Much has been written about Barak Obama's positions on the issues.  Obama himself has repeatedly lied about his positions, calling others liars when they accurately quote positions he has taken and things he has done and said.  In an attempt to show in irrefutable form what Barak Obama has really done and said, Guy Benson, Mary Katharine Ham, and Ed Morrissey at Hot Air have assembled "The comprehensive argument against Barack Obama" profusely illustrated with videos of Obama.  Topics covered include:

ABORTION
TAXES
RADICAL ASSOCIATIONS
FOREIGN POLICY JUDGMENT
DISDAIN FOR THE HEARTLAND
THE RACE CARD
LACK OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
MILITARY POLICY

This is not a 90 second summary, but if you really want to know more about Barak Obama, take the time to read this article and watch the many video clips it contains.

Bumped to top.

Michael Ramirez's latest:

HT Power Line

The following is Dr. Dobson's October newsletter in its entirety.

Dear Friends,

Can you feel the tension in the air? The nation — and indeed, the world — is holding its collective breath as the final days of the presidential campaign wind down and the candidates engage in one last round of electioneering and debating. By this time next month, we'll know whether Senator John McCain or Senator Barack Obama will be inaugurated in January as the 44th President of the United States.

Considering the stark differences between the two presidential candidates and the critical issues that are hanging in the balance, it's not difficult to understand why Campaign 2008 has been such a spirited affair. I'd like to take a few moments to consider what is at stake in this year's election, particularly for those of us who embrace a biblical worldview. Please understand that I will share these thoughts under the umbrella of Focus on the Family Action™, which has supported the preparation and distribution of this letter. Focus Action is, in turn, supported by contributions from those who do not receive tax deductible receipts for them. Thanks so much to you who made it possible.

Let's start with the need to elect a pro-family, pro-life President. The importance of this objective cannot be overstated. Between 2009 and 2012, there will likely be two or more opportunities for the President to nominate new justices to the Supreme Court. Some court watchers say there could be as many as four resignations. That alone should give us serious pause as we consider for whom to cast our votes. In the months ahead, the Supreme Court will likely hand down rulings that will impact America for generations to come. We need a President who will nominate conservative, strict-constructionist judges to the Court. If that doesn't happen, the highest court in the land could become stackedóeven more than it already isówith justices who will endeavor to legislate from the bench and impose a liberal agenda on the nation. It will likely affect the definition of marriage, religious freedom, and the protection (or lack thereof) of life in the womb.

It's probably obvious which of the two major party candidates' views are most palatable to those of us who embrace a pro-life, pro-family worldview. While I will not endorse either candidate this year, I can say that I am now supportive of Senator John McCain and his bid for the presidency. This is not because I am beholden to the Senator from Arizona or to the Republican Party. Anyone who has even a passing familiarity with my views knows that I have agonized at times during this election process, and have been strongly critical of Senator McCain and the Republican Party on numerous occasions. My concern is for the biblical and moral values that I and millions of Americans hold dear. I will gladly support politicians of any stripe who are willing to defend the sanctity of human life, support the institution of traditional marriage, protect the country from terrorism and advance the cause of religious liberty. While certainly not perfect, the 2008 Republican platform comes closest to embracing those ideals by a wide margin.

In recent weeks, I have received some measure of criticism from those who feel that my "change of heart" toward John McCain is unwarranted. I understand those views and concede that the Senator continues to embrace positions that concern me. I don't apologize, however, for reevaluating our options in this election year. John Maynard Keynes, whose views I have disagreed with strongly, said this about reversing course: "When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"¹ In this instance, Keynes' perspective is correct. Every thinking person will eventually have reason to change his or her mind as circumstances evolve, as they have done during this long political ordeal.

There are four primary — and I believe compelling — reasons why I now view the McCain presidential candidacy favorably:

1. During the "Saddleback Forum" on Aug. 16, Sens. Obama and McCain fielded questions from the Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren. Senator McCain gave very solid and encouraging answers to questions about the sanctity of life and the institution of marriage, whereas Senator Obama came down at the other end of the argument.

