Where Da "Whitey" Woman Tape At?

As of my last look around, still no actual tape of Michelle Obama using the expression "whitey" in a blast from the pulpit at Trinity Church. The latest development from Larry Johnson is the allegation that she was involved in a session there with Screwy Louie when the purported outburst took place:

I learned over the weekend why the Republicans who have seen the tape of Michelle Obama ranting about “whitey” describe it as “STUNNING.” I have not seen it but I have heard from five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape. It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan. They are sitting on a panel at Jeremiah Wright’s Church when Michelle makes her intemperate remarks. Whoops!! When that image comes out it will enter the politcal(sic) ads hall of fame. It will be right up there with the little girl plucking daisy petals in the famous 1964 ad LBJ used against Barry Goldwater.

As for the"whitey" episode, there is already a competing narrative developing among Obama supporters. So far, the only consistency from all the libs is this is a Republican hit. What a joke. The R's would hold this to October and, frankly, I think they'd rather face the Oba-messiah, than Hillary, at this point. No way they'd knock Obi off now given the water he has been taking on for weeks. He's damaged goods and I imagine there's plenty more to mine from his past for the general election.

I'm withholding judgment on the entire affair until I see a tape. So far, this could simply be a Johnson / Clinton Camp attempt to smear Obama with a tape that doesn't back up the charges, or doesn't even exist.

From what I understand, it is a tape of Michelle Obama criticizing the Bush administration.

How you'd write it:

Why did Bush cut folks off medicaid?
Why did Bush let New Orleans drown?
Why did Bush do nothing about Jena?
Why did Bush put us in Iraq for no reason?
How you'd say it:

Why'd he cut folks off medicaid?
Why'd he let New Orleans drown?
Why'd he do nothing about Jena?
Why'd he put us in Iraq for no reason?
How Larry Johnson wants you to hear it:

Whitie cut folks off medicaid?
Whitie let New Orleans drown?
Whitie do nothing about Jena?
Whitie put us in Iraq for no reason?

Comments

[jharp]

Fred,

Here is another.

on Karl Rove.

O'Reilly: "What's your beef on Karl Rove and Plame, Valerie Plame? What's your beef about Rove specifically? Because he works for us."

McClellan: "Well, I spoke with Rove about that very incident, and he told me unequivocally that he was not involved in the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity."

O'Reilly: "Right. That's what he told me. So are you telling me he's a liar?"

McClellan: "Did he reveal Plame's identity to anyone? Yes! Matt Cooper. He revealed her identity to Matt Cooper."

O'Reilly: "He said Cooper called him and said -- "

McClellan: "No, what Cooper wrote was that he was the first one to tell me -- the first time I learned that she worked at the CIA."

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Harpie: Re your quote from McClellan saying first that my opinion on misadventure is on record... Do try to recall that every major intelligence agency (Soviets, MOSSAD, Mi-6, et al) said the WMDs existed. The past President said they existed and Saddam confessed to allowing the world to think he had da shit. So falling for the misinformation is valid. Every war we've been in was hyped the same way in one fashion or another. Doesn't make it right, just true.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo, where did that seemingly endless sentence you quoted come from, the book (perhaps Finnegan's Wake?) or an interview or where?

[jharp]

Ted Kennedy in late 2002 pre invasion.

Some key passages from the Kennedy speech:

* "[T]he Administration has not made a convincing case that we face such an imminent threat to our national security that a unilateral, pre-emptive American strike and an immediate war are necessary."

* "[I]nformation from the intelligence community over the past six months does not point to Iraq as an imminent threat to the United States or a major proliferator of weapons of mass destruction."

* "[T]here is no clear and convincing pattern of Iraqi relations with either Al Qaeda or the Taliban."

And Willie I am surprised at you thinking we should reply on foreign intelligence agencies and not our own.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Willie I am surprised at you thinking we should reply on foreign intelligence agencies and not our own."

Assuming you meant rely vis "reply" I would agree...except our own spooks were telling us the same stuff. Then one questions their gleening policies, yes? Look, you should remember that I was on the nogo side all along. See even if there were "terrible machines" they were theater weapons to keep Iran at bay and could not reach my wee haven on the east coast of the US.

[jharp]

"except our own spooks were telling us the same stuff."

Yet there was no evidence to support these claims.

You accuse W of being incompetent and grossly negligent. I say he knew he spouting bullshit.

Why would he tell the weapons inspectors to leave?

