Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The Joe the Plumber story has, regardless of anything else, raised the consciousness of many voters to understand and see beyond the mirage that is Obama. The understanding comes from the realization that the Democratic party, while touting McCain as four more years of President Bush, has successfully reminded citizens of their decades of overtaxing Americans. Obama’s statement of ’spreading the wealth’ exposed that flaw and woke up a nation.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For all the abuse Joe the Plumber took from the ’spread the wealth’ liberals after being lifted onto the national stage for having the AUDACITY to ask the Messiah about his tax plans, his own words should get more play. They do in this video.

Just had to add this video to the blog as it does have entertainment and political value. Not unlike most of what John McCain does, he outperforms Barack Obama here as well.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A concern that is typical of Presidential elections was raised on this blog from time to time. What effect a candidate will have on the country in terms of the people which surround a newly elected President. As another tool in this blog’s opposition to Barack Obama for President noting those close to Obama and who would be in line for top jobs if he was elected. Valerie Jarrett was the topic of discussion in one such analysis. And this blog is not the only one suggesting a place for Jarrett in a potential Obama administration. But as Secretary of HUD is laughable.

Job One for black advocates: Back top Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett for HUD secretary. She is well-prepared for the treacheries of the Washington Beltway. Jarrett has stood down an array of Chicago characters, from cranky transit riders, vociferous public housing activists and mendacious aldermen. Her prescriptions will have the president’s ear.

If the author from this piece at the Chicago Sun Times, Laura Washington, has her way we are all in for a long painful journey that could last as much as eight years.

There will be a debt to pay.

Black folks will be ecstatic about making history, but they won’t settle for history. We are still treading on an uphill climb. A national black agenda is non-negotiable. There may be a New Black coming to the White House, but it’s still the same old USA.

Don’t hold back. Call me a racist for expressing these concerns. But you may first want to note again Valerie Jarrett’s history in housing and why the suggestion for her as a HUD Secretary is absurd.

The next two paragraphs are from an earlier post here titled, ‘ Obama Accomplice, Valerie Jarrett’ and the excerpts attributed to the Huffington Post and the Boston Globe.

WASHINGTON — “She’s always been the other side of Barack’s brain.” That’s how an Obama insider described Valerie Jarrett as an Obama campaign aide announced Thursday night the former CTA chief and current Habitat Co. CEO is taking on a larger role to help her close friend win his White House bid.

Valerie Jarrett’s involvement with Habitat Co and the dismal management of rental property in Chicago was referenced in an earlier post on this blog. Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to Obama’s presidential campaign and a member of his finance committee. Jarrett is the chief executive of Habitat Co., which managed Grove Parc Plaza from 2001 until this winter and co-managed an even larger subsidized complex in Chicago that was seized by the federal government in 2006, after city inspectors found widespread problems.

The rest of the story won’t be repeated here you can read it elsewhere on this blog at the post title above. The point is Obama and Jarrett are so intricately wound into the fabric of Chicago politics and all its assorted malfeasance there is no way his ‘right brain’, Valerie Jarrett will not be critical to his administration if elected. For all the comments made about small town white Americans clinging to their guns and bibles as well as numerous references made about white voters being ‘bubba’ if they don’t vote for Obama or ‘Joe Sixpack’ or simply racist for opposing Obama’s candidacy, sentiments like those expressed by others within this post suggest racism of a different kind. The unspoken kind that works in the other direction and is never mentioned in public. Not for fear of reprisals but the reluctance to absorb the annoyance of being called a bigot for suggesting that black America is just as likely to engage in racism as white America. How’s that for equality?

An excerpt from Radarsite that was linked with the piece from Laura Washington at the Sun Times echoes a sentiment that is close enough to the one here to be presented below.

This then is to be that great vision of change we can believe in. This is to be the new message for a new America. Once again the world around us is to be torn asunder by those ‘belligerent victims’, driven to abominations by their self-righteous rage.

It is not so much the sentiment above but the idea that Barack Obama is somehow a ‘transformational’ character. His pursuit of the Presidency of the United States is in most ways no different from anyone else’s pursuit except that he is of course, black. The politics, the strategies, the ambition of an agenda and all that goes with it is typical, not transformational. This blog was never for a liberal President. Just because this liberal candidate is black will not cause the treatment of a liberal to be any different. If you would like to attach the label of racist to this blog or the author, feel free. But whether a candidate favors white liberal special interest or black liberal special interest it is still liberal special interest and not something in which conservatives would be especially interested.

Barack Obama’s pursuit of the Office of President of the United States is just as corrupt with special interest and flawed associations as any other. The rhetoric while sometimes eloquent does not change that fact.

Here’s another possible scenario for the effects of an Obama administration. Yes, let’s let the slumlord with Chicago political machine credentials become a United States Senator.

Senator who?
October 21, 2008
BY MICHAEL SNEED Sun-Times Columnist

Sneed hears the name of Valerie Jarrett, who is this/close to Barack Obama, is high on Obama’s short list to replace him in the U.S. Senate!

Another Jarrett excerpt from an ABC report…..

Jarrett also downplayed the multiple criminal investigations in Indiana and several other states of alleged voter registration fraud on behalf of Barack Obama by the activist community organization ACORN, which was one of Obama’s former law clients.

ACORN has not received one penny from this campaign. And we’ve had a grassroots campaign. We have volunteers who are working throughout the country. We have a grassroots organization where we haven’t had to depend on funding local organizations. We’re doing the work ourselves,” Jarrett said.

Wrong again Valerie. The Obama campaign gave $800,000 to ACORN. This is why Valerie Jarrett should not be in the Obama campaign but more importantly another reason why Obama should not be elected

This blog continues to support McCain/Palin for President and Vice-President in 2008.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

How about a little non-political, non-financial good news for a while before this blog’s campaign fest resumes for the down the stretch or roundin’ third and headin’ for home finale for the 2008 Presidential election? We could use an extension on good news so a 1-1 tie in the World Series raises the possibility of a full seven game series. Okay, so if it goes seven the conspiracy theorists come out yellin’ the fix is in but what else is new? Stick around here and later we’ll give ya some more consipiracy theories you can sink your teeth into. Batter up!!

