• IN THIS SECTION

June 17, 2008

Exclusive: Tuesday, June 17

Presidential Watch

View video - Barack Obama on Religion - GO HERE.

Flashback video: Rendell rips Obama on "Crackerquiddick" - GO HERE.

Adhering to the Principles that Keep America Prosperous & Free

Fred Thompson, Townhall.com

Today many of the principles that made our country great are under assault. Some of our fellow Republicans say that things are different now and we must change with the times. We recognize that appropriate change is necessary, just as the conservative thinker Edmund Burke did when he supported the American Revolution.

However we must ask those who would modify our principles, "When did freedom and liberty become outdated?" Then, "What part of our Constitutional framework needs to be abandoned?"

We need to recognize that in a constantly changing world there are still some unchanging truths. It is when our party has abandoned our principles that we have gotten into trouble. Not when we've adhered to them.

The Democratic Party of today would abandon many of these principles and what they would not abandon they would distort. They have their own principles. They believe:

In highlighting and dwelling on America's imperfections.

In isolationism.

In policies that will give the world the impression that we are weak and divided.

In declaring defeat even when we are winning.

In stopping or reneging on free trade agreements with other countries, and making the word of the United States less reliable.

In turning over the education of our children to the NEA.

In continuing to expand our entitlement program spending even as these programs are headed bankruptcy.

Today's Democratic Party would persuade the American people that the government is the solution to all of their problems and that every economic downturn is because of a conspiracy against them. Read article.

Who Is Obama? Where Is The Press?
Tony Blankley, GOP USA.com

How would one sneak a left-wing radical into the Oval Office in broad daylight? Perhaps the same way that President George W. Bush got two strong conservatives on the Supreme Court: Find a candidate without a paper trail on the most controversial issues. For those of us who suspect but cannot yet prove that Barack Obama is a genuine radical leftist, his lack of much of a voting record is going to make it difficult to prove what his real values, policies and motives are to be president.

This is particularly the case because the media is so obviously going to give Obama cover not only for his current revelatory gaffes but also for embarrassing bits from his past.

For example, back on June 2, National Review Online ran an extraordinary article by Stanley Kurtz that closely assessed a 1995 article about Obama by Hank De Zutter titled "What Makes Obama Run?" The essence of his thesis is the following:

"De Zutter's article shows us that the full story of Obama's ties to Pfleger and Wright is both more disturbing and more politically relevant than we've realized up to now. On Obama's own account, the rhetoric and vision of Chicago's most politically radical black churches are exactly what he wants to see more of. True, when discussing Louis Farrakhan with De Zutter, Obama makes a point of repudiating anti-white, anti-Semitic, and anti-Asian sermons. Yet having laid down that proviso, Obama seems to relish the radicalism of preachers like Pfleger and Wright. In 1995, Obama didn't want Trinity's political show to stop. His plan was to spread it to other black churches, and harness its power to an alliance of leftist groups and sympathetic elected officials." Read article.

On the Second Amendment, Don't Believe Obama!

NRA-ILA.org

The presidential primary season is finally over, and it is now time for gun owners to take a careful look at just where apparent nominee Barack Obama stands on issues related to the Second Amendment. During the primaries, Obama tried to hide behind vague statements of support for "sportsmen" or unfounded claims of general support for the right to keep and bear arms.

But his real record, based on votes taken, political associations, and long standing positions, shows that Barack Obama is a serious threat to Second Amendment liberties. Don't listen to his campaign rhetoric! Look instead to what he has said and done during his entire political career. Read article.

More Words of Wisdom from the Democrat's 'Genius' Candidate

Clarice Feldman, American Thinker.com

Barack Obama once again embarrasses himself with his poor grasp of history. Even worse, the former president of the Harvard Law Review does not seem to understand the nature of a famous court. Jake Tapper of ABC's Political Punch blog writes:

Obama, a former senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, cited "that principle of habeas corpus, that a state can't just hold you for any reason without charging you and without giving you any kind of due process -- thatʼs the essence of who we are. I mean, you remember during the Nuremberg trials, part of what made us different was even after these Nazis had performed atrocities that no one had ever seen before, we still gave them a day in court and that taught the entire world about who we are but also the basic principles of rule of law. Now the Supreme Court upheld that principle yesterday."