And the thing that gets me to this day is why in the fuck we aren't getting to the bottom of who provided the forged documents alleging the phony Niger yellowcake deal.

Seems like a pretty big deal to me.

My 2 cents. They knew all along the case for was nonsense.

And then W turns around and gives George Tenet the president medal of freedom, the highest civilian honor you can get, for completely fucking up his job.

Go figure.

[Worst President Ever]

Before we invaded Iraq, the UN had weapons inspectors in Iraq looking for evidence of WMDs and they hadn't found anything of note. Certainly nothing worth going to war over.

[jharp]

"The buck stops here" is a phrase that was popularized by U.S. President Harry S. Truman. It refers to "passing the buck," i.e., handing responsibility to someone else, and the fact that the president has to make the decisions and accept the ultimate responsibility for those decisions.

Let's all hope our next President changes the Bush policy of blame everyone else and accepts responsibility for his actions.

[jharp]

Where'd everyone go?

Must be listening to Obama's historic and awe inspiring speech.

[Liberal Sheep]

"--- historic and awe inspiring speech ---"

Historic? Yes, the first Negro presumptive nominee of a major party.

Awe inspiring? Not particularly so. I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop, where after all the emotion is spent... for Obie to ask Hills to be his veep. If that happens the massive 100+ electoral vote landslide will be all but locked in.

[bobInStamford]

Wow, $4 gas and a black president. Well played, rednecks! Now go hide your guns before B. Hussein takes them away from you.

[seekeronos]

Dear Resident Trool: (spelling purposely intended)*

a) you say "black president" as though that were a bad thing. Unfortunately, the particular man in question is but an empty suit. Were that man of the qualifications or prudence of an Alan Keyes, or a Thomas Sowell, or a Clarence Thomas, I'd leap over fences to elect him. However, America's first "black presidential nominee" is a marxist, a snake oil salesman, and quite possibly a man of relatively adjusting morality which an alleycat would envy (although not yet closing in on Ol' Billy Bob himself).

b) although I am quite certain that you toss out the "hide your guns" barb as a means to troll for a response, I feel compelled to remind you, my dear multi-degreed Darthmouthite, that your statement reflects either a drastic lack of knowledge of our constitution, or a willing ignorance that is not to be mocked, but rather pitied.

Presidents cannot override the constitution to "take away everybody's guns", and even if he were to attempt it via a declaration of national emergency after the manner of the guns confiscated during the Katrina fiasco on a nationwide scale, the blowback could touch off another civil war.

And that is not a good thing, not at all.

All that said, if indeed it comes to pass that Obama will be our "dread overlord" come 20 January 2009, I shall greet him with the respect due his office, while praying that God will not utterly destroy this republic in His terrible wrath, but that through the awful things which will follow an Obama presidency, that the nation, broken hearted, will turn to God in repentance for the restoration of the Republic.

[IslamoLlama]

History is made as an African American is - for the first time - nominated to represent a major political party in a US Presidential election.

FOX News cries "Racism!", Dick Cheney loads his gun, the RNC ramps up its Facebook campaign, and John McCain pees himself a little - but only because he's got a bladder control issue, not because he's afraid.

Colin Powell goes out behind the back of his house and pounds sand.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Were that man of the qualifications or prudence of an Alan Keyes, or a Thomas Sowell, or a Clarence Thomas, I'd leap over fences to elect him. However, America's first "black presidential nominee" is a marxist, a snake oil salesman, and quite possibly a man of relatively adjusting morality which an alleycat would envy (although not yet closing in on Ol' Billy Bob himself). --"

So you won't vote for him because he's black. Got it.

"-- although I am quite certain that you toss out the "hide your guns" barb as a means to troll for a response, I feel compelled to remind you, my dear multi-degreed Darthmouthite, that your statement reflects either a drastic lack of knowledge of our constitution, or a willing ignorance that is not to be mocked, but rather pitied. --"

2nd Amendment is the only amendment that matters. Just ask Jose Padilla. I'm pretty sure they let him keep his guns.

"-- Presidents cannot override the constitution to "take away everybody's guns", and even if he were to attempt it via a declaration of national emergency after the manner of the guns confiscated during the Katrina fiasco on a nationwide scale, the blowback could touch off another civil war. --"

The other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights are fair game. Just don't take our guns or we'll start shooting cops and FBI agents. Hurray patriotism!