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Brewer report - Download (MP3)
Brewer report - Listen (MP3)

Major League Baseball’s best-of-seven game World Series is tied at one win each after the host Tampa Bay Rays beat the Philadelphia Phillies, 4-2, Thursday night. VOA Sports Editor Parke Brewer was at Game 2 in St. Petersburg, Florida and has a report.

For the second straight night, two runs came across the plate in the first inning, only this time it was host Tampa Bay, and not Philadelphia, that scored first. The Rays got their runs on a walk, a hit, an error and two ground ball outs.

They added a run in the second on three singles to make it 3-0, and their final run came in the fourth inning on two singles and a bunt up the first base line.

Philadelphia got one run in the eighth inning on a home run into the left field stands by pinch hitter Eric Bruntlett, and the other run in the ninth inning on a double and a Tampa Bay error.

The Phillies outhit the Rays in Game two, nine to seven, but they continued to struggle to get their hits with runners in scoring position, with only one in 15 tries. They left 11 runners on base to only four for the Rays.

Philadelphia manager Charlie Manual says it’s a problem.

“I’m concerned about us hitting with guys on base, because I think at times it looks like we might be trying a little bit too hard, but we can fix that,” he said. “We got behind early and we had a hard time catching up and we didn’t execute.”

On the other hand, Tampa Bay made the most of its opportunities, getting three of its four runs driven across the plate on ground ball outs.

Rays starting pitcher James Shields did not allow a run in five and two-thirds innings of work and was credited with the win. He said playing in his first World Series game was a thrill.

“There’s no doubt. This is the World Series. This is what we dreamed of doing as kids. And you know our crowd tonight was electric, and I mean it’s exciting,” he said. “It’s an exciting time in our lives and we’re trying to enjoy the moment.”

The Tampa Bay Rays have some extra time to enjoy the victory, as the series does not resume until Saturday night in Philadelphia, where games three, four and five will be played.

Trackposted to Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Cao’s Blog, NN&V, McCain Blogs, and Democrat=Socialist, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe

The story below features a topic about which this blog author knows a thing or two. Not so much about the auto plant but some of the notions presented about the election and the people of Wisconsin. For instance, I have not heard one single person express the economy as the central theme in their consideration of the candidates. Yet ’some independent groups’ according to the story below claim that may determine the election in this state. Don’t misunderstand. The economy weighs heavily on people’s mind as it does anytime, election or not, when it is not living up to expectations. But the candidates and how they are viewed as leading this country overall dominate the discussions heard from this part of the world.

If you look at the voting history of Wisconsin coupled with the fact we have two Democrats in the US Senate and one in the US Congress and a Democrat for Governor viewing this state as ‘clearly’ in Obama’s camp or ‘leaning that way’ is not a big leap. The bulk of the population in this state lives in Milwaukee and the People’s Republic of Madison. And guess which way those two liberal bastions lean. So yes, Wisconsin is quite blue.

Recent election results were Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry. Granted Nixon and Reagan won with Carter winning a narrow margin over Ford. But you get hte point. You could call much of the other political history as mixed to some degree but this state leans blue at the very least. The point is to place this state as clearly or leaning in favor of Obama and attributing it to the economy while featuring a failing GM plant is, well, nonsense. How about the reason for the plant failure is putting all your eggs in one basket. Mid-size trucks and SUV’s even with gas at a buck a gallon is a limited marketing mix. So how biased is reporting these days?

And Obama says if the government is here for you the plant will remain for another hundred years. And they call this man prepared to lead this country? Pander, pander, pander. And to whom is he pandering? A guy who worked at a two vehicle plant and his kids work there or at auto related businesses. Was there mention of all your eggs in one basket? Yes there was. And there was mention of pandering that includes growing goverment and use of taxpayer revenue to subsidize all these eggs in a basket that failed. At least by implication it is there in Obama’s speech. You can bet laid off plant workers are buying it.

It would be fair to say that life is in the dumper for many people in Wisconsin and elsewhere. No one this blog author knows is looking for Obama to solve their problems. And even the life of this blog’s author is hovering about the dumper but Obama is not viewed as the solution.

If you want more information on Barack Obama feel free to take a look around this blog. It’s everywhere. Vote McCain/Palin this November or early and often if that’s your thing.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

US Election Wisconsin report - Download (WM)
US Election Wisconsin report - Watch (WM)

When voters in the U. S. Midwestern state of Wisconsin head to the polls on November 4th, high gasoline prices coupled with job losses will weigh heavily on their minds. For both Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, Wisconsin is important to winning the White House. Lately, some independent groups charting the 50 states and their electoral votes have put Wisconsin either clearly in Obama’s camp or leaning that way. The outcome in Wisconsin could largely be determined by how voters see the economy and its future. VOA’s Kane Farabaugh recently traveled to Janesville, Wisconsin and filed this report.

GM Auto plant in Janesville, Wisconsin

For almost 90 years, this automobile plant has been in Janesville.

The plant has survived tough times — the Great Depression and World War Two. Since 1919, thousands of workers like Bill Breidenstein have passed through its doors.

In December, General Motors will close the plant.

“It’s heart-wrenching when you think you put in your life of trying to keep a company going then to have this happen,” Bill Breidenstein said. He is a retired auto worker.

Bill Breidenstein

High gasoline prices brought thick clouds to Janesville. Once the producer of iconic American cars like the 1957 Chevrolet, the plant currently makes mid-size trucks and sport utility vehicles. Sales of those cars have plummeted due to the high cost of fuel.

In addition to job losses at the plant, some six thousands more jobs throughout the region will be affected by the closing.

Senator Obama visited the GM Plant in early 2008 prior to the announcement of plant closure

In this part of America, jobs are the greatest concern for voters like Bill Breidenstein. Barack Obama tapped into this when he visited the plant earlier this year, before GM’s announcement.

“If our government is there to support you,” Obama said. “This plant will be here for another hundred years.”

