Al-Qaeda Calls for "Immediate Halt" in Syria To Stop Infighting - Yes, John McCain, Your Rebels Include an Al-Qaeda Faction

The Obama administration and John McCain have insisted that the sarin gas attacks on Syrian civilians came from Bashar Assad's Syrian government, and regime-change is needed. A new MIT report says, in essence, American Intelligence is wrong and needs to fix itself. While thinking about the attacks, we also need to think about Benghazi and a possible gunrunning operation from that city to Syrian rebels. Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri is calling for rebels to pull together rather than fighting each other, so if you (hello John McCain!) have doubts that al-Qaeda is fighting among the rebels, get over it. That's the summary for what you'll read below.

Ayman Al-Zawahri

I loathe crediting the United Nations for anything, but in this case, it bears merit. A report released this week issued by a "team of security and arms experts," concludes that the Syrian government had no viable method of delivering the sarin from any distance within Syria exceeding two miles, leaving what has been suspected for some time - Syrian rebels (including al-Qaeda) had to gas their own people in Ghouta, in an effort to get U.S. support in overthrowing Assad.

[Theodore Postol, Prof. of Science, Technology and National Security Policy at MIT] ...a basic analysis of the weapon – some also have described as a looking like a push pop, a fat cylinder filled with sarin atop a thin stick that holds the engine – would have shown that it wasn’t capable of flying the 6 miles from the center of the Syrian government-controlled part of Damascus to the point of impact in the suburbs, or even the 3.6 miles from the edges of government-controlled ground.

He questioned whether U.S. intelligence officials had actually analyzed the improbability of a rocket with such a non-aerodynamic design traveling so far before Secretary of State John Kerry declared on Sept. 3 that “we are certain that none of the opposition has the weapons or capacity to effect a strike of this scale – particularly from the heart of regime territory.”...

[Richard Lloyd, former UN weapons inspector]...Lloyd, who has spent the past half-year studying the weapons and capabilities in the Syrian conflict, disputed the assumption that the rebels are less capable of making rockets than the Syrian military.

“The Syrian rebels most definitely have the ability to make these weapons,” he said. “I think they might have more ability than the Syrian government.” Source: Syria The Truth

On Fox yesterday at 10:26 a.m. CDT, Leland Vittert reported that Syrian rebels are fighting among themselves as much as they are fighting back against the regime. More inn support of that information:

Meanwhile, as infighting among rebels has grown so deadly — nearly 1,400 killed in the past 20 days — Ayman al-Zawahri, the Al-Qaeda head, called for an immediate halt to the internal clashes.

In an audio message posted online Thursday, he said Islamic groups in Syria should set up an Islamic court that would mediate and resolve the factions’ differences.

Islamic fighters should also focus on “bringing down Assad’s secular, sectarian, unjust and criminal regime to set up a just Islamic state.”

The intervention by the Al-Qaeda leader plays directly into Mr. Assad’s argument only his government is preventing Syria’s further descent into chaos. Source: National Post

To think that al-Qaeda would hesitate to gas civilians is extraordinarily naive.

Seymour Hersh quoted in Global Research:

“Theodore Postol, a professor of technology and national security at MIT, reviewed the UN photos with a group of his colleagues and concluded that the large calibre rocket was an improvised munition that was very likely manufactured locally.  He told me that it was ‘something you could produce in a modestly-capable machine shop.’  The rocket in the photos, he added, fails to match the specifications of a similar but smaller rocket known to be in the Syrian arsenal.”

The MIT report dated January 14, 2014 is titled Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013 and can be found here.

● The Syrian Improvised Chemical Munitions that were used in the August 21, 2013 Nerve Agent attack in Damascus have a range of about 2 kilometers

● The UN Independent Assessment of the Range of the chemical munition is in exact agreement with our findings

● This indicates that these munitions could not possibly have been fired at East Ghouta from the "heart", or from the Eastern Edge, of the Syrian Government controlled area shown in the intelligence map published by the White House on August 30, 2013.

● This mistaken intelligence could have led to an unjustified US military action based on false intelligence

● A proper vetting of the fact that the munition was of such short range would have led to a completely different assessment of the situation from the gathered data

● Whatever the reasons for the egregious errors in the intelligence, the source of these errors needs to be explained

● If the source of these errors is not identified, the procedures that led to this intelligence failure will go uncorrected, and the chances of a future policy disaster will grow with certainty.

● Conspiracies are many, but some are worth considering and must be considered because what Obama and Hillary Clinton are telling us about Benghazi makes no sense, and the support of Syrian rebels makes no sense now that we know that al-Qaeda factions are in the rebel mix. (Source: "Main Policy" issues of the above linked report)

If you prefer to get technical, I encourage you to view the MIT report linked above and take note of the maps of the areas affected and their distance from the grounds held by the Syrian government.

In my opinion, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were likely conspirators in a gunrunning operation from Benghazi to Syria straight into the arms of waiting rebels. Perhaps this explains why Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Benghazi and died on September 11, 2012, along with 3 other Americans AND why General Carter Ham did not know about the CIA annex in Benghazi, and why the Pentagon didn't know the Benghazi Special Mission Compound -- the residence where Stevens and others lived and worked when Stevens was in Benghazi -- existed. Unbe-freaking-lievable, as blogger Proof Positive said in comments on my story about General Ham and the Pentagon a few days ago.

Obama is backing the al-Qaeda side of Syria, just as he is backing the Muslim Brotherhood. Every al-Qaeda leader was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Wake up America!

Washington Times, September 12, 2013:

12 years later, we are back to arming radical Muslims, having forgotten, with stunning speed, the lessons of the previous 30 years.

12 years later we have come full circle.

We all understand that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It served as the basis of our Cold War foreign policy stance towards revolutions and civil wars around the globe.

But when the enemy of my enemy, is also my enemy, it would seem as though choices for options range between “absolutely not” and “this is a terrible idea.”

Posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook

Jim Inhofe Joins Defund ObamaCare Effort - A Look at Both Sides

I received an email yesterday from Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK). He has joined with Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and other Republican Senators to defund ObamaCare. Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) wants "a way to do it that kills it..., " but defunding isn't the way to do it. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) agrees with Coburn and called the Tea Party a "loose political movement." The lines are drawn in fresh concrete. Rush Limbaugh interviewed Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today and Coburn's position is argued against in that interview below.

  

Jim Inhofe

Pullout Quote:

RUSH:  ...Okay... I guess the take-away is the people who were saying that the spending is mandatory and cannot be removed, that's not correct?

LEE:  It's not true.  As much as they might wish that were the case, it is not.

Senator Inhofe's commitment:

The Republican Senators who have joined me in signing the pledge are so committed that we will let Democrats shut down the government before we will approve Obamacare to be funded. 

People like Senator Cruz and I are serious about making sure that Obamacare is stopped before it is fully enforced. This legislation would only hurt our health care system and our economy, and we will not stand for it. 

We have signed the pledge and made the promise to defund Obamacare. Now it’s your turn. Will you join myself, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and other Republican leaders and contribute to defund Obamacare today? 

Let’s win this battle to block its funding. Donate $10 today to help guarantee it. 

I made my donation - to Inhofe.

Let's discuss both sides of this very emotional and divisive issue among Republicans. I believe Tom Coburn does want ObamaCare repeal, but believes it cannot be defunded because most of the funding is mandatory, and it cannot be repealed - the votes are not there, Obama would veto a repeal, and shutting down the government is untenable. Mike Lee asserts there is no plan to  

Tom Coburn

COBURN: I don’t think it’s achievable. A good portion of the health-care law is mandatory spending and repealing that would require two-thirds of the House and 67 votes in the Senate. I don’t see that happening. 

I don’t see how you passing a CR [continuing resolution to fund the government] that does this. And let’s say you do, and the President vetoes the CR. Then what happens? How fast do members of Congress who voted for that strategy fold when the government shuts down? I’ve been here when we’ve done that, and it’s not a strategy that works. This is misleading the conservative base because it’s not achievable, and all it will do in the long run is dispirit the base. This is a failed strategy for conservatives. 

How many people are going to close down the government over ‘I want to get rid of Obamacare’? I’ve lead the charge against it, and I’m not going to do that. What I do want to do is able to be in a position where we can fix it later. With something like this, you’re setting the base up for an expectation of something that won’t happen.

So Senator Coburn's issue is we cannot shutdown the government.

COBURN: ...What we should be doing instead is putting other things on the table, like the individual mandate delay, repealing the medical device tax or putting prohibitions on discretionary spending for Obamacare. Then those all have to be evaluated. 

You can’t defend letting rich businesses off and not letting individuals off. Nobody wants the medical device tax. And most of the American public thinks you should have to have the right income to qualify for benefits, and have that verified. Source: Washington Post

The bottom line for Coburn is that shutting down the government is a fine idea, as long as the spines in the House and Senate stay strong, but he believes the collective spines will collapse, and further points to being a Republican in the midst of a government shut-down years ago. He believes it hurt the party. Below you'll see Rush Limbaugh saying only the media thought it hurt Republicans and he offers stats to prove it.

Coburn also said "they don't have a microphone." That's a miserable excuse, not to mention ridiculous. Every Congressman and Senator can find a microphone - Democrats always find a mic. I've noticed that few Republicans, especially in the Senate, will speak-out about anything that is not the concern of a committee he/she serves on. Maybe it's a Rule - only the Chairmen speak, but if it is, it needs to stop. We need everyone at the mic, we need their opinions on their websites and in editorials. We need their opinions publicly stated - loud and proud and often.

 

Mike Lee

 Moving now to Senator Mike Lee who is engineering the defund effort along with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). Lee interviewed with Rush Limbaugh today. The following are selected portions of the interview you can read in its entirety here (all emphasis is mine and I moved one paragraph to fit with the same topic elsewhere in the discussion):

RUSH: ...What is being said by the establishment, by Washington...is this.  Look, 98, 99% of Obamacare is autopilot spending. It can't be cut. It is just like any entitlement -- Social Security, Medicare -- we can't stop it.  But wouldn't that be the truth in a normal budgetary process, but we're talking about continuing resolutions here, and doesn't that make that entirely different? 

LEE:  Well, those who are saying we can't touch this because it's mandatory spending are simply wrong.  They're simply mistaken, or perhaps they've been misinformed.  The point is that Congress can decide to pass any kind of spending bill it wants.  The fact that you've got mandatory spending that's already been authorized for Obamacare's implementation doesn't mean that can't be cut.  We can run this with an amendment -- in fact, an amendment has already been drafted up to make it so that we fund everything else in government but we claw back, we restrict funding for Obamacare, both mandatory and discretionary... 

RUSH:  What about the argument that there's no way you're ever going to get 51 votes for this? 

LEE:  Okay.  So the argument that we're never going to win so we shouldn't even try overlooks the fact that if every Republican who claims to be against Obamacare simply said, "I'm not going to vote to fund Obamacare," we would win.  There would be no way that you could fund Obamacare unless you got some Republicans in the House and some Republicans in the Senate to vote for it.  And so that's why we're encouraging people to get behind this effort, to communicate with their congressman and their senators and to say, "Please don't do this." 

And people can find out who is where on this position at a website we set up for this purpose.  It's dontfundobamacare.com.  They can go to dontfundobamacare.com, where they can be directed to the identities of those senators and those representatives who are with us and those who have not yet joined our cause.

 

Rush Limbaugh 

What if people actually like ObamaCare once implemented?

