pass a vision test. But because sightedness — unlike, for example, race — is not a classification that has traditionally been subjected to “strict scrutiny” analysis under the constitutional precedents interpreting state or federal equal protection guarantees, the state merely need show a rational reason for treating the sightless differently. They meet that requirement by showing that people who can’t meet the vision requirements are more dangerous drivers. And as for whether someone with an uncorrected vision of 20/100 is or is not permitted to drive without corrective lenses, that sort of fine calibration of the state’s classification system the courts generally leave to a combination of state legislatures and state agencies, upholding their decisions unless they are so genuinely arbitrary as to have no correlation to reality.

    Dyer is spot on correct, read the rest of his analysis HERE. comments HERE.

    Posted in Chuck Norton | 3 Comments »

    HUMOR: Old Grumpy Guy Says “Give Obama a Chance!”

    Posted by iusbvision on October 12, 2008

    Hat tip to our friends at HILLBUZZ – the most popular Hillary supporting blog on the net.

    Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    McCain Wrote Letter in May 2006 Signed by 19 Senators to Fix Mortgage Industry

    Posted by iusbvision on October 11, 2008


    Hat Tip Human Events Magazine.

    You see the four Senators who were the sponsors Hagel, Sunnunu, Dole and McCain and the other Senators on page 2.

    To learn the ins and outs of what has become the largest financial scandal in world history please read the links below.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | 8 Comments »

    TROOPERGATE RESULTS: Branchflower finds Sarah Palin “Guilty” of not Keeping Her Husband Todd from Defending His Family from a Maniac State Trooper

    Posted by iusbvision on October 11, 2008

    Sounds like a silly headline, but when you read the report, in a nutshell that is exactly what it claims.

    The Media is going nuts saying “Palin Abused Power” – but they are not giving you all the pertinent details that are in the report. Before I get into the details a few things need to be understood.

    1. The report is the finding of just one man, Steve Branchflower. Who is the so called “independent investigator” who colluded with Democrats Hollis French and Kim Elton to keep some of Palin’s witnesses from testifying.

    2. Hollis French, the Senator leading the investigation, is a strident Obama supporter and said unabashedly that he intended for the UPCOMING investigation to be used as an “October Surprise” for the election.

    4. Monegan worked with Hollis French to try and get funding for projects that Governor Palin had previously vetoed.

    …insubordination from Monegan from the official documents:

    • 12/9/07: Monegan holds a press conference with Hollis French to push his own budget plan.
    • 1/29/08: Palin’s staffers have to rework their procedures to keep Monegan from bypassing normal channels for budget requests.
    • February 2008: Monegan publicly releases a letter he wrote to Palin supporting a project she vetoed.
    • June 26, 2008: Monegan bypassed the governor’s office entirely and contacted Alaska’s Congressional delegation to gain funding for a project.

    Even after all this, Palin didn’t want to fire Monegan, she just wanted to reassign him. She offered him another job on the spot. If Palin was personal and wanted to “get even” with Monegan she would have fired him.

    Here is our previous coverage with the evidence of French’s, Monegan’s and Kim Elton’s politically motivated misconduct in the investigation—>

    5. The 12-0 decision was not a unanimous finding of any guilt. It was a vote on whether or not to release Branchflower’s report to the public… so the Anchorage Daily News, who we have said before is often biased in its reporting against Palin, got it wrong when they said that the legislature found her guilty.

    6. The press says that it was bi-partisan because the legislative committee has Republicans and Democrats on it. Lyda Green, the Republican leader of the Alaska Senate, who sits on the committee hates …and I mean HATES Governor Palin. Why do we say that? Lyda Green, as we reported HERE, is a part of that good old boys corruption network in the Alaska Republican Party that Palin brought down. Green tried to get revenge against Palin repeatedly, including trying to get the State of the State address schedule changed so that Palin would miss her son’s graduation. Lyda Green became very unpopular for opposing Palin’s reforms. So unpopular that she is not running for re-election.

    It is important to remember that the Republican and Democrat party machines both hate Palin and would certainly be more aggressive towards her if she did not have an 80% approval rating. She ended their billion dollar corruption ring with the energy companies that owned the state government. Lets face facts, lots of people have been killed for less money. Palin refuses to endorse Republican Senator Ted Stevens, and it was Palin’s outing of the corruption ring that got the FBI interested in investigating Ted Stevens to begin with.

    Here is the Branchflower Report.

    The report states clearly:

    Governor Palin’s firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

    The conspiracy theorists and partisan pundits said that the only reason Palin fired Monegan because he would not fire Alaska State Trooper Wooten (we will get to Wooten in a minute). Which, if true would have been a technical violation of state ethics laws. This has now proved to be false. This is an important lesson in the unintended consequences of passing sweeping legislation. As we will start to cover in a moment, if anyone on Earth deserved to be fired and have his right to own a gun taken away, it is Trooper Mike Wooten. Wooten has amassed quite a history of illegal, violent and reckless behavior, including threatening the lives of members of Palin’s family while in uniform. If the ethics laws prevent a governor from getting a threat to the public like Wooten off the street with a state issued firearm, the law has a problem.

    The law should not be written in such a way as to prevent a governor from protecting the public from a threat such as a rogue cop like Wooten.

    The report also states that Palin abused her power and violated ethics laws by not preventing her husband, Todd Palin, from trying to get Wooten fired. A stretch for many reasons with the most obvious reason being that husbands protect their families and good luck deterring Todd Palin from doing what he thought was best under such a threat and Todd Palin’s under oath statement states clearly that Sarah asked him to stop. What is she going to do, have her husband arrested to put an end to it? Its silly.

