Obama's Global Poverty Act- turns over American sweat to the UNITED NATIONS. IT'S NOT OBAMA THEY LIKE, it's your slave labor

This should be common knowledge by now, but somehow the media seems to have missed it.

• "Obama's Global Poverty Act"

(May 20, 2008): "Even as a junior Senator, Obama has already tried to break the back of our economy by putting the entire planet on American welfare:

The Global Poverty Act (S.2433) would require the United States to spend $845 billion ($845,000,000,000.00) on welfare to third-world countries.

• This amounts to a tax of over $2,000 on each man, woman and child in the United States.

• The foreign aid budget now stands at $300 billion; the Act would add the additional expenditure to the already huge amount allocated to assist the world.

From there it would grow, like all government programs.

As we have learned the hard way, welfare does not alleviate poverty; it subsidizes it. But the point isn't to give money to barefoot peasants,

• or even to the Third-World tyrants who would actually receive it. The point is to take it from you, because
  
• 
  
• the less wealthy you are, the easier you are to control.

The act also undermines American sovereignty by controlling how money expropriated from American taxpayers will be spent:

The bill requires the President: "acting through the Secretary of State, and in consultation with the heads of other appropriate departments and agencies of the United States Government,

• international organizations, international financial institutions, the governments of developing and developed countries,

United States and international nongovernmental organizations, civil society organizations, and other appropriate entities, shall develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further… the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal".

• The "international organizations" and "international nongovernmental organizations" and "other appropriate entities" are of course
  
• the United Nations; the same institution that has a record of
  
• corruption, bad judgment and anti-Americanism.

The "Millennium Development Goal" is a communist doctrine — basically a blueprint for the

• subjugation and looting of America by the Third World via
  
• the United Nations.

If control of this country is offered over to those who hate it, America will not survive. Our soldiers throughout the generations will have fought and died in vain if we let our enemies conquer us from within."

Newspapers in the tank for fully realized, feminized, democrat

NEW YORK (Updated Sunday) "The Obama-Biden ticket maintains its strong lead in the race for daily newspaper endorsements, by

• 160 to 59, an almost 3-1 margin

and an even wider spread in the circulation of those papers (see full tally below).

• Obama's lopsided margin, including most of the major papers that have decided so far, is in stark contrast to John Kerry barely edging George W. Bush in endorsements in 2004 by 213 to 205."...

Here is proof, but no, no don't pay attention to it. These people are not to be questioned under any circumstances. By all means, resume your passivity. (sm)

The hubris of politicians and back room deals. NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg must be stopped.

• Bloomberg should be arrested for this and related acts in my opinion:
  

NEW YORK -- "Mayor Michael Bloomberg is strong-arming City Council members to support his plan to change the city's term-limits law so he can run again, the city comptroller said Sunday.

Comptroller William Thompson said some council members had been threatened with losing perks such as committee chairmanships or funding for programs in their districts. He did not say who they were.

"Undue pressure has been placed on them," Thompson said.

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser said no inappropriate pressure was being applied.

"We're certainly making our case to members of the council and asking for their votes, but those allegations are untrue," Loeser said.

Bloomberg, a Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent, announced this month that he would aim to modify the city charter so he could seek a third term. Existing law limits city officeholders to two consecutive four-year terms, and he is set to leave office at the end of 2009.

The billionaire founder of the financial information company Bloomberg LP said he decided to pursue a third term because he believes his financial expertise is crucial during the economic crisis.

The City Council could vote on the term-limits proposal as early as this week.

Thompson, a Democrat who had been considered a likely mayoral candidate, said two public hearings last week were not enough to give New Yorkers a chance to air their views on the issue.

• He said the matter should be put before voters in a referendum following hearings in all five boroughs. Voters set the current limit in a 1993 referendum and reaffirmed it three years later.

• "This rush to judgment in a 2 1/2-week period of time is wrong," Thompson said.

The New York Times reported Friday that organizations that receive both city funds and grants from Bloomberg's personal giving have been asked to call undecided City Council members to make the case for a third term. Loeser told the newspaper the mayor was careful to keep his philanthropic giving separate from his management of the city."

Free Speech an outdated notion--unless you agree with the power structure

• photo via Lucianne.com

Intolerance for Republicans is socially acceptable prejudice

• When I saw this article I thought of Neil Best-sadly:
  

"Before we sprain our shoulders patting ourselves on the back for our color-blind, bias-free selves, let's acknowledge that

• certain prejudices are far from taboo. In fact, in some quarters
  
• they are ascendant and celebrated.

I'm thinking of the overt, outrageous prejudice that infuses some of the contempt on the left for Palin. Scrape away the surface excuses and much of it is because she is a Republican. And an anti-abortion one at that. How dare she!

• That the bias comes from people we think of as sophisticated makes it disappointing, but not surprising. After all, contempt for Republicans is the only
  
• socially acceptable prejudice remaining among
  
• many educated people today.

A celebrated retired journalist, a man I've long admired, was surprised when I told him I hadn't decided whom to vote for. "You're too smart to vote for John McCain," he said, thereby insulting 50 million Americans.

A well-to-do, middle-aged professional woman who identifies herself as very liberal casually declared at a recent social gathering that Palin was unqualified to be vice president. "Look at all those children; she would be neglecting them," the woman said, before adding she herself has five grown daughters.

I could hardly contain myself. "How," I managed to say relatively calmly, "would you feel if a man just said what you said?"

"Oh, I didn't mean anything; I was just thinking of the children," she said sheepishly.

Of course she was thinking of the children. And Jimmy the Greek was just talking history when he discussed slavery and black anatomy and Al Campanis was misunderstood when he said blacks lacked the "necessities" to be baseball executives.

• Those unmaskings of raw bigotry came on TV 20 years ago. Times change, and so does prejudice. And not all sightings are dramatic.

George W. Bush appointed the first two black secretaries of state, but does anyone on the left regard him as a racial trailblazer? When I raised that question to another liberal, she dismissed the idea, saying Bush "never thought about race."

That exchange took place three years ago, but I still can't grasp her logic. How does she know what Bush thought? Why would it be more important than

• what he does?

A similar blind spot toward the political "other" explains much of the contempt for Palin.

• If she were a Democrat, her unusual life would be spun into a compelling narrative that would make her
  

• the darling of the coastal elite.

How she's raising that lovely brood of kids, her care for that severely handicapped baby, her relationship with that rugged hubby who often cares for the kids and is part native, her unlikely rise through the political minefields, her tough knocks and gutsy performance on the national stage -

all would be testament to a breakthrough of historic proportions we would be ordered to celebrate in the name of

• diversity and equality.

Yes, I know there are many legitimate reasons to vote against her and McCain. And I am not arguing for a second they should be supported, least of all because of her gender.

But couldn't we all at least acknowledge Palin's moment and what it means for America?

Apparently not. She must lose, the liberal narrative goes,

• because she is unqualified, case closed.

Some day, we will look back with disgust at the abuse Palin has taken and wonder how it could happen in this great nation, circa 2008.

• Spare me. We already know the answer." Michael Goodwin, NY Daily News, 10/5/08

via Lucianne.com