Islamic Xmas Song

Sound the Alarm Now

Newscast from the future

It is January, 2009 and President B. Hussein Obama has been sworn in as president of the United States. For days Islamic extremists have been dancing in the streets in Arab capitals. Partial birth abortion is cleared for federal funding and same sex marriage is declared legal in every state. Meanwhile a new FCC rule takes all conservative and Christian talk shows off the air. Watch the newscast now at www.obamanews2009.com and learn what the reality of a B. Hussein Obama presidency would be.

Election 911


crédito: SoundTheAlarmNow

Joe, the plumber

Crédito da imagem aqui




Barack HUSSEIN Obama And The DNC Are Committing Fraud Against The American People


Acesse também:
www.obamacrimes.com




Clique abaixo para saber mais sobre B. Hussein!

SARAH ROCKS!

O título acima, do qual compartilho entusiasmada, é do post de Michelle Malkin sobre o debate entre Sarah Palin e a raposa Joe Biden (ou rato do Senado norte-americano?).

O trecho final do post de Michelle Malkin resume o debate que eu vi (na FOX, é claro!):

"Pause to reflect on this: She matched — and trumped several times — a man who has spent his entire adult life on the political stage, run for president twice, and as he mentioned several times, chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sarah Palin looked presidential.

Joe Biden looked tired.

Sarah made history.

Biden is history."

Quem é o pitbull?

Sarah Palin tem sido atacada indiscriminada e injustamente pela mídia esquerdopata daqui e de lá (com exceções, é claro).


Ao mesmo tempo, prepararam para Palin outra armadilha suja (que aliás, é o que caracteriza os esquerdinhas de toda ordem): o debate de amanhã entre Sarah Palin e Biden, terá a "moderação" de Gwen Ifill que é uma 'afrodescendente democrata' pró B. HUSSEIN autora do livro "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama", que além de ser LIXO puro, comprova o que afirmo aqui.


Abaixo reproduzo o post e o artigo de Michelle Malkin a respeito do assunto:



(Aí está a tal "isenta" Gwen Ifill com B. HUSSEIN)*


"My first syndicated column of the week, filed this afternoon, shines light on PBS anchor Gwen Ifill, who will moderate Thursday’s only vice presidential debate. Try as she might to deflect questions about her impartiality, her biases — and her conflict of interest — are clear. But don’t you dare breathe a word about any of this. You know what will happen if you do…

RACIST!


Sidenote: TVNewser reports that Ifill has broken her ankle, but she’s still going to do the debate. But will she disclose her conflict of interest? Inquiring minds want to know.


Ask the Commission on Presidential Debates if she will acknowledge her conflict of interest: USA 202-872-1020.


And here’s the e-mail address of Janet H. Brown, Executive Director of the Debates Commission: jb@debates.org


Hopefully, their email system works better than the House.


Tons of readers recommend that Sarah Palin open her debate remarks by congratulating Ifill on her book and asking her to tell everyone the title.

***

A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama

By Michelle Malkin • September 30, 2008 10:13 PM

Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008


My dictionary defines “moderator” as “the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting.” On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.


But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.


In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.


The title of Ifill’s book? "Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.


Ifill’s publisher, Random House , is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:


“In The Breakthrough, veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama’s stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African American politicians forging a bold new path to political power…Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Senator Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the ‘black enough’ conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history.”


Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?


Yeah, I just registered 6.4 on the Snicker Richter Scale, too.



Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano:


“Barack Obama is sitting in the back of his rented luxury campaign bus with its granite counters and two flat-screen TVs. The Illinois senator’s arms are wrapped around his wife, Michelle, whom he doesn’t get to see much these days. At this very moment he is, of all things, singing.”


