I’m looking forward to hearing the democrats call Sarah Palin “a strong woman” - in any context – even a negative one.

Bet they don’t.

Hillary was identified as a strong woman and we were told that any man who didn’t buy into her leftist agenda was afraid of a strong woman. This “strong woman” rhetoric has been used as a weapon by feminist for years, much as the charge of “racist” is used to label any white person who doesn’t intend to vote for Barack Obama.

Just what defines a “strong woman”?

Following are some attributes summarized from several sources to describe what I believe approximates a “strong person.” I am specifically leaving out references to physical power since those attributes have no bearing on this context. Here are some definitions of “strong” that are appropriate when assessing a person’s character.

• Having a force of character and will
• Intense in degree or quality, forceful or vigorous
• Not easily upset, resistant to harmful or unpleasant influences
• Morally or intellectually powerful, having a powerful effect

While I can’t speak for everyone, I believe that most people will agree that anyone, man or woman, who can be described as having those attributes, is a strong person. And therefore, a woman possessing those attributes is, by definition, a “strong woman.”

Enter Sarah Palin.

Sarah is a MOM, in the truest, most admirable sense of the word. Her children weren’t raised by nannies and sent to boarding schools. She and her husband have five children, four still at home. The oldest son joined the Army on September 11^th of 2007 and will ship out to the Middle East this year. She’s been a “hockey mom,” and assisted in coaching youth basketball. A wife and mother of five should be enough to classify someone as a strong woman, but of course not to the militant feminists.

She began her political career in 1992 when she ran for a seat on the City Council of Wasilla, Ak. She won and served two terms until 1996. Serving on a city council of even a small town (under 10,000) takes a certain amount of assertiveness and practical judgment.

In 1996, she was elected Mayor of Wasilla, beating out the incumbent. She reduced her own salary and reduced property taxes by 40 %, as promised during her campaign. She ran for reelection in 1999 against the same previous mayor and won by an even greater margin. Once again, Sarah showed spunk and determination in firing the police chief and the library director for misdeeds. She was also elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.

The Governor appointed Palin Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she served from 2003 to 2004. In 2004, she resigned in protest over what she called the “lack of ethics” of Republican leaders (her own party). After resigning, she exposed the state party’s chairman and a former Alaska Attorney General for wrongdoings and both men subsequently resigned, one paying a record fine. She bucked her own party’s leaders and won.

In 2006, she upset then-Governor Murkowski in the primary, and then won the gubernatorial election in November by over 8%, despite being outspent by her opponent, former Governor Tony Knowles. She became Alaska’s first woman Governor, and the youngest in the state’s history. She challenged the party politics and the “good old boy” network and won.

Palin’s approval rating as Governor have frequently risen above 90% but reached a low of 76% after she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Note that her LOW approval rating is approximately seven times that of our current U.S. Congress.

Her list of substantive achievements in two years as Governor exceed the “major” accomplishments of Barack Obama during his six years as Illinois State Senator combined with his time as a United States Senator.

Three shiny, new black SUVs pulled up in front of Flo’s Café and parked. Two “suits” got out, one from the first car and one from the third, and stood silently while looking through their dark sunglasses at the quiet street with the single traffic light. After a scan of the area found no items of concern, the first “suit” said something to his shoulder and doors opened.

Five men in black got out and gathered around an open door of the middle SUV as Barack Hussein Obama stepped out into the sunlight. He looked like the all-American politician, open necked pale blue shirt with sleeves rolled up, and khaki chinos. And smiling – boy, was he smiling, and what a set of gleaming teeth. A little sparkle flashed as the sunlight reflected off those pearly-whites.

He was in the heartland, and since an accident on the Interstate forced a detour, he decided to sample some real Midwest cuisine. So, a couple of miles of back-road driving brought the caravan to Flo’s.

Hankpanky was real small-town Ohio, only 320 residents, one traffic light, two barbers, four bars, two gas stations, two (real) restaurants, and Flo’s. The town’s only claim to fame was when Caroline Kennedy (accidentally) drove her Oldsmobile off the road and into Eurine Creek and damn near “drownded” Eric Holder. They were the vetting team checking out Obama’s candidates for Vice President. They had eaten at Flo's and liked it.

Flo’s was owned and operated by Florence I’Tally, a tall, slim, middle-aged blonde (helped along by Revlon) who was constantly chewing bubble gum. Looking like an icon from the 50’s in her blue and white waitress outfit. She looked the part.

