http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCcHzUmVP5c&feature=related

The above link should take you to a youtube clip of Sal, from the Howard Stern show, interviewing Harlem voters.  Virtually all of them were voting for Obama.  Virtually none of them had any clue what Obama stands for or what his policies are.  The three highlighted 'agree' with Obama on his supposed pro-life policy, his decision to keep the troops in Iraq, his anti-stem cell research policy.   Each one of them likes Obama's choice of Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate.

For the record-- just to be really clear-- Obama is the most liberal senator in the U.S. Senate.  He is not only for unlimited abortion, he even objects to saving the life of a born and living child if it survives a late-term abortion attempt.  He is for stem cell research.  And depending which day of the week he answers the question, he is much more likely than McCain to pull our troops out of Iraq. 

Now, if you're for those things, vote for him.  But it is frightening to me that so many people will vote for him, apparently because he's black, without any clue what policies they are bringing onto our country.

Please!  Know your candidate!  Vote your values, not by skin color!

an e-mail:

While researching other things, I came across danielpipes.org.  Daniel Pipes is a leading authority on on the mid-east-- his extensive credentials are listed in the biographical link of his homepage-- who has a unique perspective on Obama as president.

One reader comment at his site is titled: The Worst President Ever. A Post-Obama Amehttp://www.danielpipes.org/article/5845 rica, Year 2016.
Reader comment on article: Barack Obama through Muslim Eyes .  I learned things I hadn't known in this article, such as that a great number of his files from years past are missing.  It always disturbs me when candidates for public office have great blank spaces in their lives.  It makes me wonder what they're hiding.  All the records from his years as Illinois state senator are missing, and his client lists from his years at a law firm.  Two years of his life are reportedly skimmed over in his biography.

The author brings to light some of his thuggish behavior in quashing those who disagree with him or air facts he'd rather not have known.  She suggests that he has fallen for his own 'mythology' that he is the One who will lead us to a better future.  I agree this can be dangerous thinking when it leads one to view oneself as above the law, to believe that oneself is so good that the ends justify the means and ordinary laws do not apply to that One.

The author issues concerns about his desire to limit American power: "...and that we should follow the dictates of the vile and corrupt U.N. Equal power sharing is another fantasy. Without America as the Superpower, which nation will step into the vacuum?"  A valid question.  Equality sounds nice, but when you're comparing the schoolyard bully to the one who intervenes to protect the innocent, I would prefer that the protector have more power.  There are far too many in our country who do not understand that there really are cruel and evil people in this world, and some of them run countries, and some of them really do want to hurt us.

The list goes on, with a number of very serious concerns about his ability to lead this country well, about his associations, about his honesty.  I strongly recommend that anyone with genuine concern about this country read the article and give it fair consideration.

Also at Daniel Pipes' site is his article "Barack Obama Through Muslim Eyes." This is the unique perspective to which I originally referred.  We have heard plenty about those, presumably Christian conservative Republicans, who say he might be a secret Muslim and those presumably rational kind-hearted liberals who say that's nonsense and he's been at Jeremiah Wright's Christian church for twenty years.  But this is the first I have heard of what is being said about Obama's religion by Muslims around the world, and it has definite nuances beyond the is he or isn't he that has encompassed the conversation thus far. 

Daniel Pipes offers the three views among which Muslims choose: never was a Muslim, is a Muslim, or is an apostate ex-Muslim.  His article discusses the reasons why various people take each of these positions, and, more importantly, the ramifications of those beliefs regardless of what Obama actually is or isn't. 

He discusses both the positive and negative ramifications of those assumptions.  Again, I think it's a fair and balanced article well worth reading.  For the record, I personally have never thought twice about whether Obama is a Muslim.  He says he's Christian, I take him largely at his word, although I would have to agree with the first article I referenced, whose author states: "It seems to me religion isn't important to him at all. My guess is that he doesn't think about it much, if at all.... his true religion is himself and his ambition...."  Pipes' article is not discussing whether he's Christian or Muslim or anything else, but what Muslims themselves are saying, and the ramifications of those beliefs.

