After the elections Sarah Palin

 Now that the election is over, and Barack Obama has been elected as the 44th President… are we still going to hear about Sarah Palin? Or will her name become obsolete? After elections, the opponent that loses usually disappears within a week after the election… but this is Sarah Palin we’re talking about… 
 

75 percent of evenagelcials still did not vote for Obama, or 49 percent of the voting US population..

“The media is already harping on the fact that 60 percent of voters expressed doubts about Sarah Palin being ready to take over as President should something happen to John McCain.

But if you study the exit polls carefully, there is no evidence that this fact actually influenced the vote.

When people were asked if Palin’s presence on the ticket was an important factor in their decision, 60 percent answered yes, 33 percent no. But of the 60 percent that said yes, 56 percent ended up voting McCain versus 43 percent Obama.

On the other hand, of the 33 percent that said no, only 33 percent voted McCain versus 64 percent Obama.

What does this mean? People who thought Palin’s presence on the ticket was important were more likely to vote McCain by a significant margin. So the media is allowing their bias to influence the interpretation of the data.

You can look even closer than that. Palin was picked specifically to influence a few key demographics for the Republicans – women, independents, white evangelicals and gun owners:

– White women voted McCain/Palin 53-46. That’s within the margin of error for how Bush/Cheney score with the same group in 2004, 55-44.

– White independents voted McCain/Palin 49-47. There are no comparable data on this group for 2004, but we do know that independents went for Kerry 49-48 in 2004, and 52-44 for Obama this year. It’s safe to conclude that the swing to Obama in this category was caused by non-white independents voting overwhelmingly for the Democratic ticket.

– White evangelical/born again cCristians voted McCain/Palin 74-24 in 2008, which is slightly lower than the 78-21 breakdown in 2004. But their share of the total vote was larger this time than last time (26 percent in 2008 versus 23 percent in 2004), so on balance the white evangelical/born again contribution to the Republican vote was probably about the same size as it was in 2004.

– Gun owners voted for McCain/Palin in the same numbers they voted for Bush/Cheney last time round: 62-37 in 2008 versus 63-36 in 204

So, in those four major target groups, Palin delivered the goods for the McCain campaign. These are groups that were skeptical about McCain before Palin joined the ticket.

In all four categories, the McCain/Palin share of the vote was virtually identical to the Bush/Cheney share in 2004. That seemed impossible before Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin will be a force to be reckoned with over the next four years.”

http://www.thesarahpalinblog.com/

Sarah Palin In 2012


It was a teary-eyed Sarah Palin who waved to the crowd in Phoenix last night and is now on her way home to Alaska to split time as Governor and Mom.

She has a son in Iraq, a daughter pregnant and an infant with Down Syndrome.

She has her hand’s full.

But she has made it clear that this is not the last we will see of Sarah Palin.

“I’m not doing this for naught,” Palin said last week, when asked if all the mudslinging in the campaign made her long for a return to the more sedate politics of Alaska, where she is governor.

After McCain’s stinging loss, Palin, 44, has emerged as one of the strongest brands the Republicans have got.

As one of the most recognisable figures in a party searching for direction and new leadership, Palin’s future role will be a major theme when Republican heavyweights weigh up strategies for the 2010 mid-term congressional elections.

“She definitely is going to be the most popular Republican in this country when this thing is over,” Republican strategist Ed Rollins, and former political director to president Ronald Reagan, told CNN before the election.

And the carefully coiffed conservative Christian who cast herself as a maverick, a reformer and an anti-corruption star, has clearly indicated the 2008 run wasn’t an end-all to her national political ambitions.

“I think that, if I were to give up and wave a white flag of surrender against some of the political shots that we’ve taken, that would bring this whole” endeavour to nothing, Palin told ABC last week.

In the last pre-election episode of NBC’s Saturday Night Live, comedienne Tina Fey, in her much lauded role impersonating Palin, made a show of “going rogue” from the McCain campaign talking points by trying to hawk “Palin 2012” t-shirts.

At Republican rallies in recent weeks supporters too have been seen displaying “Palin 2012″ shirts and banners.