“Suit one” opened the squeaky front door and held it as the others filed in. “Boy howdy, this looks like a mortician’s convention comin’ in.” Al, the cook, looked up to see what Flo was talking about. “Jezzus Flo, that’s that guy – that’s that Obomber guy.” “What Obomber guy?” Flo was not what you’d call “informed,” uni-formed was as close as she’d get to “informed.” If it wasn’t on American Idol, it didn’t exist – besides, she spent her off hours entertaining her men-friends.

Suits two and three slid into a booth facing the door and across from Obama. The other two took the booth closest to the door.

“Morning Miss, I hear you have good food here.” The black guy was making small talk. Flo quipped back with her stock reply, “Honey, we've got the third best food in town!”

“Where you fellas from?” Obama was a little surprised that she didn’t seem to recognize him. “We’re from Washington, D.C.” “Ooohwee, you’re a long way from home, ain’t cha?” she smacked her gum a few times.

“You mean you don’t know who I am?”

Flo didn’t like that response “who’s he think he is” she thought. “No, sir, I ain’t got a clue – who are you?” She blew a small bubble.

“I’m going to be your next President.”

Flo laughted, "No way, honey, you’re black, and I know for a fact that John McCain is white, so you can't be no John McCain.”

Suits two and three stifled back laughter, suit four did giggle aloud – which really ticked off Obama – he turned and glared at suit four for a moment.” “I am Barack Obama,” he said with some haughtiness in his voice.

“Bareact O’who?”

“Obama, Obama.”

“Well honey, don’t go getting all huffy. How’m I supposed to know who you are – ain’t got no name tag or nothing?” She blew a big bubble this time. Pop.

Obama regained his composure – “can’t let this moronic twit get me upset,” he thought. “I’m sorry, miss, I’m a candidate for President and my name is Barack Obama. I thought you might have seen me on TV.”

“Don’t watch much TV, Mister Olabama.” Suit three turned away and you could see his body shaking, doing his best to fight back the laughter. Chew, chew, smack, pop.

Obama regained control, “that’s fine, maybe we can get menus then.”

“Shore honey, Al, gimme two more menus.” Al was smiling too now. Ellis was due to take the late morning shift soon, but Al thought he might want to hang around and watch this guy duel with Flo. He’d lose of course, Flo was the queen of the acid comebacks.

“Can you make an egg-white omlet with arugula?”

“Honey," she paused, "I got egg-whites, I got Jimmy Dean sausage, I got bacon, I got hotcakes, but I ain’t got none of that argoola stuff. I got grits, you want grits?”

Obama took a deep breath, “just bring me orange juice, decaf coffee, bacon, and two or three of those grits, I’ll try them.”

“Two or three grits?” Flo was perplexed, ain’t nobody ever asked her for “two or three grits” before. Was he making fun of her? “I’ll slap that skinny big-eared weasel silly,” she thought. No, wait, maybe he was just one of those "slow" people.

The suits, all four of them, were doing their best to look serious yet still laughing inside. This was too much.

“I’m sorry, I stand corrected, I’ll have a bowl of those grit things.”

She picked up a coffee pot (a nice, fresh pot for the suits) and proceeded to fill the suit's cups. Chew, pop, chew, pop.

“Is that decaf?” Big ears asked. “No, this is ‘caf,’ sir, I’ll be back with yours in just a minute.” Flo picked up the oldest, stalest pot still on the warmer (it had been "coagulating" for days) and filled Omama’s cup. “Here’s your decaf, sir.” “Right," she thought, she’d seen roofing tar thinner than that swill, "hope he likes it.” Pouring it was like pouring thick paint, Flo half expected it to make a glop, glop, glop sound as she poured.

“We’ve got to get going, can you bag our food to go?” asked suit one. “Sure, only take a minute.” Flo was happy to see them go, that one Omumba guy that looked like a brown Herman Munster was a real pain in the butt.

Al quickly packaged everything into Styrofoam containers, everything except the grits – Flo took care of the grits. Suit two handed Flo a credit card and signed it when she returned. They hurriedly left and got into the SUVs.

That’s when she noticed that they had stiffed her, no tip, no tip at all. “What buttholes.”

The three SUVs pulled out and sped away.

“Oh well, I guess that makes us even. If they’d left a decent tip I’d feel bad about filling that paper bag full of runny grits, now not so much.” She blew a small bubble and popped it.

Al busted out laughing, “you poured runny grits into a paper bag?”

“Yep, there’s a whole lotta little gritses in that bag and they’re just itchin' to get out.” "Be free, little gritses!"

It has been said that the uncommon zeal exhibited by Barack Obama’s followers is more like a religion than a political movement. It is so. We have uncovered tenets of the theocracy surrounding this messianic candidate. In order to better understand the movement and, in the spirit of forgiveness (for they know not what they do), accept them into our hearts, we provide this information.