RUSH: ...The subsidies equal Santa Claus and the Republicans don't want to take a stand against it now since it's already the law of the land and they've got enough trouble being perceived as anti- this and anti-poor and anti- you name it, so they don't want to be on record as opposing subsidies or help for people who need it because it isn't gonna help 'em, and they're worried that somewhere down the line public opinion on this is gonna shift and people are gonna end up liking it. 

LEE:  ...once they're in place, they're almost impossible to get rid of.  You got death, you got taxes, and you've got entitlements.  So it's better to stop this thing before it kicks in, before it starts, you know, buying some loyalty among those who will never let it go away, than it would be to let it kick in and just hope and expect we can repeal it later.  That becomes much more difficult.

Remember the illegalities:

LEE: ...this was a law supposedly passed by, you know, a democratically elected Congress [not a single Republican in either Chamber voted for the Affordable Care Act]. Well, in a sense that's true, but we have to remember...that it's been amended now four times.  It's been amended four times by people who didn't have the authority.  It's been amended twice by the Supreme Court, as I explained in my book, Why John Roberts was Wrong About Healthcare, amended the statute two times in order to make it constitutional, even though they found it wasn't. Two more times by the president who didn't have the power to change it, but still did.

Why aren't Republicans more forceful in standing up for this conservative issue:

RUSH:  ...A lot of people -- Senator, you might be among them -- think that the country, I don't want to put words in your mouth, that we're hanging by a thread here.  That this country's in the midst  of a purposeful transformation that makes government not just the center of everybody's life, but essential, and people do not want that to happen. They've always thought the Republican Party stood against that, so why not just stand up, even if you're afraid people might end up liking it, the fact that it's not good for the country to make even more people totally dependent on government for another aspect of their lives.  It simply is not good for the country or for them.  Why can't that be said and have it said aggressively and compassionately and use that to attract voters and grow the party? 

LEE:  The biggest single reason why that's not being said at this point is because we don't yet have enough members of Congress, in the House and in the Senate, who have seen the electoral benefits, the political benefits that will come from making the right policy choice. 

We see that good politics necessarily flow from good policy.  The right policy here is to stop this horrible law before it steps in and makes life worse for nearly all Americans, for the vast majority of Americans.  If we undertake the right policy, which is to stop Obamacare by any means possible, then we will benefit as a party, because that's what the American people elected us to do. 

By the same token, if we don't do that, we're in huge trouble as a party because we were put into power in the House of Representatives after the 2010 election because of Obamacare.  We were put into power to stop Obamacare. 

RUSH:  Exactly!  The 2010 midterms, and Obama is out campaigning today trying to sell Obamacare, which is already the law of the land.  Why is he doing that?  Because he doesn't want a repeat in 2014 of what happened in 2010.  They want to win the House.  And there's no push-back, Senator, other than you. Can you give me some other names that have joined you in this?

Who is supporting Lee? (Jim Inhofe's name is not mentioned, but he is a part of the movement)

LEE:  ...the Senate... Marco Rubio, ...Ted Cruz, ...Rand Paul, John Thune, Mike Enzi...Chuck Grassley... Mike Crapo...Mike Enzi...Jeff Chiesa... We've got a total of 13.  We've got about 70 in the House that have signed a similar pledge.  And we're building these numbers every day. We're building because as people become aware of this effort they will get there. I was just told by my staff that within the last day or so the House of Representatives has risen to the level of about a hundred. There are a hundred members of the House of Representatives that have now joined with us, and these numbers are building every single day because the American people are speaking out.

For conservative Oklahomans, it's important to know Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK-4th) is joined at the hip with Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and does not support defunding ObamaCare. What about a government shutdown?

RUSH:  ...Senator, another argument that is made is the dreaded government shutdown argument, that you can't get where you want to go in the continuing resolution fight without a government shutdown.  And then they say, "Look what happened in '95.  We got killed.  '95 ruined us." 

In reality we only got killed in the media.  We picked up two Senate seats after the '95 shutdown. And the House, I don't think there was great damage. Plus, that budget fight arguably could be said to have set the table for great policy that followed, such as welfare reform that Clinton signed, because it involved people taking a stand.  But it's looked at as a debacle because of the impact it supposedly had on Newt, but it really wasn't.  You're fighting a tremendous obstacle there with this fear if there's a government shutdown, that the Republicans are finished.  So what do you say to people who have that obstacle in front of them? 

LEE:  ...I want to be very clear that what I'm calling for is not a shutdown.  I don't want a shutdown. I don't think we need a shutdown. We ought to be able to fund the government responsibly without a shutdown...we ought to fund government, just not Obamacare.  We shouldn't have to vote for all of it, including Obamacare, or have none of it.  

That's crazy. Secondly, if we signal in advance that no matter what we're going to fund Obamacare, that's the best way to make that happen. And so that's not the signal we should be sending. 

Finally, if we get enough people...in the house and...Senate who have expressed concerns about Obamacare and are willing to say "I'm going to vote to fund government, but not Obamacare" you then put Harry Reid in the position, the untenable position of having to say because we didn't get everything we wanted, even though you funded every other program in government, even the programs Republicans hate, we're gonna shut down the government in the Democratic Party because you didn't include funding for Obamacare.  That's a terrible position for him to be in. I don't think he wants to fight that fight, and, frankly, I don't think he can win that fight.

Are Democrats worried?

RUSH:  ...is there some legitimate worry on the Democrat side that you could pull this off? 

LEE:  Deep down yes, I think there is, and that's one of the reasons why they're more than happy to have fellow Republicans be at the tip of the spear and the attack against this effort. 

...I am fully aware of the fact that the Washington establishment is not happy with me about this effort....Meanwhile, the Democrats are thrilled that we've got Republicans doing their bidding on this, fighting against this effort, and you've got Republicans essentially saying "Yeah, no matter what, we're gonna fund Obamacare."  That's a problem. 

RUSH:  Well, that's it. 

Okay... I guess the take-away is the people who were saying that the spending is mandatory and cannot be removed, that's not correct?