There has been talk in Hollywood of Sarah Palin getting a talk show; talk in Washington of Sarah Palin as the best fundraiser the Republicans have; talk in Alaska of Sarah Palin running for the Senate.

There is a world of options in front of Sarah Palin. She is the star of the Republican Conservative base and if you think she will stay in Alaska for long – you’re wrong.”

http://www.thesarahpalinblog.com/

 if you think the evangelicals have died for long – you’re wrong

Sarah Palin fires back at ‘jerks’ Los Angeles Times – The governor and her aides dispute claims about her foreign-policy knowledge and $150000-plus wardrobe. By Seema Mehta and Maeve Reston Alaska Gov.
Palin Denounces Her Critics as Cowardly ABC News
Palin Calls Criticism by McCain Aides ‘Cruel’ New York Times
Reuters – The Associated Press – Washington Post – The Weekly Standard
all 802 news articles »
 
Readers Respond: Bush and His Critics Wall Street Journal –  The reader response to “The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace” has been overwhelming. Here’s a selection from the thousands of comments submitted by Opinion Journal readers: Finally, someone with the guts to stand up for W. 
 
Advertisements

The Faith Factor 2008 vs. 2004 — Exit Polls

“”We worship an awesome God in the blue states,” Barack Obama declared during his 2004 Democratic convention keynote. Thunderous applause greeted that line, in part because Democrats felt frustrated that they’d been unfairly cast as a secular or even anti-religion party, and by the political dominance of religious conservatives.”

The Rise of the Religious Left. But clearly Obama still did not get the evangelical votes.

The Faith Factor 2008 vs. 2004 — Exit Polls

election god gap detail final.JPG

election attenders non attenders final.JPG

election by faith whites final third try.JPG

 

elections evangelicals final second try.JPG

http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/ 

http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/obama-triumphs-will-be-first-black-us-president/

 

Ten Faith Factors for Election Night

1.How Many Obamagelicals Are There? – It might seem farfetched that a socialist-terror-lovin’-pro-abortion candidate like Obama could win any evangelical Christians but he’s been courting them fervently since he began his presidential run. The key the 40% of evangelicals who call themselves “moderate” or “liberal.” Point of reference: John Kerry won 21% of white evangelicals, Gore 18%. Bill Clinton in 1996 won 26%.  

2.  Will Palin Turn Out the “Religious Right”? — By picking Sarah Palin, John McCain gambled that she’d be able to rev up the evangelical “base.” Even as her popularity has fallen generally, evangelicals still love her (some even believing she was sent to battle the anti-Christ.) Assuming most conservative evangelicals vote for McCain, the second question is: how many will show up? Point of reference: white evangelicals accounted for 23% of the electorate in 2004.

3. Do Midwestern Evangelicals Split With Their Brethren? — Recent polls have showed Obama trailing badly among evangelicals in Florida and Colorado but doing quite well with them in Michigan, Ohio and

Pennsylvania. If he succeeds there, he may have tapped into regional differences in style, theology and politics and launch a new era in faith-and-politics punditry, in which we no longer talk about “the evangelical vote” as a geographically uniform phenomenon.4. Will Catholics Ignore Their Bishops? – The overall Catholic vote has gone with the popular vote winner every election since 1968. Catholic Bishops have been urging Catholic voters to vote for pro-life candidates but a majority of Catholic voters are now pro-choice so it remains to be seen what influence the church will have. (Obama is also winning with the 100-year-old-nuns bloc) Another factor in Obama’s favor: a higher percentage of the Catholic vote will be Latino this year. Last election, George W. Bush won the Catholic 52%-46%.

5. Can Obama Finally Bowl a Strike With Skeptical White Catholics? – During the primaries, Obama did poorly with white Catholics, often working class ethnics or their offspring. Remember his feeble attempt to curry favor through bowling? They tend to be culturally conservative and haven’t voted for a Democrat since 1996. On the other hand, they’re especially concerned about the economy this year, and Joe Biden has been trying to bond with them as a fellow “cultural Catholics.” Point of reference: In 2004, Bush won 56% of white Catholics, Kerry 43%.