   You will recall the following interchange during the forum:

   Pastor Rick Warren: "At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?"

   Senator Obama: "...Answering that question with specificity, you know, is, uh, is, above my pay grade."²

   With all due respect, Senator, if this question is above your pay grade, then so is the job attached to it.

2. The Republican Partyís 2008 national platform is a remarkably conservative document.³ Indeed, it is the strongest pro-life platform in the history of the party, surpassing even the pro-life advances of the Reagan years. It was approved and sanctioned by the McCain campaign.
3. Senator McCain selected an astonishingly strong pro-life, pro-family running mate in Governor Sarah Palin. Although he could have embraced a liberal Vice Presidential nominee, such as Senator Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, he made the bold decision to join forces with a VP pick whose views reflect those of the party's conservative base. I'll discuss Governor Palin's candidacy in greater detail in a moment.
4. The longer the campaign continues, the more concerned I have become with Barack Obama's liberal views. Certainly, he is an attractive and very charismatic candidate who has embarked on a campaign of historical proportions. However, the majority of his policies represent the antithesis of principles I hold dear. Senator Obama's record is more liberal than that of any other Democrat in the Senate⁴ — and that's saying something! For example, when he was a state senator in Illinois, he voted four times in three years against legislation that would have saved the lives of babies that managed to survive the abortion process.⁵ The U.S. Senate subsequently passed similar legislation called The Born-Alive Infant Protection Act by unanimous consent.⁶ (Obama was not a U.S. Senator at the time.) State Senator Obama was chairman of the committee that opposed this protection of babies, and in 2001 and 2002 was the only legislator who rose to argue against the Illinois Born Alive Act.⁷ That is an undeniable fact!

My good friend, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum published a scathing analysis of Senator Obama's pro-abortion record earlier this year. Here is an excerpt of what he wrote:

In March 2001, [Senator] Obama was the sole speaker in opposition to the bill on the floor of the Illinois Senate. He said: "We're saying they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a 9-month child delivered to term. I mean, it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child."⁸ So according to [Senator] Obama, "they", (babies who survive abortions or any other preterm newborns,) should be permitted to be killed because giving legal protection to preterm newborns would have the effect of banning all abortions.⁹

To further underscore Senator Obama's radical devotion to abortion rights, he has promised that "the first thing I'd do as president" would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.¹⁰ The FOCA is a devastating piece of legislation that would overturn nearly every local, state, and federal anti-abortion law passed in the last 40 years.¹¹ In fact, it's so broadly written that legal analysts suggest the bill may prevent institutions and physicians from refusing to provide abortion services by invoking the conscience clause.

Earlier this year, while talking about sex education and abortion, the Senator said the following: "I've got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."¹² In other words, a pre-born baby is viewed as a form of punishment, and can therefore be murdered in the name of convenience.

It is a matter of historic significance that Barack Obama has become the first African-American to capture the nomination of a major political party for the office of President of the United States. I applaud that remarkable accomplishment. Nevertheless, I cannot support his candidacy because the positions he holds on moral, social and family issues place him at the extreme left of the political spectrum. What the Senator believes and the policies he would seek to implement are on a collision course with the biblical principles and beliefs I have fought to defend for more than 35 years.

Turning the corner, the significance of Governor Palin to the 2008 presidential race is also worthy of further consideration. Here is a woman who is a deeply committed Christian, and who is pro-life not only with regard to her policies, but in her personal life. She and her husband welcomed their latest child, Trig, into the world even though he was diagnosed with Down syndrome while still in the womb. Approximately 90 percent of babies with Down syndrome are aborted,¹³ but Governor Palin carried her precious child to term and now loves and cares for him despite the challenges associated with a special needs child. Similarly, her teenage daughter, Bristol, who became pregnant out of wedlock, could have bowed to cultural pressure to seek an abortion. Instead, she and the father plan to get married and raise their child together. Governor Palin has been married for 20 years, and by all accounts, she is a portrait of Christian motherhood and womanhood.