"-- All that said, if indeed it comes to pass that Obama will be our "dread overlord" come 20 January 2009, I shall greet him with the respect due his office, while praying that God will not utterly destroy this republic in His terrible wrath, but that through the awful things which will follow an Obama presidency, that the nation, broken hearted, will turn to God in repentance for the restoration of the Republic. --"

God doesn't like black people either. You're making a terrible mistake. Please elect a non-scary-black-man for President or I'll be forced to hide in my fall out shelter until the second coming of Ronald Reagen.

FUCKING AWESOME! THIS KOOL-AID TASTES GREAT! AND THE TRACK SUITES ARE SO EASY FITTING AND COMFORTABLE! TIME FOR A NAP, THEN UFOs TO HEAVEN! HAHA! GOP FOR LIFE, BITCHES!

[Worst President Ever]

Seek, you seem to think anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan is a Marxist. Makes me wonder if you understand what Marxism is, because Democrats in general and Obama in particular ain't Marxists.

And God, if he / she even exists, isn't a partisan Republican and really, from all evidence, doesn't give a rat's ass who we elect as president - see George Bush - or what we do as a nation.

[shockwave]

"...go hide your guns..."

I don't think so, ape. As a matter of fact, I've been at the shooting range the past few weeks sharpening my skills. My motto is to be prepared for the worst, just in case it happens. If it doesn't, then apes like you can continue to multiply, even though it is a waste of precious resources. Really, you ought to drive yourself off a cliff or something. Think of it as a public service.

[Fred Beloit]

One simply must admire the Llama. Moe is a person of integrity and fairness who is always careful to debate only the issues, like all good libs.

He says: "John McCain pees himself a little - but only because he's got a bladder control issue, not because he's afraid."

[seekeronos]

Now that Islamoe has had time to take his meds and cool down... let's review a few things:

"--- So you won't vote for him because he's black. Got it. ---"

No, I said I won't vote for him because he is not a man of quality. This has nothing to do with his skin colour.

If a conservative, Christian black man were running with the DNC nom, I'd vote for him just as certainly as I will not vote for the ultra-liberal, Soros-funded, ACORN-loving Red Obama.

"--- 2nd Amendment is the only amendment that matters. Just ask Jose Padilla. I'm pretty sure they let him keep his guns. ---"

Oh, look. Another wild leap, a blind jump, to something off topic.

"--- The other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights are fair game. Just don't take our guns or we'll start shooting cops and FBI agents. Hurray patriotism! ---"

Once again, you are reading into something completely off topic here. I'm responding to a troll who decides to bait the hook for how "President Barry 'Heinrich' Obama" will take away the 2nd amendment by presidential fiat. Constitutionally, it has very little chance of happening.

Even by executive order, it would fly, but only after substantial national division, if not civil war. I don't think that Obama is ready to try and make a Lincoln out of himself by forcing his will over gun rights. Most likely he will appoint some of his Marxist buddies to the SCOTUS and lower federal courts to gradually chip away at the 2nd amendment in order to get an interpretation that speaks of gun ownership a collective right of the state rather than a personal right.

But in fairness, the other nine amendments are just as important. This is not a thread where I will address them.

"--- God doesn't like black people either. You're making a terrible mistake. Please elect a non-scary-black-man for President or I'll be forced to hide in my fall out shelter until the second coming of Ronald Reagen. ---"

Again, you purposely twist my words. I said that I would be "praying that God will not utterly destroy this republic in His terrible wrath, but that through the awful things which will follow an Obama presidency, that the nation, broken hearted, will turn to God in repentance for the restoration of the Republic."

Obama will be every bit as much a curse from God upon this nation as Bush was, and even more so: Bush savaged the Constitution while making a claim to be putting the interests of the Global War on Terror ahead of all else.

Yes, Bush and Clinton both have been part of a progressively worsening series of evil rulers authorized by God and delivered by the devil to chasten this nation toward repentance, and because we have not heeded God's word, they have become for our nation a snare for our feet and scorpions in our beds.

Obama shall be a judgment from God that will make the Bush years look like Eisenhower's by comparison.

And by the way, Reagan is dead in his grave, awaiting the descent of our Lord, the Word of God, Jesus Christ, from His Holy Heaven.