LEE:  It's not true.  As much as they might wish that were the case, it is not.

END TRANSCRIPT 

Siding with Coburn:

1. Seven-term Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah said he feared Republicans would look "feckless" in pushing a doomed legislative strategy that some Democrats simply describe as "hostage-taking." 

2. [Lindsey] Graham, another senior Republican voice, said the strategy by the Tea Party - a loose political movement that seeks lower taxes and a smaller federal government - was "a bridge too far." 

3. "Oh, I think it's a silly effort," Republican Senator Bob Corker told MSNBC on Tuesday. "What people are really saying who are behind that effort is we don't have the courage to roll up our sleeves and deal with real deficit and spending decisions." [no joke - it hasn't happened in 4-1/2 years] 

4. Senator John McCain, calling the Obamacare defunding effort a "non-starter," said on Tuesday that the senators behind it were not around for past government shutdown battles. Source: Reuters

As a member of that "loose political movement," the Tea Party, there is no compromise with the other side in either party. There is no way to consider the Rubio, McCain, Graham and Flake immigration bill as a sovereign fix. Had Rubio stuck to his promise to secure the border first, we would have been on our way to a fix, but instead they gave away our sovereignty. We were not asked to compromise. We were told how it it would be. 

 Health Care: We could have put in place the ability to purchase health care across state lines and it we would have had a good first fix, but the plan is single-payer and ObamaCare is the way to get it. As I said above, not one single Republican voted for ObamaCare. There is no one to trust - a huge difference from the Gingrich shutdown.  

These are not the 'good old days' when everyone just got along, went for cocktails, returned to the Hill and worked together to write legislation everyone could live by.  We’re dealing with full out Marxism. If we give in, we give in to everything the Constitution warns us about, that hasn't already been given in to. The compromise is too terrible. Doing the right thing is always doing the right thing. We sent some there to do it, now I hope they do.

Gang of 2 Caves: Lindsey Graham John McCain Give Up Fight to Block Hagel Nomination

Chuck Hagel's speech at Rutgers University in 2007 has been on the front burner the last few days because he is alleged to have said in that speech: the U.S. was an "adjunct of the Israeli Foreign Ministry." Just as Senators Graham and McCain say they will remove the 'hold' on Hagel's nomination as they take him at his word (silly boys) that he doesn't "recall" saying it, we get this news: Hagel's Rutgers' speech was scheduled, and Hagel was escorted to it, by Hooshang Amirahmadi, an Iranian politician who is currently on the ballot to run for President and to replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Amirahmadi is pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah and you can't get on an Iranian ballot unless you are "Shia, male, and committed to the Islamic revolution," and the Mullah's must approve your candidacy, according to Daily Caller. So after making a lot of noise about a 'block, the Gang of 2 have have lain down and rolled over.

While both men have said Hagel is "unsuited" for the position, the purpose of the "block" to deny an up or down vote, was intended to force the administration to hand-over answers to questions on Benghazi and the deaths of 4 Americans. Laughable, as two separate contempt of court charges against Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and a U.S. lawsuit and Contempt of Court charge by the House of Representatives (and I remember a contempt of court charge as well) against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder  can't move this administration. The administration is lawless and it's time this Congress understand the Rule of Law is dead.

The Hagel "adjunct" quote came from this blog post, dated March 3, 2007, written by George Ajjan who ran for Congress in 2004. The enthusiastic and political Hagel supporter highlighted the speech in 7 points. Hagel's speech transcript has been found, but the question and answer period was not transcribed. The search is on. Congress has requested two additional speeches by Hagel and the waiting stonewalling continues.

Never mind, these two Senators have abandoned their 'hold' just as evidence piles up, they've gotten no answers to the important questions they sought and answers the American people are due, a connection to an Iranian Islamist, whose goal is to demolish Israel surfaces, isn't enough to keep them hot and bothered. Graham and McCain always look for camera time, and this is how they stay relevant in the news. Photo credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP

A Plea to My Fellow Conservatives

I received this from my friend James M. Sharp.  A piece that speaks loudly to those who cry that they will vote 3rd party or not vote on November 6th, 2012.  Take heed of his words.

Dear fellow conservatives,

Well, it is the end of April; just over six months until election day. Arguably THE most important and potentially pivotal election in the history of our great nation. From all indications, it would appear that the stage is set and that the final combatants will be President Barack Hussein Obama and Governor Mitt Romney facing off against one another.

Many of you dislike Gov. Romney; I understand that and I understand the reasons why. Well, most of them, anyway. Gov. Romney was not my first choice of Republican candidates to face President Obama. He was not even my SECOND choice. But now that the other Republican candidates have fallen by the wayside, it is time to accept the fact that it is going to be Romney against Obama in the title bout.

I voted for John McCain in 2008. Was John McCain my choice for president? Not by a long shot. But I knew what Obama represented and I saw through his shiny veneer. So I did what I had to do. I voted for McCain. I know all about voting one's conscience; I did it in 1992 when I was young and foolish. But I was disillusioned with President George H.W. Bush and I could not, in good conscience, cast a vote for him. I fancied myself a Libertarian, so I voted for the Libertarian candidate, Andre Marrou. This was in the pre-internet days and, although I knew very little about Marrou, I felt that my beliefs very closely aligned with the views of the Libertarians. What did my vote for Marrou accomplish? Very little - except for one very important thing: It helped to elect Bill Clinton. I have vowed to never again throw away my vote.

I need not tell you that we Americans are at a crossroads - perhaps, more accurately, a fork in the road. We have it in our power to decide which fork to take. We can either continue down the road toward European-type socialism under Barack Hussein Obama or we can take a right at the fork and attempt to roll back some of the "hope & change" that he has been wreaking upon our nation and its economy. Again, I acknowledge the fact that Mitt Romney is not the "perfect" candidate. But as far as I am concerned, the best thing that Romney has going for him is the fact that he is NOT OBAMA! And that, my dear friends, is good enough for me.