As for Governor Palin's qualifications to be Vice President of the United States and to assume the mantle of President, should that ever become necessary, she is much better suited for the job than the talking heads on the liberal Left would have you believe. She came out of nowhere to win the Alaskan gubernatorial race against a powerful incumbent. While in office, she bravely fought widespread corruption — including that within her own party — in the face of great opposition. Govenor Palin's critics suggest that her experience as mayor of a "small town" is somehow a liability, but it is an asset. In fact, her time as Mayor of Wasilla and then as Governor of Alaska gives her a greater degree of executive experience than Senator Barack Obama can claim. Her qualifications to be Vice President, I would submit, exceed those of Senator Barack Obama, who spent only 143 working days in the U.S. Senate prior to announcing his run for President.¹⁴ He authored no significant legislation during that time.

I'm sure you have heard the shrill voices from the political Left decrying Mrs. Palin for any and every reason under the sun. They gloat over the pregnancy of her daughter Bristol and claim it as "evidence" that abstinence education, which Sarah Palin strongly supports, is somehow a sham. They criticize Governor Palin for daring to hold political office and run for Vice President while having a baby at home, even though the Left has for decades supported a woman's right to do just that. The attacks on Governor Palin and her family in recent weeks have been astonishingly unfair and mean-spirited. If she were a liberal Democrat, she would be praised and lauded for making the same decisions for which she is now being criticized. The double standard is obvious.

Governor Palin's decision to run for Vice President while raising a baby with special needs has given pause to some conservative voices as well. Some have even questioned my enthusiasm over Governor Palin's candidacy in light of these circumstances. It's important to note that although I have often said stay-at-home moms are vitally important to raising the next generation, I have never suggested that it is wrong for mothers to work outside the home. Indeed, Focus on the Family® has hired thousands of mothers over the years. I have said, however, that if a mother is going to enter the workplace, she and her husband must first find a way to meet the needs of their children. Sarah Palin appears to have done that. Todd, her husband, is actively involved in the raising of their children, and it seems obvious that Sarah will continue to be a positive force in her children's lives even as she carries out her duties in the political arena. Regardless of your political views, may I suggest that the Palins need our prayers, not our disdain, at this critical moment in our nation's history.

Senator Obama's selection of fellow liberal Democrat Joseph Biden (Del.) is also extremely revealing. While the National Journal ranked Obama the most liberal Senator last year, Senator Biden was ranked 3rd on their list — just ahead of Vermont's Bernie Sanders, a self-avowed socialist.¹⁵ While the Senator of 36 years from Delaware stands in blatant opposition to the pro-family movement, many of you will remember him from his vociferous opposition to several of our finer Supreme Court justices, namely, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Alito and Thomas.

Returning to our theme, America's future seems to hang in the balance at this time. Our next President will have a dramatic impact on countless legislative issues. Since being relegated to minority status in 2006, Senate Republicans have skillfully used the rules of parliamentary procedure to frustrate many of the Democrats' attempts to pass bad legislation. To this point, that effort has almost always been backed by a President who is willing to use the veto pen when necessary. The threat of President Bush's veto on hate crimes legislation and issues regarding the sanctity of life have kept a Democrat-controlled Congress from implementing its liberal agenda. Will our next President stand up to Congress in the same manner, or will he side with them, thereby giving the Democrats free reign to impose their liberal values on America?