During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis before Michelle Obama’s speech on NBC News: “A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself…”


During the Republican National Convention, the PBS ombudsman fielded numerous complaints about Ifill’s coverage of Sarah Palin’s speech. Wrote Brian Meyers of Granby, Ct.:


“I was appalled by Gwen Ifill’s commentary directly following Gov. Sarah Palin’s speech. Her attitude was dismissive and the look on her face was one of disgust. Clearly, she was agitated by what most critics view as a well-delivered speech. It is quite obvious that Ms. Ifill supports Obama as she struggled to say anything redemptive about Gov. Palin’s performance. I am disappointed in Ms. Ifill’s complete disregard for journalistic objectivity.”


Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”


It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.


***


Here’s the video clip of Ifill’s reaction to Palin’s RNC speech:



***

As Instapundit’s newsroom correspondent put it: “The fix is in, and it’s working.”


Bob Unruh adds:


"Ifill declined to return a WND telephone message asking for a comment about her book project and whether its success would be expected should Obama lose. But she has faced criticism previously for not treating candidates of both major parties the same.

During a vice-presidential candidate debate she moderated in 2004 – when Democrat John Edwards attacked Republican Dick Cheney’s former employer, Halliburton – the vice president said, “I can respond, Gwen, but it’s going to take more than 30 seconds.”

“Well, that’s all you’ve got,” she told Cheney.

Ifill told the Associated Press Democrats were delighted with her answer, because they “thought I was being snippy to Cheney.” She explained that wasn’t her intent."


Uh-huh."


Aí vai um 'close' do verdadeiro pitbull:





* comentário meu
*************************************************



DESTAQUE:

No site de Heitor de Paola a mais pura expressão da verdade:

DAS ELEIÇÕES, LÁ E CÁ



"APROXIMAM-SE AS ELEIÇÕES LÁ (EUA) E CÁ (BRASIL). ME PERGUNTAM PORQUE NÃO COMENTO AS DE CÁ. A RAZÃO É SIMPLES: EM REGIME DE PARTIDO ÚNICO NADA HÁ A COMENTAR! EXPLICO: CÁ, AS SIGLAS PARTIDÁRIAS NÃO EXPRESSAM IDEOLOGIAS NEM MESMO DIFERENÇAS POLÍTICAS MAS MERA ARRUMAÇÃO ALEATÓRIA DE MASSINHAS NUM PRATO DE SOPA DE LETRINHAS."

YES to Sarah Palin, NO to B. HUSSEIN

Sarah Smile




Song Lloyd Marcus.

Mais curiosidades obâmicas

Por Olavo de Carvalho
Jornal do Brasil, 25 de setembro de 2008



A coluna de Maureen Dowd citada no artigo anterior era falsa. O engraçadinho que a enviou a mim sabia disso, pois não pode tê-la colhido nas páginas do New York Times, onde ela nunca esteve.


Em todo caso, não a mencionei como prova de nada, apenas como ilustração, curiosa mas dispensável, de algo que já estava bem provado por mil e um outros meios: que, se a candidatura de Barack Obama, como qualquer outra, é subsidiada por uma multiplicidade de fontes, o mesmo não se pode dizer da sua carreira total, criada e financiada desde o início por pessoas ligadas a organizações pró-terroristas e/ou ao banditismo puro e simples. Quem formou sua mentalidade foram os doutrinadores extremistas Frank Marshall Davis e Jeremiah Wright, quem o lançou na política foi o terrorista William Ayers (do grupo “Homem do Tempo”), quem pagou seus estudos em Harvard foi um mentor dos “Panteras Negras”, quem mais coletou dinheiro para ele nas eleições ao Senado foi um vigarista sírio condenado por dezesseis crimes. Que essa candidatura desperte o entusiasmo de todos os grupos pró-terroristas e partidos comunistas do mundo não prova uma “conspiração” em sentido estrito – tecnicamente, nenhum movimento histórico de amplitude mundial pode ser chamado uma “conspiração” –, mas também não pode ser uma inocente coincidência ex post facto. Obama nasceu desse meio, alimentou-se dele, e o aplauso que daí recebe é apenas o reforço final necessário para que a ambição longamente acalentada de destruir os EUA desde dentro (e desde cima) deixe de ser apenas um sonho de mentes malignas e se torne uma temível realidade.