For over three years now, we have watched Obama and his band of thugs and thieves as they have tried to tear down the American Dream. They have managed to take grotesque deficit spending and kick it into hyperdrive in the name of rescuing us from "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression". All we have heard is how much worse it COULD have been had we not spent all of that money - which we did not have in the first place.

We have watched one unbelievable event after another take place under this president's watch: First, it was the $868 billion stimulus bill which accomplished basically nothing. The unemployment rate still went to over ten percent and has yet to dip below eight percent. This coming after the administration assured us that, by spending all of that money, the rate would not exceed eight percent. Then there was Obamacare which was passed using political chicanery against the will of the majority of the American people. Since its passage, we have heard experts state that the bill is going to do nothing to alleviate the problem of escalating health care costs and will, in all probability, increase costs for most people (i.e., those that actually work). We have seen record numbers of people living on the public dole under this president. Who can forget "Cash for Clunkers"? We have seen this administration trample upon the rights of states. First it was the Justice Department's lawsuit against the State of Arizona seeking to invalidate that state's immigration law. Then came the NLRB's kowtowing to labor unions in Washington State by attempting to shut down a Boeing plant in South Carolina. How about "Fast & Furious"?

The list goes on and on.

Perhaps the most important point to consider when going to the polls (or not) in November is the fact that, if he is elected to a second term, Obama will get at least one - likely two - additional Supreme Court picks. This, my friends, could be the worst consequence of "Obama - Act 2".

Again, I understand that many of you dislike Governor Romney. I GET it. But you need to think long and hard about your decision to either sit out the election or throw your vote away by writing in Ron Paul or someone else.

Our nation needs you. It needs your vote. Conservatism needs your vote. It may well be our last shot.

Many thanks & God bless America!

James M. Sharp

This election is too important to risk another 4 years for Obama.  In fact a vote for a third party IS a vote for Obama.

While I didn't endorse any candidate, as it looks, Mitt Romney WILL be the Republican nominee and I will endorse him for President then.  And I will donate to his campaign.  I hope you will do too.  You can donate here.  Every cent counts this time.  AND EVERY VOTE COUNTS!!!  Remember that on November 6, 2012.

Americans Never Quit. We Never Surrender.

It is easy to give a victory speech. The thrill of winning is with you. Your supporters are cheering that you won. And you can be as gracious as you want to be. It is very much different when you have to make a concession speech. Normally you say a few words to thank your supporters, you congratulate the candidate, then leave. But tonight I do believe that John McCain gave the best speech of his life. It wasn't the speech that he wanted to give tonight, but I do believe in the long run of history, his will go down as the most memorable speeches of this election.


Thank you. Thank you, my friends. Thank you for coming here on this beautiful Arizona evening.

My friends, we have -- we have come to the end of a long journey. The American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly.

A little while ago, I had the honor of calling Sen. Barack Obama to congratulate him.

To congratulate him on being elected the next president of the country that we both love.

In a contest as long and difficult as this campaign has been, his success alone commands my respect for his ability and perseverance. But that he managed to do so by inspiring the hopes of so many millions of Americans who had once wrongly believed that they had little at stake or little influence in the election of an American president is something I deeply admire and commend him for achieving.

This is an historic election, and I recognize the special significance it has for African-Americans and for the special pride that must be theirs tonight.

I've always believed that America offers opportunities to all who have the industry and will to seize it. Sen. Obama believes that, too.

But we both recognize that, though we have come a long way from the old injustices that once stained our nation's reputation and denied some Americans the full blessings of American citizenship, the memory of them still had the power to wound.

A century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt's invitation of Booker T. Washington to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage in many quarters.

America today is a world away from the cruel and frightful bigotry of that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African-American to the presidency of the United States.

Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth.

Sen. Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country. I applaud him for it, and offer him my sincere sympathy that his beloved grandmother did not live to see this day. Though our faith assures us she is at rest in the presence of her creator and so very proud of the good man she helped raise.

Sen. Obama and I have had and argued our differences, and he has prevailed. No doubt many of those differences remain.

These are difficult times for our country. And I pledge to him tonight to do all in my power to help him lead us through the many challenges we face.

I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.

Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans. And please believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.

It is natural. It's natural, tonight, to feel some disappointment. But tomorrow, we must move beyond it and work together to get our country moving again.

We fought -- we fought as hard as we could. And though we fell short, the failure is mine, not yours.

I am so deeply grateful to all of you for the great honor of your support and for all you have done for me. I wish the outcome had been different, my friends.

The road was a difficult one from the outset, but your support and friendship never wavered. I cannot adequately express how deeply indebted I am to you.

I'm especially grateful to my wife, Cindy, my children, my dear mother and all my family, and to the many old and dear friends who have stood by my side through the many ups and downs of this long campaign.

I have always been a fortunate man, and never more so for the love and encouragement you have given me.

You know, campaigns are often harder on a candidate's family than on the candidate, and that's been true in this campaign.

All I can offer in compensation is my love and gratitude and the promise of more peaceful years ahead.

I am also -- I am also, of course, very thankful to Gov. Sarah Palin, one of the best campaigners I've ever seen, and an impressive new voice in our party for reform and the principles that have always been our greatest strength, her husband Todd and their five beautiful children for their tireless dedication to our cause, and the courage and grace they showed in the rough and tumble of a presidential campaign.

We can all look forward with great interest to her future service to Alaska, the Republican Party and our country.

To all my campaign comrades, from Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter, to every last volunteer who fought so hard and valiantly, month after month, in what at times seemed to be the most challenged campaign in modern times, thank you so much. A lost election will never mean more to me than the privilege of your faith and friendship.