Breidenstein was there for Obama’s speech. He worked at the plant for more than 30 years. Most of his children work at the plant or at its suppliers.

Breidenstein supports Obama. “We have an administration in there now that has done nothing but promote companies moving overseas,” Breidenstein said. “We cannot have that, and Obama after he gave his speech, he says one thing we need to do is penalize companies that move overseas and not give them tax breaks like they’ve been getting for the last eight years.”

But McCain supporters like Jim Chesmore disagree. Chesmore is a former plant worker. “I can’t say the problems this plant is having is actually political,” Chesmore said. “I think it’s more economy from gas prices, has a big thing to do with it.”

Jim Chesmore

Chesmore worked at the Janesville plant for almost 40 years. He supports offshore drilling which Obama initially opposed. Chesmore believes that jobs at the plant would have been saved if drilling were already underway. “It’s there, it just has to be tapped into,” Chesmore said.

Many issues intersect at Janesville, from the economy to jobs to the high cost of fuel. All contributed to the plant closure. Despite the political rhetoric, it seems no solution can be reached in time to save the plant and the people employed there.

When Wisconsin voters head to the polls on November 4th, they are expected to cast their ballots for the candidate they feel has the best plan for their future and their jobs.

Obama & DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit - Obama’s “Not” Qualified to be President
Obama Should Immediately Withdraw his Candidacy for President

For Immediate Release: - 10/21/08 - Complete contact details and pdfs of this press release and motions filed by plaintiff Berg today are at the end of this article

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and tbe DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.

Berg stated that he filed Requests for Admissions on September 15, 2008 with a response by way of answer or objection had to be served within thirty [30] days. No response to the Requests for Admissions was served by way of response or objection. Thus, all of the Admissions directed to Obama and the DNC are deemed “ADMITTED.” Therefore, Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President.

OBAMA - Admitted:

1. I was born in Kenya.
2. I am a Kenya “natural born” citizen.
3. My foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii.
4. My father, Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr. admitted Paternity of me.
5. My mother gave birth to me in Mombosa, Kenya.
6. My mother’s maiden name is Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham.
7. The COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website “Fightthesmears.com” is a forgery.
8. I was adopted by a Foreign Citizen.
9. I was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia.
10. I was not born in Hawaii.
11. I was not born at the Queens Medical Center in Hawaii.
12. I was not born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Hawaii.
13. I was not born in a Hospital in Hawaii.
14. I am a citizen of Indonesia.
15. I never took the “Oath of Allegiance” to regain my U.S. Citizenship status.
16. I am not a “natural born” United States citizen.
17. My date of birth is August 4, 1961.
18. I traveled to Pakistan in 1981 with my Pakistan friends.
19. In 1981, I went to Indonesia on my way to Pakistan.
20. Pakistan was a no travel zone in 1981 for American Citizens.
21. In 1981, Pakistan was not allowing American Citizens to enter their country.
22. I traveled on my Indonesian Passport to Pakistan.
23. I renewed my Indonesian Passport on my way to Pakistan.
24. My senior campaign staff is aware I am not a “natural born” United States Citizen.
25. I am proud of my Kenya Heritage.
26. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name.
27. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name.
28. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth.
29. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name.
30. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name.
31. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth.
32. The document identified as my Indonesian School record from Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia is genuine.
33. I went to a Judge in Hawaii to have my name changed.
34. I went to a Senator and/or Congressman or other public official in Hawaii to have my name changed.
35. I had a passport issued to me from the Government of Indonesia.
36. The United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.
37. I am ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United States.
38. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Indonesia.
39. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Kenya.
40. I am an Attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law.
41. Kenya was a part of the British Colonies at the time of my birth.
42. Kenya did not become its own Republic until 1963.
43. I am not a “Naturalized” United States Citizen.
44. I obtained $200 Million dollars in campaign funds by fraudulent means.
45. I cannot produce a “vault” (original) long version of a birth certificate showing my birth in Hawaii.
46. My “vault” (original) long version birth certificate shows my birth in Kenya.
47. The only times I was to a Hospital in Hawaii was for check-ups or medical treatments for illnesses.
48. Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me.
49. Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me.
50. I was born in the Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.
51. I represented on my State Bar application in Illinois that I never used any other name other than Barack Hussein Obama.
52. I went by the name Barry Soetoro in Indonesia.
53. My Indonesian school records are under the name of Barry Soetoro.
54. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when admitted to the State Bar of Illinois to practice Law.
55. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when I was Sworn into my United States Senate Office.
56. I hold dual citizenship with at least one other Country besides the United States of America.

DNC - Admitted:

1. The DNC nominated Barrack Hussein Obama as the Democratic Nominee for President.
2. The DNC has not vetted Barrack Hussein Obama.
3. The DNC did not have a background check performed on Barrack Hussein Obama.
4.The DNC did not verify Barrack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States.
5. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya.
6. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born” United States citizen.
7. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was not born in Hawaii.
8.The DNC admits they have not inquired into Barrack Hussein Obama’s citizenship status.
9. The DNC admits they have a duty to properly vette the Democratic Nominee for President.
10.The DNC admits Lolo Soetoro, M.A., an Indonesian citizen adopted Barrack Hussein Obama.
11. The DNC admits the Credentials Committee has been aware of this lawsuit since August 22, 2008 as the lawsuit was faxed to our Washington D.C. Office on August 22, 2008.
12. The DNC admits their Credentials Committee failed to verify and/or inquire into the credentials of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as the President of the United States. 13. The DNC admits their Credential Committee’s Report failed to address the issues of Barack Hussein Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President of the United States.
14.The DNC admits Howard Dean, Chair Person has and had knowledge Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya and ineligible to serve as the President of the United States.
15. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all Democratic citizens of the United States have been personally injured as a result of not having a qualified Democratic Presidential Nominee to cast their votes upon.
16. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional Right to vote for the President of the United States and to have two (2) qualified candidates of which to choose from.
17. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional right to have a properly vetted Democratic Presidential Nominee of which to cast their vote.
18. The DNC admits an FBI background check is not performed on the Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidates.
19. The DNC admits the United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.
20. The DNC admits they collected donations on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama for his Presidential campaign.
21. The DNC admits Plaintiff and Democratic citizens donated money based on false representations that Barack Hussein Obama was qualified to serve as the President of the United States.
22. The DNC admits if Barack Hussein Obama is elected as President and allowed to serve as President of the United States in violation of our Constitution, it will create a Constitutional crisis.
23. The DNC admits Barack Hussein Obama took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution.
24. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to due process of law in violation of the United States Constitution.
25. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to Equal Protection of the laws in violation of the United States Constitution.
26. The DNC admits the function of the DNC is to secure a Democratic Presidential Candidate who will protect Democratic citizen’s interests, fight for their equal opportunities and fight for justice for all Americans.
27. The DNC admits the Democratic National Committee has been promoting Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidential election knowing he was ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