It is likely, say the pundits, that both the House and the Senate in the 111th Congress will still be controlled by Democrats. If that party also takes the White House, a wave of anti-family, pro-homosexual legislation is almost guaranteed to pass in 2009. The bills put forward and advanced this year by Democrats reveal where they want to take the country. For example, they inserted hate crimes language into the 2008 Defense Authorization Bill, but were forced to remove it in conference, again under the threat of veto.¹⁶ While in the Illinois Senate, Senator Obama voted for a bill authorizing "comprehensive" sex education beginning in kindergarten. Defenders have attempted to downplay its significance, citing the fact that it called for the content to be "age appropriate" and "medically accurate" — dubious and subjective qualifiers given the sensitive nature of the topic and innocence of the audience!¹⁷ (When criticized for supporting this legislation, the Senator was dismissive and said proudly, I quote, "It's the right thing to do."¹⁸)

Large portions of the agenda promoted by homosexual activists will also be enacted. The implications for a federal hate crimes law are clear. People speaking against homosexuality have already been prosecuted under hate crimes laws both in the United States and abroad. If a federal hate crimes law passes, there will be little to prevent the government from endeavoring to control and curtail religious speech, especially from the pulpit. It is entirely possible that a pastor could be charged with inducing a federal hate crime simply by preaching from one of the many biblical passages that address homosexuality.

Congressional Democrats will also seek to pass the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, meaning businesses will be forced to accept and condone homosexuality — and possibly transgenderism — in making employment decisions. Further, business owners, including religious businesses, will not be able to make hiring and firing decisions based on their religious convictions. Earlier this year, Senator Barack Obama said, "I will place the weight of my administration behind the enactment of the Matthew Shepherd Act to outlaw hate crimes and a fully inclusive Employment Nondiscrimination Act."¹⁹

Finally, I am deeply concerned about the tax and spend policies Senator Obama will impose on the American people if he is elected, especially in light of the current financial crisis. This is not the time to be taking money out of the economy, yet, he has proposed enormous new federal programs and entitlements that will cost multiple billions of dollars. These initiatives cannot be effected without huge increases in taxation on businesses, which will be passed on to the public and to individual families. This will almost certainly require a return of the odious marriage penalty tax that plagued families for 32 years!

The races for the White House and the Congress are hardly the only matters worthy of concern in this election cycle. At the state and local levels, numerous policies and pieces of legislation are being put to a vote, and many of them are directly related to family and moral issues. For example, the definition of marriage is on the ballot in Arizona (Proposition 102), California (Proposition 8) and Florida (Amendment 2). Voters in Colorado will be given the opportunity to expand the definition of "personhood" to include all human beings from the moment of fertilization (Amendment 48). In South Dakota, voters will be asked to ban all abortions except those involving cases of rape and incest, or when the pregnancy seriously jeopardizes the life or physical health of the mother (Measure 11). Michigan is considering whether to legalize embryonic stem cell research, which would result in the killing of tiny human beings. In California, voters will also get the chance to decide whether minor girls should be required to give 48 hoursí notice to a parent or adult relative before having an abortion (Proposition 4). Arkansas voters will decide whether to prevent couples living together out of wedlock — heterosexual or homosexual — from adopting children or serving as foster parents.

These are just a few of the important issues that, depending on which state you live in, will be on the ballot next month. I implore you to spend the few days remaining before the election researching the various amendments, ballot measures, and local and national candidates. Then, exercise your responsibility before God to vote on or before Nov 4. Please, let your voices be heard. For more information, visit Focus on the Family Actionís Web site at focusaction.org.

Regardless of your political views, I want to urge Christians everywhere to be in prayer about this election. There are many scriptural references wherein King David "inquired of God" when he was faced by troubling circumstances (1 Samuel 23:2,4; 30:8; 2 Samuel 2:1; 5:19,23). It is time for Christians everywhere to turn to Him for guidance and wisdom. Find some time to be still and listen to what He wants to tell you. The National Day of Prayer Task Force, led by my wonderful wife, Shirley, has embarked on a national campaign entitled "Pray for Election Day." All around the country, individuals and groups are being encouraged to gather every Thursday leading up to Nov. 4 between 12 noon and 12:30 p.m. Spend time with the Lord, asking Him to guide and direct those privileged to cast a ballot. If you are able, I would also encourage you to fast and pray immed"ately before the election. After all, it was the Reverend Billy Graham who once said that ìTo get nations back on their feet, we must first get down on our knees."²⁰ Amen, Dr. Graham.