I don't know -- I don't know what more we could have done to try to win this election. I'll leave that to others to determine. Every candidate makes mistakes, and I'm sure I made my share of them. But I won't spend a moment of the future regretting what might have been.

This campaign was and will remain the great honor of my life, and my heart is filled with nothing but gratitude for the experience and to the American people for giving me a fair hearing before deciding that Sen. Obama and my old friend Sen. Joe Biden should have the honor of leading us for the next four years.

I would not -- I would not be an American worthy of the name should I regret a fate that has allowed me the extraordinary privilege of serving this country for a half a century.

Today, I was a candidate for the highest office in the country I love so much. And tonight, I remain her servant. That is blessing enough for anyone, and I thank the people of Arizona for it.

Tonight -- tonight, more than any night, I hold in my heart nothing but love for this country and for all its citizens, whether they supported me or Sen. Obama -- whether they supported me or Sen. Obama.

I wish Godspeed to the man who was my former opponent and will be my president. And I call on all Americans, as I have often in this campaign, to not despair of our present difficulties, but to believe, always, in the promise and greatness of America, because nothing is inevitable here.

Americans never quit. We never surrender.

We never hide from history. We make history.

Thank you, and God bless you, and God bless America. Thank you all very much.

Tonight the nation listen to this speech from one of the greatest living patriots this nation has. I am saddened that he did not prevail in this election, but given his words, proud of being a part of a nation that has spawned such a man.

Congratulations to Barack Hussein Obama on his victory. And here at Monkey in the Middle we will be keeping an eye on you and the Congress. We will hold your feet to the fire and keep you from trying to turn this nation into a carbon copy of Europe. You have to remember that we are not Europeans and do not wish to have many of their values on us.

What ever may come in the next 4 years, one thing is certain. The media will start to talk about the 2012 elections some time within the next week. And we won't hear the end of that until November 7th, 2012.

McCain vs. Obama A knockdown!

Last night's winner

I won't call last nights debate a knockout for John McCain since there are still 3 more debates left to go. But it was a first round knockdown for the Senator from Arizona.

Here are some highlights:

MCCAIN: But I want to emphasize one point to all Americans tonight. This isn't the beginning of the end of this crisis. This is the end of the beginning, if we come out with a package that will keep these institutions stable.

And we've got a lot of work to do. And we've got to create jobs. And one of the areas, of course, is to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.

Senator Obama suspended those requests for pork-barrel projects after he was running for president of the United States. He didn't happen to see that light during the first three years as a member of the United States Senate, $932 million in requests.

Maybe to Senator Obama it's not a lot of money. But the point is that -- you see, I hear this all the time. "It's only $18 billion." Do you know that it's tripled in the last five years? Do you know that it's gone completely out of control to the point where it corrupts people? It corrupts people.

That's why we have, as I said, people under federal indictment and charges. It's a system that's got to be cleaned up.

I have fought against it my career. I have fought against it. I was called the sheriff, by the -- one of the senior members of the Appropriations Committee. I didn't win Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate.

Now, Senator Obama didn't mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs.

Now, that's a fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama. I want to cut spending. I want to keep taxes low. The worst thing we could do in this economic climate is to raise people's taxes.

Right now, the United States of American business pays the second-highest business taxes in the world, 35 percent. Ireland pays 11 percent.

I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in -- in the United States of America and create jobs.

We had an energy bill before the United States Senate. It was festooned with Christmas tree ornaments. It had all kinds of breaks for the oil companies, I mean, billions of dollars worth. I voted against it; Senator Obama voted for it.

You've got to look at our record. You've got to look at our records. That's the important thing.

Who fought against wasteful and earmark spending? Who has been the person who has tried to keep spending under control?

Who's the person who has believed that the best thing for America is -- is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair? And I've fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it.

Let's give every American a choice: two tax brackets, generous dividends, and, two -- and let Americans choose whether they want the -- the existing tax code or they want a new tax code.

And so, again, look at the record, particularly the energy bill. But, again, Senator Obama has shifted on a number of occasions. He has voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year.

Senator Obama has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. It's hard to reach across the aisle from that far to the left.

The point -- the point is -- the point is, we need to examine every agency of government.

I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong. And we fixed it and we killed it and the people ended up in federal prison so I know how to do this because I've been involved these issues for many, many years.

Look, we are sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don't like us very much. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. We have to have wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power.

Senator Obama opposes both storing and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. You can't get there from here and the fact is that we can create 700,000 jobs by building constructing 45 new nuclear power plants by the year 2030. Nuclear power is not only important as far as eliminating our dependence on foreign oil but it's also responsibility as far as climate change is concerned and the issue I have been involved in for many, many years and I'm proud of the work of the work that I've done there along with President Clinton.

And that was just on economic/domestic issues. On foreign policy John McCain shined:

MCCAIN: I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict. Our initial military success, we went in to Baghdad and everybody celebrated. And then the war was very badly mishandled. I went to Iraq in 2003 and came back and said, we've got to change this strategy. This strategy requires additional troops, it requires a fundamental change in strategy and I fought for it. And finally, we came up with a great general and a strategy that has succeeded. This strategy has succeeded. And we are winning in Iraq. And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds.

OBAMA: Well, this is an area where Senator McCain and I have a fundamental difference because I think the first question is whether we should have gone into the war in the first place.

Now six years ago, I stood up and opposed this war at a time when it was politically risky to do so because I said that not only did we not know how much it was going to cost, what our exit strategy might be, how it would affect our relationships around the world, and whether our intelligence was sound, but also because we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan.

Yes Senator Obama did oppose the war, but he wasn't in the Senate then. And now we are at war and he is still talking about what he would have done years ago, not today.

MCCAIN: Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that's in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing.

OBAMA: Look, I'm very proud of my vice presidential selection, Joe Biden, who is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and as he explains, and as John well knows, the issues of Afghanistan, the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don't go through my subcommittee because they're done as a committee as a whole.