6. Will Whitebread Protestants Back the Black Guy? – Recent polls show Democrats gaining with a group that had leaned Republican for most of the past few decades – Mainline Protestants. It appears that while Sarah Palin energized evangelicals, she may have alienated some Mainliners. In 2004, they went for President George W. Bush 54%-46%.

7. Will Latino Protestants Vote Their Values or the Pocketbook? – One positive trend for Obama will likely be the shift of Latinos from the Republican side, where they resided in 2004, to the Democrats. The hidden religious story: most of the shift is driven by Latino Protestants. Many are evangelical and liked Bush’s Christian faith and his conservative positions on social issues (gay marriage, abortion) but have shifted to Obama because of the economy and concerns about immigration.

8. How Will the Kinda-Sorta Religious Vote? – In recent elections, the most religious you were, the more likely you were to vote Republican. This is known as the God Gap, which will still certainly exist. But watch for two things: among weekly churchoers how big is McCain’s margin? Bush won that group 61%-39% Second, Kerry last time beat Bush among more occasional churchgoers 53%-47%. Will Obama increase that margin?

9. Will Jews Schlep to Republican Side? – This only really matters in

Florida, and even there it doesn’t matter as much as you’d think (Jews made up 5% of the electorate there in 2004). Early polls had Obama struggling among Jews – in part because of fears about his former church’s connections to Louis Farrakhan — but more recently he’s caught up, possibly because Jews fear that Sarah Palin is an extreme evangelical. Or possibly the Sarah Silverman factor. Jews reportedly went about 75%-25% for Kerry.10. Will the GOP Become the ROP? – Will Republicans become the Religiously Oriented Party? In 2004, white evangelicals made up 36% of Bush voters.
Will that go up or down? If it becomes an even more dominant force within the party, how will that shape either the way McCain governs if he wins or, if he loses, how the Republicans re-invent themselves.

Carla Hinton  Religion Editor http://blog.newsok.com/religionandvalues/2008/10/31/389

 

so what do you say  about the faith factor…

Though the economy clearly was the defining issue of the election, Obama forged a new coalition by luring millions of religious left voters who had avoided Democrats in recent years.

In short:

He narrowed the God Gap. Bush beat Kerry among weekly church-goers by 61%-39%. McCain is beating Obama 54%-44% Most of that gain appears to have come from Protestants rather than Catholics

He won Catholics back. Early exit polls indicate he won 54% of the Catholic vote compared to 45% for John McCain. George W. Bush won the Catholic vote 52%-46%. Most of those gains came from Catholics who don’t attend mass weekly.

He also improved among white Catholics, according to the early exit polls. Bush got 56%-43% As of now, McCain lead by just 51%-49% This was despite an aggressive push by more than 50 Bishops to encourage Catholics to focus on abortion as the central issue.

He man real gainst among Evangelicals. Evangelicals and Born Again Christians made up a greater portion of the electorate this year than last election but that didn’t all accrue to McCain’s benefit, as predict. Obama improved slightly on a national level, getting 25% compared to Kerry’s 21%

But far more important, he made significant progress in the pivotal rustbelt states that won him the election. For instance, evangelicals flooded the polls in Ohio and Obama significantly improved on Kerry’s showing.

He attracted more Mainline Protestants — Though shifting toward the center in recent years, mainline Protestants — once a core of the Republican party — – still went for the Republicans in 2004. The exit polls didn’t ask specifically about mainline Protestants but it appears Obama improved slightly with this group.

He energized the lightly religious. Though secular voters already voted Democratic, they did so by an even bigger margin this year. Even more important, a quarter of the electorate says they go to worship services but only a few times a year. Kerry won that group with 54%-45%. Obama won 61%-38%

BREAKING: Catholic Shift to Obama

The rap on Obama during the primaries was that he couldn’t win because he struggled with Catholics. Apparently, he got past that. Early exit polls indicate he won 54% of the Catholic vote compared to 45% for John McCain….