Ahmadinejad tem razão: a eleição de Obama, se acontecer, será o sinal verde para a conquista da América pelo Islam revolucionário e seus parceiros comunistas, como a sedução da alma do príncipe Charles por um guru muçulmano, mais de vinte anos atrás, – ignorada pela mídia até hoje – foi o início da conquista da Inglaterra. Esta geração dificilmente passará sem que o mundo veja a autodissolução da Igreja anglicana e sua transformação em entreposto do islamismo. Mas talvez passe sem que os EUA – e portanto Israel – consumem sua rendição sacrificial ante o altar de seus inimigos. A presente eleição americana não é o último lance dessa disputa, mas é certamente um dos mais decisivos.



Ainda não sei ao certo como a crise econômica sustada pela ação rápida da Presidência americana se insere nesse quadro, mas sei que ela foi criada pelos democratas, que agora escondem suas culpas, como sempre, por trás de acusações ao governo e extraem proveito eleitoral de seus próprios crimes ignorados pela população. Fannie Mae e Freddie Mac já estavam encrencados em 2005 e o Senado discutia uma lei para impedir o desastre. A lei foi bloqueada pelos senadores Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd e – vejam só – Barack Obama, que em seguida receberam vultosas contribuições de campanha de Fannie e Freddie. (Leiam a história em http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0, e fiquem tranqüilos: ninguém me enviou a matéria por e-mail, eu mesmo a li na página da Bloomberg.)



Seria ingênuo esperar de esquerdistas uma conduta mais decente. Nas últimas semanas, eles apelaram aos expedientes mais extremos para esculhambar a candidatura McCain: montaram grupos terroristas armados de coquetéis Molotov para desmantelar a convenção republicana (cem incendiários foram presos na véspera, mas os remanescentes ainda fizeram um belo estrago), espalharam fofocas escabrosas sobre a família Palin (incluindo insinuações de incesto), armaram um escândalo nacional em torno da demissão de um policial no Alasca, como se fosse um novo Watergate, e invadiram os e-mails de Sarah Palin, publicando tudo (droga!, não havia nada de comprometedor). E a Folha de S. Paulo, com a cara mais bisonha do universo, informa a seus queridos leitores que Obama está escandalizado com o baixo nível dos ataques vindos da campanha McCain...

B. HUSSEIN said McCain is “right” nine times

Some of debate moments
September 26th, 2008 9:45 PM Eastern




PS - B. HUSSEIN is a FAKE!





By the way... this is a band that supports B. HUSSEIN (the name of this band is "Los MIERDAS" or SHIT, if you know what I mean....

Sarah Palin Interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity

Sarah Palin Interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity Part 1





Sarah Palin Interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity Part 2




Sarah Palin Interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity Part 3






Email Warning!



If you get an e-mail with "Nude Photos of Sarah Palin" in the subject line, do not open it. It might contain a virus.



If you get an e-mail with "Nude Photos of Hillary Clinton," do not open it.
It might contain nude photos of Hillary Clinton.

OBAMA: LUCIFER IS MY HOMEBOY

by Ann Coulter
September 17, 2008



It's another election season, so that means it's time for Democrats to start uttering wild malapropisms about the Bible to pretend they believe in God!

In 2000, we had Al Gore inverting a Christian parable into something nearly satanic. Defending his nutty ideas about the Earth during one of the debates, Gore said: "In my faith tradition, it's written in the book of Matthew, where your heart is, there is your treasure also." And that, he said, is why we should treasure the environment.


First of all, people who say "faith tradition" instead of "religion" are always phony-baloney, "Christmas and Easter"-type believers.