    The reasoning that Branchflower uses to make this finding is here:

    I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

    The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.

    The problem is that this is a wholesale misreading of the law and it takes a great deal of tortured logic to get there. We were preparing to explain why this is in detail, and while our previous legal analysis here at the IUSB Vision has ALWAYS proved accurate, trial attorney Bill Dyer was kind enough to publish his own analysis which we find to be spot on.

    Hugh Hewitt published trial lawyer, Bill Dyer’s analysis HERE.

    Excerpts – read this very carefully:

    Instead, Branchflower has piled a guess (that the Palin’s wanted Wooten fired, rather than, for example, counseled, disciplined, or reassigned) on top of an inference (that when the Palins expressed concern to Monegan about Wooten, they were really threatening to fire Monegan if he didn’t fire Wooten) on top of an innuendo (that Gov. Palin “fired” Monegan at least in part because of his failure to fire Wooten) — from which Branchflower then leaps to a legal conclusion: “abuse of authority.” Branchflower reads the Ethics Act to prohibit any governmental action or decision made for justifiable reasons benefiting the State if that action or decision might also make a public official happy for any other reason. That would mean, of course, that governors must never act or decide in a way that makes them personally happy as a citizen, or as a wife or mother or daughter, and that they could only take actions or make decisions which left them feeling neutral or upset. This an incredibly shoddy tower of supposition, and a ridiculous misreading of the law.

    This is exactly the entire point right here, in order for what Branchflower says to be true, the law would have to be read in a ridiculously broad manner. No serious judge (granted there are judges who ignore legal ethics routinely) would allow such a broad interpretation. In fact the number one reason why most laws are shot down by the courts is that they are overly broad. For example: when Palin returned a portion of the states energy revenue to every citizen of the state, including members of the Palin family who are citizens, according to Branchflower’s reading of the law this would have been a violation of the states ethics law. It’s silly.

    Branchflower puts under a microscope every direct and indirect contact that can possibly be claimed to come, directly or indirectly, from Gov. Palin or her husband, Todd. In none of them did either Sarah or Todd Palin demand or request that Wooten be fired. Some of them date back to before Gov. Palin was even a candidate for governor. All of them are equally well explained by legitimate concerns that Wooten was a potential threat to the Palin family (having already made death threats against Gov. Palin’s father) and/or an embarrassment to the Alaska Department of Public Safety and the entire state law enforcement community. That the Palinsalsohad strong — and entirely understandable! — negative feelings about Trooper Wooten does not make any of these communications remotely improper, much less illegal.

    Nevertheless, Branchflower leaps to the personal conclusion (page 67 of the .pdf file) that “such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palins’ real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family related reasons.” Well, here’s another memo to Mr. Branchflower: When the family is question is the family of the Governor of Alaska, and when her security detail is charged with protecting her from threats, and in the process of that, the security detail actively seeks out information as to who may have previously made death threats against the family, that’s no longer solely a “personal family related reason.” And when someone like Trooper Wooten threatens to bring ridicule and shame to the entire state of Alaska, that’s no longer solely a “personal family related reason” either.

    Branchflower, I’m told, is an attorney and a former prosecutor. If he thinks this kind of nonsense could support a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, or even a finding of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, then he may be the worst lawyer I’ve ever encountered — and I’ve met a lot of awful ones in almost three decades before the bar.

    We are thrilled the most respected bloggers on the internet such as and Hugh Hewitt have come to similar conclusions as we did when we finished reading the report. After seeing Hugh Hewitt’s report from Bill Dyer, we were also thrilled to see feature Bill Dyer’s spot on analysis in their own report.

    Now lets move on to Trooper Wooten:

    Way back on September 3rd we published an analysis of “Troopergate” sometimes called “Tasergate” with this headline:

    Ending the Biggest Lie Against Palin – Called Troopergate: Hey Ladies How Would You Deal With a Violent, Reckless, Out of Control Rogue Cop Who Threatened Your Family’s Life and Stalks Your Relatives – All While His Fellow Cops are Covering for Him.

    This is the situation Palin’s sister faced. An abusive and violent cop for a husband that she was trying to divorce. A cop with a history misconduct…. including the tasering of his own 10 year old son.

    Palin’s sister obtained a domestic violence protection order against Trooper Wooten. Wooten said in uniform that if Palin’s father helped Palin’s sister obtain an attorney, “I will make him eat a f**king lead bullet”.

    Unfortunately, any women who has been a victim of domestic violence by a police officer knows how hard it is to get justice. When the family reported what was going on the Alaska State Police was none too keen on investigating one of their own and the Palin’s were forced to hire a private investigator just to take statements to submit to the investigation because the state police simply refused to do it.

    After it was all over, the state police suspended Wooten for 10 days  and reduced that punishment to five days. Wooten taunted the Palin’s saying that he got away with it and that there was nothing they could do to stop him. Wooten even threatened Governor Palin’s daughter Bristol at a Wasilla football game.

    Be sure to read our analysis HERE and read official documents on Wooten’s behavior HERE.

    The Palin’s offer no apology for any of their actions and any person with any sense at all would have acted the same. See the video HERE.

    The mistake that Palin and the campaign did make.

    The mistake that the campaign made was not getting ahead of this problem and trusting the media to be fair about reporting it. When you are a governor or a president you cannot afford to let your enemies or the press define the issue for you. All you here from Democrats and the elite media is “abuse of power” with almost no context.

