Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘DNC’

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/obama-and-dnc-motion-for-protective-order-staying-discovery-pending-decision-obama-is-indonesian-obama-is-an-illegal-alien/

Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

ORDER

AND NOW, THIS ___ DAY OF ___________, 2008, upon consideration of the
Motion of Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator Barack Obama for
Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision On Dispositive Motion, and of the
submissions of the parties relating thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion is
GRANTED.

Surrick. J.

DMEAST #10127194 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 2 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

MOTION OF DEFENDANTS
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE AND
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), defendants Democratic National Committee
and Senator Barack Obama respectfully move the Court for a protective order staying all
discovery in this action pending the Court’s decision on defendants’ motion to dismiss
the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), on October 6, 2008, counsel for defendants
conferred with plaintiff about agreeing to stay or defer discovery, including deferring
responses to the discovery requests already served by plaintiff (attached as Exhibit A
hereto). Plaintiff refused to consent to any such stay or deferral.

DMEAST #10127157 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 3 of 10

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1, accompanying this Motion is a Brief in Support of

Motion for Protective Order and a proposed Protective Order.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.

Dated: October 6, 2008
John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL,
LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103

(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com

Of counsel:

Joseph E. Sandler
General Counsel, Democratic National Committee
SANDLER, REIFF & YOUNG, P.C.
300 M Street, S.E. #1102
Washington, D.C. 20003
Telephone: (202) 479-1111
Fax: (202) 479-1115

Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Defendants
Senator Barack Obama and
Democratic National Committee

DMEAST #10127157 v1

2
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 4 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

BRIEF OF DEFENDANT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
AND DEFENDANT SENATOR BARACK OBAMA
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON
DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator Barack Obama submit
this Brief in support of their Motion for Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending
Decision on Dispositive Motion. Plaintiff has served extensive discovery requests on
defendants. As noted in Defendants’ Brief in Support of their Motion to Dismiss, this
lawsuit is entirely without merit and plaintiffs’ allegations are patently false. Defendants
have moved to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to
state a claim. That motion presents solely issues of law; no discovery is needed in order
to resolve the motion. If the motion is granted, it will dispose of the entire action,
obviating the need for the burdensome discovery sought by plaintiff. A protective order
staying discovery is therefore warranted.

DMEAST #10127159 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 5 of 10

I. Procedural Background
In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as
President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges
(falsely), Senator Obamais purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr.
Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama is ineligible to run for President;
an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction
barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of
all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college
and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being
vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests for admission on Senator Obama. On that same
date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production
of five categories of documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a
matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for
President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.

True and correct copies of these discovery requests are attached as Exhibit A hereto.

DMEAST #10127159 v1

2
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 6 of 10

II. Discussion
Rule 26(c)(1) authorizes the Court to enter a protective order to protect a party
“from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,” including an
order forbidding the discovery or specifying terms for discovery. “While the court should
not automatically stay discovery because a motion to dismiss has been filed, ‘a stay is
proper where the likelihood that such motion may result in a narrowing or an outright
elimination of discovery outweighs the likely harm to be produced by the delay.’” 19th
St. Baptist Church v. St. Peters Episcopal Church, 190 F.R.D. 345, 349 (E.D. Pa. 2000),
quoting Weisman v. Mediq, Inc., 1955 WL 273678, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5900 *2 (E.D.
Pa. 1995). “Where a pending motion to dismiss may dispose of the entire action and
where discovery is not needed to rule on such motion, the balance generally favors
granting a motion to stay.” Weisman, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at *5.

In Weisman, in which this Court found that a motion to dismiss could be decided
on the pleadings, and could be decided in a relatively short time period, the Court granted
a stay of discovery. Similarly, in Norfolk Southern Rwy Co. v. Power Source Supply,
Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15306 (W.D. Pa. 2007), defendant filed a motion to dismiss
based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction; plaintiff served interrogatories and document
requests while that motion was pending. The court granted defendant’s motion for a
protective order staying discovery, ruling that, “where, as here, an objection to the
Court’s jurisdiction made under Rule 12 might compel the dismissal of an entire action,
the Court finds that considerations of fairness and efficiency suggest the prudence of
limiting discovery to those facts necessary to resolve the motion. Because the Parties in
this matter have fully briefed the jurisdiction issue and await only the Court’s ruling,

DMEAST #10127159 v1

3
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 7 of 10

discovery in this case shall be stayed and Defendant protected from the requests that
Plaintiff has already propounded.” Id. at *4.