Second, Jesus was making almost the exact opposite point, saying: "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on Earth," where there are moths, rust and thieves, but in heaven, because, Jesus said, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."


I guess that's the kind of mix-up that can happen when your theological adviser is Naomi Wolf.


Then in 2004, Democratic presidential candidate and future Trivial Pursuit answer Howard Dean told an interviewer that his favorite part of the New Testament was the Book of Job. The reporter should have asked him if that was his favorite book in all three testaments.


And now in 2008, we have Democrats attacking Sarah Palin for being a Christian, while comparing Obama to Jesus Christ. (And not in the sarcastic way the rest of us do.)


Liberals have indignantly claimed that Palin thinks the founding fathers wrote the Pledge of Allegiance, which is Olbermannic in the sense that (a) if it were true, it's trivial, and (b) it's not true.


Their claim is based on a questionnaire Palin filled out when she was running for governor of Alaska in 2006, which asked the candidates if they were "offended by the phrase 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance." Palin answered: "Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me, and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."


As anyone can see, Palin was not suggesting that the founding fathers "wrote" the Pledge of Allegiance: She said the founding fathers believed this was a country "under God." Which, um, it is.


For the benefit of MSNBC viewers who aren't watching it as a joke, the whole point of the Declaration of Independence was to lay out the founders' breathtaking new argument that rights came not from the king, but from God or, as the Declaration said, "Nature's God," the "Creator."


That summer, in 1776, Gen. George Washington -- a charter member of the founding fathers -- rallied his troops, saying: "The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves. ... The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of the army."


So Washington not only used the phrase "under God," but gave us one of the earliest known references to the rights of the "unborn." That's right! George Washington was a "pro-life extremist," just like Sarah Palin.


There is no disputing that a nation "under God" was "good enough" for the founding fathers, exactly as Palin said.


Meanwhile, on the House floor last week, Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee compared Palin to Pontius Pilate -- and Obama to Jesus. Cohen said: "Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor." Yes, who can forget the Biblical account of how Jesus got the homeless Samaritan to register as a Democrat in exchange for a carton of smokes!


Rep. Cohen would be well-advised to stay away from New Testament references.


As anyone familiar with the New Testament can confirm for him, there are no parables about Jesus passing out cigarettes for votes, lobbying the Romans for less restrictive workfare rules or filing for grants under the Community Redevelopment Act. No time for soul-saving now! First, we lobby Fannie Mae to ease off those lending standards and demand a windfall profits tax on the money-changers in the temple.


David Freddoso's magnificent new book, The Case Against Barack Obama describes the forefather to "community organizers" like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- the famed Saul Alinsky.


Alinsky is sort of the George Washington of "community organizers." If there were an America-hater's Mount Rushmore, Saul Alinsky would be on it. He tried to hire Hillary to work for him right out of Wellesley. A generation later, those who had trained with Alinsky did hire Obama as a community organizer.


In Freddoso's book, he quotes from the dedication in the first edition of Alinsky's seminal book, "Rules for Radicals," where Alinsky wrote:


"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: From all our legends, mythology and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer."


I suppose it could have been worse. He could have dedicated his book to George Soros.


Even liberals eventually figured out that they shouldn't be praising Satan in public, so the Lucifer-as-inspiration paragraph was cut from later editions of Alinsky's book. (But on the bright side, MSNBC* adopted as its motto: "Who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which.")


That's exactly what happens to most Democratic ideas -- as soon as they are said out loud, normal people react with revulsion, so Democrats learn to pretend they never said them: I was NOT comparing Palin to a pig! I did not play the race card! I did not say I would meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions!


Sarah Palin might be just the lucky break the Democrats need. As a staunch pro-lifer, Palin could give Democrats an excuse to steer away from topics they know nothing about, like the Bible, and onto a subject they know chapter and verse, like abortion.

COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER


*MSNBC - Militant Socialist Network

*******************************************************

Vídeo balado do site do Heitor De Paola

Hockey Moms

NEVER FORGET AND NEVER GIVE UP!