Our website obamacrimes.com now has 50.7 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers, radio and TV stations. Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@obamacrimes.com
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Attachments:

Motion for Expedited Ruling on Plaintiff\’s Motion for Order re Req. for Admissi

Obama, Motion for Order deeming Request for Admissions Admitted.pdf

Press Release Obama - DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit.

It sounds good enough and is not the first time this scenario has been suggested. But the flaw of the argument or the fly in the ointment lives within the other words of the commentary referenced here.

Which brings me back to why the Republicans need to get throttled: A humiliated, decimated GOP that rejuvenates and rebuilds around the principles of limited government, free markets, and rugged individualism is really the only chance for voters to possibly get a real choice in federal elections down the road.

The wake up call for the GOP was with the midterms in 2006 where they lost the majority. And the author above is also right about the Dems interpreting any defeat of the GOP as an endorsement of their failed agendas. To wit: the new direction for America marketed by Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats has resulted in nothing. Nothing except an approval rating for Congress lower than that of the President. This is not just a GOP problem but a GOP and DNC problem. Ousting what is left of the GOP from Congress and putting a Democrat in the White House will not solve the problem. Giving the Dems the majority in Congress in 2006 is enough proof of that.

It’s hard to think of how Obama could be worse. He’ll just be bad in different ways. And that is where the author loses his argument. To object to the recent interventions of the federal government in response to allowing the subprime mortgage mess to dismantle the credit markets and put just about everyone as risk and call it GOP socialism is a bit over the top not to mention wrong. What should have been done? Let everything fall where it may? That is poetic justice but the crisis itself if it can be called that was also proof enough how well that strategy works. Something had to be done and nearly any response would be judged inadequate or simply wrong. There was no way to win once the problem had been allowed to develop in the first place. The Dems have plenty of complicity in the subprime mess and the GOP is not without guilt either.

This isn’t to say that Barack Obama would be any better. Government would undoubtedly grow under his watch. And from my libertarian perspective, he has been increasingly disappointing even on the issues where he’s supposed to be good. There it is. Obama won’t be an improvement. The government will grow on his watch. He is increasingly disappointing.

You cannot engage in politics only during an election cycle and expect things to go the way you want. Even if you are diligent year round this is a republic and we elect representatives who are not required to do as we ask. They are to represent us in what they believe is the best way. If we disagree we can vote for someone else. Rather than throw out the baby with the bath water as this author suggests, we need to retain the GOP in the White House and at least hold where the member numbers are in Congress. Along with that expressing our reactions to what happens in Washington as individuals must be maintained. It was in evidence in the summer of 2007 when Congress considered amnesty for illegal immigrants. The measure was soundly defeated due to an enormous public outcry rendering the Congressional phone system unusable from overload or simply being turned off to stem the tide. That is what gets the public’s opinion listened to in Washington.

The biggest problem with the author’s suggestion to throw out the GOP in hopes of reforming their lost ways is the damage that would be caused by Obama and friends and no guarantee of when the GOP would be able to return renewed. Unbridled power to the left may be a tipping point the republic cannot withstand.

Abandoning the GOP is not the answer. Doing your part to keep Washington honest is the answer. And voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin is the start. Doing your part after that by continuing to let your voice be heard in Washington throughout the year and beyond is the finish. That’s what keeps government working for you. Don’t blame everything on the GOP or Washington. As citizenz we share in the blame for how things are no matter who is in charge.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If you are tired of reading the list of flaws in Obama’s past, present and future from a viewpoint of the mystery of what he is hiding to questions of judgment and associations, how about his tax plan for a topic? Not surprisingly, both McCain and Obama have been taken to task by those more skilled on such matters as tax and finance. Neither has really outdone the other. At best McCain’s plans will cost something less but questions remain about what will be accomplished. That should not bother anyone because Presidents do not control the purse strings by themselves nor have sole control over the economy. At best their policies have a psychological effect on economics that are largely controlled by others. So what about Barack Obama’s tax plan?

The plunder that the Democrats plan to extract from the “very rich” — the 5% that earn more than $250,000 and who already pay 60% of the federal income tax bill — will never stretch to cover the expansive programs Mr. Obama promises.

What next? A core group of Obama enthusiasts — those educated professionals who applaud the “fairness” of their candidate’s tax plans — will soon see their $100,000-$150,000 incomes targeted. As entitlements expand and a self-interested majority votes, the higher tax brackets will kick in at lower levels down the ladder, all the way to households with a $75,000 income.

Calculating how far society’s top earners can be pushed before they stop (or cut back on) producing is difficult. But the incentives are easy to see. Voters who benefit from government programs will push for higher tax rates on higher earners — at least until those who power the economy and create jobs and wealth stop working, stop investing, or move out of the country.

Another analysis suggests the same dismal outcome…..

Numerous organizations, including the Associated Press, have noted that Obama’s proposals spend hundreds of millions of dollars more than his tax hikes raise. What is less well known is that Obama’s tax plan itself sends out of Washington far more than it brings in. Obama’s campaign twice admits that in the wording of the tax plan.