In this case, as in Weisman and Norfolk Southern Rwy., defendants’ pending
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction would dispose of the entire
action. The motion does not involve any disputed issues of fact: defendants contend that,
as a matter of law, plaintiff lacks standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate
for President and that there is no federal cause of action that could serve as a means for
such a challenge. Thus, discovery is not needed in order to rule on the motion. In these
circumstances, a stay of discovery is warranted and appropriate.

DMEAST #10127159 v1

4
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 8 of 10

CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the Court should grant the motion of defendants
DNC and Senator Barack Obama for a protective order staying discovery pending a

decision on their motion to dismiss.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Dated: October 6, 2008 John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL,
LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com
Of counsel:
Joseph E. Sandler

PLEASE TAKE NOTE: EMPHASIS ADDED TO POINT OUT THE ATTY FOR THE DNC AND OBAMA IS ALSO THE SAME ATTY WHO REPRESENTS LOUIS FARRAKKAN AND THE NATION OF ISLAM AMONG OTHER QUESTIONABLE CLIENTS! COINCIDENCE?? DOUBTFULL!

General Counsel, Democratic National Committee
SANDLER, REIFF & YOUNG, P.C.
300 M Street, S.E. #1102
Washington, D.C. 20003
Telephone: (202) 479-1111
Fax: (202) 479-1115  (Emphasis added)

Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Defendants
Senator Barack Obama and
Democratic National Committee

DMEAST #10127159 v1

5
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 9 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :
:
Defendants :

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 26.1(F)

Undersigned counsel for Defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator

Barack Obamahereby certifies pursuant to Local Rule 26.1(f) that the parties, after reasonable

effort, are unable to resolve the dispute that is the subject matter of Defendants’ Motion for

Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision On Dispositive Motion.

/s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.

Dated: October 6, 2008
John P. Lavelle, Jr.
Attorney I.D. PA 54279
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103

(215) 864-8603
(215) 864-9125 (Fax)
lavellej@ballardspahr.com

DMEAST #10127199 v1
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this day, a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Defendant Democratic National Committee’s and Defendant Senator Barack Obama’s
Motion for a Protective Order Staying Discovery Pending Decision on Dispositive Motion
and Brief in Support thereof was served by First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, upon the
following:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 09867

Plaintiff

Dated: October 6, 2008 /s/ John P. Lavelle, Jr.
John P. Lavelle, Jr.

DMEAST #10127407 v1

Jeez! Am I the only one who thinks it’s getting too deep here? I mean instead of just showing the proof Obama and the DNC filed a motion to dismiss and then when Berg filed for discoverey ect. they request an order to delay any and all discovery until after the motion to dismiss has been ruled on. In other words ( I’m no lawyer) they don’t want to respond or show proof. They filed to dismiss on grounds they don’t think Berg has a case (yeah right) and when berg filed to force discovery (in other words show the documents) they ask the court to protect them from having to show proof until they get the judge to dismiss the case so they won’t have to.

BULLSHIT! Show us the proof you fucking cowards! All this posturing and begging the court to do his bidding is just too much! They are wasting time and resources instead of simply digging out the documents requested and putting his money where his mouth is so to speak! For crying out loud! He wants the top job in the country and he gets insulted and asks for special treatment, special protection from the rules and laws the rest of us have to live by every time anyone questions him on qualifications, experience, eligibility, specific definitions of his “Hope” and “Change” you know little things like that.

I recently read a comment about how we should all just fall on our knees and worship the “great leader” instead of wasting time on such tiny, little technicalities. I suppose the Constitution is just a technicality then?

Read Full Post »

 A few words about justice and justification.

People can find a way to justify pretty much anything. The only requirement is the ability to momentarily (or in some cases permanently) suspend reality. It’s like a different facet of denial in that way.