GOD BLESS USA



9/11 TERRORIST ATTACK

By the way...

B. HUSSEIN and his MUSLIM FAITH!

I heard the entire interview. The video is not "out of context."
The "educated", "eloquent", "articulate B. Hussein", when not reading from a script, puts his foot in his mouth every time.

"Why is FOX NEWS the only one to show this clip and CNN & MSNBC not showing this?"

You really have to ask why Militant Socialist Network and CNN aren't showing it???


You can't hold the Bible in one hand and the Karan in the other and declare yourself a Christian.

B. Hussein is a LIAR!

Rede Globo: agonia e êxtase!

por Heitor De Paola em 04 de setembro de 2008

Resumo: Os jornalistas brasileiros que só lêem os press releases do Washington Post e do New York Times levaram um susto com a escolha da candidata a vice-presidente do republicano McCain, e transformam suas análises sobre o episódio num festival de hiprocrisia e reacionarismo moralista.

© 2008 MidiaSemMascara.org


A mídia oficialista brasileira levou um susto quando soube quem McCain havia escolhido como Vice. Depois de ignorarem solenemente a existência da Governadora do Alaska, embora qualquer pessoa que acessasse os jornais eletrônicos americanos já soubesse de sua inclusão nos planos há mais de um mês – e de seu favoritismo há duas semanas – se apavoraram com a notícia. Nossos grandes jornalistas que ganham para fazer não sei bem o quê, e só lêem os press releases do Washington Post e do New York Times, na véspera da escolha ainda colocavam três nomes como favoritos – todos homens, à frente Mitt Romney, há muito descartado.


O grande susto foi porque Sarah Palin é mulher, muito bonita, casada com o descendente de uma minoria – esquimós – mãe de muitos filhos, inclusive um com Síndrome de Down que recusou abortar porque é radicalmente anti-abortista, é a favor da abstenção pré-casamento, contra o ‘casamento’ (sic) gay, a favor da exploração do petróleo no seu estado, mas que já provou não ser capacho das petrolíferas impondo-lhes pesadas perdas. À primeira vista, imbatível! Agonia na Globo: e agora? Nosso queridinho Osama – perdão, Obama – pode ser derrotado!


O dia do comunicado também foi preciso: a data em que se comemora a assinatura da XV Emenda à Constituição Americana com a qual as mulheres conquistaram definitivamente o direito de sufrágio. Após um longo debate a Emenda foi aprovada pelo Congresso e, como é necessário, passou pelo processo de ratificação de, no mínimo, 36 estados, o último dos quais foi o Tennessee em 18 de agosto de 1920. No dia 26 foram certificadas as ratificações e a lei posta em vigor a 29.


The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

O timing foi tão perfeto que ofuscou até mesmo a data escolhida por Obama, a do discurso de Martin Luther King Jr. na véspera.


A Globo, como todo mundo sabe, tem uma influência decisiva na opinião pública americana – línguas maldosas dizem até que pululam secretamente cursos de Português para entender a GloboMews (atenção revisora: não é erro, é estábulo mesmo, devido ao conteúdo que expele!). O que fazer para reverter votos ex-Hillary e de conservadores irritados com Bush, e com as posições mais liberais de McCain?


Eis que se descobre um grande pecado e a agonia se transmuta em êxtase: a filha da Sarah, solteira, com 17 aninhos, está grávida! Oh, o horror! Finalmente os pés de barro que faltavam! A Globo, extremamente conservadora, como defensora incansável da moral tradicional e dos bons costumes – o que se espelha em suas saudáveis novelas de casamentos estáveis, famílias felizes, o bem sempre vencendo o mal – não poderia menos do que denunciar este escândalo indesculpável, esta afronta inominável!