JESUS will be the one making a second coming, and He is the True God and the Eternal King of Israel, who shall rule the nations of the earth with an iron rod (Psalm 2)

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%202&version=9;

[IslamoLlama]

"-- If a conservative, Christian black man were running with the DNC nom, I'd vote for him just as certainly as I will not vote for the ultra-liberal, Soros-funded, ACORN-loving Red Obama. --"

So you won't vote for him because he's Red? I don't think Barack Obama has any Native American blood in him. But... ok. I'm just saying that you're party happily voted for big government, pro-war, anti-civil rights, Christian-in-name-only Presidential candidates since Eisenhower. You seem to be allergic to one of two Obama traits. The color of his skin or the (D) in front of his name. All that nonsense about "ultra-liberal", "Soros-funded", and "ACORN-loving" doesn't say much about his voting record or your problem with his political platforms. While they're very pretty little conservative ephitets, they simply highlight how little you actually know about the candidates. How much money has Obama received from George Soros, for instance? And how has this money negatively influenced his campaign? Does this make him a better or worse candidate than, say, Bob Barr and why? If Rupert Murdoch donates money to a candidate, does that serve as a black mark or a redemning grace? We never find out.

"-- "--- 2nd Amendment is the only amendment that matters. Just ask Jose Padilla. I'm pretty sure they let him keep his guns. ---"

Oh, look. Another wild leap, a blind jump, to something off topic. --"

I think it has everything to do with the topic at hands. You have no gun rights in jail. Ergo, you have no gun rights if you can be jailed without cause or recourse. Clinging to guns doesn't protect your 2nd Amendment rights when you allow a government official the power to freeze your bank accounts, spy on your family and friends, and send a SWAT team to your door to arrest you on false charges.

Barack Obama has expressed interest in repealing all of Bush's anti-Constitutional executive orders and Presidential power grabs. John McCain has demanded more Presidential war-time powers and refused to question George Bush's executive orders or investigate his torture programs and domestic spying operations. The difference is stark and very real. If you value your guns, a vote for John McCain saves you that right in name only. If you value your right to practice your religion in peace without US storm troopers kicking down your front door and kidnapping your kids - just ask the Texas mormons who they'll be voting for in the fall. I'm betting they're not going straight ticket GOP after the last month.

"-- Yes, Bush and Clinton both have been part of a progressively worsening series of evil rulers authorized by God and delivered by the devil to chasten this nation toward repentance, and because we have not heeded God's word, they have become for our nation a snare for our feet and scorpions in our beds. --"

Then we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. I've yet to see a candidate that hasn't been labeled as a damnation on the soul of America by some corner of the political sphere. At a certain point, cries of "Jesus says you should vote for my guy!" ring hollow. People have to start using common sense and stop relying on religious doctrine that gets twisted to serve whatever cause du jour happens to be on the ballot.

Clinton damns us. Bush damns us. McCain damns us. Obama damns us. I don't see the Constitution Party or the Libertarian Party doing any better just because they cling to your version of a sound tax policy. Certainly cherubs haven't opened up the sky and anointed any Presidential Nominees that I've ever lived through. Why both turning to religion at all for political guidance? Just go off and don't vote. Hide away from the rest of the wicked, wicked world. Dive into the belly of the whale and bemoan how mankind is doomed, doomed, doomed. Then pray for rapture and enjoy yourself.

[seekeronos]

"--- Seek, you seem to think anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan is a Marxist. Makes me wonder if you understand what Marxism is, because Democrats in general and Obama in particular ain't Marxists. ---"

Funny thing. Ronaldus Magnus himself was once a Truman Democrat.

It's a fact.

But that aside, I think that most people to the left of *Calvin Coolidge* are likely to be just a little bit funny in the head, but that's just me.

I think that I have a fairly good ideal of what Marxists are about: BIG government, socialized/collectivized everything, little freedom of choice, centrally planned economy.

Those are the basics.

State religion (in the form of coerced atheism) is also high on their list.

Now most Democrats aren't true Marxists, but many of them have grown comfortable with the sharp push leftward toward socialized medicine, ideas about nationalizing the oil companies, pushing radical dogmas (such as the homosexual agenda which is a statistically minute population group relative to most Americans).

Much of the Democratic leadership grew up under the influence of retrenched Trotskyites and Marxists from the 1960s. Obama has his mentors in liberation theologists like Wright and Pfleger and oddly enough, his atheist mother and socialist father and his other African relatives. He has his roots with ACORN, much discussed in other recent posts here on RWV.

Hillary is not terribly far behind him for that matter, but moderate enough in the eyes of most Dems... which will make this primary drama culminate in a joint Obie-Hill ticket to keep angered Democratic moderates/blue dogs from drifting into McCain orbit.