If you think you are going to avoid a tax increase on Obama’s watch because you aren’t “rich,” remember this: A government that arbitrarily picks $250,000 as a dividing line can, using the same purely political considerations, pick any number as a dividing line. What makes you so sure that you will wind up on the right side of that equation once an Obama administration begins making up the difference between the massive number of benefits it promised to deliver and the tiny amount of pain it promised to inflict to finance those benefit?

Obama and his ads continue to stress that 95% of Americans will get a tax cut under his plan. He also uses the tired old liberal appeal that he will tax the rich. Whether you believe the charge of redistribution of wealth as tagging Obama a socialist or not, it is apparent the political downside calculated by Obama to only anger 5% of the population with his tax plan is as flawed as the plan itself. Not having the funds to pay for his agenda through a tax on the rich he will have to lower the income range of the tax to include more taxpayers. Not only to fund what taxing the rich does not cover but to pay for tax cuts for millions who pay no taxes in the first place. If you don’t see that as redistribution of wealth and socialist doctrine you need to take another economics course.

In an interview with Fox News, John McCain was asked about Barack Obama’s claim that 95 percent of Americans will not see their taxes go up under Obama’s proposals.

“You spent a lot of time in your debate dealing with that. Is that honest? Is that truthful?” commentator Sean Hannity asked in an Oct. 12, 2008, interview.

“Well, first of all, it’s not truthful in the respect that 50 percent or 40 percent of the American people — of taxpayers — American citizens don’t pay taxes, federal income taxes,” McCain said. “So right there, that obviously is wrong. And maybe that means that he just wants to give them a check. But I don’t know if you could interpret that as a quote, ‘tax cut.’ “

John McCain has a habit of telling the truth even if it is not in his own best interest as viewed by some. Obama uses one of those true statements in an ad. McCain said at one point if the election was about the economy he would lose. That is because the political reality favors the opposition party when the economy falters before an election. But for all the criticism McCain takes on economic matters the quote above is more truth that supports the notion Obama is a socialist based on his own words and tax plan. You are right Senator McCain, it is not a tax cut. It is a tax on the rich which may filter down to the middle class to among other things pay for money given to those who pay no taxes. Obama called it ’spreading the wealth around’ and defined it as a ‘good thing.’

At the heart of Obama’s tax policy is the refundable tax credit (John McCain relies on refundable tax credits for healthcare, but they are utilized in a different way). This tax credit allows total tax liability to be reduced to below zero. Say that a couple pays $1,000 in income taxes per year. Assuming that there is a $2,000 refundable tax credit and that this couple qualifies for the tax credit, the couple would receive a check from the government in the amount of $1,000, according to Obama’s plan. The same applies to those who pay no income taxes, meaning that they would be receiving a subsidy from the government. Not to mention the fact that anywhere from 35 to 41 percent of Americans would pay no income taxes. The Tax Foundation estimates that approximately 44 percent of all tax filers will have zero income tax liability under this proposal, as reported in an article in the Wall Street Journal.

Anyway you slice it, Obama’s tax plan is a return to the traditional tax and spend reputation of the Democratic party. So how does that differ from the complaint that the GOP wandered away from conservative principles of fiscal responsibility? No one denies that the Bush Administration and enough members of Congress strayed from these principles. McCain has a record of fighting spending, pork barrel abuses and earmarks. The left portraying McCain as four more years of Bush is as lame as their lie about his position on Medicare. McCain has no such plan to reduce Medicare or Social Security. McCain has no plan to raise taxes and he has the right stuff to return the GOP to its conservative principles which are not devoid of concern for the average citizen as the left would have you believe.

Vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin this November and do yourself some good. The war hero, maverick and his other positive attributes served him well before this campaign season had others attacking him and his running mate with all manner of unwarranted insults. Serving the country and doing what is right is the history of John McCain. While no one is perfect and John McCain has said as much about himself, his dedication and honesty allows him to admit mistakes and make corrections proving he is human as well as a good public servant. His choice of Sarah Palin as VP is not a lapse in judgment but a continuation of his effort to clean up Washington by selecting someone as focused on reform as he is. This blog may never have specifically urged voters to select McCain/Palin but is doing so now.

VOTE FOR MCCAIN/PALIN THIS NOVEMBER (or earlier as the case may be)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Liberals have no original thoughts. They drink from the Kook-Aid trough and merely reword the standard mantra of the far left in hopes no one will notice. Richard Cohen is no exception. The phrase ‘ without compromising basic intellectual or cultural values’ is liberal code. They elevate their own agenda as superior to anyone else by defining it as intellectual. And cultural values is their lame attempt to sneak in the race card. It is the same argument they use to dismiss voter fraud. It is not disenfranchising the poor or those of lesser intellectual or cultural standing than a typical Democrat elitist to object to registrations of dead people, children, mickey mouse or the same person being registered multiple times.

Still, a Democrat can remain a Democrat — or at least vote as one — without compromising basic intellectual or cultural values. That, though, is not what Colin Powell was saying Sunday about his own party. “I have some concerns about the direction that the party has taken in recent years,” Powell said. “It has moved more to the right than I would like.” He cited McCain’s harping on that “washed-out terrorist” Bill Ayers as an effort to exploit fears that Obama is a Muslim (so what if he were? Powell rightly asked) and mentioned how Palin’s presence on the ticket raised grave questions about McCain’s judgment. In effect — and at least for the time being — Powell was out of the GOP. S’long, guys.

It is not a basic intellectual or cultural value to deny funding to the troops or call a General by insulting names or engage in fringe antiwar protests that provide aid and comfort to the enemy. Those sins are compounded when it is done simply for political gain. And that Colin Powell would conspire with the party embracing those actions raises more questions than it answers about what he is willing to sacrifice to endorse a candidate spearheading surrender in war and appeasement as his foreign policy. A true risk that was outlined by his own running mate this week.