Happy Reading!

Is Sarah Palin Ready?

I read today that there is 'growing concern' that Sarah Palin is 'not ready' to be the vice president. 

In over twenty years of voting for presidents, I don't remember, ever, this much focus on the vice presidential candidate, or questions about their 'readiness.'  I don't think that's because Sarah Palin is any less qualified than any other candidate. 

WikiAnswers lists 20 men who moved on from being governor to being president:

Thomas Jefferson, Governor of Virginia, 1779-81
James Monroe, Governor of Virginia, 1799-1802
Andrew Jackson, Governor of the Florida Territory, 1821
Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1829
William Henry Harrison, Territorial Governor of Indiana, 1801-13
John Tyler, Governor of Virginia, 1825-26
James Knox Polk, Governor of Tennessee, 1839-41
Andrew Johnson, Governor of Tennessee, 1853-57, Military Governor of Tennessee, 1862-65
Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Governor of Ohio, 1868-72, Governor of Ohio, 1876-77
Grover Cleveland, Governor of New York, 1883-85
William McKinley, Governor of Ohio, 1892-96
Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1898-1900
William Howard Taft, Governor of the Philippines, 1901-04
Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey, 1911-13
Calvin Coolidge, Governor of Massachusetts, 1919-20
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1929-33
James Earl Carter, Jr., Governor of Georgia, 1971-75
Ronald Wilson Reagan, Governor of California, 1967-75
William Jefferson Clinton, Governor of Arkansas, 1978-80, 1982-92
George Walker Bush, Governor of Texas, 1995-2000

When nearly half of our presidents were former governors, I think that speaks well to governorship as qualification.  Interesting to note, one source says that only fifteen presidents came by way of senatorship.  So if being a governor is not qualification enough for Sarah Palin, then perhaps Obama, McCain, and Biden all need to drop out, too.

Of more interest was that seven of those governors-turned-president were governor for two years or less:  Jefferson, Tyler, Polk, Cleveland, Roosevelt, Wilson, and Coolidge.  Notice two of those presidents who came from being governor for two years or less were well-enough respected as presidents to join Washington and Lincoln on Mount Rushmore.

In discussions around the web, when this is brought up, the argument quickly turns along lines of, "She's hardly Jefferson."  Well, most of us aren't, but the real issue here is that they are changing their criteria.  They said the issue was that being governor for nearly two years is not qualification.  History clearly shows that it is qualification.

Let me repeat that, let me stress it:

They said the issue was that being governor for nearly two years is not qualification.  History clearly shows that it is.

So why is there 'growing concern' about Sarah Palin's readiness?  I'm sorry to say that I believe it is a media created event, if it's happening at all.  I question whether there is widespread 'growing concern' among the general public, or only among liberals.  And if there is widespread 'growing concern,' it's because the media, dominated by registered Democrats who have, since the days of Watergate largely seen their job as changing the world rather than reporting it, are pummeling the public with their negative views of Sarah Palin, with their insistent party line.  Nowhere in Clinton's campaign did I ever see this constant drumbeat that Clinton was 'only' a governor-- and of a very small state, at that-- and therefore not qualified.

I have been very impressed with the woman I've seen.  She has educated herself, she has worked hard, she has participated in politics on all levels.  She has competed successfully in a man's world.  She is not only the first woman to govern Alaska, she is also the youngest person ever to serve that state as governor.  And as if that's not enough, she has also been showing approval ratings among Alaskans of 86%, 89%, even 93%.  Among Republicans, that number soars to an almost unanimous 97%.  She has been called by various news articles "the most popular governor in America."

Am I supposed to be upset that her approval ratings are now 'tumbling' in Alaska and around the United States.  I'm not, because, frankly, Obama's reputation, my reputation, your reputation, anyone's reputation, would take a beating if we were subjected to the media rantings and the gotcha-style interviews to which she has been subject.

I believe this woman is as qualified as any man who's ever been up for vice president.  I think the real problem here is that she is living the feminist's dream-- but she's committed the mortal sin of being conservative while doing it.