But if you must put me into some sort of category, I'm probably best described as a Old Right, non-interventionist, pro-faith (Bible-believing, fundamentalist Christianity in particular) pro-family values (i.e. sexual purity, purity of the marriage bed, marriages-conscientiously-and-loving-entered-into-once-for-life) and pro-life, pro-small business, pro-growth, small government paleoconservative with a few libertarian quirks (such as my not really caring who smokes pot or who drinks liquor, but also acknowledging with that my right not to have to pay for their willfully self-inflicted diseases with my taxes).

"--- And God, if he / she even exists, isn't a partisan Republican and really, from all evidence, doesn't give a rat's ass who we elect as president - see George Bush - or what we do as a nation. ---"

God, the Living and True God, The Heavenly Father of Lights, the LORD (YHWH) is HIS Name, and HIS SON, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is One in Being with The Father through the trinity by the Holy Spirit.

Blessed be the Name of the LORD, our Father, and through Whom is our Salvation in Christ Jesus, who is truly God born of perfect human flesh, our Kinsman-Redeemer-King.

His kindom is "not of this world", (John 18:36) and on this matter, you are actually correct: He is not partisan, but acts to see His will done on earth, (Ephesians 1:11, Daniel 4:35, Ecclesiastes 3:14) and it is He that setteth up one king (or president) and deposes another.(Psalm 75:7, Daniel 2:21).

Keeping this in mind, it is HIS will that one man or another become the president of these United States; even if that decision is in the hands of the electorate, it shall be the LORD's doing.

Therefore, if it is indeed God's will for Obama to be our next president (though as a free agent I do not vote for Obama) --- if it comes to pass on 5 November that he is then known as "President Elect Obama, then though I shall be agreived in my heart for this nation, I shall yet rejoice in my God's will being done, and shall continue to seek His counsel and His face as to what His plans for me shall be then.

[seekeronos]

"--- So you won't vote for him because he's Red? I don't think Barack Obama has any Native American blood in him. But... ok. ---"

I am not voting for him because he is a RED, as in "Marxist". You know, like Red as in "Red China" or "Red October", or "Red Commie". The undiluted communist, of who folks like you are but diluted and watered down pinko-liberals.

"--- I'm just saying that you're party happily voted for big government, pro-war, anti-civil rights, Christian-in-name-only Presidential candidates since Eisenhower All that nonsense about "ultra-liberal", "Soros-funded", and "ACORN-loving" doesn't say much about his voting record or your problem with his political platforms. While they're very pretty little conservative ephitets, they simply highlight how little you actually know about the candidates. How much money has Obama received from George Soros, for instance? And how has this money negatively influenced his campaign? Does this make him a better or worse candidate than, say, Bob Barr and why? If Rupert Murdoch donates money to a candidate, does that serve as a black mark or a redemning grace? We never find out. ---"

Ah, the scatter-shot approach which would take me until after dinner to answer each one. A very well played Kossack ploy. Unfortunately, I am not going to bite.

Let me just summarize and say that I don't agree with many, if not most of the positions Obam has taken, his past record, which includes endorsements from Marxists and Democratic SOCIALISTS (the DSA, the American chapter of the same ultra-leftist party that failed to elect Ségolène Royal to the French presidency).

The money is itself affecting his campaign rather wonderfully, allowing him to outspend Hillary by several factors, and outspend McCain by an order of magnitude. It is all the reason why a (relative) nobody - a junior senator from IL could beat the presumptive Queen of the Democrats at her own game.

The money item will be the reason why Obama gets prime treatment from the press, the best advertising and marketing staff, whilst third party candidates like Barr and Baldwin will be lucky to get ex-Ron Paulites to run up some less-than glossy ads on YouTube and similar venues.

While reaching the youth may yet pay great dividends for Libertarians and Constitutionalists years down the road, I regretfully do not see much chance for either of these men to emrge beyond the role of spoiler votes.

And Murdoch? He probably doesn't give a tweet about our electoral process being an Aussie and forbidden by law from contributing directly from his resources. If I had to venture a guess as to who he'd support, I'd probably say he wouldn't mind another RiNO (McCain) to run things.