Obama Luring Rest Belt Evangelicals But Not Southerners

Obama seems to have made far more progress with Born Again Christians in rust belt states than in the South. Based on preliminary exit polls: Florida: 78%-20% (McCain-Obama) Virginia: 78%-21% Ohio: 70%-29% Indiana: 66%-32%

BREAKING: Weekly Churchgoers vs. Occasionals

One thing that puzzles me about these numbers: Obama’s progress among Catholics is with those who don’t attend mass weekly. But among Protestants, he improved among those who do attend weekly. One possible theory: abortion. Mass-attending Catholics are more likely…

Sarah Palin gets loads of free media coverage again

 

Palin denies accepting $150K in designer clothes Associated Press  Friday, October 24th, 2008 

“Sarah Palin says much of the fuss over the $150,000 worth of designer clothes, hairstyling and accessories the Republican Party bought her is being generated by her gender.She tells the Chicago Tribune a double standard exists. She also says the clothes aren’t worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention.Palin says, in fact, most of the clothes have never left the campaign plane and that the whole story isn’t being told.John McCain was asked about the purchases several times on Thursday. Time and again he maintained they were bought because Palin needed clothes, and that they’d be donated to charity after the election.”  “The clothes are a complete NON-ISSUE. Without the clothes, Palin would have been ridiculed for dressing like a country bumpkin, with the clothes, she is ridiculed for spending a lot of money.” More mere hypocristy clearly by the Democrats“It is so good to be back,” Palin said, “A lot in common between Alaska and the Hoosier state. And in fact getting off the plane tonight, and getting out of the vehicle, chilly enough just like it is at home, gotta put a jacket on, you know, in this crisp – and it’s my own jacket from Wasilla, Alaska!”

But the vast US media coverage over her clothes has been much appreciated, it again, continually keeps Sarah Palin in the media spotlight and with the voters. Obama himself would love to have that much free media coverage.. maybe he should get some donated clothes next?
 
 

Sarah Palin says clothing budget row is sexist
guardian.co.uk – 2 hours ago
Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin says the clothing debate shows double standards in the election campaign. Photograph: AP vice-presidential nominee herself blamed the row on sexism.
Hockey mom says $150K clothing ‘frugal’ PRESS TV
The case for Sarah Palin’s wardrobe Toronto Star
Sydney Morning Herald – Telegraph.co.uk – The Associated Press – The Age
all 1,574 news articles »

 

SARAH PALIN has testified for the first time about her   firing of an Alaska police chief, amid false objections of the cost of her fashion makeover to the Republican campaign. Mrs Palin and her husband Todd yesterday gave sworn depositions about the Alaska firing, which a legislative inquiry said last month was within the law although some would say Mrs Palin had supposedly broken some ethics rules by pushing for her former brother-in-law to be sacked from the state police force. More bad cops should be sacked world wide too.
 
In an interview with NBC News   Mrs Palin also said she is not thinking about her political future after the election. “As for furtherance in a political career, I’m not even thinking about that, I’m thinking between now and November 4th what it is that we have to do in reaching out to the electorate, letting them know who John McCain is, what we represent and how electing John McCain is the right decision for the future of America,” she said. She still has a goal of being a winner and not a loser. Despite all the endorsements and money, Obama’s lead has really not changed significantly over the last few months. And that lead is not big enough to offset either the last-minute effect of valid Republican counter attacks and the actual votes. These two effects will  still likley  lead to John McCain getting elected. 
      
   
In her first policy speech of the presidential campaign, Gov. Sarah Palin also vowed Friday that a McCain administration would allow all special-needs students the choice of attending private schools at public expense, a potentially costly proposal.Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, also vowed that she and Sen. John McCain would provide public schools the federal money that was promised when the law covering students with special needs was passed in 1975, a pledge aimed to address the top concern of many school districts and one that has been made by many other politicians but never fulfilled.  Palin described the challenge she faced when she found out her son Trig would be born with Down syndrome, but says it has given her a newfound focus to advocate for special needs children. “When I learned that Trig would have special needs, honestly, I had to prepare my heart,” Palin said. “I did a lot of praying for that understanding, and strength, and to see purpose. And what’s been confirmed in me is every child has something to contribute to the world if we give them that chance.” Palin is concerned about children with disabilities, but she is also turning all this into an effective political fire. Today, for she laso has  accused Obama of planning to increase taxes on trust funds set up for children with disabilities.”Many families with special needs children or dependent adults, they’re concerned about in this race our opponent in this election who plans to raise taxes on precisely these kinds of financial arrangements,” Palin warned.               
             