Consider this, Al Capone, notorious mobster, murderer, breaker of the law, considered himself to be a misunderstood and persecuted individual who , in his own words, was a “great benefactor to the people”.

I guess he thought that his running of the gambling, prostitution and illegal liquor establishments was somehow a humanitarian effort. All those murders committed by him and at his request were obviously acts of “public service” and he should have gotten the keys to the city!  

Apparently to Capone the law and it’s enforcers were unfairly and unjustly persecuting him because they expected him to obey the laws of the land and they intended to stop him and prosecute him for not doing so. I suppose every criminal in the prison system probably thinks the same way. It’s part of their make up. If they admitted to themselves, or anyone for that matter, that they were in the wrong they might be forced to really think about their actions and the repercussions of them. Thus to them they are innocent and wronged by the system.

The Justice system sees things quite differently indeed. If you break the law you will pay the price. Message: Don’t break the law and you won’t have a problem.

We’ve seen an awful lot of this in the last 19 months. It seems lots of law breaking has been “justified” and gone unpunished.

A prime example is the recent hacking into the personal email account of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. It’s old news to anybody who surfs the net and it’s starting to get some exposure on MSM. Her personal email account was hacked, password changed and screen shots of her emails, contact list, photos of her family and email addresses and cell phone numbers of her family were published on the web by the hacker.

I have heard time and again from Obama supporters that the hacker was supposedly justified because there were reports she might be using her personal email to hide work related things she doesn’t want the public to see. Bullshit! Even if that were the case it is for officials and law enforcement to find out not some snot-nosed college punk who proudly calls himself an Obamacrat.

We are not allowed to take the law into our own hands in this country for a reason. So even if the allegations were true (the hacker himself admitted there was nothing incriminating in the emails) it is not the “job” of non-professionals to break the law to find out.

I have also heard that Sarah Palin supposedly “deserved” it or that this should prove she is incapeable of being VP because her email was hacked. First off who deserves to have their privacy invaded? Second how in the hell is that her fault or does it prove that she is not up for the job? Someone broke the law and invaded her privacy but we’re told that this makes her unqualified?

So what about when Obama’s, Hillary’s and McCain’s passport info was accessed illegally?  (by people connected with the Obama campaign no less) Wouldn’t that make Obama unqualified too by those standards? I mean if it makes Palin unqualified how come Obama was just a “victim” when it happened to him? Answer: because according to Obama and the Obamacrats he is ALWAYS the victim in any circumstance. It’s just a given.

When ever there is any question they automatically give the points to their guy just like the RBC meeting in May when the DNC gave Obama the uncommitted delegates and then the gave him 4 delegates that Senator Clinton earned even though his name wasn’t even on the ballot. Yup! And they broke their own sunshine rules to do it with a secret vote during their 2 1/2 hour lunch break.

Oh but they were “justified” in doing so because, well, because they wanted Obama to win. We’re up to here with their “justification”.

This is far from the first time Obama and his supporters have broken the law. Hillary supporters have been hacked, threatened, had their blogs shut down, been kicked off of previously democratic web sites that are nothing more than Obama shills now and the list goes on and on. Alot of these activities are illegal but we’re told that the Bots are justified and if we didn’t have the sites there they wouldn’t be able to hack them. It’s our own fault according to these people because we won’t just shut up and go away.

So I guess in their view if you speak out against them or speak out for what is right you are standing in their way and according to them that is a crime. I have news for them it is not a crime to refuse to vote for someone. It is not a crime to speak out for what you beleive is right. In fact is the opposite. Speaking out against corruption and evil is a civil duty of the highest order!

Then we have the fact that the hacker in question turns out to be the 20 year old son of a Democratic Senator from Tennessee. According to one MSM source he says “he was just playing around” and there are supposedly no charges being filed? That’s what I heard on CBS last night anyway.

I don’t care if he was playing around or not it is a crime to access someone’s personal correspondence and it should be treated as such. Plus they said he was the son of a “prominent democrat” but failed to mention just how prominent. Just one more example of how Obama has the media in his pocket.