This election is about the future of the nation, but it will also go a long way toward determining the culture your children and grandchildren will come to know. I know you will vote with your children and your children's children in mind. That certainly puts the election in a different light, doesn't it?

You know my heart on these issues, and I hope you understand that I am less concerned with politicians and political parties than I am with the timeless biblical principles that those parties have the power to either strengthen or damage. No candidate is perfect, whether in this election or any other. Please don't make your decisions lightly. There is simply too much at stake. May God grant each of us wisdom as Nov. 4 approaches.

Sincerely,

James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
Founder and Chairman

P.S. Since I began researching and writing this letter, the economic meltdown on Wall Street and congressional reaction to it has occurred. These are, indeed, difficult times for American families and businesses. Thank you for continuing to support this ministry, even though in many cases it has required sacrificial giving. You are helping to keep us afloat during this financial crisis, and we appreciate your contribution and prayers more than I can tell you.

Please share this with your friends and family.

This letter may be reproduced without change and in its entirety for noncommercial and nonpolitical purposes without prior permission from Focus on the Family Action.

---

ENDNOTES

¹ Louis Uchitelle, "2 Mavericks in Economics Awarded Nobel Prize," The New York Times, Oct. 12, 2004, http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/aml6/econ001/pdfs/nobel2004.pdf (Sept. 29, 2008).
Also: Alfred L. Malabre, Lost Prophets: An Insider's History of the Modern Economists (1994), p. 220. (Responding to criticism when changing monetary policy in the midst of the Great Depression.)

² Saddleback Presidential Candidates Forum, CNN Transcript, Aug. 16, 2008. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0808/16/se.02.html (Sept. 29, 2008).

³ Republican National Committee, 2008 Republican Platform, gop.com/2008Platform/ (Sept. 28, 2008).

⁴ "National Journal's 2007 Vote Ratings," National Journal Group Inc., 2008, nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm (Sept. 29, 2008).

⁵ bornalivetruth.org/obamarecord.aspx (September 2008).

⁶ frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S7084&position=all (Sept. 29, 2008).

⁷ bornalivetruth.org/obamarecord.aspx (Sept. 30, 2008).

⁸ "Obama Blocked Born Alive Infant Protection Act," Illinois Federation For Right to Life Daily News online, April 3, 2008, ifrl.org/ifrl/news/080403/1/ (Sept. 29, 2008).

⁹ Rick Santorum, "The Elephant in the Room: A Harsh Ideologue hidden by a feel-good image," The Philadelphia Inquirer, February 29, 2008, http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/rick_santorum/20080228_The_Elephant_in_the_Room__Obama__A_harsh_ideologue_hidden_by_a_feel-good_image.html (Sept. 28, 2008).

¹⁰ youtube.com/watch?v=uUl99id2SvM (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹¹ aul.org/FOCA (Sept. 29, 2008)

¹² "Ballot Bowl 2008: More Campaign Happenings," CNN Transcripts, March 29, 2008, transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/29/bb.01.html (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹³ Patricia E. Bauer, "What's Lost in Prenatal Testing: Why Encourage Testing for Down Syndrome," Jan. 14, 2007, Washington Post. washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011201954.html

¹⁴ "Days in Session Calendars," Thomas, The Library of Congress, thomas.loc.gov/home/ds/ (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹⁵ National Journal online, 2008, Ibid.