“One of the most wonderful experiences in this campaign has been to see all the families of children with special needs who come out to rallies and events just like this,” Palin said today in Pittsburgh. “We have a bond there. We know that children with special needs inspire a special love.”You bring your sons and daughters with you, because you are proud of them, as I am of my son,” Palin continued. “My little fella sleeps during most of these rallies, even when they get pretty rowdy. He would be amazed to know how many folks come out to see him instead of me.” “Too often, even in our own day, children with special needs have been set apart and excluded,” said Palin, whose infant son Trig has Down syndrome. “Too often, state and federal laws add to their challenges, instead of removing barriers and opening new paths of opportunity. Too often, they are made to feel that there is no place for them in the life of our country, that they don’t count or have nothing to contribute. This attitude is a grave disservice to these beautiful children, to their families, and to our country — and I will work to change it.”

” In her speech, Palin said the federal government could finance the new investment by taking some of $18 billion it spends each year on earmarks, specific projects that are designated by members of Congress. “That’s more than the shortfall to fully fund the IDEA,” she said. “And where does a lot of that earmark money end up? It goes to projects having little or nothing to do with the public good — things like fruit fly research in Paris, France, or a public policy center named for the guy who got the earmark. In our administration, we’re going to reform and refocus. We’re going to get our federal priorities straight, and fulfill our country’s commitment to give every child opportunity and hope in life.””

No matter what I write about, Sarah Palin  is still the best seller on my sites too.

and many people now what to know what is happening to her now? after the election

News reporting these days tends to be Unprofessional

 
I have known now for half a century that news reporting these days tends to be Unprofessional, whether it is the Times, CNN or what ever, for News reporting has too often now become lies, spins, desertions , contradictory even.. no  wonder many people stop buying news papers, do not believe necessary all they hear and read as well, especially in Canada now too  it seems the Vancouver Sun, Calgary Sun, Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal, the National Post, and many many others now too. So now also  the cops they also do  tend to be unprofessional  it seems as well. Why?
 
 Do now simply go the the Google Canadian http://news.google.ca/  or the US version  http://news.google.ca/news?ned=us   of the news and read about the same subjects first 
 
 for example
– The Canadian federal elections, related political parties and their leaders
– The US federal  elections, related political parties and their leaders
 
and as you read you will see the news editors, news reporters, columnist offering you now their gossip, their opinion, their lies, their slanders, spins  too often and not the balanced, impartial, professional fair , honest facts firstly to allow you to make the right decision on your own.. and too often they even do immorally bully, bash others no as well..
 
sad.. this is all really sad and unacceptable still too
 
“The Canadian 2008 federal election campaign will go down as one of the nastiest in recent political memory.  There was no mistaking the steady use of U.S.-style political attack ads by almost all of the parties. We witnessed just about everything: from a pooping puffin defecating on Liberal leader Stéphane Dion’s shoulder to Conservative leader Stephen Harper being inextricably linked to lame-duck U.S. President George W. Bush.” But did  these attack ads actually work? clearly they  were they successful in producing such a strong showing for Canada’s Prime Minister Mr. Harper in yesterday’s vote? “Some pundits and party operatives argue that attack ads are merely part of the cut and thrust of politics. They maintain that we need to know both the good and the “bad” about our prospective political representatives.  Not surprisingly, they have no hesitation about saying that these ads are very effective during election campaigns. To be sure, the very fact that political parties continue to use them is proof positive of their electoral value and import. These same analysts would quickly point to the “Willie Horton” ad in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign — used by George Bush Sr. to paint his Democratic challenger, Michael Dukakis, as soft on crime for supporting weekend furloughs for murderers when governor of Massachusetts — to highlight just how powerful these attacks can be. Others will single out the “Swift Boat” attacks against former presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004 to buttress their argument. For them, these ads enabled the sponsoring party to define their opponent in a very negative light. And if the target of the ad doesn’t respond immediately and forcefully, that individual risks being framed in an inauspicious fashion — as Mr. Dion knows only too well. The ads work, then, because the negative image tends to stay longer in the mind of the hapless voter. Furthermore, those voters sitting on the fence or undecided about their party preference are likely most susceptible to this type of electoral messaging.” And we will see more not less of them but THE ADVERTISING MONEY AVAILABLE STILL DID NOT GIVE THE TORIES  HERE THEIR DESIRED MAJORITY GOVERNMENT AND WHY WAS THAT? WAS IT ALL A WASTE OF MONEY RATHER, THE ELECTION NOW INCLUDED? http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/canada-harper-failed-again-in-an-attempt-to-win-majority-government/