    The Campaign should have started calling this issue “Fathergate” or “Tasergate” at every opportunity. The campaign should have sent Sarah Palin out to blast Hollis French, Steve Branchflower, Walt Monegan and Trooper Wooten very publicly for what they did and kept the focus on them.

    After the fact (now) I would find an ally in the legislature and file an ethics complaint against Hollis French. Why?? Because by Steve Branchflower’s own far overreaching and over broad interpretation of the ethics law, French personally benefited from this investigation and personally benefited because he said before the investigation got underway that he intended this to be an October surprise for the election. It’s politics and you gotta play rough, honest, but rough.

    The documents in the case so far:

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Firearms, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

    DEBATE: Obama Reversed himself on Genocide – Ignored Genocide Under Saddam

    Posted by iusbvision on October 8, 2008

    Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe points out today:

    Moderator Tom Brokaw asked the candidates what their “doctrine” would be “in situations where there’s a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security,” such as “the Congo, where 4.5 million people have died since 1998,” or Rwanda or Somalia.

    In such cases, answered Obama, “we have moral issues at stake.” Of course the United States must act to stop genocide, he said. “When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening . . . and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.”

    But that wasn’t how Obama sounded last year, when he was competing for the Democratic nomination and was unbending in his demand for an American retreat from Iraq. Back then, he dismissed fears that a US withdrawal would unleash a massive Iraqi bloodbath. “Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep US forces there,” the AP reported on July 20, 2007.

    What kind of candidate is it whose moral response to genocide – genocide – can reverse itself 180 degrees in a matter of months? Is that the kind of candidate who ought to be the leader of the free world?

    It get’s worse. Saddam Hussein genocided the Marsh Arabs in the South of Iraq and was gassing the Kurdish in the North in an attempt to gas them. In Saddam’s Reign some estimates are that millions have been killed or simply vanished. Under Obama’s new standard of military intervention for humanitarian relief Iraq easily qualifies. comments HERE.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

    Our First Reaction from Tonights Debate

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    McCain did better at the beginning but Obama did better at the end. Mostly because McCain did not jump all over Obama when he spoke total nonsense on some foreign policy issues.

    McCain was just better on the economy when he talked about his record of cutting spending, reigning in corruption and opposing his own party at times when it was needed. McCain is right about this folks. If you think the credit crunch is bad now. Unless this debt gets under control the crunch that will come will make 1929 look like romper room.

    On Iraq McCain should just have said look, Saddam was giving money and support to terrorists all over the world and while most of his WMD stock pile was gone he preserved the programs to reproduce those weapons in violation of the cease fire agreement and UN Resolutions. After 9/11 we could not let that behavior go on and the Congress voted likewise. What is important is the here and the now and in the here and the now Obama has been wrong on step after step.

    Iran and North Korea. Four years ago from the Democrats it was the United States does everything unilaterally and we need to work with our neighbors. So we did just that and let France & Germany work diplomacy on Iran while we gave our support for the talks. It got no where. It just bought Iran time. Now Iran has told the UN to cram it.

    In North Korea Carter and Clinton did unilateral talks with the North Koreans, gave them all sorts of goodies in treasure and what did we get? A nuclear North Korea. So Bush worked hard to get the 6 party talks with Japan, China, South Korea and Russia to all lean on North Korea and they suspended their program. And now from time to time they threaten to start it up but that is North Korea, it is how they do things. The rub is, the Democrats were totally opposed to the 6 party talks and wanted direct talks again.

    The reality is that no matter what we do, whether it worked or not, the Democrats proclaim the opposite.  


    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

    Obama Campaign Conceeds They Lied About Ayers – Admits Obama Knew About Ayers Past When They Worked Together.

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    UPDATE: Now Obama says he worked with Ayres, knew about his past but thought he was rehabilitated, in spite of highly publicized interviews where Ayres said he was proud of what he did and regrets nothing. Details HERE.

    [So lets see, first Obama said he was a guy in the neighborhood, then it was a tanjential relationship to Bill O’reilly, then it was well we worked together on a board, then we find out that Ayres hired him to serve on two boards to hand out millions in misspent charity money that wnet to political activisim instead of helping kids, then its I served with Ayres but I didn’t know about his past, now its ya I knew but I thought he was rehabilitated, which is also a lie because in a series of highly rtelevised interviews Ayres made it clear how proud he was of what he did and how he did not do enough. Obama lied when he said he had nothing to do with ACORN either. I can’t speak for all of you folks, but I have had my fill of liars in office. – Editor]

    ABC’s Mark Halperin Got the Scoop – reports:

    Obama spokesman: Yes, he continued to work with Ayers after he found out about his past

    posted at 5:05 pm on October 7, 2008

    Simple question from a surprisingly dogged Mark Halperin: Does Obama consider it appropriate to associate professionally with an unrepentant terrorist or not? No answer from Gibbs, although in practice The One’s answer is clear enough: Of course he does. The “statute of limitations” had run, don’tcha know, which is why Axelrod now feels bold enough to admit, “No one is suggesting that he never knew.”

    After you watch the clip, take a crack at this short BBC radio interview with Ayers from 2007. Exit quotation: “I don’t make any apology for it at all.”

    See our previous post with the evidence of Ayres and other radical relationships HERE.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

    W Ketchup Company Demands Obama Return Fannie Mae Contributions

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    For media inquiries contact Bill Zachary (917) 733-3038

    W Ketchup Demands Obama Return Fannie Mae Contributions

    Eagle Bridge, NY — October 7, 2008 — In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act to force banks to lend money to low income communities. In 1995, President Clinton dramatically expanded the Act, requiring greater lending to low income, inner city populations, and allowing radical community groups to exact fees from banks for marketing these risky loans. The quasi-government institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought many of these loans from local banks, repackaged them, and sold them to Wall Street firms.