Variations of Obamanism

The Fundamentalist Obamanites believe in the inerrancy of the Prophet Obama’s holy website.

The majority of his followers believe that the statements made on his holy website, barackobama.com, are infallible when berating his opponent, Senator John McCain or bashing the President, George W. Bush. But they believe that when discussing healthcare, taxes, abortion, William Ayers, Rev. Wright or anything else, he speaks in an ancient tongue not fully understood by mortals and thus, he is often misquoted and misunderstood.

Some of his flock are staunch defenders of each and every word on the holy site – they believe that barackobama.com (having been blessed by the Prophet) is incapable of hosting anything but truth – it is entirely inerrant. It even states “I AM HE WHO AM,” and they believe that he really “is he who is.”

The Four-day Obamanites are a small spin-off faction of the Seventh-day Obamanites but meet in 4-day Tire store for worship. The tire shop surroundings have resulted in a “What Goes Around, Comes Around” doctrine to keep the faithful from hydroplaning down the road of life.

With sermon themes like “Inflate Your Tires, Not Your Ego” and “Stay Pumped Up, Don’t Fall Flat,” the Four-day Obamanite congregation expects a “Good Year” as a result.

A Reform (or Reformed) Obaminite believes that Obama’s dogma is a “living” dogma. It is subject to constant reinterpretation in an attempt to keep pace with the Obamessiah’s dogma de jour.

Reform Obamism is a form of Confusionism which embraces the Phlip Phlop creed. The creed tells of a Mantra of Alternating Voices by which one may confuse voters by talking out of both sides of one’s mouth.

First defined by Master Dam Wee Phlip in 1610 and further expounded by Sub-master Ewe Kan Phlop in 1612, the scripture requires that disciples constantly change position to keep Republican demons from gaining advantage. Those who follow this scripture are known as Phlip Phloppers and religiously follow opinion polls.

Some berate the Prophet when speaking extemporaneously because he often pauses and inserts an “uhhhh” or an “ahhhh” into his replies. The faithful prefer to believe that Obama is meditating during the “uhhhh” and “ahhhh” pauses in his sermons, all the while thinking far ahead of any mere mortal.

A Conservative Obaminite is an oxymoron; no such thing exists.

An Orthodox Obaminite is a Marxist in a Ralph Lauren suit – a Ray Nagin (New Orleans Mayor) with a better façade. The group’s philosophy is “Let Sleeping Dogmas Lie.” Orthodox Obaminites attend worship services but are oblivious to sermons. Instead, they meditate on important issues, like Priestess Scarlett Johansson in a teddy, Scarlett Johansson in a bikini, and Scarlett Johansson without her priestly trappings.

No matter the sect, all Obaminites embrace the theology of “He is the One We’ve Been Waiting For” for faith fills their hearts and they yearn for his triumph. Lives will be complete, ambitions achieved, and all will be right in the heavens.

Passages from The Book of Soros, The Book of Wright, The Book of Ayers, etc. have not yet been fully translated. The first book to be completed was The Book of Deception. It is presented here:

The Prophet Obama, the Book of Deception

For I will stretch out My hand, and smite McCain with all my wonders which I will do in the midst thereof. Neither will the people hearken to the voice of McCain. He is old of body, and of a slow tongue, lest he be the king and bring upon us an age liken unto the old king and beget an era of war.

And Obama said unto McCain, what is that in thine hand? And McCain said, it is a rod of truth. And Obama said, cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent of truth; and Obama shrank and fled from before it.

And God (not Obama) spoke

Verily I say unto you, why have Democrats sent us such a false prophet? He hath naught in his heart, not truth, not wisdom. He hath gathered no straw, he has built no shelter, nor has he suffered a bondage. He is empty of tunic and his head is of air, he knows naught but what he is bid by the Pharisees of Soros and the minions of moveon. And he has not a strong hand and our enemies will know he is weak and rain down stones and fire upon us.

If Obama is chosen, the fault hath lain in thine own people and great taxes and bondage will fall on the country. He will smite our swords and take them away, our children will be cut from the womb, and He will bring pestilence and frogs and locusts and swarms of flies upon the land. Fish and insects will be exalted and people will be diminished. Thunder and hail will darken the land. Our oils will dry up and our lamps will dim and freedom will shrivel and die.

And we will be beholden to the false prophet.

OBEY MY WORD: SPEAK NOT OBAMA, SPEAK MCCAIN

Following are excerpts from:

Teachers give Dallas ISD's new grading rules an F

12:00 AM CDT on Friday, August 15, 2008

By KENT FISCHER / The Dallas Morning News
/ The Dallas Morning News
Tawnell D. Hobbs, Stella M. Chávez and Karin Shaw Anderson contributed to this report.