“Other observers and commentators argue just the opposite — namely, that these attack ads have little impact or staying power during an election campaign. In addition, they contend that the more discerning voter would not be influenced by this kind of political appeal.” And that on the contrary such adds will clearly rather cause a backlash, cause more people to van support the person being attack as has clearly happened in the republican vice president nominee Sarah Palin TO THE CLEAR, ADMITTED FRUSTRATIONS NOW OF THE DEMOCRATS IN REALITY.

In reality Genuine Born Again, Evangelical, Christians are total abstainers from smoking, drugs, alcohol, cheating, lying, stealing, tax evasions, pornography, or rather all personal vices, Impairments, gay sex now too.  
 
 Clearly ** The Bible teaches against drinking alcoholic beverages.
 
The liars and the demons  of course will say other wise.

 The Sarah Palin effect has clearly perturbed the Democrats

 

 
do see also
 

Dirtied politics

NO WONDER IT IS STILL TOO OFTEN CALLED DIRTY POLITICS

For me the biggest hypocrisy of the election is the liberals,  democrats who would lie to us and say they are angels, that they do not lie, or abuse, slander, use negative messages against the other side.. ha ha ha.. not even when they are sleeping? and how stupid do they think we are now too.
 
The democrats are really loudly upset  these  days  that so many people do not accept their lies, distortions, about the right wingers republicans and the Christians.. Dream on.. and how stupid do they think we are now still too.
            
The Bible’s suggestions on electing rulers..

(Deu 1:13 KJV)  Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.
(Deu 1:14 KJV)  And ye answered me, and said, The thing which thou hast spoken is good for us to do.
(Deu 1:15 KJV)  So I took the chief of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over you, captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over fifties, and captains over tens, and officers among your tribes.
(Deu 1:16 KJV)  And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.
(Deu 1:17 KJV)  Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
(Deu 1:18 KJV)  And I commanded you at that time all the things which ye should do.

(1 Tim 3:1 KJV)  This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
(1 Tim 3:2 KJV)  A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
(1 Tim 3:3 KJV) 
Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
(1 Tim 3:4 KJV)  One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
(1 Tim 3:5 KJV)  (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
(1 Tim 3:6 KJV)  Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
(1 Tim 3:7 KJV)  Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
 

When Sarah Palin, John McCain discuss negatives against Obama, Bilden , it is all supposedly lies and slanders, but when the Liberals, Democrats, Biden, Obama say their negatives against against the other two  it is supposedly all fair game.. my how unbelievably perverted, and double standard. An unacceptable  fact I have even shared often before too.
“I’ve been hearing for a while now the common theme that  the McCain/Palin camp is supposedly inciting racism, hatred and violence. See http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/2008/10/08/newest-obamacrat-talking-point/  for more on this.
 