    In 1999, after the Clinton expansion of the Act had taken effect, Steven A. Holmes wrote: “In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.” Last month Congress bailed out Fannie and Freddie at a potential taxpayer cost of $200 billion.

    Bill Zachary, Chairman of W Ketchup, commented: “It should not be any wonder that a housing bubble occurred as Congress forced banks to make risky loans and Greenspan lowered interest rates to 1.25%. Politicians have blamed Wall Street greed for this financial crisis, but on Wall Street greed is balanced by fear, and the market soon erases excesses. For Washington politicians, greed has no restraint since Congress can confiscate money from taxpayers at will.”

    President Bush twice tried to restrict the dangerous lending banks were required to make under the Act, and in 2005 Senator John McCain proposed reform legislation. Democrats blocked the reform efforts. The New York Times defended the Act saying: “Since its inception, the law has prompted banks to channel more than $1 trillion into [low income areas] — without requiring a single dollar of Congressional spending.” Last Friday Congress passed a $700 billion rescue measure to bail out financial markets hurt by the housing mess.

    Dan Oliver, CEO of W Ketchup, reacted: “Modern socialists believe government need not own the commanding heights of enterprise, but instead should direct them through tax incentives and regulatory requirements. This is the ‘Third Way’ championed by President Clinton and the UK’s Tony Blair. But socialism in any form produces the same results: poverty and misery. Leftists like Big Tuna Pelosi blame the current financial panic on free markets. In reality, while markets are not perfect and there exist individual cases of predatory fraud, market distortions perpetrated by liberals created the magnitude of this crisis.”

    In the 1990’s Presidential candidate Barack Obama worked for a Chicago law firm that sued banks for not issuing enough subprime loans to low income applicants. Obama also worked and raised money for ACORN, a radical, left-wing community group that coerced banks to make risky loans by intimidating the families of bankers at their homes. The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that $9.5 billion in “commissions” have gone to groups like ACORN under the Community Reinvestment Act. Since he began his run for Congress, Barack Obama has received $126,349 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, becoming the second highest recipient of any Congressman in three short years.

    Obama’s closest advisors include Jim Johnson, former Fannie Mae CEO who misreported his $21 million bonus as $6 million, and Franklin Raines, another former CEO of Fannie Mae who faced civil charges for overstating the company’s earnings in order to receive $52 million in bonus, in addition to his $38 million in pay.

    Dan Oliver added: “We call on the government to recover the multi-million dollar payments to Obama’s advisors under the principles of common law fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. We further call on Obama to return the contributions from Freddie and Fannie, money that rightfully belongs to American taxpayers. Finally, we call for the repeal of the Community Reinvestment Act so markets can return to their function of efficiently allocating capital.”

    During the ten years after the market crash of 1929, a Democratic Congress and President created the regulatory state, tripled federal spending, and sharply restricted trade, turning a short-term financial panic into the Great Depression. Senator Obama has promised to expand regulations on large sections of the American economy, has promised nearly $1 trillion in new government spending, and has proposed renegotiating trade agreements, if elected President.

    Posted in Mortgage Crisis, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    “The Round Up” of ALL you need to know October 7-10, 2008

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    This post is stickied – Editor

    Obama said that Terrorist Bill Ayres was just a guy who lived in the neighborhood. Then we learned that Obama’s political career was launched at a gathering in Ayers home. Then we learned that Ayers hired Obama to work on the Woods Foundation. Obama Campaign then said that well of course they worked together, but Obama didn’t know about Ayres past. The evidence came out in a short time that the Obama campaign did know. Now the evidence is out that Ayers hired Obama to hand out $50 million on Annenberg Charity money. That isn’t something you do for someone you know is “just in the neighborhood”. That money went to radical political groups instead of helping kids. Now the Obama campaign admits that Obama worked with Ayres and knew his past. So should we be surprised to see this ad from the McCain Campaign?


    This is a MUST SEE Video about Obama from CNN

    We have always said that gets it wrong almost half the time. When we use them as a source we always find a way to double check before we run with it. Today Not Your Sweetie, a Hillary Blog, peeled one of their last pieces of near laughable propaganda like a bananna.


    DEBATE: Obama Reversed himself on Genocide – Ignored Genocide Under Saddam


    Our first reaction to the Second Presidential Debate.


    Holy Cow You Simply MUST Watch This Video

    Colbert Report with a top economist on who is at fault for the mortgage mess – maybe they read the Vision.


    Obama Campaign Conceeds They Lied About Ayers– Admits Obama Knew About Ayers Past When They Worked Together on two boards to ABC’s Mark Halperin – video included.


    W Ketchup Company demandsthat Obama return the Fannie Mae money he recieved and gives a synopsis of how his people helped get us into this mess.


    Looks like the couple who scammed Wachovia with the sale of billions in sub-prime mortgages are huge contributors to ACORN and all sorts of far left organizations. – See the update section of that post.


    McCain Campaign finally starts telling the world about what happened at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They should have started this 2 weeks ago – but this is a great speech worth the time.  

    VIDEO: CNN Outs Obama for Lying about Bill Ayres – lets face it folks, Ayres didn’t pick Obama to spread out $100 million in Annenberg Charitry Funds which were misspent on political activism because they were just people that were “in the neighborhood”. Notice also how Michelle Obama has been put away after a few comments from her? Obama need sto keep silent those who know him best. Think about it.