¹⁶ Paul Kane, "Hill Negotiators Drop Hate-Crime Provision," Washington Post, Dec. 7, 2007, washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/06/AR2007120602453.html (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹⁷ Byron York, "On Sex-Ed Ad, McCain Is Right," National Review Online, Sept. 16, 2008, article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NzI3ZDUzOTE0ZThlMTU3MTY0MDI4ZTY0MTZhY2I2MGY= (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹⁸ "Obama on Sex Ed in Kindergarten: 'It's the Right Thing to Do,'" Free Republic online, Sept. 10, 2008, freerepublic.com/focus/news/2079415/posts (Sept. 29, 2008).

¹⁹ Michael Foust, "Obama: If elected I will use the bully pulpit for gay causes," Baptist Press, Feb. 28, 2008, bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=27510 (Sept. 29, 2008).

²⁰ Chuck Spinner, A Book of Prayers: To the Heavens from the Stars, (AuthorHouse: 2008), p. 225, excerpts online at: books.google.com/books?id=cfgSFGcC_n0C&pg=PA225&lpg=PA225&dq=%22To+get+nations+back+on+their+feet%22+and+%22get+down+on+our+knees%22+and+Graham&source=web&ots=HjqHwcw-mT&sig=OYFZAIONNVb_Ff138BCi2TmH1yo&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result (Sept. 29, 2008).

Many folk have been asking me about all the Amendments and Referendums on the Colorado ballot.  Amendments are put on the ballot by citizen initiative, while Referendums are put on the ballot by the State Legislature.  Kevin Lundberg the state representative from House District 49 has his suggestions for voting on the state wide Amendments here.

Boulder County has two ballot issues 1A and 1B.  1A would cost the County taxpayers nearly $100,000,000.00 in order to pay for solar and other renewable energy projects.  I will be voting NO on 1A.  1B will extend a sales tax surcharge to 2018 that would otherwise expire.  This is being billed as causing "no increase in any County tax" which is dishonest as it will extend the time of the tax if not the dollar amount.  I will be voting NO on 1B.  Boulder County is very corrupt and has been in one party hands for years.  I don't want to give this bunch more money to play with.

Wall Builders has the best short voter guide for the Presidential race.

Colorado Right to Life sent questionaires to the candidates for state office.  The responses are here.

Colorado Family Institute has a voter guide that covers all the Federal and State races in Colorado.

Family Research Council Action has their Presidential Voters Guide here.

Family Research Council Action and Focus on the Family Action have published their guide to how all the members of the US House and US Senate voted this last year.

BJ Nikkel has some interesting suggestions on how to vote for the judges here.

Bumped to top.

Much has been written about Barak Obama's positions on the issues.  Obama himself has repeatedly lied about his positions, calling others liars when they accurately quote positions he has taken and things he has done and said.  In an attempt to show in irrefutable form what Barak Obama has really done and said, Guy Benson, Mary Katharine Ham, and Ed Morrissey at Hot Air have assembled "The comprehensive argument against Barack Obama" profusely illustrated with videos of Obama.  Topics covered include:

ABORTION
TAXES
RADICAL ASSOCIATIONS
FOREIGN POLICY JUDGMENT
DISDAIN FOR THE HEARTLAND
THE RACE CARD
LACK OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
MILITARY POLICY

This is not a 90 second summary, but if you really want to know more about Barak Obama, take the time to read this article and watch the many video clips it contains.

Bumped to top.

It is easy in this day and age to discount let another story of "media bias", but we should not get complacent about this stuff since it is destroying our country.  Bill Dyer at Hugh Hewitt's blog recounts how Joe Lieberman gave a straightforward statement:

Lieberman said he was confident that Palin, whose foreign policy background has been questioned by Democrats, could step in and handle the chief executive's job.

"If, God forbid, an accident occurs or something of that kind, she'll be ready," Lieberman said. "She's had executive experience. She's smart and she will have had on-the-job training."

So what headline does the Associated Press, Washington Post, USA Today, ABC News, CNBC, San Francisco Chronicle and others put on this story?

"Lieberman skirts issue of Palin's readiness."