If this was my email account, or yours, or anybody else’s they would be steaming mad and rightly so. Why is it only a crime if it’s against Obama but not when it’s against his opponents? This kid should be prosecuted for breaking the law and the media should be honest about the fact this is a crime and who his father really is. We are tired of them protecting the politicians they want to protect and crucifying the ones they don’t.

Actually we are tired of the media as a whole period. They should just go find jobs as hot dog vendors or carnival workers and leave the news to real journalists with scruples and ethics.

What about the crime Obama committed by trying to stall the troops withdrawal from Iraq for his own political gain? It is a crime. It is a felony. He violated the Logan Act. It is treason.

Thanks to Shtuey at http://ohmyvalve.blogspot.com/ for the excellent video!

Not to mention the fact it’s about as phony and hypocritical as you can get to campaign on the whole “Stop the war and bring our troops home” all the while wheeling and dealing behind the scenes to manipulate the public.

I suppose IF we hear anything about it from the MSM it will be somehow “justified” too. I suppose Obama is “justifying” any deaths that occur because of the delays caused by his meddling as a sacrifice that must be made in order for him to gain control and therefore “save” us! Pfffft! Don’t even get me started on that one!

Every single one of the soldiers serving overseas is worth more than a hundred Obamas! Every single one of them is out there fighting to protect the rights Obama would bargain away at the drop of a hat and issue some lame “justification” afterwords. He is not worth the spit they shine their boots with!

On a lighter note I found this on http://harddriller.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/new-nickel-design/ while tag surfing!

It was just too funny not to steal!

 

Oh such sweet truth!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Thanks to DemKR at the Hillary Clinton Forum for the graphic!

Yup I think this is going to be very popular on breakfast menus everywhere! Not only is he cash strapped and begging Babs and her friends for $$$$ https://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/cash-strapped-obama/    now he’s losing high powered Democrats. More importantly he’s losing wealthy, well connected and firmly entrenched Democrats.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/prominent-clinton-backer-and-dnc-member-to-endorse-mccain/

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

So it would seem some party stalwarts are taking another look and deserting the sinking Obama ship. Why throw more money or effort into a losing proposition?

UPDATE: PROFILE OF LYNNE FORRESTER DE ROTHSCHILD:

http://www.fmwf.com/newsarticle4.php?id=399&cat=6

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Awww! That’s like so sad! Apparently The One, the Rock-Star-Money-Machine, Senator Barrack Obama himself is now cash strapped, fighting for his political life and is unable to support and stump for the
down-ticket Dems. I guess right about now he’s wishing he had stuck to that pledge on public financing.

Mark Impomeni writes about it here:  http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/16/cash-strapped-obama-turns-down-dem-senators/

Earlier this week, the Obama campaign announced that it raised $66 million in the month of August. That figure was hailed as a recordfor a single month in many media accounts. But left out of the analysis is the amount of money that Obama had to spend to raise that cash, known as the burn rate. At the end of July, the campaign reported having cash-on-hand of $66 million. Add in the $66 million the campaign raised in August, and the campaign would have $132 million available if it spent nothing. But the Obama campaign reported having $77 million in the bank at the end of August, meaning that it spent $55 million during that time frame. In other words, the campaign spent 83% of what it raised in August, netting only $11 million of that record total.

Hmmm… it seems the funds are drying up and the fundraising is now costing nearly the amount raised. How awful! I’m so sad! NOT!

In fact, quite the opposite is true. I find a smile on my lips and a sense of satisfaction in my heart. No wonder Barbara Streisand had to throw a big fundraiser for him! He’s going to need a lot more than Hollywood endorsements and over the top $28,500 a ticket parties to make it through the next 47 days!

CQ

Read Full Post »

Nice! Real patriotic NOT! Here is the first of three articles that tell the truth about how Obama feels about Iraq and our troops there.

Obama Interferes In US-Iraq Agreement

 

In direct interference in US foreign policy and the execution of the war in Iraq, Barack Obama today told the Iraqi foreign minister, according to the New York Times’ Caucus blog report,

While the Bush administration would like to see an agreement reached before the summer’s political conventions, Mr. Obama said today that he opposed such a timetable. 