    Saturday Night Live did a skit on the mortgage crisis putting the blame right square on the Democrats for blocking all reforms because they were on the take. NBC then promptly removed the video from NBC’s web site. Fortunately a smart Hillary supporter posted a copy of it HERE.


    Democrats are running hearings about how the mortgage crisis happened….. but they are refusing to look at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae or Congresses own role in this mess. Chris Shays has something to say about it.


    The L.A. Times is now doing KGB style edit jobs on McCain’s speeches.


    Another columnist rips Biden for his lies in the debate.


    VIDEO: Palin shuts down a heckler.


    The Democrat lawyer who ran the Keating 5 investigation says McCain did nothing wrong and should not have been dragged into it.


    It’s not just the L.A. Times – the AP is in full blown propaganda mode for Obama as well.


    VIDEO: Another black American explains why he cant vote for Barack.


    New 527 Video adson Fannie Mae curruption.


    AUDIO: Obama said in 2007 that giving these sub-prime mortgages to people who couldn’t previously affortd a mortgage is a good idea.


    Mike Oxley – A republican who is trying to lie his way out of responsibility for his role in the mortgage crash. IUSB Vision is the only one who has this accurate analysis.


    Watch and see how carefully and brilliantly Barney Frank lies to Bill O’reilly.


    VIDEO: L.A. Chapter President of NOW endorses Palin…. and the media is silent.


    VIDEO: Brilliant Black Conservative Episode III.


    Thomas Sowell asks: Do facts Matter? The famed economist tells how Fannie and Freddie happened and who is responsible.


    VIDEO: Biden Used to Stand on Principle – What Happened?


    Editorial – An Appeal to Reason.


    Palin gives more to charity in one year than Biden did in eight and she has less income.


    DISTURBING VIDEO: Obama Youth Fraternity Regiment.


    Tackling the bogus “deregulation” argument.


    Fact Checking the Palin/Biden debate – Palin was pretty straight – was Joe?


    Top 20 Industry Money Recipients This Election Cycle – Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?


    Elite Media is avoiding talking about the candidates records.


    Bill Clinton saysthat Obama is wrong about the mortgage crisis.


    Biden’s “I Was Shot At” lie – Hillary Moment?


    VIDEO: Wind Power vs. Storm – guess who wins.


    Congressional Candidates speak out on the bailout– By the way did you know that our very own Congressman Joe Donnely sits on the committee that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac… nice job Joe….


    CNN Video: Biden’s Pork and his bridge to nowhere. Ask yourself why it is you have not heard of this story.


    Wanna see cool VIDEO of our members of Congress saying how what GREAT SHAPE Fannie Mae and Freddie mac are in???


    VIDEO: Ok so Biden is lying about his support for clean coal technology. Biden said give it all to China. Why not Joe everything else is moving there…


    George Obama lives in a 6×10 hut – so a Christian sets up a charity to help him out. He lives on $12 a year.


    Alan Greenspan testified for Republicans and McCain’s bills to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – Democrats said that they knew better.


    Obama’s pro-gun ad is a LIE. Don’t be fooled.


    Palin Blasts Iran’s Nuclear Program & Treatment of Women.


    Bush Administration Warned Congress Over 20 Times Reforms Were Needed in Mortgage Industry.


    Why Are Former Fannie Mae CEO’s Not in Front of Congress Getting Grilled?

  issues double whammy agaionst Obama ads.


    Is censorship becoming main stream on the left?


    Todd Palin is the evil shadow governor!!^$#@$#@$#@!%^$ … because the media is sure a woman can’t do it…


    The Wilkow Guide to Media Perception.


    In Plain English: How Did The Biggest Financial Scandal in History Happen?


    VIDEO: The Man Obama Wants to Chat With.


    Happy Anniversary IUSB!


    New York Times walks down smear memory lane!


    Washington Post walks down smear memory lane!


    Donald Trump on McCain and taxes.


    VIDEO: Can taxing “the rich” actually cost YOU more?

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    SNL SKIT EXPOSES DEMOCRATS ROLE ON MORTGAGE COLLAPSE – NBC REMOVES THE VIDEO – UPDATE: Those who scammed and profited are big doners to left wing organizations!

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    See the UPDATE: section below!

    Not Your Sweetie blog at is a Hillary blog that has had enough of what has been going on in the Democratic Party.

    Saturday Night Live did a great job of exposing the Democrats role in the mortgage crisis in a skit. Of course since it was so accurate NBC removed the video from its web site and from Youtube, just like the other accurate skit SNL did against the New York Times two weeks ago.

    Here is what Not Your Sweetie Blog had to say. Be sure to notice that they were wise enough to save a copy of the video and put a link to it:

    SNL: who created the crisis

    To my surprise, I found one SNL skit that is both funny and accurate

    Mini-Update: Another link from the Not Your Sweetie blog for the Video can be found HERE.

    Pat Dollard has the video HERE.

    Some highlights

    After Nancy Pelosi (played by Kristen Wiig) blamed the Bush administration and Republicans for the current financial crisis, President Bush (played by Jason Sudeikis) interrupted: “Wait a minute. Wasn’t it my administration that warned about the problem six years ago? And it was Democrats who refused to listen?” When Pelosi protested, Barney Frank (played by Fred Armisen) corrected her, “Actually, this time, this time he’s sort of right.”

    and also

    George Soros (played by Will Forte) told viewers that all of the $700 billion coming from the recently passed bailout bill is going to him. Under his captioned name on the screen were the words “Multi-billionaire Hedge Fund Manager, Owner, Democratic Party.”