This is not just media bias, this headline is an outright lie, and contradicted by the story that follows.  As Dyer writes:

This sort of headline, ladies and gentlemen, is another bald-faced lie brought to you by the Associated Press and by mainstream media editors across the country. They are so cynical that they're willing to completely prostitute their journalistic credibility — by using headlines to tell obvious lies contradicted by the very stories they accompany — because those headlines fit their pre-existing pro-Obama narrative. They're willing to live with the likelihood that most people will either just read the headlines or won't read the actual text closely enough to spot the lies.

Agentina recently confiscated the retirement funds of their workers to "protect" them.  Now Democrat leaders are proposing similar plans for your 401K here in the USA.  These plans include eliminating the tax break for your retirement funds, and requiring you to "contribute" even more to a new retirement plan run by Social Security.

Bill Dyer has a post on Hugh Hewitt's blog that should be must reading by every Democrat.  Here are some excerpts:

But to my honest and patriotic Democratic friends, I must say this forthrightly, and I must say it now:

There is a criminal element that is infesting your Party to a degree unprecedented in American history, and they are trying to buy the White House for your candidate through overtly criminal means.

Fraud and dirty money have been involved in politics, of course, for generations — but never on a scale and with a brazenness remotely close to this year's fraud committed for the benefit of Obama-Biden.

For a start, every honest Democrat should demand that everyone associated with the decision to disable the most basic anti-fraud mechanisms from the Obama-Biden campaign's credit-card donations systems be publicly identified and immediately fired. Every honest Democrat should demand the immediate and full cooperation from the campaign — pointedly beginning with Barack Obama — in seeing them prosecuted and convicted.

I ask this of you because I value your integrity, as I know you always have in the past. Disappointing your conservative or Republican friends is far from the worst of what's at risk for you. Let Saint Mark's words in the title of this post be your guide.

More background is in my post here.

Read Bill Dyer's entire post.

UPDATE: More here.

I asked, "well what is going to happen to those people we can't reeducate, that are diehard capitalists?" and the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated.

And when I pursued this further, they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers.

And when I say "eliminate," I mean "kill."

Twenty-five million people.

I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of which have graduate degrees, from Columbia and other well-known educational centers, and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people.

And they were dead serious.

This was the testimony of FBI informant Larry Grathwohl in the 1982 documentary No Place to Hide.

The 25 people plotting the extermination of the 25 million Americans who would bitterly cling to the American way of life?

The Weather Underground, led by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

The same Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who hosted Barak Obama's political introduction party in their home when he ran for the Illinois Senate.  The same Bill Ayers who was on the board of directors of a foundation Obama was chairman of.  The same Bill Ayers that ran the Small Schools Workshop that Obama led foundations gave almost $2,000,000 to.  The same Bill Ayers that Obama now claims he hardly knew and was just "some guy in the neighborhood".

Barak Obama has had amazing success in raising funds over the Internet in amounts that John McCain has not been able to match.  It now turns out that one reason for this success is that the Obama campaign has turned off all the common checks on fraudulant donations via credit cards on their website.  Donations made to Obama from John Galt, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Bill Ayers at obviously phony addresses but billed to a common credit card were accepted, while attempts to make similar donations to McCain were rejected.

Federal campaign law requires donors to campaigns to be citizens of the USA, and places a cumulative limit of $2300 on the donations from anyone to a given campaign.  Since Obama has turned off the usual credit card fraud protection checks on their on-line donation system, there is nothing to stop anyone from making donations far in excess of the federal limit as long as the donation amounts are kept small and different names are used.  Obama's system will also accept donations from persons outside of the USA, which is contrary to federal campaign law.

A donation from Della Ware of 12345 No Way was accepted by Obama.

Obama even accepted a donation from Mr. Fake Donor, address 1 Dollar To Prove A Point, Fraudulent, AL 33333, email allmyinfoismadeup@mediabias.com, phone 2125551212, employer Mainstream Media.  An attempt to make a similar donation to McCain was rejected.