Yes Senator, Joe Biden is more experienced than you in every field except how to make a speech. There you exceed him.

OBAMA: ... of judgment, of whether or not -- of whether or not -- if the question is who is best-equipped as the next president to make good decisions about how we use our military, how we make sure that we are prepared and ready for the next conflict, then I think we can take a look at our judgment.

MCCAIN: I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy. But the important -- I'd like to tell you, two Fourths of July ago I was in Baghdad. General Petraeus invited Senator Lindsey Graham and me to attend a ceremony where 688 brave young Americans, whose enlistment had expired, were reenlisting to stay and fight for Iraqi freedom and American freedom.
And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq.

OBAMA: That's not true.

Yes Senator it is true. Not once has Obama ever has stated that he was wrong. That scares me. For he seems to believe he is never wrong, everybody else is.

OBAMA: I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable. We didn't have a difference on whether or not we were going to be funding troops.

MCCAIN: Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama's plan is dangerous for America.

No Senator. Again you try to fool the American people. You have voted against all funding for our troops. It seems by your record that you hate the military.

MCCAIN: I -- I don't think that Senator Obama understands that there was a failed state in Pakistan when Musharraf came to power. Everybody who was around then, and had been there, and knew about it knew that it was a failed state.

And I'll tell you, I had a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, and a woman stood up and she said, "Senator McCain, I want you to do me the honor of wearing a bracelet with my son's name on it."

He was 22 years old and he was killed in combat outside of Baghdad, Matthew Stanley, before Christmas last year. This was last August, a year ago. And I said, "I will -- I will wear his bracelet with honor."

And this was August, a year ago. And then she said, "But, Senator McCain, I want you to do everything -- promise me one thing, that you'll do everything in your power to make sure that my son's death was not in vain."

A war that I was in, where we had an Army, that it wasn't through any fault of their own, but they were defeated. And I know how hard it is for that -- for an Army and a military to recover from that. And it did and we will win this one and we won't come home in defeat and dishonor and probably have to go back if we fail.

OBAMA: Jim, let me just make a point. I've got a bracelet, too, from Sergeant - from the mother of Sergeant Ryan David Jopeck, sure another mother is not going through what I'm going through.

Checking out this hit I found out that Senator Obama doesn't wear his bracelet and didn't know the name on it until a few days ago.

MCCAIN: My reading of the threat from Iran is that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region because the other countries in the region will feel compelling requirement to acquire nuclear weapons as well.

Now we cannot allow a second Holocaust. Let's just make that very clear. What I have proposed for a long time, and I've had conversation with foreign leaders about forming a league of democracies, let's be clear and let's have some straight talk. The Russians are preventing significant action in the United Nations Security Council.

I have proposed a league of democracies, a group of people - a group of countries that share common interests, common values, common ideals, they also control a lot of the world's economic power. We could impose significant meaningful, painful sanctions on the Iranians that I think could have a beneficial effect.

And the Pakistanis are going to have to understand that that bombing in the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad was a signal from the terrorists that they don't want that government to cooperate with us in combating the Taliban and jihadist elements.

OBAMA: But we are also going to have to, I believe, engage in tough direct diplomacy with Iran and this is a major difference I have with Senator McCain, this notion by not talking to people we are punishing them has not worked. It has not worked in Iran, it has not worked in North Korea. In each instance, our efforts of isolation have actually accelerated their efforts to get nuclear weapons. That will change when I'm president of the United States.

Obama will talk and Iran will bomb. Obama is just another appeaser who will sell out everyone so he can claim the Nobel Peace Prize. Even if it means another 6 million Jews are to die.

MCCAIN: But after 9/11, Senator Joe Lieberman and I decided that we needed a commission, and that was a commission to investigate 9/11, and find out what happened, and fix it.

And we were -- we were opposed by the administration, another area where I differed with this administration. And we were stymied until the families of 9/11 came, and they descended on Washington, and we got that legislation passed.

And there were a series of recommendations, as I recall, more than 40. And I'm happy to say that we've gotten written into law most of those reforms recommended by that commission. I'm proud of that work, again, bipartisan, reaching across the aisle, working together, Democrat and Republican alike.

But I can tell you that I think America is safer today than it was on 9/11. But that doesn't mean that we don't have a long way to go.

And I'd like to remind you, also, as a result of those recommendations, we've probably had the largest reorganization of government since we established the Defense Department. And I think that those men and women in those agencies are doing a great job.

But we still have a long way to go before we can declare America safe, and that means doing a better job along our borders, as well.

OBAMA: And this is the greatest country on Earth. But because of some of the mistakes that have been made -- and I give Senator McCain great credit on the torture issue, for having identified that as something that undermines our long-term security -- because of those things, we, I think, are going to have a lot of work to do in the next administration to restore that sense that America is that shining beacon on a hill.

The trouble is Senator is that millions of people strive to come to this great nation. Millions more cross our borders illegally to achieve their dreams. If this wasn't a great nation, they wouldn't come. You just don't get it. There is no but to that statement. This is the greatest nation on the Earth. And I don't think you ever will.

A Horror Tale of Financial Woes

Hat tip to Maggie's Notebook

Once upon a time, in a land called the United States, people would try and buy a home. They would save for years and keep their credit clean. They would look through out the neighborhood for a home they would like to buy. Then they would hope and pray that their local bank would grant them the all important mortgage. When the bank would grant this wondrous gift, they would rejoice and move into their new home. But this gift of mortgage came with a price. They had to pay it back to the bank. A payment to be made on the 1st of each month, over the course of 30 years. The people did not mind paying the mortgage. It was not as much as the rent they had been paying. The nation was in good shape when this was done.