It has even been “proclaimed” that Mac and his supporters are trying to get someone to assassinate The One. ( Obama)
I’ve read and heard many say that the anger expressed by supporters at McCain/Palin events is “out of control rage and racism” and that supposedly McCain isn’t doing enough to stop it.   
 I cannot believe the people who tell me they are not at all concerned about Obama’s radical associates, his connection to foreign and domestic terrorists, his ties to ACORN (Yes he IS tied to ACORN in a very big way), his affection for radical religious leaders like Rev. Wright, Father Phleger, Louis Farrakkan and more. Mostly radical religious leaders who peddle hate speech as sermons.
Not only that but these are the same people (Obamabots) who have posted things on The Daily Kos and even the Official DNC website not only advocating but in some cases out right calling for physical and/or sexual violence against Hillary Clinton and many of these hateful posts are still on display for all to see while any reference to anything not positive about The One is immediately deleted and the user(s) banned and admonished as haters and racists. 
This from the campaign that told supporters “I want you to get in their face”, and “if they bring a knife then we’ll bring a gun”. The wonderful candidate who has blogs from his supporters on his own website demanding that they commit to making sure Obama got the nomination “by any means necessary” and the same supporters who have written numerous blogs and essays about how “violence and rioting will ensue” if Obama is not the next president.
This from the guy that went to Kenya on the taxpayers’ dime to campaign for his cousin Ralia Odinga. You know the guy that lost his first attempt at power and incited race riots, ethnic cleansing and general chaos afterward claiming that the election was “stolen” from him though it was clearly not. The guy who won his second attempt in large part because of those tactics and the fact that he basicly bought the support of radical muslims by promising to install Sharia Law. The cousin who took notes from Obama on how to do this. If you don’t beleive me read up on Odinga. Or you can watch this video. http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/the-newest-bs-obama-talking-point-and-why-its-bs/       
Seriously these Obama supporters have been the nastiest, the rudest, the most hateful and violent I have ever encountered in an election cycle. They will threaten, stalk, hack whatever it takes to suppress any views other than their own. I have heard of more death threats and threats of violence and various reprisals from Obama supporters than should ever be allowed and yet I have not once seen him try to reign them in.

Well , he did say that the families were off limits after his supporters and his official surrogates had already been smearing Sarah Palin and her children for a week or so. It’s easy to speak out after the damage is done.

Suddenly telling the truth is racist and hateful. I had one message from an Obama supporter saying that she did not care one bit about his relationship with Bill Ayers and she wouldn’t care even if he were still doing the despicable things he did back then. It would have absolutely no effect on her decision making!

  Anyone who doesn’t care if the candidate they want to see in the white house has friendships with terrorists really isn’t smart enough to vote. Sorry but there it is.   Seriously does this guy have even one friend or associate that is not either a criminal, a terrorist, a radical hate monger or a far-left nutjob? Not even one normal friend?

How many of us would have this number of anti-American leaning friends? All we hear from camp Obama is how he’s the poor widdle victim of hate and racism and the mean old republicans are trying to kill him! (Sorry for the tweety bird speak I just can’t help it)

Ever notice no matter what happens? when  Obama attacks the others then claims he is attacked. Sure, sure he is always the “victim” and those of us who do love America and democracy are always the “bullies”. Funny because if you look around you won’t see threats from Hillary Clinton supporters or from McCain/Palin supporters. ” http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/the-newest-bs-obama-talking-point-and-why-its-bs/   

 

I had read on many lying Sites that Barrack Obama does not drink alcohol and  that is not true.. that is clearly PR crap! http://www.sofakingdrunk.com/2008/05/09/obama-and-clinton-drinking-alcohol-obama-drunk-clinton-drunk/

When Sarah Palin, John McCain discuss negatives against Obama, Bilden , it is all supposedly lies and slanders, but when the Liberals, Democrats, Biden, Obama say their negatives against against the other two  it is supposedly all fair game.. my how unbelievably perverted, and double standard. An unacceptable  fact I have even shared often before too.
 

 

 “The Canadian 2008 federal election campaign will go down as one of the nastiest in recent political memory.  There was no mistaking the steady use of U.S.-style political attack ads by almost all of the parties. We witnessed just about everything: from a pooping puffin defecating on Liberal leader Stéphane Dion’s shoulder to Conservative leader Stephen Harper being inextricably linked to lame-duck U.S. President George W. Bush.” But did  these attack ads actually work? clearly they  were they successful in producing such a strong showing for Canada’s Prime Minister Mr. Harper in yesterday’s vote? “Some pundits and party operatives argue that attack ads are merely part of the cut and thrust of politics. They maintain that we need to know both the good and the “bad” about our prospective political representatives.  Not surprisingly, they have no hesitation about saying that these ads are very effective during election campaigns. To be sure, the very fact that political parties continue to use them is proof positive of their electoral value and import. These same analysts would quickly point to the “Willie Horton” ad in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign — used by George Bush Sr. to paint his Democratic challenger, Michael Dukakis, as soft on crime for supporting weekend furloughs for murderers when governor of Massachusetts — to highlight just how powerful these attacks can be. Others will single out the “Swift Boat” attacks against former presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004 to buttress their argument. For them, these ads enabled the sponsoring party to define their opponent in a very negative light. And if the target of the ad doesn’t respond immediately and forcefully, that individual risks being framed in an inauspicious fashion — as Mr. Dion knows only too well. The ads work, then, because the negative image tends to stay longer in the mind of the hapless voter. Furthermore, those voters sitting on the fence or undecided about their party preference are likely most susceptible to this type of electoral messaging.” And we will see more not less of them but THE ADVERTISING MONEY AVAILABLE STILL DID NOT GIVE THE TORIES  HERE THEIR DESIRED MAJORITY GOVERNMENT AND WHY WAS THAT? WAS IT ALL A WASTE OF MONEY RATHER, THE ELECTION NOW INCLUDED? http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/canada-harper-failed-again-in-an-attempt-to-win-majority-government/