    Video – now removed by NBC

    Update: Interestingly enough, NBC pulled the video from their website. And they just took down the one on you tube. Luckily, I saved a copy. You tube took it down as soon as I uploaded it so you can now see it here

    UPDATE Malkin weighs in with crucial facts! Michelle Malkin has the clip HERE.

    One of the rapacious couples featured in the skit was Herbert and Marion Sandler (portrayed by Darrell Hammond and Casey Wilson). Unlike the other composite figures, the Sandlers are a real-life couple.

    Also lampooned: Left-wing billionaire George Soros.

    As Todd Thurman at Heritage notes, the Sandlers are left-wing moguls who built “a mortgage company whose major product was subprime mortgages and they sold it to Wachovia for $24.2 billion in 2006. And what do the Sandlers do when they are not peddling subprime garbage? They are busy writing checks to leftist groups like the Center for American Progress, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). Yes that ACORN.”

    The Sandlers are seething over the skit. And George Soros must be livid as well. Anyone else smell a legal threat behind the disappearance of the vid?

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 3 Comments »

    Democrats Run hearings in Congress to “Investigate the Mortgage Collapse” but Refuse to Look at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Congress’ Huge Role in the Debacle. Democrats Refuse to Even Summon Documents from Fannie and Freddie.

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008 has comments and the video of Republican Chris Shays taking the Committee for this sham of a hearing. Folks the two big problems with our economy are bad energy policy and bad mortgage industry policy – in both cases Democrats have said NO to reforms year after year after year.

    Democrats have begun a search for the culprit in the financial collapse in a manner somewhat akin to the OJ Simpson search for Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman’s murderer. The Hill reports that Henry Waxman’s Oversight Committee hearing grilled Lehman Brothers executives over CEO pay and “deregulation”, but never mentioned the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Republicans found that more than a little strange:

    Democrats aimed their harshest attacks at deregulation and CEO pay, using former Lehman Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard Fuld as an example during a recess hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

    Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) also released internal documents showing Lehman’s compensation committee recommended $20 million in “special payments” to three departing executives on Sept. 11, four days before the firm filed for bankruptcy.

    Republicans, for their part, launched a campaign to pin the financial meltdown on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and attacked Waxman for not holding a hearing to dig into the now-nationalized mortgage giants.

    “Any hearing on oversight that does not begin with Fannie and Freddie and [former Fannie Mae CEO] Franklin Raines will be a sham,” said Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.). “This is like investigating a train robbery and only talking to the dining car stewards.”

    Christopher Shays ripped the Oversight Committee for its refusal to investigate Congress itself.

    Our complete coverage of the mortgage bailout crisis, who got paid, who benefited and who is lying, is HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE. – Editor

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    L.A. Times Does Edit Job on McCain’s Speeches

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    Patterico has been on fire lately with some of the finest media analysis from the left coast available. Today he dissected an L.A. Times piece where they do a total KGB style propaganda job on McCain. This is the key Portion of the news he delivers and I added McCain’s speech about the economy. The L.A. Times after being caught replaces the story while still using the SAME URL in an effort to make it look like Patterico made it all up… but screen shots and Google’s cache of the site are forever. Be sure you read the rest of Patterico’s awesome reporting HERE. – Editor

    Update: An L.A. Times reader tells Patterico, “What you cannot see on the web is how the Times laid out the story. On A6, there’s a bright 6″ x 9″ photo of Obama grinning at a restaurant with five smiling customers. Cheery. – On A7, there’s a 3″ x 5″ photo of McCain and wife in silhouette. They are debarking an airplane, looking down at the steps, giving them both a slumping demeanor. Gloomy.”

    L.A. Times Cuts Out McCain’s Remarks About Economy, Then Quotes Barack Obama Saying McCain is Scared to Talk About the Economy

    Today John McCain finally began to tell the country about his own efforts to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the Democrats’ incredible inaction. Yes, as many of us had urged, McCain finally talked about the economy, and the conservative blogs went nuts. Republican bloggers know that McCain has to talk about this, because the economy is the top issue concerning Americans, and McCain has a good story to tell — even if it’s one that the media has been ignoring.

    Speaking of which:

    How did the L.A. Times cover McCain’s stunning speech taking on this core economic concern?

    By pretending McCain never said it, and by quoting Barack Obama talking about how McCain is scared to talk about the economy.

    I’m not joking:

    At a rally here, McCain also lumped Obama in with Chicago politics’ history of corruption, while Obama responded that the Republicans were fostering political shenanigans and scare tactics.

    . . . .

    “It’s as if somehow the usual rules don’t apply, and where other candidates have to explain themselves and their records, Sen. Obama seems to think he is above all that,” McCain told the cheering crowd. “Whatever the question, whatever the issue, there’s always a back story with Sen. Obama. All people want to know is, what has this man ever actually accomplished in government? What does he plan for America? In short, who is the real Barack Obama? But ask such questions and all you get in response is another barrage of angry insults.”

    That’s precisely the point where McCain started to talk about Democratic responsibility for the economy. McCain’s very next words, which never appear in the L.A. Times, were these words:

    Our current economic crisis is a good case in point. What was his actual record in the years before the great economic crisis of our lifetimes?

    At which point McCain launched into the amazing speech quoted by Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, during which he laid out the case, at great length, for the Democrats’ responsibility for the mortgage crisis.

    This is what McCain said:

    Our current economic crisis is a good case in point. What was his actual record in the years before the great economic crisis of our lifetimes?