Then in 1977 a strange thing happened. Jimmy Carter, then the President of the United States, convinced the members of Congress (the people who make the laws) to pass the Community Reinvestment Act. This Act gave birth to 2 children: Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. This Act was a good idea, for it gave the gift of mortgage to more people, in neighborhoods in which the banks originally gave a redline to. As long as the people had good credit and some savings, the bank would give them a mortgage and the nation was in good shape.

Then one day in 1995, a new President by the name of Bill Clinton decided that although the Community Reinvestment Act was good, it needed to become better, to let more people buy a home. So he changed the Act so everybody could buy a home.

This should have been a good thing, but it was the worst thing that could have been done. For no longer would the people have to have good credit and savings to get the gift of mortgage. They could have no savings, bad credit and still get this marvelous gift.

And no longer would the gift of mortgage be fixed at a special rate. It would be variable and be able to climb to any rate the bank wanted. These special mortgages were called Subprime and allowed the banks to make a lot of money on their mortgages.

And the people rejoiced and everyone went out to buy their home. But a strange thing started to happen. Homes that once were $60,000 or $70,000 were now being sold for $250,000, $400,000 or even $500,000. Builders started to build new homes and selling them for more than they were actually worth. But the people would scream "We want this house!" and the bank would give them the gift of mortgage.

But not all was right. A new President, George W. Bush, saw that this could become a problem. People with low incomes buying homes they really could not afford. And he tried to make it better. In the year 2003 he tried to move governmental supervision of Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. But the evil Democrats who ruled the Congress said, NO!

Again voices were raised that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not well. They tried to sound the alarm in the year of 2005. A group of Senators from the Congress, headed by John McCain, tried to heal the 2 children, but to no avail. For the evil Democrats said NO! IT WOULD HURT THE POOR. So nothing again was done.

Then came the bad year, 2007. What was warned about started to happen. The people who didn't have the good credit or the savings found that their gift of mortgage was not a very good gift. The payment that they owed each month was getting bigger and bigger, while their paycheck was getting smaller and smaller. And when they could not pay their mortgage to the bank, the bank took their house away.

This was happening to many people who cried to their President and Congress for help. But what did their Congress do? They just laughed. For Fanny and Freddie were sneaky children. They would give their friends in Congress many gifts and presents. Gifts of special mortgages (that the poor people could never get) and gifts of money. Some got many gifts. Dodd of Connecticut got $133,900, Obama of Illinois got $105,849, Pelosi of California got $32,750. And they did nothing for they wanted more gifts.

And then the crash came, August of 2008. The banks started failing and there was no one to give the gift of mortgage. For Fanny and Freddie were very, very ill. They couldn't save the banks or even themselves. And the Congress finally had to do something before they would die. But what did they do? They gave them more money. $700 trillion of the people's money they would give. It would help save the 2 children and give the banks a chance to live.

But them people who knew how the banks should have worked said please don't do this, it will do more harm than good. To give such a sum without government oversite, would only create the same conditions we now face.

So nothing is being done, and banks are failing. The people are still losing their homes, and all we get is the evil Democrats crying: IT'S JOHN MCCAIN'S FAULT!

IT IS NOT!

If you have like this little tale feel free to cross post it, just give me a link back to my site.




View at YouTube

The Difference in Leadership and Making a Speech!

There is a major difference between the 2 candidates, John McCain and Barack Hussein Obama. A very big difference. LEADERSHIP.

It takes a very strong man to walk away from an election or to suspend his campaigning this close to Election Day. But again we see the character of the 2 men. For John McCain has suspended his campaign in order to work on this economic crises that this nation is facing.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain announced Wednesday that he is suspending his campaign to return to Washington and focus on the "historic" crisis facing the U.S. economy.

The Arizona senator called on his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, to do the same. He also urged organizers of Friday's presidential debate at the University of Mississippi to postpone the event.

"I am calling on the president to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself," McCain told reporters in New York. "It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem."

There was no immediate response from the Obama campaign.

Knowing Senator Obama and his people, they will call this a publicity stunt and continue to make speeches.

This is not the time of speech making or rhetoric. It is the time for both parties to sit down and come up with real solutions to this problem. This is not the time for casting blame on each other. It is the time for a bi-partisan effort to fix this mess. This is the time for a leader to arise and take charge. And he has. It is John McCain. A man who would give up a chance for the White House in order to save his nation. A true American Patriot. A man worthy of your vote.

2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON

If you are an American citizen, you should know these things, and if you have questions about them, there are some reference web sites at the bottom of this post.

Whatever your political persuasion, be sure to get out and vote in November, and get educated before you vote!

2008 Presidential Candidate Comparison

---

Issue	John McCain	Barack Obama
Favors new drilling offshore US	Yes	No
Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it	Yes	No
Served in the US Armed Forces	Yes	No
Amount of time served in the US Senate	22 Years	173 DAYS
Will institute a socialized national health care plan	No	Yes
Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy	No	Yes
Would pull troops out of Iraqimmediately	No	Yes
Supports gun ownership rights	Yes	No
Supports homosexual marriage	No	Yes
Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase	No	Yes
Voted against making English the official language	No	Yes
Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals	No	Yes

Capital Gains Tax

---

MCCAIN

0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

OBAMA

28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you ? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)

DIVIDEND TAX

---

MCCAIN

15% (no change

OBAMA

39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, y ou will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')

INCOME TAX

---

MCCAIN (no changes)	Single making 30K - tax $4,500 Single making 50K - tax $12,500 Single making 75K - tax $18,750 Married making 60K- tax $9,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)	Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 7 5K - tax $23,250 Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!

INHERITANCE TAX

---

MCCAIN	- 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA	Restore the inheritance tax. Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.

NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA

---

New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!

You can verify the above at the following web sites:

McCain vs. Obama: Who will cut small-business taxes?
Taxes
RAW DATA: Fred Thompson’s Remarks at GOP Convention
McCain, Obama Offer Different Visions on Taxes
Archive: Barack Obama

You be the judge and then decided. With these facts, who really has your best interests at heart?