Dallas public school students who flunk tests, blow off homework and miss assignment deadlines can make up the work without penalty, under new rules that have angered many teachers.

The intent may have been to create a uniform grading policy, but the result was to lower standards, said Dale Kaiser, president of the teachers' group NEA-Dallas. The school board and superintendent "talk about elevating standards and holding high expectations for kids, but we're telling the kids that whether they do the work or not is irrelevant," he said.

Last school year, Dallas' board of trustees reaffirmed a policy that prevented teachers from giving students a grade lower than a 50 in any one grading period. The reason given was that students who fall below 50 have no hope or motivation to bring up their grades and just give up.

“Babying the rules so that [students] have almost unlimited chances to pass, that’s unreal,” said Joshua Perry, a 2007 graduate of Skyline High School. “In the real world, you don’t get a whole lot of chances or other ways to make something up.”

-------------------------------------------------------------

Even the teachers and the NEA union are against this bone-headed move.

I just read an excellent article by Joseph Farah (World Net Daily) about Obama’s “nuanced” responses to questions on the Rick Warren show.

And it struck a nerve.

The technique of “nuanced” response appears to be a tenet of the left. Rather than a direct, concise answer to a question, it appears that lefties are more impressed by obfuscation – by verbal gymnastics, in order to avoid a simple, direct answer. As an example from the Rick Warren’s forum, Warren asked about how to handle “evil.” John McCain’s response was “defeat it.” Obama’s “nuanced” answer took 1:27 minutes and it boiled down to “confront it.”

Like John (who served in Vietnam) Kerry before him, Obama’s command of the language impresses those with a lesser ability, and for them, that equates to a superior intellect. Why on earth would anyone answer a question with a simple “yes” or “no” when one could impress the sheeple with subtle shadings and delicate gradations, all the while spinning a web of misty confusion. “What the hell did he say?” “I dunno, but it sure sounded smart!”

It certainly appears to be a pattern. Remember John (he served in Vietnam) Kerry’s oratorical exercises when “answering” questions? His meanderings through the English language led his followers to believe him to be light-years above George Bush in intellect. Based on real evidence, it wasn’t true. I still have a 7-8 page study of their SAT scores and military tests that showed Bush to have a higher IQ than Kerry – whoda thunkit? Certainly not Kerry (who served in Vietnam) supporters.

And Barry Obama is perhaps even better at subtleties and waltzing with words than Kerry (who served in Vietnam) was. The problem is that Barry leaves one train of thought to insert another explanatory part-statement and before he’s completed that one, he’s off to yet another shading of the issue. I don’t know if the man is capable of a simple one-word “yes” or “no.” Evidence shows otherwise.

I’m beginning to believe that Barry’s disciples prefer the verbal meanderings since they result in a statement so ambiguous that a creative parsing of the words can yield almost any desired interpretation. Remember Bill Clinton’s "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is?

His positions are hard to pin down, not only because they’re a moving target, but because his statements are so inexact. And, in that respect, Obama is an artist - a real Renoir of bullsh*t. When he speaks without the crutch of a teleprompter, the “ahhhs” and “ummms” are a signal that he is searching for a camouflaging statement to hide his real thoughts.

I’ve recently received some inside information about Obama’s vetting of Vice Presidential candidates. Most of the tips came from a source inside the campaign who only talked when assured of anonymity. He was referred to as “Deep Hyperbole” (he is given to exaggeration).

Originally, we’re told that the vetting team (Jim Johnson, Caroline Kennedy, and Eric Holder) started with a rather long list of possible suspects – something in the order of 78 names. It was later pared down when it was learned that some of the “list compilers” had worked in democrat voter drives in Chicago and consequently the list included some suspicious names like “I.P. Freely,” “Seymour Wiener,” “Hugh G. Rection,” and at least twenty-two dead people.

Now that Jim Johnson has resigned, Kennedy and Holder have been furiously gathering information about the remaining prospects. The vetting process was slowed a bit last week when Kennedy’s Oldsmobile accidentally missed a bridge, ran off the road and into Eurine Creek, outside of Hankpanky, Ohio. Fortunately, Mr. Holder had attended a workshop on “breath holding,” and managed to survive until rescued by a roving band of Dykes on Bikes. Ms. Kennedy was relieved to learn of Mr. Holder’s narrow escape when she called 911 for help the following day. Mr. Holder now brings scuba gear when traveling with Ms. Kennedy, “just in case.”