Uma teen-ager grávida e solteira e nem favelada é! ECA nela! Finalmente as crianças e adolescentes até os 18 anos devem ter a ‘proteção’ do Estado. Ah, mas lá eles não têm ECA para cassar o pátrio poder dos Palin e mandar a transviada para o Conselho Tutelar de Juneau. Que pena! Já que não se pode tomar nenhuma medida legal recorra-se à suprema hipocrisia: paladinos das teorias liberais de criação de filhos transmutam-se imediatamente em sisudos reacionários e com aquele ar de indignação e cenho franzido como só os esquerdopatas conseguem à perfeição, decretam: incoerência assola a família Palin, enquanto a mãe defende a abstenção sexual pré-nupcial a filha ‘dá pra todo o mundo’, é uma devassa (comuna quando finge indignação não deixa por menos!). A esta altura, se bem conheço as redes comunistas mundiais, as ofensas já se espalharam por todo o planeta, tanto quanto foram sonegadas as informações sobre as ligações comunistas e antiamericanas do queridinho Os(b)ama, bem como sua falsidade ideológica – certidão de nascimento falsa e tudo quanto a ele se opõe.


Com que então, solenes cavalheiros, os filhos têm que seguir as idéias morais dos pais senão, pau neles? Ora, a alegação de incoerência não passa de um sofisma de péssima qualidade baseado nas idiotices coletivistas que recusam o direito à liberdade individual. Mas não vai dar certo, os conservadores americanos não são idiotas - e, queira a Globo ou não, são eles que votam: o truque do falso moralismo de ocasião não deu certo com o atual Vice, Dick Cheney, cuja filha é declaradamente lésbica, chefiou sua campanha ao lado de sua ‘companheira’ e Bush-Cheney foram eleitos duas vezes!


**********************************************************

Comentário meu:
A tal "Rede Globo" é o próprio PRAVDA bem como quase toda a mídia tupiniquim e esquerdopata que mente, desinforma, enfim, não passam de um bando de criminosos que poderiam muito bem ter seus delitos tipificados no código penal para que fossem devidamente processados.

Convenção Republicana USA - Live

The Best Man Turned Out To Be A Woman

by Ann Coulter* (09/03/2008)


John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his running mate finally gave Republicans a reason to vote for him -- a reason, that is, other than B. Hussein Obama.

The media are hopping mad about McCain's vice presidential selection, but they're really furious over at MSNBC. After drawing "Keith (plus) Obama" hearts on their denim notebooks, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews stayed up all night last Thursday, writing jokes about Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the presumed vice presidential pick. Now they can't use any of them.

So the media are taking it out on our brave Sarah and her 17-year-old daughter.

They claimed Palin was chosen only because she's a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she's pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She's fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she's a "Republican."

As a right-winger, Palin will appeal to the narrow 59 percent of Americans who voted for another former small-market sportscaster: Ronald Reagan. Our motto: Sarah Palin is only a heartbeat away!

If you're going to say Palin was chosen because she's a woman, you're going to have to demonstrate that the runners-up were more qualified. Gov. Tim Pawlenty seems like a terrific fellow and fine governor, but he is not obviously more qualified than Palin.

As for former governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge and Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, the other also-rans, I can think of at least 40 million unborn reasons she's better than either of them.

Within the first few hours after Palin's name was announced, McCain raised $4 million in campaign donations online, reaching $10 million within the next two days. Which shortlist vice presidential pick could have beaten that?

The media hysterically denounced Palin as "inexperienced." But then people started to notice that she has more executive experience than B. Hussein Obama -- the guy at the top of the Democrats' ticket.

They tried to create a "Troopergate" for Palin, indignantly demanding to know why she wanted to get her ex-brother-in-law removed as a state trooper. Again, public corruption is not a good issue for someone like Obama, Chicago pol and noted friend of Syrian National/convicted felon Antoin Rezko.

For the cherry on top, then we found out Palin's ex-brother-in-law had Tasered his own 10-year-old stepson. Defend that, Democrats.