This would be a huge story, if the MSM were doing their job.

UPDATE from Mark Steyn here.

Denver's Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput speaks for many Christians, not just those who are Catholic, when he wrote:

I believe that Senator Obama, whatever his other talents, is the most committed ''abortion-rights'' presidential candidate of either major party since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973. Despite what Prof. Kmiec suggests, the party platform Senator Obama runs on this year is not only aggressively ''pro-choice;'' it has also removed any suggestion that killing an unborn child might be a regrettable thing. On the question of homicide against the unborn child - and let's remember that the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer explicitly called abortion ''murder'' - the Democratic platform that emerged from Denver in August 2008 is clearly anti-life.

Prof. Kmiec argues that there are defensible motives to support Senator Obama. Speaking for myself, I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates.

If you follow the link in the post below and watch the videos showing what Obama himself said on the topics of abortion, partial birth abortion, and the care of children that survived an abortion, you will see that Obama is on the far left fringe of even most who call themselves "pro-choice".

HT: Hugh Hewitt

Thanks to Hugh Hewitt for pointing me to Dan McLaughlin's series on "The Integrity Gap" between McCain and Obama.  It is an extremely well documented look at what may well be the key issue in this race,

Part I talks about Governor Sarah Palin:

One of the most basic ways in which a candidate can demonstrate the integrity voters are looking for is to build a record of standing up to corruption and waste - and doing so even when it appears in his or her own party, or on the part of his or her own allies or backers. This is not just a matter of honesty and prudence, but of toughness and courage.

Part II Chapter 1

Introduction

Chapter 2 Obama's Rootless Ambition

looks at the influences that shaped Obama before he ran for office.

Chapter 3 Obama and the Extremists

looks at his relationships with left-wing radicals and how they were an integral part of his rise in politics.

Chapter 4 Obama and ACORN

looks at his intimate relationship with a network of community organizers with a pervasive record of voter fraud and deep involvement in the subprime housing crisis.

Chapter 5 Obama and the Machine

looks at Obama's long, deep and multifacted partnership with machine politicians in Chicago and Springfield.

Chapter 6 Obama and the Favor Factory

looks at Obama's routine practice of trading favors with his political benefactors.

Chapter 7 Obama, "New Politics" and Principles

looks at the illusory nature of Obama's "new politics," his absence of a record of fighting tough battles on principle, and wraps up and concludes the series.

Part III is yet to come.

20 Republican Senators including John McCain signed a letter on May 5, 2006 urging action be taken:

We are concerned that if effective regulatory reform legislation for the housing-finance government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. ...

Today, almost half of the home mortgages in the U.S. are guaranteed by these GSEs. They are mammoth financial institutions with almost $1.5 Trillion of debt outstanding between them. With the fiscal challenges facing us today (deficits, entitlements, pensions and flood insurance), Congress must ask itself who would pay this debt if Fannie or Freddy could not? [emphasis in original letter] ...

It is vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that these institutions benefit from strong and independent regulatory supervision, operate in a safe and sound manner, and are primarily focused on their statutory mission. More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event either GSE should fail.

John Hinderaker of Power Line writes:

One thing I hadn't realized is that McCain's reform legislation was passed through the Senate Banking Committee, but was not able to gain majority support on the Senate floor. All twenty Senators who signed the letter calling attention to the urgency of reforming Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were Republicans. After May 2006, the Democrats continued to use Fannie and Freddy as their private slush funds until the inevitable collapse, which McCain had warned against so eloquently, occurred.

John Hinderaker of Power Line posts some interesting background on Obama:

it appears clear that as of 1996, the New Party and its parent organization the Democratic Socialists of America considered Barack Obama to be their guy--one of a handful of avowed socialists running for office at any level in the United States. It strikes me that Obama has some explaining to do.

They have screen captures showing both groups considered Obama as their candidate when he ran for State Senate in Illinois.