(Though Obama was clearly referring to the principle of giving criminals a day in court, it's worth pointing out the distinction here, that the Nuremberg trials did not give Nazi war criminals access to U.S. courts, but to a special international military tribunal created by the U.S., USSR, France and the U.K. Though Nuremberg currently is considered a model for international law, it's not as if Rudolph Hess had access to challenge his detention in U.S. federal court.) Read article.

The Pentagon Gets Ready For President Obama

Strategy Page.com

U.S. military planners are working on how to deal with another round of major cutbacks, in terms of budgets and manpower. This is because one of the major candidates for Commander-in-Chief (president of the United States), Barak Obama, has a video in circulation, of a short speech he gave earlier this year, about how he planned on handling the Department of Defense. His major points were;

"I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning; and as president, I will end it.

"Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems.

"I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the Quadrennial Review is not used to justify unnecessary defense spending.

"Third, I will set a goal for a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal." Read article.

Terrorist Rights-Ruling Rallying Point for McCain

Ronald Kessler, NewsMax.com

Conservatives seeking a reason to rally behind John McCain for president need look no further than the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to give foreign enemy combatants the same rights as American citizens to challenge their detention.

Writing for the liberal majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

By this reasoning, illegal aliens should be given access to the federal civilian courts to contest their expulsion from the country. Nazi soldiers taken prisoner during World War II and held on American soil should have been allowed to argue their cases in federal court. Instead of shooting terrorists on the battlefield, American soldiers should read them their rights and ship them off to American jails.

In fact, under the majority opinion in Boumediene v. Bush, suspected terrorists are given more rights than our own soldiers are afforded when charged with crimes. Their cases are restricted to the military courts.

The court acknowledged it was the first time it had ruled that "noncitizens detained by our government in territory over which another country maintains de jure sovereignty have any rights under our Constitution." It said such a constitutional right can be suspended by Congress only in times of "rebellion or invasion."

Justice Kennedy noted that we are not currently under "invasion or rebellion." But that has nothing to do with a war overseas. Read article.

Not Your Father's JFK

Fran Coombs, Human Events.com

Sometimes you have to feel sorry for the "mainstream" media. In its pursuit of oversimplification, there are only so many heroes to choose from, particularly when it comes to liberal politicians. With the last lion of the Kennedy clan terminally ill and the next generations of the family proving inept at best, it's time for a new Kennedy. Meet Barack Obama.

For months now it seems everywhere you turn someone has been making comparisons between the senator from Illinois and John F. Kennedy. Just Sunday the New York Times even compared Michelle Obama's fashion sense with that of the legendary Jackie O.

The Kennedys themselves have gotten on board, with a full family rally in January to endorse Mr. Obama at which Sen. Edward M. Kennedy likened the presidential hopeful to his martyred brother. Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, the late president's daughter, accompanied the endorsement with a newspaper op-ed.

Of course, Mr. Obama demurs if the comparison to Kennedy is raised, while his campaign milks it whenever possible. He's even enlisted JFK's premier wordsmith Ted Sorensen to work on his speeches.

Here's the catch: The late President Kennedy was far more conservative than the political party he represented is today. Just a look at the hawkish Cold War tone of his national security speeches during the 1960 campaign would cause a building-wide fainting spell at the Democratic Party's national headquarters. So, like many historical figures, he has been twisted Gumby-like into an all-purpose, one-size-fits-all caricature to meet the needs of whoever is quoting him on a given day. Including his own family. Read article.

McCain and Obama: We Don't Care What You Want

Arnold Ahlert, Political Mavens.com

Crazy me. I always thought the best way to get elected president would be to align oneself with the overwhelming majority of the American public on critical issues. Apparently both candidates see it differently. How out of touch are Barack Obama and John McCain? Consider just two issues where they are at complete loggerheads with most Americans:

1. Illegal immigration. What most Americans want is crystal clear: border enforcement first, everything else second.

What both Obama and McCain want: another incarnation of the "reform" Congress failed to foist on America last year. Another round of obfuscation, double-talk and browbeating designed to obscure the fact that Congressional vote-whoring and big-business wage-busting are the primary motivations behind the attempt to legalize 12-20 million border-busters-and their extended families.