Some remaining on the “short list” are the names that we’d expect to see, such as: Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore, etc. But a few are not so well known.

Rep. Cliff Notes (Ohio) must be considered a dark horse, but his resume includes “Audio/Visual Club Organizer,” which is known to impress Obama. Additionally, he has only been a member of Congress for 130 days which is another plus. Like Obama, his work history is unsullied by excessive experience.

Two candidates were suggested by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who although at odds with Obama, is still committed to helping his former parishioner.

Mfume Mfumoo earned Rev. Wright’s respect when in his professional capacity as a chicken whisperer, helped many wayward chickens come home to roost. He has attended Trinity United for ten years and, like Obama, doesn’t remember ever hearing one of Rev. Wright’s vile sermons (he usually has his iPod on, listening to inspirational rap from “Fitty” Cent and Ludicrius).

The other suggestion by Rev. Wright is also a long shot. A “sister” in both a literal and figurative sense, it is Sister Mary Oprah, an African-American nun who ministered to orphan goats in Kenya. She formed the first halfway house for goat herders in Nairobi where she helped many herders overcome unrequited love for their “significant” goat. She later moved to Chicago and has been romantically linked to Fr. Michael Pfleger who found that a nun, without her habit, was more fun than a choir boy. If they’re caught un-frocked, they could both be de-frocked.

A name that has recently received much attention is Sen. Ted Kennedy. Sen. Kennedy would bring several strengths to a ticket: his Bahston whiteness would counter Sen. Obama’s blackness, his bulk would offset Obama’s slim physique, his wealthy aloofness would appeal to rich people, and his heroic efforts to save Mary Jo Kopechne add to his appeal as a true hero. Unfortunately, in response to any of the team’s questions, Sen. Kennedy only responds “dos Dewars, por favor … *burp*.”

Of course, Sen. Hillary Clinton has to be one of the front runners. Even though to some, she is genetically “indeterminate,” she is generally regarded as female and could appeal to women whose husbands think that they’ve gotten away with affairs until a sharp blade relieves them of “Mr. Happy.” Obama does know how to get along with a strong woman (i.e., Michelle); he simply cowers and wets himself. It would be humiliating for the President to become known as a “MINO” (Man In Name Only).

And Sen. John Kerry has “reported for duty.” A member of the Foreign Relations committee, he would bring gravitas to the ticket and has a military background. To bolster his record as a decorated veteran, he has applied (retroactively) to USDOD for three more Purple Hearts for wounds received before was discharged, those incidents are “seared” in his memory. Records show that he burned two fingers while “toking up” in late December, 1968, he received a large splinter in the buttockal region from a bizarre outhouse incident in January of 1970, and in April, 1970, while in an airport men’s room, a very large man stepped on his right foot which had “accidentally” moved over into the next stall, badly bruising the pinkie-toe.

Another name mentioned was Rep. E. Knee Miney, a first term representative from Alabama. Rep. Miney has the prerequisite slim resume, but was a successful businessman who founded the Tuskegee Hairman, a chain of toupee shops. He has been a very prolific bundler for Sen. Obama and has generated sizeable contributions for the campaign, including over $4.4 million from the Sisters of Perpetual Poverty and $2,412,088 from a Buddist Monk temple in California.

The final name on the short list (and perhaps Obama’s favorite) is William Ayers. Obama is known to savor Bernardine Dohrn’s collard greens and sushi. While Ayers does have a number of negatives, Obama is known to respect his expertise in explosives and thinks Ayers is “da bomb.” Ayers is also an expert Marxman. According to Ayers, he and Berrnardine came to the realization that they could do more damage to the country from within the system than on the outside. Thus, Ayers has become mainstream and is now a professor of education, passing on “proper” political ideas to college students.

Obama may be convinced that he can slip one by the voters and nominate his kindred spirit to help him fix our broken country. If nominated, Ayers has agreed to change his first name to “Pungent”, his mother’s maiden name, to hide his true identity.

Obama’s legal team is also investigating whether there is “controlling legal authority” preventing him from holding both President and Vice President positions concurrently. He has suggested that he could wear a black Chicago Bears cap when he is acting as the President and a white White Sox cap when he was Vice President. That way anyone could tell in which capacity he was acting. “Brilliant!” was the unanimous verdict of his staff. “See, now I’m the prez.” On went the black cap, “and now I’m the veep,” switching caps. “Now the prez, now the veep, now the prez, now the veep.” His staff marveled at the pure genius of the idea – it really illustrates the massive intellect at work here.