Do basic cultural values of Democrats allow for the outrageous treatment of Sarah Palin at the hands of the liberals? Does it also defend insulting John McCain for not using current digital technology due to injuries received from his captors while a POW? And Richard Cohen’s not so subtle entry of the race card to charge supporters of McCain/Palin as racist is not lost on this blog. To declare a ‘column’ as starting with Condi Rice and ending with Colin Powell to defend Barack Obama and criticize their opposition as largely white and intellectually and culturally inferior is over the top race baiting and hate mongering equal to the likes of Revs Wright and Pfleger.

And the stupidity of liberal commentary does not end there. Roger Simon at Politico either drinks the Kook-Aid or thinks you did by his complete acceptance of an event he endorses on its face without the requisite scrutiny. His reaction to Powell on Meet the Press fits his liberal mind set so well there is no question exploring the motives behind the Powell endorsement or the Brokaw set up. Gee Wally, Colin Powell is so perfect that his criticism of the GOP et al, and endorsement of Barack Obama is a miracle that must have been so divine it was arranged by the Messiah himself. C’mon!! Is there no wonder in Roger Simon’s mind or is it full of liberal nonsense creating an inability to ask relevant questions like a journalist should do?

Colin Powell is, indeed, prepared to say whom he is supporting. And he does so for the next seven minutes and eight seconds, a lifetime on television, which Brokaw has the wisdom not to interrupt.

Of course Brokaw did not interrupt. Why would he when he is getting what he wants. That’s not wisdom. That is following the script. This was not a spontaneous event. Joe Biden is a spontaneous event, not Brokaw, Powell or Meet the Press.

Powell, who is of the same generation as McCain (Powell is a year younger), of the same party and of the same military background, criticizes McCain for his negative campaigning, for being “narrow,” and for aiding and abetting the “rightward shift” in Republican politics.

Yes, Roger, conservatives are to the right and liberals are to the left. So what is your and Colin Powell’s problem, the GOP is not liberal enough for you. What a surprise that is, NOT. As for narrow, McCain may characterize it as focus. Those items, which are many, that the liberals prefer to abandon, like the rule of law, or ignore, like voter fraud and the war on terror which are things McCain continues to address in an effort to protect the country. But liberals define all that as racist or some other slur to attract more of the kook fringe to their party.

The importance associated with many stories in this political season may pale in comparison to events that would occur if Obama is elected. Joe Biden expressed the risk of electing Barack Obama and the failures that will follow the crisis he forecasts in a statement this week. Something this blog and so many others have been expressing for so long. And the endorsement of Barack Obama by Colin Powell does not diminish that dismal forecast. We will see if the American people are smart enough to vote for country first with John McCain and Sarah Palin, voter fraud notwithstanding, or fail to abandon the liberal hand out for the promise of personal gain. A promise that will not be kept as certain as the Biden forecast of crisis if Obama is elected.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For those who ponder voter fraud, especially those who dismiss it, this post opens with poll results from Oct 20, 2008 on how many people link ACORN with voter fraud.

45% Say ACORN Trying to Register Illegal Voters

Monday, October 20, 2008

Forty-five percent (45%) of voters say the liberal activist group ACORN is trying to register voters illegally, but they’re divided over whether Barack Obama has ties to the group, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Only 25% think ACORN, under investigation in several states for possible voter registration fraud, is not trying to put illegal voters on the rolls.

It just keeps getting better. With those on the right continuing the fight to eliminate voter fraud from the likes of the Obama supported ($800,000 from his campaign) ACORN activist group to the liberal leaning MSM and Democrats continuing to dismiss voter fraud as an attempt to bar legitimate voters from the rolls, the state of California is a fine example of muddying the waters of voter fraud.

Orange County offers drive-through democracy

Registration and early voting without leaving the car will be available today, the last day to register for the Nov. 4 election.
For those registering to vote, election officials will hand the paperwork through car windows, or people can fill out the forms at a well-lighted table outside.

If illegal aliens or others with stolen identities drive up to the registrar of voters in California what is to stop a fraudulent registration from becoming an illegal vote? To those who wish to dismiss concerns here is a concession. It is probably just as likely that a fraudulent registration and vote done the old-fashioned way will be overlooked as well. Even in Mexico they have an ID with photo, fingerprint and other security measures to avoid fraudulent voting. But in this country a national ID was criticized and those supporting called racist or xenophobic. Is that still the current argument for allowing voter fraud?

SoCal voters cast ballots in drive-through style

By AMY TAXIN –

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — There were no burgers, car washes or lattes at this Orange County drive-through — just democracy.

Eager voters pulled their vehicles into the county registrar’s parking lot on Monday to either register or cast ballots at an electronic drive-through poll station.

The one-day-only offer came on the last day of voter registration for Californians. Only Orange County was offering the drive-through electronic voting service.

Another California example that voter fraud may be getting easier. If getting everyone eligible to vote requires instant access does that not increase the chance of fraud and decrease the government’s ability to verify voter information as valid. What was so wrong with requiring those interested in voting to register far in advance of an election to be able to vote? The answer is it does not facilitate fraud. Even using traditional voter registration methods sometimes left the door open for fraud. So instead of tightening registration requirements we, as a nation, have made it simpler to cheat and discredit the process.

Old-fashioned voting on the wane

Changing preferences lead to cuts in counties’ number of polling places
By Will Oremus
MediaNews
10/18/2008

Every year since 1972, Evan Economos of Palo Alto has been among the first people in line when his polling place opened on Election Day.

The financial analyst and father of two had to move up his morning routine a half-hour or so to keep on schedule, but didn’t mind. In fact, he looked forward to it.

“Often the people at the polling place know who I am, because they’ve seen me there before,” Economos says. He signs his name, casts his ballot, and saves the “I voted!” sticker to affix to the wall of his office at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.

Not this year.

Two weeks ago, Economos got a letter from the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters, informing him that there is no longer a polling place for his precinct.

And some voters are not even given the chance to do as they have done for years. It is not so much that old-fashioned voting is on the wane as it is those interested in subverting one of the most small d democratic processes in this republic. The author of this blog looks forward to the visit to the local polling place also and has for many years. It is a right. It is a responsibility to do one’s part. It aids in conducting a legal and legitimate process. And the social exchange of participating in traditional voting methods strengthens the process as well. But that does not favor a party, the Democrats, who have supported ACORN and others bent on doing whatever it takes to turn around their habit of losing important elections including fraud.