    This crisis started in our housing market in the form of subprime loans that were pushed on people who could not afford them. Bad mortgages were being backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it was only a matter of time before a contagion of unsustainable debt began to spread. This corruption was encouraged by Democrats in Congress, and abetted by Senator Obama.

    Senator Obama has accused me of opposing regulation to avert this crisis. I guess he believes if a lie is big enough and repeated often enough it will be believed. But the truth is I was the one who called at the time for tighter restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could have helped prevent this crisis from happening in the first place.

    Senator Obama was silent on the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and his Democratic allies in Congress opposed every effort to rein them in. As recently as September of last year he said that subprime loans had been, quote, “a good idea.” Well, Senator Obama, that “good idea” has now plunged this country into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

    To hear him talk now, you’d think he’d always opposed the dangerous practices at these institutions. But there is absolutely nothing in his record to suggest he did. He was surely familiar with the people who were creating this problem. The executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have advised him, and he has taken their money for his campaign. He has received more money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than any other senator in history, with the exception of the chairman of the committee overseeing them.

    Did he ever talk to the executives at Fannie and Freddie about these reckless loans? Did he ever discuss with them the stronger oversight I proposed? If Senator Obama is such a champion of financial regulation, why didn’t he support these regulations that could have prevented this crisis in the first place? He won’t tell you, but you deserve an answer.

    Does the L.A. Times report one word of that? No. Instead, they cut the quote of McCain’s speech short there, right before he talks about the economy, and proceed to quote Obama as claiming that McCain is scared to talk about the economy:

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

    L.A. Times Columnist Rips Biden for Lies in the Debate

    Posted by iusbvision on October 7, 2008

    Biden, the master gasbag

    The vice presidential candidate isn’t really an expert, he just plays one on TV.

    Jonah Goldberg
    October 7, 2008,0,427931.column?track=rss

    Last Thursday’s vice presidential debate was the most revealing, and depressing, event of the entire campaign because it showed how irredeemably fraudulent America’s political class is and how superficial the voters who will decide this election are.

    Recall, if you will, that going into the debate, the conventional wisdom was that Gov. Sarah Palin would be woefully outgunned by Sen. Joe Biden. A self-touted foreign policy expert and constitutional law professor, Biden joined the Senate some time after the Cretaceous period but well before bell bottoms went out of style.

    As we know, the conventional wisdom was wrong. Palin wasn’t stellar. But she crushed those low expectations, salvaged her political career and turned herself back into an asset for the McCain campaign.

    But what about Biden? Overwhelmingly, the professional political class proclaimed that he blew her away on “specifics” and “knowledge” and “seriousness.” The New York Times said Biden avoided making any gaffes, “while showing a clear grasp of the big picture and the details.” The Wall Street Journal’s Gerald Seib proclaimed on ABC’s “This Week” that Biden avoided any “verbal excesses or rhetorical flourishes.”

    The Associated Press called Biden the “master senator … rattling off foreign policy details with ease.”

    And that’s true in a sense. Biden was at ease; he easily rattled off a string of falsehoods and gasbaggeries.

    According to the master senator, the U.S. and France “kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon.” Afterward, according to Biden, “I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t know — if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.’ ” Perhaps Biden meant to say the U.S. and France kicked Syria out of Lebanon. But even this is woefully glib. Syria never fully abandoned Lebanon. And there was no “vacuum” for Hezbollah to fill. The terrorist group was already firmly in control of southern Lebanon and part of the government. No one remembers Biden and Obama fighting for the stupidly impossible NATO move either.

    Biden insisted it’s “just simply not true” that Obama has said he’d “sit down with [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad,” even though in the primaries Biden criticized Obama for exactly that.

    Biden bragged about how he and Obama have focused on Pakistan, insisting that “Pakistan’s weapons can already hit Israel and the Mediterranean.” Um, no. Their missiles don’t get halfway there.

    The constitutional law professor scornfully mocked Dick Cheney because the vice president “doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president. That’s the executive branch.” Wrong. Article I defines the Legislature, Article II the executive branch. Both define the role of the VP.

    He flatly said that McCain voted with Obama on a tax hike. He didn’t. He said McCain’s healthcare plan amounted to a tax hike. It doesn’t. Biden said we “must” drill for oil, but that ain’t how he’s voted. He said he’s for clean coal, but just this month he passionately insisted to a voter that “we’re not supporting clean coal” and vowed “no coal plants here in America.” The scrapper from Scranton boasted about bonding with the common folks at a restaurant that’s been closed for two decades.

    Now, Palin had her own problems. She failed to answer direct questions directly. She offered up some obviously canned one-liners.

    But here’s the difference. Palin is supposed to be everything Biden isn’t, according to liberal pundits and mainstream reporters alike. For weeks they’ve been saying she’s ill-prepared, uninformed and lacks the requisite experience. But that criticism is also an excuse of sorts.

    Biden has no excuse. He’s been in the majors for nearly 40 years, and yet he sounds like a bizarro-world Chauncey Gardner. The famous simpleton from Jerzy Kosinski’s “Being There” (played by Peter Sellers in the film) offered terse aphorisms that were utterly devoid of specific content but nonetheless seemed to describe reality accurately. Biden is the reverse: He offers a logorrheic farrago of “specifics” that have no connection to our corner of the space-time continuum.

    In short, he just makes stuff up. But he does it with passionate, self-important intensity. He’s like a politician in a movie with a perfect grasp of a world that doesn’t exist. He’s not an expert, he just plays one on TV.