2. A rational energy package. What most Americans want: not to go broke filling up a gas tank.

What McCain and Obama want: to "save" the planet from global warming even if it destroys the economy-and even if it won't do anything remotely significant to reduce global temperatures. Read article.

Will Iran Give Hezbollah A Nuke?

IBD Editorials.com

Iran's supreme leader proclaims Tehran isn't interested in nuclear weapons itself but that someday terrorists will have such weapons. We'll need more than Barack Obama's doublespeak to stop them.

The U.S. and the European Union this week announced tentative plans to ratchet up economic sanctions against Iran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program.

It's a pretty tough move, one spearheaded by President Bush, that will grab Iran's attention. It also appears to be a preparatory step to a possible military strike against Iran if it refuses to stop its nuclear weapons program.

That's one way to deal with a dangerous rogue state. Obama has another.

If a President Obama ever gets to conduct his "aggressive personal diplomacy" with Iran, it will present the world with an interesting dialogue in which leaders of both countries are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

The man who is apparently running for Jimmy Carter's second and third terms once said that he was willing to talk with Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

Now, having discovered the Jewish vote, he talks of the need for careful preparations for such talks: "Contrary to the claims of some (including his own speechwriters), I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking."

That's not the only issue regarding Iran that he's flip-flopped on. Read article.

The Obama Referendum

Greg C. Reeson, NMJ.us

This past weekend on FOX News Sunday, Brit Hume remarked that the upcoming presidential election had little to do with John McCain and was instead a referendum on the Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama. Is the country ready for an African American president? Are Americans searching for something new, having grown tired of the business-as-usual mentality in Washington? Has President Bush so destroyed the Republican Party that no GOP candidate has a legitimate shot at winning this November?

These are all fair questions, but at this point in the contest the answers are purely speculative. What is not speculative is Obama's plan for America if he is elected to the White House this November. The "Blueprint for Change," published just prior to the Iowa Caucus, offers a glimpse into where this country is headed if the Senator from Illinois becomes the next President of the United States.

Domestically, Obama's plan has three primary themes: a massive increase in the size and scope of government; the further redistribution of wealth within American society; and more government control coupled with a corresponding decrease in individual accountability and responsibility. Here are a few examples.

First, let's look at Obama's plan for growing the government. Despite his pledge at the beginning of the blueprint "...to put government back in your hands, where it belongs," an Obama presidency promises substantial and sustained increases in the size and scope of the federal government that will result in more control over the lives of ordinary Americans and more interference with the conduct of private business. Read article.

Zapping Mac - How the Dems Mean to Batter McCain

Kirsten Powers, NY Post.com

The Democratic assault on John McCain will go far beyond the "McBush" attacks tying him to President Bush - effective as that line is.

Democrats will relentlessly batter McCain from every angle - chipping away at the vaunted "McCain brand" of being a moderate, independent, straight-talking, maverick expert on foreign policy.

The first line of attack will go right for his supposed strength - by arguing that McCain can't be trusted on foreign policy.

Another target: McCain's rep as a "maverick" and independent thinker. How exactly did his "independent" principles coincidentally lead him to the exact same conclusion as George Bush and his Republican cohorts 95 percent of the time when it came to his Senate votes?

Democrats will also say McCain has been quick, in this current White House run, to abandon positions that put him at odds with his party. Once reasonable on immigration, for example, he now says he "got the message" from the right wing; he's certainly adjusted his position to try to placate the "close the border" crew. Read article.

McCain's View on Expanded Oil Drilling Uncertain

Kaitlynn Riely, CNSNews.com

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is "open to the possibility" of tapping America's domestic oil and gas reserves, but it is not clear from his voting record whether he would actively push to expand offshore oil recovery efforts.

On ABC's "This Week -with George Stephanopoulos," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C), a McCain friend and supporter, said the Arizona Republican would be open to talking about looking for oil and gas "in our own backyard."

"John McCain would allow offshore explorations, if the states consent," Graham said Sunday.

Graham's statement echoed the position McCain took in response to a survey conducted by the League of Conservation Voters last year. The League questioned all the 2008 presidential candidates about whether they supported maintaining current moratoriums on new offshore oil and natural gas drilling. Read article.