The bien-pensant criticized Palin, saying it's irresponsible for a woman with five children to run for vice president. Liberals' new talking point: Sarah Palin: Only five abortions away from the presidency.

They claimed her newborn wasn't her child, but the child of her 17-year-old daughter. That turned out to be a lie.

Then they attacked her daughter, who actually is pregnant now, for being unmarried. When liberals start acting like they're opposed to pre-marital sex and mothers having careers, you know McCain's vice presidential choice has knocked them back on their heels.

But at least liberal reporters had finally found someone their own size to pick on: a 17-year-old girl.

Speaking of Democrats with newborn children, the media weren't particularly concerned about John Edwards running for president despite his having a mistress with a newborn child.

While the difficult circumstances of Palin's pregnant daughter are being covered like a terrorist attack on the nation, with leering accounts of the 18-year-old father, the media remain resolutely uninterested in the parentage of Edwards' mistress's love child. Except, that is, the hardworking reporters at the National Enquirer, who say Edwards is the father.

As this goes to press, the latest media-invented scandal about Palin is that McCain didn't know her well before choosing her as his running mate. He knew her well enough, though admittedly, not as well as Obama knows William Ayers.

John F. Kennedy, who was -- from what the media tell me -- America's most beloved president, detested his vice president, Lyndon Johnson.

Until Clinton interviewed Al Gore one time before choosing him as his vice presidential candidate, he had met Gore only one other time: when Gore was running for president in 1988 and flew to Little Rock seeking Clinton's endorsement. Clinton turned him down.

To this day, there's no proof that Bill Clinton ever met one-on-one with his CIA director, James Woolsey, other than a brief chat after midnight the night before Woolsey's nomination was announced.

Barring some all-new, trivial and probably false story about Palin -- her former hairdresser got a parking ticket in 1978! -- the media apparently intend to keep being hysterical about McCain's alleged failure to "vet" Palin properly. The problem with this argument is that it presupposes that everyone is asking: "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?"

No one's saying that.

Attacks on McCain's "vetting" process require the media to keep claiming that Palin has a lot of problems. But she doesn't have any problems. Remember? Those were all blind alleys.

Unfortunately, for the ordinary TV viewer hearing nonstop hysteria about nonspecific "problems," it takes a lot of effort to figure out that every attack liberals have launched against Palin turned out to be a lie.

It's as if a basketball player made the winning shot in the last three seconds of the game and liberals demand that we have a week-long discussion about whether the player should have taken that shot. WHAT IF HE MISSED?

With Palin, McCain didn't miss.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," "Slander," "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," "Godless," and most recently, "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans."

VOCÊ É BRANCO? CUIDADO!

por Ives Gandra da Silva Martins*


Hoje, tenho eu a impressão de que o 'cidadão comum e branco' é agressivamente discriminado pelas autoridades e pela legislação infraconstitucional, a favor de outros cidadãos, desde que sejam índios, afrodescendentes, homossexuais ou se autodeclarem pertencentes a esses grupos submetidas a possíveis preconceitos. Assim é que, se um branco, um índio ou um afrodescendente tiverem a mesma nota em um vestibular, pouco acima da linha de corte para ingresso nas Universidades, e as vagas forem limitadas, o branco será excluído, de imediato, a favor de um deles. Em igualdade de condições, o branco é um cidadão inferior e deve ser discriminado, apesar da Lei Maior.



Os índios , que pela Constituição (art. 231) só deveriam ter direito às terras que ocupassem em 5 de outubro de 1988, por lei infraconstitucional passaram a ter direito a terras que ocuparam no passado. Menos de meio milhão de índios brasileiros - não contando os argentinos, bolivianos, paraguaios, uruguaios que pretendem ser beneficiados também - passaram a ser donos de 15% do território nacional, enquanto os outros 183 milhões de habitantes dispõem apenas de 85% dele. Nesta exegese equivocada da Lei Suprema, todos os brasileiros não índios foram discriminados. Aos 'quilombolas', que deveriam ser apenas os descendentes dos participantes de quilombos, e não os afrodescendentes, em geral, que vivem em torno daquelas antigas comunidades, tem sido destinada, também, parcela de território consideravelmente maior do que a Constituição permite (art. 68 ADCT), em clara discriminação ao cidadão que não se enquadra nesse conceito.