As for Soros - here - don't ever say I didn't help you out. Here's a link to Google to tie down the Soros-Obama connection:

http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+soros+connection&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

"--- I think (the Padilla case) it has everything to do with the topic at hands. You have no gun rights in jail. Ergo, you have no gun rights if you can be jailed without cause or recourse. Clinging to guns doesn't protect your 2nd Amendment rights when you allow a government official the power to freeze your bank accounts, spy on your family and friends, and send a SWAT team to your door to arrest you on false charges. ---"

I suppose not; and I'll even agree that the Padilla case was, and is, and continues to be a travesty of justice and an outright overthrow of the Constitution. If Obie is truly serious about righting this particular wrong, the first thing he will do will be to grant a full presidential pardon to Padilla.

On the flip side, a well-armed people shall more ably restrain the excesses of those "entrusted" to govern.

"--- Barack Obama has expressed interest in repealing all of Bush's anti-Constitutional executive orders and Presidential power grabs. ---"

I'll believe it when I see it, and won't be surprised if he fails (or more likely: choose not) to deliver. Meanwhile, I fully expect him to be an accomplice in the worst economy this nation has had to face since FDR's bungling of the Great Depression. He may very well sweep Carter's records for inducing economic malaise.

"--- John McCain has demanded more Presidential war-time powers and refused to question George Bush's executive orders or investigate his torture programs and domestic spying operations. ---"

I'll not be terribly surprised if that is so. The torture thing is a bit odd, considering his record as a formerly tortured.

"--- The difference is stark and very real. If you value your guns, a vote for John McCain saves you that right in name only. If you value your right to practice your religion in peace without US storm troopers kicking down your front door and kidnapping your kids - just ask the Texas mormons who they'll be voting for in the fall. I'm betting they're not going straight ticket GOP after the last month. ---"

And I suspect that those mormons were never very big on voting before, but given that the CP's Texas branch is among the more developed branches of the CP, I'll not be surprised to hear that they supported Chuck Baldwin.

Most of us "religious types" are fairly well convinced that the general notion of the "Party of Even Bigger Government" would be plenty happy to not only take away their kids and their guns, but to also tell them how to worship the state (since a true Marxist has no other gods to follow).

"--- Then we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. I've yet to see a candidate that hasn't been labeled as a damnation on the soul of America by some corner of the political sphere. At a certain point, cries of "Jesus says you should vote for my guy!" ring hollow. People have to start using common sense and stop relying on religious doctrine that gets twisted to serve whatever cause du jour happens to be on the ballot. ---"

I agree. Heh, betcha didn't see that coming.

Indeed, the "evangelicals" got schnookered, hook, line, and stinker by the Rove Machine of Fear. But that's not much different from the Dems who line up at the trough of entitlements whenever the Dem candidates promise to hand them out. The sword, as "they" say, cuts both ways.

A rational review of the candidates along _with_ prayer can be most efficacious for pointing a believer in the right way.

Unbelievers can only hope that their sense of "rational review" doesn't get blindsided by the spiritual baggage they are tied down with.

"--- Clinton damns us. Bush damns us. McCain damns us. Obama damns us. ---"

Yup, they are all pretty much useless in my book.

"--- I don't see the Constitution Party or the Libertarian Party doing any better just because they cling to your version of a sound tax policy. ---"

The Constitution Party is pretty much online with everything I stand for.

Paleoconservative? Check.
Sound money (based on standardized, hard commodity such as gold & silver) ? Check.
Non-interventionism foreign policy (DOD only used for continental and territorial defense) ? Check.
Small government? check.
Tight budget with accountability? Check.
Preservation of Judaeo-Christian values and sound moral values? Check.
Preservation of American culture (and yes, by that I mean primarily that northern European: Anglo-Saxon-Celtic-Ibero-Frankish-Scandinavian strain of culture) ? Check.
English as a national language? Check.
Preservation of Amendments 1-10 in particular? Check.
Repeal of the 16th amendment (income tax) ? By God's will and prayer and fasting.

Chuck Baldwin in 2008, and downticket CP'ers where they are avialable in contrast to RiNOS? Check, and checked again.

http://www.baldwin2008.com

[tally]

history is made > for president,the democrats nominate the first anti-american racist. gawd, this is a hoot.

[jharp]

so now wives are fair game?

Cool, then where is the story about Cindy McCain's drug use?

Where is the story about how she actually stole drugs?

Where is the story about how John McCain ditched his first wife, an invalid, for this rich trophy bride second wife - since we're talking wives?

[jharp]

post below is from Americablog.com

Sorry. I hit post before I gave due credit.