[Let me first apologize for the length of this piece, it is long, but it is simply not possible to cover the issues in much less space. In fact, it could easily be three or four pages longer]

The purpose of this commentary is to illustrate why Obama’s bill (S.2433) is dangerous to the United States’ sovereignty. It is primarily because it legally ties us to one of the UN’s goals for global governance. This will be the first time that a U.S. law specifically supports, by direct mention, one of the UN’s specific directives.

The linkage is found in the language of the bill itself. The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress:

Global Poverty Act of 2007 – Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide who live on less than $1 per day.

Does the bill actually provide funding for the development goal? No, it doesn’t, but it does establish the underpinnings for the President to include appropriations for the additional foreign policy funding in the budget he submits to congress.

Why hasn’t it been voted on by the full Senate and submitted to the President for approval – what’s the holdup? Simply, they’re awaiting additional democrat Senators (via 2008 elections) to assure passage and … a President Obama to sign it into law.

So, let’s look at the history of the UN’s Millennium Declaration (55/2) (which includes the United Nations Development Goals), how the goals were developed to further the global governance ambitions of the UN, and why it should matter to us.

In 1999 and 2000, under the auspices of the UN, groups called non-governmental organizations (NGOs) held meetings around the world to write what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy (CGD). The CGD document was developed as a blueprint for achieving global governance.

You might ask, “What are non-governmental organizations”? The answer is, nothing more than political groups with their own agendas. The UN says these NGO’s will become the “Assembly of the People,” and will be the new governing authority of the UN.

The CGD described its goals by way of 12 principles:

1. Consolidation of all international agencies under the direct authority of the UN.
2. Registration of all transnational corporations and financial institutions, requiring an international code of conduct governing environmental and labor standards.
3. Consider various methods to create sources of revenue for the UN, such as taxes on international money transactions, taxes on flights, shipping fuels, and licensing of what the UN calls the “global commons.” This includes the use of air, water, and natural resources.
4. Would eliminate the permanent member status in the Security Council. The U.S. is currently a permanent member of the Security Council and has veto power over council resolutions. Principle Four would essentially eliminate the U.S.’ power and influence in that world body. Instead, the CGD called for creation of an “Assembly of the People” which would be hand-picked by the non-governmental organizations.
5. Would authorize a standing UN army.
6. Would require UN registration of all arms and the reduction ofall national armies “as part of a multinational global security system” under the authority of the UN.
7. Would require individual and national compliance with all UN “Human rights” treaties and declarations.
8. Would activate the UN Criminal Court and make it compulsory for all nations.
9. Called for a new institution to establish economic and environmental security by ensuring “Sustainable Development.”

10.        Would establish an International Environmental Court.

11.        Demands an international declaration stating that climate change is an essential global security interest and will create a team to allocate carbon emissions based on equal per-capita rights.

12.        Demands the cancellation of all debt owed by the poor nations, global poverty reductions, and the “equitable sharing” of global resources, as allocated by the UN.

As you can see, the Charter for Global Democracy was intended to give the UN domain over all of the earth’s land, air, and seas. In addition, it would give the UN the power to control all natural resources, wildlife, and energy sources. This control would allow the UN to tax everything that could be defined as having come from the earth’s resources – the “global commons.”

The UN would become the policing agency for the entire world. With its own standing army and corresponding reductions in all national armies, the UN’s word would be law. Remember that the UN will be governed by the “Assembly of the People” – their word will be law.

Later, in September of 2000, the UN held a “Millennium Summit” which was attended by literally every head of state and world leader (including then-President Bill Clinton). The original “Charter for Global Democracy” was renamed the “Millennium Declaration” and contained watered-down wording to achieve the same ends but to arouse less negative reaction. No vote or debate was allowed.

The original twelve principles were magically morphed into eight goals. These eight goals are described in much more politically correct terms, to keep from alarming the masses but the intent of the original twelve principles is still there.

Here are a few selected passages taken directly from 55/2 United Nations Millennium Declaration:

• To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures.
• To make every effort to ensure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol ~ and to embark on the required reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases.
• To take measures to ensure respect for and protection of the human rights of migrants, migrant workers and their families, to eliminate the increasing acts of racism and xenophobia in many societies.
• Global challenges must be managed in a way that distributes the costs and burdens fairly in accordance with basic principles of equity and social justice. Those who suffer or who benefit least deserve help from those who benefit most.
• Responsibility for managing worldwide economic and social development, as well as threats to international peace and security, must be shared among the nations of the world and should be exercised multilaterally. As the most universal and most representative organization in the world, the United Nations must play the central role.
• To strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs and, in particular, to ensure compliance by Member States with the decisions of the International Court of Justice.