They vigorously complained about the 2000 and 2004 elections but no longer. As they have found a way to stack the deck in their favor there will be no complaining about voter fraud this year.

Mail ballots available for Nov. 4 election

Vote-by-mail ballots for the Nov. 4, general election are available from the Sonoma County Registrar of Voters.

County Clerk Janice Atkinson said that voters who wish to vote by mail must submit a signed request for the ballot to the Registrar of Voters office. Requests can be in person or by mail. Registered voters should receive a sample ballot and voter information pamphlet before the election. The application on the back of the sample ballot can be used to request a vote-by-mail ballot. Requests can also be made by sending a personally signed letter to the Registrar of Voters

Drive up and vote. Mail in your registration and vote. Vote early, vote often is no longer a historical footnote on past election fraud. Voter registration offices all over the country are making it easier to cheat rather than limiting the possibility of fraud. If they do not have the people or the time to properly check voter registration then that is the strongest case for requiring enough time to do it right. Since the voter fraud king, ACORN, has been around for nearly forty years if they were legitimate they would have had enough time to register voters the right way. Their complaint that voters are being kept from voting by registration restrictions falls flat. It is simply a nonsense excuse to perpetrate the fraud. If people cannot get registered the old fashioned way it may be more proof they are dead. Since ACORN has a habit of registering dead people the more anonymous the registration the better for them.

Absentee Ballots Mandatory in Many Santa Clara County Precincts

SAN JOSE (KCBS) — So many people have chosen to vote by mail that county officials will not staff polling places in hundreds of precincts this November.

Sixty-eight percent of the county’s 759,000 registered voters have switched to absentee ballots, said Elma Rosas, a spokesman for the Santa Clara County Registrar.

Another fine California example of making it easier for those intent to commit fraud. Mail it in folks. Can it get any easier to cheat? It probably can.

A little humor in this unfunny story. Does anyone remember receiving advice not to offer incentives to potential voters for registering?

Voting advice from the top

On Monday’s deadline to register to vote for the Nov. 4 election, Secretary of State Debra Bowen will be sponsoring a dawn-to-midnight voter-registration fair on the sidewalk across from the state Capitol. Perhaps its chief value will be as a visually interesting place for TV cameras to get live shots as they remind viewers on Monday that this is their last chance to be relevent in the 2008 election.

Bowen also has laid out a useful list of voting do’s and don’ts — something worth passing along for the political activists who read this blog:

DON’T: Offer incentives to voters for agreeing to register to vote or to vote a certain way. This is illegal under state and federal law.

No kidding. The insanity of the voting process marches on. There was a time when telling the truth, registering to vote and casting your vote was an honorable exercise. Not that we are all saints but at least voter fraud may have been limited with rare exceptions throughout history. Now voter fraud may become the rule rather than the exception. A large public outcry to return to the sanity of traditional registration and voting may solve the problem. The question is are enough people interested in fixing the problem or not. There appears to be plenty of doubt.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Trackposted to Mark My Words, Rosemary’s Thoughts, A Blog For All, Right Truth, DragonLady’s World, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, NN&V, Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, , Faultline USA, third world county, Allie is Wired, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and Stageleft, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Welcome to Blog @ MoreWhat.com’s Open Trackback

Secure the Borders Linkfest

This is an open trackback linkfest. It happens on Tuesday and Saturday or… Each linkfest is open until the next one starts. Trackbacks will be on the frontpage in a post called MoreWhat Matters. The Secure the Borders theme is intended as a reminder to all for obvious reasons. If you have any suggestions, criticisms, questions or just feel the need to communicate, trackback or post it in the comments. If you want to be added to Z’ Blogroll, register and/or inquire to make arrangements. The Honor Roll is reserved for blogs viewed as special by this blog’s owner.
JIHAD stands for Jesus I Have A Deathwish.

This linkfest is dedicated to the guest worker who never left.There are plenty of illegal immigration posts on this blog.

If you’re here legally and behavin’ yo self, welcome aboard.
.
.

We suggest using the Linkfest Haven Deluxe Trackback pinger for ease of use and time savings to catch all the festive linking activities today. Or, if you have done this less than we have, the permalink for this Open Trackback is the title link and the trackback is located near the bottom of the permalink page for this post. Just poke around, you’ll find it.

links in the sidebar

NOTE: It may be worthwhile to comply with the unofficial standard of submitting your blog’s best work for open trackbacks whether here or at multiple sites. The practice may have been inspired by a desire for increased quality versus quantity as well as providing greater impact from the power of the blogosphere.

On the one hand it is understandable that ordinary citizens would hold money matters as central to their thinking especially in an election year. On the other hand that thinking may be flawed and the average voter may be selecting a candidate based on something over which they have little or no control. It is again the MSM who is fanning the economy flames in this election. If it wasn’t obvious to you in months past it should be now. The coverage if you can call it that is now all Obama, all the time with constant reminders that the economy is the big issue.

It’s not the economy, stupid!!! The MSM knows that wallet issues are sensational and drive readership, viewership and ad revenue. They are supporting the notion that the 2008 US Presidential election is all about the economy. Early in this campaign season when it appeared the war in Iraq would be the central issue in the election the MSM supported the notion that everything was wrong with Iraq and the GOP was to blame. The Democratic party Presidential contenders were all about immediate withdrawal and their surrogates like MoveOn were shamelessly attacking General Petraeus with outrageous insults. When they learned that immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a disaster they all changed their tune and MoveOn became silent. Now they push the economic issue as the war issue failed them.

The excerpt and link below suggests a realistic view on the economy and the President’s limited influence over it. Something lost on most MSM treatment of the topic now that election day is so close.

No matter which party you belong to, or which Big Idea or school of economic policy you subscribe to, one thing is clear: Globalization has overwhelmed Washington’s ability to control the economy. Whether you’re a Republican supply-side tax-cutter, a Wall Street deficit hawk of either party, or a Silicon Valley techie type, your preferred levers of economic policy just don’t work as well as they once did.