Os homossexuais obtiveram, do Presidente Lula e da Ministra Dilma Roussef, o direito de ter um congresso financiado por dinheiro público, para realçar as suas tendências, algo que um cidadão comum jamais conseguiria.
Os invasores de terras , que violentam, diariamente, a Constituição, vão passar a ter aposentadoria, num reconhecimento explícito de que o governo considera, mais que legítima, meritória a conduta consistente em agredir o direito. Trata-se de clara discriminação em relação ao cidadão comum, desempregado, que não tem este 'privilégio', porque cumpre a lei.



Desertores e assassinos , que, no passado, participaram da guerrilha, garantem a seus descendentes polpudas indenizações, pagas pelos contribuintes brasileiros. Está, hoje, em torno de 4 bilhões de reais o que é retirado dos pagadores de tributos para 'ressarcir' aqueles que resolveram pegar em armas contra o governo militar ou se disseram perseguidos. São tantas as discriminações, que é de se perguntar: de que vale o inciso IV do art. 3º da Lei Suprema?
Como modesto advogado, cidadão comum e branco, sinto-me discriminado e cada vez com menos espaço, nesta terra de castas e privilégios.



*IVES GANDRA DA SILVA MARTINS - Professor Emérito das Universidades Mackenzie e UNIFMU, da Escola de Comando e Estado-Maior do Exército, e Presidente do Conselho de Estudos Jurídicos da Federação do Comércio do Estado de São Paulo.



CONSTITUIÇÃO FEDERAL
Art. 3º - Constituem objetivos fundamentais da República Federativa do Brasil:
IV - promover o bem de todos, sem preconceitos de origem, raça, sexo, cor, idade e quaisquer outras formas de discriminação.



Até quando os cidadãos de bem, aqueles que trabalham e garantem o desenvolvimento da Nação, vão ficar calados, assistindo ao movimento não tão silencioso da espoliação do país pelas forças 'socialistas', coordenada por sindicalistas vagabundos e oportunistas, ONGs de mentirinha, desocupados de plantão e o restante da família política de petistas & associados? Enquanto eu ajudava no crescimento do Brasil, colaborando na expansão da Siderurgia, Cimento e Celulose, de sistemas de Geração, Transmissão e Distribuição de Energia, agora com 43 anos de engenharia, os vagabundos bebiam cerveja, faziam pregações de uma doutrina política que se autoextinguiu (de porre, evidentemente) e nas horas em que não estavam de resssaca, roubavam bancos para garantir fundos mais fáceis em substituição àqueles obtidos pelo trabalho honesto, ou o cofre do Ademar de Barros (Dilma Roussef garante que coordenou a operação do roubo, mas que não participou da abertura do mesmo para o saque de alguns milhões em moeda estrangeira; é por isso que acredito em duende, saci-pererê, papai noel e coelhinho da páscoa etc).
Ziraldo e Jaguar, perseguidos políticos e merecedores de indenizações da ordem de 15 milhões de reais, cada um, mais pensão vitalícia de 4.500 reais mensais? Deve ser piada, já que eles são humoristas.



Viva o Brasil? O país mereceu minha ajuda? A volta do Estado de direito retorna pelo voto? Deve ser brincadeira acreditar nisso.

Olavo de Carvalho direto do abismo!

DIRETO DO ABISMO ENTREVISTA OLAVO DE CARVALHO DIRETO DO ABISMO ENTREVISTA OLAVO DE CARVALHO

Clique aqui para participar!

Beijing 2008 - come visit