I selected those few items above from nine pages of single-spaced fluff. Most of the declaration is devoted to rhetoric that no one can quibble with – here are a couple of random examples, under item 20: “To develop and implement strategies that give young people everywhere a real chance to find decent and productive work,” and under item 25: “To strengthen the capacity of all our countries to implement the principles and practices of democracy and respect for human rights, including minority rights.” Who could oppose such noble goals?

I’d be less than honest if I didn’t state that thus far, Obama’s bill only ties us to the first goal. It is the one that proposes to “Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty.” But that is the goal that specifies 0.7 % of “gross national income.” This bill, if it becomes law, will ease the camel’s nose way under the tent, with more to surely follow.

Lest there be any accusation of a misinterpretation of the 0.7 % “assessment,” UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said it plainly in 2005, “Developed countries that have not already done so should establish timetables to achieve the 0.7 % target of gross national income for official development assistance by no later than 2015,” pretty plain, huh?

Consider what we now know about the UN’s effective stewardship of money, Iraq’s Oil for Food program, for example. It is now accepted fact that the program suffered from widespread corruption and abuse. Many UN officials have been accused of taking kickbacks and commissions, some amounting to millions of dollars. At least three indictments have been issued thus far and investigations are continuing. It has been estimated (by our Government Accounting Office) that Saddam Hussein’s regime generated over $10.1 billion dollars in illegal revenues. Even Kofi Annan and his son were among those included in accusations of kickbacks and corruption.

And regarding the effect of our foreign aid, it has been said that “U.S. handouts go into the hands of corrupt dictators who hate us and vote against us in the UN, and that only 30 percent of American foreign aid ever reaches the poor.”

Ask yourself this question: “Am I prepared to pay yet another new tax to the UN so they may distribute those funds to third-world leaders in expectation that it will find its way to those in need?”

Obama, following the directive of Kofi Annan, has taken the first step in preparing to assess U.S. taxpayers in a massive wealth redistribution scheme to provide welfare to third-world countries.

Is this the kind of “leadership” we want? Starting down the road to yielding our national security and our national sovereignty to the United Nations?

That is not an American position, it is a “global citizen’s” position.

I’m working on Obama’s Global Poverty Act (part C) right now and will post it tomorrow (I hope), BUT, I just received (thank you, Amazon) both the Obama Nation by Dr. Corsi, and Fleeced by Dick Morris, and I’ve got to at least start on Corsi’s book. Also received Buy Gold Now by Shayne McGuire - anybody else dabble in rare gold coins as investments or hobby?

I was just listening to Hugh Hewitt who invited bloggers to shoot holes in the Obama campaign’s “pushback” of Dr. Corsi’s allegations. He went over a couple, reading the pushback and pointing out the verifiable lies they used as rebuttal on both items. I’m sure that some on Townhall will do just that – that is, shoot holes in the pushback.

Re: Obama’s Global Poverty Act, I’ll have more details underpinning the global governance ambitions of the UN and the so-called rebuttal to the $845 billion dollar price tag.

I’m very pleased to report that Dr. Jerome Coursi was on Hannity and Colmes last evening touting his NYT best selling book “The Obama Nation.” As you may recall, he also co-wrote “Unfit for Command,” which was instrumental in “swift-boating” (in the positive sense) John Kerry’s military credentials in the 2004 election.

Dr. Coursey mentioned Obama’s Global Poverty Act and how it directs the President (whoever he or she is) to “the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal (UNMDG).” Included in the UNMDG, are MANY things that would be damaging to the U.S. Not the least of which would be an assessment of 0.7 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over 13 years, amounting to a tax on U.S. citizens of 845 BILLION dollars, which will be GIVEN TO THE UNITED NATIONS TO SPEND.

Dr. Coursey reiterated the dangers of Obama’s bill committing the U.S. to allow THE U.N. to dictate the amount of our foreign aid, but giving us no say in the distribution of the moneys (and we all know how efficient the U.N. is at handling money). We’ll be pressured to accede to the International Court, the Kyoto Treaty, the Law of the Sea Treaty, and other propositions that are not in our interest, but called for in the UNMDG. I’m doing more research on Obama’s bill and the UNMDG and will post more details on both soon.

It was gratifying to see some national exposure of a newsworthy item that has heretofore been “under the radar” of voter’s considerations when vetting a candidate for President.

This bill, more than anything else, provides the “smoking gun” evidence of Obama’s world government view. If he is elected, you can expect President Obama and a democrat Senate to ram this bill through and create the mechanism to cede many U.S. powers to the U.N. If the bill is passed, it is “unknown” whether President Bush’s will sign it.

Folks, I’m continuing to highlight this issue because I think that we’re nearing a “tipping point” in assuring that Obama will not be our next President. With the candidates within the margin of error on most polls, I believe that this issue could severely damage Obama’s chances, IF WIDELY KNOWN.

After all, how many of us are ready to give the United Nations authority over the government and the people of the United States? THE UNITED NATIONS?

Not me.

His campaign was relieved when Obama’s proctologist called to say that they found his head

Since Michelle doesn’t snore, burp, sweat, or fart, she simply must bi*ch or she’ll blow up

Jesus loves Obama, but everyone else thinks he’s an a**hole

Obama is so dense, light bends around him

If he were any more stupid, he’d have to be watered twice a week

He’s a gross ignoramus, that’s 144 times worse than an ordinary ignoramus

For Obama, everything is possible except skiing through revolving doors

Remember Obama, a closed mouth gathers no feet

Obama tried to get a new car for Michelle, but the dealer wouldn’t take her (rimshot)

Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool

Obama has delusions of adequacy

Obama’s philosophy: “sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

And never, NEVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night

And a few political quotes

Before he clinched the nomination, the founders of Ben & Jerry's ice cream decided to endorse Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, which makes sense because Baracky Road is a catchier name for an ice cream than Pantsuits and Cream." --Conan O'Brien

"Senator Obama answered doubts about his inexperience by saying he has gained tremendous insight from his work as a community organizer, civil rights attorney, constitutional law professor, key club president, 4H treasurer, lunch room monitor, two years of jazz, and four years of tap." --Amy Poehler

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! - P.J. O'Rourke

In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other. - Voltaire (1764)

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul. -.George Bernard Shaw

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man ....which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy

Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. - James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries. - Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. - P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. - Ronald Reagan (1986)

To further define that statement and lay groundwork for my hypothesis, first I need to identify who is “us” and who is “them.” The “us” and “them” I’m referring to are the politically informed and the uninformed. And since I’m writing this piece, I get to define the subtexts that qualify an individual as one or the other. Certainly, I’m working within dictionary definitions, but will further define the methods one may use to become informed. Here’s the dictionary definition (from MSN Encarta online) of informed:

1. Having enough information to understand something: having sufficient and sufficiently reliable information or knowledge to be able to understand a subject or situation and make appropriate judgments or decisions regarding it (informed citizens)

2. Based on accurate knowledge: based on an accurate knowledge and understanding of the situation or subject in question (an informed decision)

Let me first state that I won’t simply distribute left/liberal/democrats into the uninformed category and right/conservative/republicans into the informed group. That’s simply not accurate. There are informed liberals and informed democrats. They are informed, but they are (apparently) incapable of lucid thought due to any number of physical or emotional reasons, thus their informed, but incorrect positions. But at least they did some research, for that I can respect them.

No, the voters I am most concerned about are the uninformed of all persuasions. The uninformed have their reasons for being uninformed: I’m “too busy,” I don’t care, both candidates stink, my vote is insignificant, etc.

In MY perfect world, they wouldn’t be allowed to vote. But alas, the world is not perfect and these cretins’ vote will count just like yours and mine. They’ll vote based on name recognition, on skin color, on party affiliation, and an number of other totally illogical reasons to select perhaps the single most important person on the planet.

Our president, man or woman, black or white, will have an impact on every individual living or working in the United States in many ways.  Some will be more affected than others, but the President and the policies that he/she embraces will affect us all. Is selecting that person not important? Isn’t that decision at least as important as where to buy a car, which flat screen TV to buy, or which college our children attend? Decisions that we may agonize over and research for days.

Why then, are so many voters averse to doing some research into the candidates in order to make an informed decision? Unfortunately, many uninformed voters believe themselves to be informed voters. Why, because their information comes entirely from the Mainstream Media (MSM) consisting of print media and network television. By now, I believe it to be an unassailable fact that the MSM in the United States is not objective; they lean liberal and always have. They choose not to publish (or otherwise hide) negative stories about liberals and democrats (John Edwards is the most recent example of that), and choose not to report positive news about the Iraq war or anything at all positive about President Bush and republicans. If the only news that a person hears or sees is tainted, how can that individual make a truly informed decision? That’s easy, they can’t.

And that, dear friend, is what worries me.

Results from two separate nationwide surveys of the general public provide some interesting information as to where voters got their information.

In both surveys, over 80 percent of respondents said that television and newspapers or magazines were personally important for gathering political information. Roughly 77 percent said that they thought political parties and candidates' campaigns were also important to them. Following relatively close behind these were community organizations, radio, and friends, family and coworkers.