“My concern is that the Bush administration, in a weakened state politically, ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it’s my administration or Senator McCain’s administration,” Mr. Obama said.

According to Obama, “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”
What else could he say when confronted with such effrontery by someone not the president who might be.

The CBS reporton the phone conversation doesn’t think it’s significant enough to mention this part of their conversation, nor that regardless of the progress that’s been made Obama says he’s firm on withdrawing US troops quickly. Jenifer Rubin at Commentary’s Contentions blog, however, correctly sums it up: “Great Surge, Let’s Quit.”

The Washington Post’s editorial today says of the agreement,

It means that Iraq, a country with the world’s second largest oil reserves and a strategic linchpin of the Middle East, just might emerge from the last five years of war and turmoil as an American ally, even if its relations with Iran remain warm. So it’s hard to fathom why Democrats in Congress have joined Ayatollah Khamenei in denouncing the U.S.-Iraqi agreements even before they are written….

 

Ed Morrissey comments,

So why haven’t the Democrats shown more enthusiasm? They would have to admit that they were wrong about the surge, wrong about Maliki, and wrong to declare defeat fourteen months ago. Democrats from Barack Obama down have insisted that the US should abandon Iraq as a failed mission rather than adjust to better strategies. Had the Bush administration listened to them, Iran would already be in charge of Iraq through Moqtada al-Sadr.

 

Another example to add to the many that Barack Obama is a dangerous poseur.

Bruce Kesler | Jun. 16, 2008 | 4:52 PM

So not only did he meddle to try and influence the elections he used the troops that he claims he is so concerned about to do it! The media did know but said nothing. I see the pattern is not straying from the traditional Obama “whatever it takes to climb the ladder” mindset that we’ve all come to know so well.

Here’s more:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_tour_de_farce_122049.htm?page=0

 

O’s Tour de Farce  by Amir Taheri 

Posted: 3:24 am
July 29, 2008

TERMED a “learning” trip, Sen. Barack Obama‘s eight- day tour of eight nations in the Middle East and Europe turned out to be little more than a series of photo ops to enhance his international credentials.

“He looked like a man in a hurry,” a source close to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said last week. “He was not interested in what we had to say.”

Still, many Iraqis liked Obama’s claim that the improved situation in Iraq owed to Iraqi efforts rather than the Gen. David Petraeus-led surge. In public and private comments, Obama tried to give the impression that the Iraqis would’ve achieved the same results even without the greater resources America has poured into the country since 2007.

In private, though, Iraqi officials admit that Obama’s analysis is “way off the mark.” Without the surge, the Sunni tribes wouldn’t have switched sides to help flush out al Qaeda. And the strong US military presence enabled the new Iraqi army to defeat Iran-backed Shiite militias in Basra and Baghdad.

Nevertheless, in public at least, no Iraqi politician wants to appear more appreciative of American sacrifices than the man who may become the next US president.

Iraqis were most surprised by Obama’s apparent readiness to throw away all the gains madein Iraq simply to prove that he’d been right in opposing the 2003 overthrow of Saddam Hussein. “He gave us the impression that the last thing he wanted was for Iraq to look anything like a success for the United States,” a senior Iraqi officialtold me. “As far as he is concerned, this is Bush’s war and must end in lack of success, if not actual defeat.”

Even so, Obama knows that most Americans believe they’re still at war with an enemy prepared to use terror against them. So he can’t do what his antiwar base wants – declare an end to the War on Terror and the start of a period of love and peace in which “citizens of the world” build bridges between civilizations.

That’s why Obama is trying to adopt Afghanistan as “his” war. He claims that Bush’s focus on Iraq has left Afghanistan an orphan in need of love and attention. Even though US military strategy is to enable America to fight two major wars simultaneously, Obama seems to believe that only one war is possible at a time.

But what does that mean practically?

Obama says he wants to shift two brigades (some of his advisers say two battalions) from Iraq to Afghanistan. But where did that magicalfigure come from? From NATO, which has been calling on its members to provide more troops since 2006.