    No one seems to care. He convinced the focus groups he’s an expert. The media, with a few exceptions, let it all slide. But imagine if Palin had made any of these gaffes. It would be incontrovertible proof that her critics are right.

    Palin “lost” because she’s bad at being a dishonest politician. Biden won because he is, after all, a “master senator.”

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    VIDEO: Palin Shuts Down a Heckler

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    The Bottom Line on the Keating 5

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

    The Democrats own lawyer in the “Keating 5” investigation, Bob Bennet, said that McCain did absolutely nothing wrong and should never have been dragged into the investigation, but he said that the Democrats did it anyways because they wanted a Republican to make the scandal look “bi-partisan”,2933,331651,00.html

    Video: Watch Part 1 of the interview | Watch Part 2

    Democrat Lawyer and Power Broker Bob Bennet

    Democrat Lawyer and Power Broker Bob Bennet

    BENNETT: You know, I’m in a pretty unique position to talk about John McCain. First, I should tell your listeners, you know, I’m a registered Democrat, so I’m not on his side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this New York Times article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years.

    And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the New York Times to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain’s public statement about this is correct. It’s a smear job. I’m sorry.

    COLMES: It’s OK, sir. In your book, you actually talk about the Keating Case and how you suggested they not pursue John McCain. The Washington Post reported back in December that you sent prepared answers to written questions submitted by the New York Times concerning the breaking news we are discussing tonight. Can you elaborate on that?

    BENNETT: Yes. All of the matters that they allude to – I mean, they are not even very specific – we answered fully to the New York Times. We showed them that there was just nothing there. And, unfortunately, they have just obviously disregarded all of the hard evidence that we presented.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    McCain FINALLY unloads on Obama’s record with Fannie Mae and the “It’s Republican’s deregulation” lie.

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

    It’s about darn time.  

    McCain tells how Obama and the Democrats blocked reforms that would have fixed this. He should have been doing this weeks ago. McCain finally calls Obama out as a liar for saying that it was McCain and the Republicans who resisted regulation of Fannie Mae. The record shows the truth that Republicans tried to fix this problem over and over and over again and were blocked by Democrats, as we have shown in detail in a series of articles, packed with evidence, about every facet of this story HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE ….. but if you had to read just ONE of those articles I suggest THIS ONE as it gives the best synopsis with all the evidence you need to be certain.

    Hat tip for the video link.

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    Associated Press in Full Blown Propaganda Mode for Obama

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008


    First AP tried to say that Obama and Ayres just passed by from time to time and that Palin is a racist for even bringing it up… well now the Obama campaign just says that he didn’t know about Ayres past. Just like he never heard Pfleger and Wright make those America damning sermons over a 20 year long relationship. Even MSNBC went after the AP for that one transcript HERE and the video is here in WMV format to download.

    Ayres was Obama’s boss at Woods and CAC all the while Ayres was being interviewed with Connie Chung, had a big spread in Chicago Magazine and in the New York Times saying that he had no regrets about the people and places he bombed and that he wished he had done more. Of course Ayres is one of a long list of dangerous or hateful radicals that Obama has chosen to hang out with for 20 years. This evidence is in posts HERE and HERE (and the associated evidence, links and video’s in those posts.

    Well here is today’s spin from AP:

    McCain calls Obama a liar

    Oct 6 03:44 PM US/Eastern
    Associated Press Writer

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) – Republican John McCain is calling Democratic rival Barack Obama a liar.
    The GOP presidential candidate told a campaign rally: “Sen. Obama has accused me of opposing regulation to avert this crisis. I guess he believes if a lie is big enough and repeated often enough it will be believed.”

    In some of the harshest language yet, McCain said the campaign comes down to a simple question: Who is the real Barack Obama?

    McCain drew the loudest cheers when he said the Democrat has written two memoirs but “he’s not exactly an open book.”

    Trailing in the polls, McCain and his advisers say they will hammer that theme as the campaign heads toward the Nov. 4 election.

    Does AP even bother to fact check to see if McCain is correct?? Not on your life. They know this because it is in the record and all over the blogosphere and has even gotten scant mention in the debates.

    Here is McCain’s Bill that he co-sponsored and Statements: 

    S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
    A bill to address the regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes. Here is the text of the bill. HERE is the link to McCains remarks on the floor of the Senate. The bottom line, Bush and McCain, who Obama accuses of knowing nothing about the economy and putting us in this mess, predicted it and tried to fix it, while Obama and Dodd and others were taking the largest sums of money from these people. They should have gone public and made a big stink in the press, but Republicans since Nixon have been awful at communications strategy.

    The House version of S.190 was H.R. 1461

    In fact Senators Sununnu, Hagel, and Dole introduced this legislation repeatedly (link HERE).

    Every facet of the mortgage crisis story, who benefited and who is lying can be found HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HEREHERE, HEREHERE and HERE. – Editor

    UPDATE: comments on this story HERE and has video HERE

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

    Video: Another Black American “I Can’t Vote for Barack”

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

    “I’ts not like an unrepentant terrorist met Barack when jogging out of the blue and said, ‘Hey let me throw a political fundraiser for you at my house.'”

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

    Hillary Clinton Blogs Furious Over Sexist Attacks on Palin and Media Love Fest with Obama

    Posted by iusbvision on October 6, 2008

    Not Your Sweetie Blog

    P.U.M.A. Blog

    Yesterday in California, Sarah Palin received a very important endorsement from Shelly Mandell, the head of the Los Angeles Chapter of NOW (National Organization for Women). This big endorsement has been ignored by the MSN. Why?

    Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »