Obama Ad Lies About Family Income

/in , /by

In a recent television ad, Barack Obama claims that family incomes are falling:

“For eight years, you’ve been told that the way to a stronger #economy was to give huge tax breaks to corporations and the wealthiest Americans, and somehow prosperity would trickle down. Well now we know the truth. It didn’t work. Instead of prosperity trickling down, pain has trickled up. Working family incomes have fallen by $2,000 a year.”

According to the Tax Foundation, that is not actually true.  They go on to say it is “not even in the ballpark.”

Faith and FactsReal incomes for working families have not even fallen by $2,000 in the entire eight year period of the past eight years, according to the Census Bureau; and that’s even judging by an income metric (cash money income) that doesn’t include in-kind benefits like the value of employer-provided health insurance. . . .

…median family income in 2007 (most recent year data is available) was at an all-time high, and mean working family income (which can be skewed by very high income earners) has actually only fallen by about $348 in real terms since 2000. The latter implies an average decline of about $50 per year, meaning Obama is overstating the decline by about forty-fold.

I realize that in any campaig, both parties make claims that are disputed by their opponents. One role of the media is to fact-check these claims/accusations and report the truth.

Sadly, the mainstream media is embedded so deeply in Obama’s hip pocket they refuse to analyze an outrageous accusation such as this one.

Don’t expect the MSM to call attention to the fact that this ad by Barack Obama and the Democrats is an outright lie.

Voting For McCain is Racist

/in , , , /by

The Wall Street Journal has an excellent article that reflects my concerns over the Democrats persistent use of the race card. I am exhausted by the repetitive, unsubstantiated charges of racism against John McCain’s campaign specifically and Republicans in general. Anyone not voting for Obama must be a racist.

Things are supposed to be looking rosy for Democrats this November. But in case Barack Obama loses the Presidency, an excuse is all ready to go: America’s too racist to elect a black man. Not even, in his Vice Presidential pick Joe Biden’s inimitable description, one so “articulate and bright and clean.”

This narrative has gained traction with the Democratic Presidential candidate’s recent setbacks in the polls. We hear it from the convention crowd in Denver and liberals in the press. The older, poorer, white, often Hillary voter who sounds ambivalent about the Obama coronation is an enticing scapegoat.

“Call me crazy, but isn’t it possible, just possible, that Obama’s lead is being inhibited by the fact that he is, you know, black?” wrote John Heilemann in New York magazine earlier this month. “What makes Obama’s task of scoring white votes at Kerry-Gore levels so formidable is, to put it bluntly, racial prejudice.”

In this week’s Newsweek (and on Slate), Jacob Weisberg reasoned that only some “crazy irrationality over race” could prevent Mr. Obama from winning the White House. If he does win, America will have reached post-prejudice Nirvana. “If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth,” Mr. Weisberg continued. “To the rest of the world, a rejection of the promise he represents wouldn’t just be an odd choice by the United States. It would be taken for what it would be: sign and symptom of a nation’s historical decline.” Wow. Vote for Barack, or America is as irredeemable as many foreigners believe.

The Racism Excuse – WSJ.com.

Reforms by Obama and Ayers a Flop

/1 Comment/in , /by

Obama’s only claim to have executive experience qualifying him for high government office came before being in elected office according to a claim in a 2000 televised debate during a failed campaign to unseat incumbent Democratic Congressman Bobby Rush.  Of that experience, Obama said: “I have chaired major philanthropic efforts on the city, like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) that gave $50 million to prompt school-reform efforts throughout the city.”

It was an impressive line on anyone’s resume. It was also a flop.

According to an article in IBD,

In 1998-99, just 36% of the Annenberg school students in grades three through eight were reading at or above national norms compared with 35% in Chicago schools citywide. In math, the results were similar. Some 43% of Annenberg students were at or above national norms versus 42% for non-Annenberg students.

High school graduation rates for both groups of students were the same at 40%. The Annenberg schools edged out Chicago schools in dropout rates — 35% to 36%. As the report said, there were no signs of improvement that warranted the expenditure of $160 million.

The CAC did not improve the schools, and in some ways made things worse. The executive summary also notes: “Classroom behavior, students’ sense of self-efficacy, and social competence were weaker in 2001 than before the Challenge.”

The report stated: “In 2001, students in Annenberg schools were somewhat less inclined than in 1994 to respect each other, work well together and help each other learn.” Neither student attitudes nor student achievements were aided by Obama’s efforts.

The comprehensive report on the results of efforts by Obama and Ayers goes on to say

When Obama collected the endorsement of the American Federation of Teachers, he told the teachers that support for alternatives to the #education monopoly amounted to “tired rhetoric about vouchers and school choice” even though efforts like the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship, unlike those of the CAC, have produced stunning improvements.

Not being left behind are Obama’s daughters, who attend the private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools. There the tuition ranges from $15,528 for kindergarten to $20,445 for high school. When asked about it during last year’s YouTube debate, Sen. Obama responded that it was “the best option” for his children.

They had a choice Obama would deny others.

Chicago’s children were still being left behind | Right Voices.

Online Voter Registration

/5 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

I am praying that over 150,000,000 people will register and vote in this election season. The opportunity to vote is both a right and a privilege. With the advent of the Internet, online voter registration is easier than ever. While concerns over voter fraud have attorneys piling up the fees, it should not keep anyone away from the polls. You should register online and vote.

Several sites are listed below that show how to register online to vote. Voter registration websites can be just as partisan as our political parties. I have tried to be fair and balanced by including Republicans, Democrats and Others.

Remember to register online for early or absentee voting.

Just Vote
Rock the Vote
Democrat registration form
Republican registration form

CNN Says Obama Is Lying About Ayers

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Give a hat tip to CNN and Anderson Cooper for reporting on the link between Barack Obama and unrpentant domestic terrorist William Ayers.

If you read this blog with any regularity, you know how abhorent double-standards are to me. I regularly criticize the media, and anyone else, for praising one person and condemning another person for exactly the same action.

On that rare occasion when a regular transgressor gets things right, I am glad to call attention to their good deed.

Barack Obama has been lying about his relationship with William Ayers. Obama claims to have barely known Ayers even though Obama served on two non-profit boards with Ayers, put on a major fundraiser with him, and arranged grants to schools at Ayers direction.  Anderson Cooper calls this “dishonest” in his report.

Way to go Coop!

Check these blogs with additional info:

Obama and Ayers: Radical Collaborators

The Obama Ayers Relationship

CNN: Obama Lying About Ayers

Judge Right has an extensive post

Quote of the Day

/2 Comments/in , /by

If John McCain had a long association with a guy who’d bombed abortion clinics, I don’t think people would say, “That’s ancient history.”

IBDeditorials.com: Terrorists For Obama.

McCain Was In Albuquerque Today

/1 Comment/in , , /by

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiPwbX6_6AA

Let Limbaugh Moderate The Next Presidential Debate

/15 Comments/in , , /by

I suggest we ask Rush Limbaugh to ‘moderate’ the next Presidential Debate. He does not have a book coming out on McCain. He has been a harsh critic of McCain at times. While he is a vocal conservative, he would add a good balance to the the line-up of Moderators we have this season. Compare him to Gwen Ifill.

Gwen Ifill is a partisan supporter of Barack Obama. As one writer described her, Ifill is so far in the Obama tank, she needs an oxygen line. She has book coming out that is nothing short of glowing in her admiration for the Senator. she has followed him on the campaign trail and written a piece for Essence that defines the term “Puff.”

What has been the reaction when people have questioned her ability to be impartial? RACISM she cries. She thinks I object to her because she is Black. How frighteningly silly.

I object because she is so obviously biased.

Let Rush Limbaugh moderate the next Presidential Debate. It will set the scales to fair and balanced.

Michelle Malkin’s article » A debate “moderator” in the tank for Obama comments:

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

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

Instapundit says The Fix Is In

.

Pelosi Allows Dems To Vote No

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Why did 94 #Democrats vote against the bailout? Take a look at Bill Dyer’s analysis:

I thought it was bad enough that House Speaker Nancy #Pelosi had made a deliberate decision not to make today’s vote on the Democrat’s economic stabilization bill a “party loyalty” vote in which the House Democratic leadership made absolutely clear that it expected loyal Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. Ignoring all of the immense power to persuade that inheres in the position of Speaker of the House, Speaker Pelosi wouldn’t even offer (or threaten to withhold) so much as a choice Capitol parking spot to make up the 12-vote margin between victory and defeat of H.R. 3997, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

Speaking on John Gibson’s radio show later in the day, however, Karl Rove ran through, by name and often by committee or subcommittee chairmanship, the many, many Democratic members of the House whom Speaker Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership expressly authorized to vote against the economic stabilization bill. Glenn Reynolds boils this down to a succinct sentence which is almost exactly right: Pelosi gave key Democrats a pass on the bailout vote. The only quibble I have is that she didn’t just give key Democrats a pass. She gave them all a blanket pass, and then some members particular and specific encouragement to take it. It is inconceivable that she didn’t know exactly what the result would be.

The Dems Play Games with Votes.

Right Voices has a great video of Karl Rove

Mark My Words is a new blog I have just discovered. Read this for sure.

The Real Culprits In This Meltdown

/3 Comments/in , , /by

I wrote a lengthy post on this top yesterday but Investor’s Business Daily has expanded and improved on my material.

Big Government: Barack Obama and Democrats blame the historic financial turmoil on the market. But if it’s dysfunctional, Democrats during the Clinton years are a prime reason for it…

[I]t was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions.

Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties.

The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority home ownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky sub-prime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but “predatory”…

Obama and Democrats on the Hill think even more regulation and more interference in the market will solve the problem their policies helped cause. For now, unarmed by the historic record, conventional wisdom is buying into their blame-business-first rhetoric and bigger-government solutions.

While government arguably has a role in helping low-income folks buy a home, Clinton went overboard by strong-arming lenders with tougher and tougher regulations, which only led to lenders taking on hundreds of billions in subprime bilge.

Market failure? Hardly. Once again, this crisis has government’s fingerprints all over it.

Powerline quotes Barney Frank in 2003 as saying

‘These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.

Way to go Barney!

Investor’s Business Daily::The Real Culprits In This Meltdown.