“Other observers and commentators argue just the opposite — namely, that these attack ads have little impact or staying power during an election campaign. In addition, they contend that the more discerning voter would not be influenced by this kind of political appeal.” And that on the contrary such adds will clearly rather cause a backlash, cause more people to van support the person being attack as has clearly happened in the republican vice president nominee Sarah Palin TO THE CLEAR, ADMITTED FRUSTRATIONS NOW OF THE DEMOCRATS IN REALITY.

Sarah Palin, Todd Bentley, etc.,

 

I have 6 wordpress blog sites at least and they are all great, cause they are written by me and I put a lot of work into it..

Sadly I have learned that if I want to get loads of readers I just refer to these two words.. and I next do get loads of visitors..  but sadly  the other topics,  the  other words mostly  do not.. 

the really  bad thing is that by me doing this attracts next the some of bad persons as well, not just the good ones. such is life…

Do see also

http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/10/08/fighting-the-smears-about-sarah-palin/

http://mccainvrsobama.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/mccain-versus-obama-hot-free-speech/

http://witnessed.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/christian-missionary-alliance-2/

http://thefocusonthefamily.wordpress.com/2008/10/02/christian-graphics-wallpapers/

http://wittnessed.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/popular-christian-based-readinsg-resources/

http://wittnessed.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/hello-world/

Another Snap election call- Ukraine

  
 
President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine has dissolved the Ukrainian  parliament weeks after the collapse of the country’s ruling pro-Western coalition.  Mr Yushchenko announced Ukraine’s third general election in less than three years in a pre-recorded speech on TV. The polls will be held on 7 December. Yushchenko’s party, which is seeking closer ties with the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, quit the coalition on Sept. 3 after its former ally Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko teamed up with the pro-Russian opposition to strip the president of some powers. Yushchenko and Timoshenko joined forces four years ago to win the 2004 election in the bloodless Orange Revolution. After a split in 2005, the two reunited before last year’s vote. Since then, Yushchenko and Timoshenko have been locked in a battle over how to tackle Europe’s fastest inflation rate, sell state assets and how to spend budget.  “Early elections are not likely to bring political stability,”   “Tensions between the parliament and the president are likely to continue” as “the pro-presidential party may gather even fewer votes than predicted, as the population is clearly dissatisfied with the frequent elections. Yushchenko is thus likely to face, after elections, parties he has already had a lot of difficulties working with.”  Ukraine’s inflation rate, driven by global food and energy costs and exacerbated in Ukraine by government spending, rose to 24.3 percent in August. The annual rate almost tripled in a year to 31.1 percent in May, prompting Standard & Poor’s to cut the country’s credit rating.  Ukraine’s hryvnia fell 18 percent in the past month as the country’s ruling coalition collapsed and debt markets seized up.  “The early elections are clearly negative for the economy. They may further undermine economic fundamentals,” . “The country is in a very precarious economic situation. The economy is expected to slow sharply, while consumer price inflation should remain high.”
 
Really now! How is that the rather still dumb it seems politicians, who think turn a blind eye to the problems the citizens have, by calling a snap election in Canada, Ukraine, elsewhere now  will help next them, or the citizens?