As recently as 10 years ago, the U.S. economy was still relatively self-contained. Then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan–often called the most powerful man in the world–could be sure that the U.S. economic machine would eventually respond when he called for higher or lower rates. Tax and spending decisions made in Washington could set the course for growth, while economic events in the rest of the world, such as the Asian financial crisis of the mid-1990s, were felt as minor bumps.

That has changed. Since 1995 imports have risen from 12% of gross domestic product to about 17%. And foreign money finances about 32% of U.S. domestic investment, up from 7% in 1995. In other words, the U.S. is more open to the global economy than ever before, and the links run in both directions. Now many of the levers affecting the U.S. economy are located not in Washington but in Beijing, London, and even Mexico City.

Below is another reference to why the economy is not something a President can control. While it is true that Presidents like to take credit for a good economy and their opponents like to tag them with responsibility for a bad one the fact remains they have little to do with it beyond a mistakenly perceived connection.

It Ain’t the Economy, Stupid
Why no president can control our $14 trillion engine

As the economy weakens and the campaign intensifies, we’ll hear more of James Carville’s familiar refrain: It’s the economy, stupid. Well, it ain’t or, at least, shouldn’t be. I’m not claiming that Carville is wrong about voting. People vote their pocketbooks. In the latest Washington Post-ABC NewS poll, the economy overshadows Iraq as the most important issue by 39 percent to 19. What I’m saying is that this sort of voting is shortsighted. It rewards or punishes candidates for something beyond their power.

A surprising report from a member of the MSM questioned the value of the economic issue in an election some time ago. But of course the topic is receiving another type of attention lately.

Economy May Not Influence Election As It Has in Past
Polls Contradict Forecasting Models

Economists who say economic conditions can be used to explain the outcome of almost every presidential election since at least the 1950s are perplexed.

The character, personal attributes, history and experience of candidates should be placed more prominently in the mind of voters before casting their vote. If you review economic events throughout the last few decades you will find that Presidents had little to do with it and we all survived just like we will this time. The short sighted view of the economy as the central issue in this campaign only serves the left in dismissing and distracting from the flaws of the Obama candidacy. Voting merely on economic matters and supporting Obama for that reason will render those voters accomplices in the single largest scam ever perpetrated against the public in the US.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There are obvious questions about Colin Powell’s essentially 11th hour endorsement of Barack Obama. Not the least of which would be why Powell’s son remains loyal to Senator John McCain. In the piece below from The Hill there is a suggestion that the junior Powell may stand to win a job in a McCain Administration. One could make the case he could have a job in either candidate’s administration. A more compelling question could be is Colin Powell’s endorsement a little payback for falling on his sword at the United Nations with his now famous address laying out the case for WMD leading up to the war in Iraq? Or is it simply that Colin Powell is now in a position to do what he wants?

Colin Powell splits with son over White House race
By Alexander Bolton
Posted: 10/20/08 02:21 PM [ET]

Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, has put him at odds with his own son, former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael Powell.

Michael Powell, who served as a policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, is a surrogate for John McCain and represents the GOP nominee on the campaign trail.

He endorsed McCain early in the Republican primary in January, and said the Arizona senator was the best candidate to “calm the turbulent economic waters and to steer the new economy in a direction that will bring growth, opportunity and prosperity to all Americans.”

Rush Limbaugh wants you to believe Colin Powell’s endorsement is based solely on race. There is not sufficient information to conclude that to be true or false. But it certainly is plausible. This blog believes its payback time. All those years of being the good soldier, serving at the pleasure of the President and a fine record of accomplishment and a stellar reputation that was at least threatened by the United Nations episode may see the General using his new found freedom to stick it to the GOP and his former colleagues. But at what price?

Barack Obama comes with a substantial amount of baggage as does his running mate Joe Biden. If Colin Powell is supporting Barack Obama simply due to the shared heritage of race, how would that play if any of Obama’s skeletons in the closet emerge as major political scandals? By throwing support for the Democratic party candidate Powell may be risking more bad press if the conveniently scheduled post-election hearings on the housing scandal at Freddie and Fannie are not successful in covering up DNC complicity in the subprime mortgage mess.

Colin Powell did not have to endorse either candidate. Is it possible that the man with the stellar reputation and immense standing in the world is merely endorsing Barack Obama for President because he truly believes he is the right man for the job? You can only believe that if you are certain that Colin Powell did everything in his life based on what he believed in rather than what was expected of him. Powell was at odds with Cheney and Rumsfeld over the Iraq situation and was regularly ganged up on by others in the Adminstration. Yet he went to the United Nations, again serving at the pleasure of the President, and made the case for the Bush White House and WMD. Are you convinced he believed what he was saying or do you think he did what was expected of him?

So it is possible Colin Powell is endorsing Barack Obama for reasons other than he believes Obama to be the right man for the job. Could it be another reasonable person is being used by the scam phenomenon that is Obama? Colin Powell’s endorsement may be more complicated than any one reason. He may believe Barack Obama is the right man for the job. He may be doing this solely on race. He may be getting payback on his former colleagues.

The endorsement effect may have faded over time so the announcement this close to the election may be more telling than other indicators. Help shore up some fading support and dominate some of the news cycle with a big name endorsement with two weeks left. This is strategy and Powell is no stranger to such things. This is politically motivated and there is an agenda in which Powell is a player. Endorsements should not have much significance these days as there is little risk to those offering the endorsement in most cases.

So the payback angle still holds. But what Colin Powell may have in mind is another run at Secretary of State. Go back and do things the way you wanted to without the restrictions from opposition like the last time around. But that could be done in a McCain Administration as well. But then Powell would not get the added bonus of doing it with a black President.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Won’t bore you with the details but this installment of the weekly Blogs 4 Borders video blogburst is being presented a little differently. Some network issues caused it to be offered in a simple format. Click on the image above and you get this week’s report.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This video series brought to you by Freedom Folks