NATO wants the added troops mainly to improve the position of its reserves in Afghanistan. The alliance doesn’t face an actual shortage of combat units – it’s merely facing a rotation schedule that obliges some units to stay in the field for up to six weeks longer than is normal for NATO armies.

Overall, NATO hopes that its members will have no difficulty providing the 5,000 more troops it needs for a “surge.” So there’s no need for the US to abandon Iraq in order to help Afghanistan.

The immediate effect of Obama’s plan to abandon Iraq and send more troops to Afghanistan is to ease pressure on other NATO members to make a greater contribution. Even in Paris, some critics think that President Nicolas Sarkozyshould postpone sending more troops until after the US presidential election. “If President Obamacan provide all the manpower needed in Afghanistan, there is no need for us to commit more troops,” said a Sarkozy security adviser.

Obama’s move would suit Sarkozy fine because he’s reducing the size of the French army and closing more than 80 garrisons. Other Europeans would also be pleased. German Chancellor Angela Merkelwill soon face a difficult general election in which her main rivals will be calling for an end to “the Afghan adventure.”

Today, with the sole exception of Spain (where the mildly anti-American Socialist Party is in power), pro-US parties govern Europe. These parties feel pressure from the Bush administration to translate their pro-American claims into actual support for the Afghanistan war effort. By promising to shoulder the burden, Obama is letting the European allies off the hook.

Obama doesn’t seem to have noticed the European scene’s subtleties. Despite his claim that he came to listen, he seems to have heard nothing of interest during his 10,000-mile trip.

Having announced his strategy before embarking on his “listening tour,” he couldn’t be expected to change his mind simply because facts on the ground offered a different picture.

In Paris, a friendly reporter asked the Illinois senator if there was anything that he’d heard or seen during his visit that might persuade him to alter anyaspect of his polices. Obama’s answer was clear: no.

Amir Taheri’s next book, “The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution,” is due out this fall.

 

So Obama saw the whole tour as a photo op. Not news. That he tried to interfere in foreign affairs for his own political gain? Big, game changing news. This article was from July, the previous one from June yet we haven’t really heard much about this until now. The media for the most part is beyond not doing their job they are now doing Obama’s job.

The latest again from the New York Post is by the same author and is dated today. Really informative.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm?page=0

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops – and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion.”

“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open.” Zebari says.

There’s more. Click the link to read the entire article.

The idea you might get here from reading these things about Senator Obama is that he really doesn’t care as much as he claims about the troops and getting them home. He cares about how he can spin this to favor him in the election. How refreshingly new and full of hope and change! (Sarcasm off sorry  couldn’t resist)

Mr. We need to Just admit defeat and bring our guys home decided he wants them to stay a bit longer because he doesn’t want the Republicans to look less lik the Devil if people know that they did at least one thing right. The surge that Obama did not support actually worked to some degree and the American officials are actually working with the Iraqis to get things under control and get our troops headed home. Remember how hard he fought to admit the surge actually worked? How about the NAFTA thing with Canada anybody remember that? How he denied it all and then had to admit that he did just what he said he would not do. Pander to the guys he was railing against just to make him look “good”.

That’s a joke. Nothing could make him look good to me. Everthing about him screams narcicistic, arrogant fraud. He is not above using anybody and anything to further his own career and adgenda.

Oh I forgot to mention that what Obama did by trying to interfere in the politics of a foriegn country without authorization from our government is illegal. It is against The Logan Act.

So yes by any other name it is still a stinky, fake, hypocritical rose just the same! (Sorry Shakesphere!)

CQ

Read Full Post »

 

You know I’ve been back and forth with this many times over the last year or so. Should I just change my registration to Independent or Unaffiliated? Or should I stay a Dem because the only way I can affect real change is from within? Many of my fellow Dems and Hillary Supporters have been agonizing over this for quite a while now. Some have already left the party and I, for one, consider it a great loss.

Many of us have been considering who to give our votes to as we know we will not be voting for Obama. Most of us have been subjected to ridicule, scorn, Internet flaming and even real threats, stalking and in some cases abuse. We’ve lost friendships and family over it or at the very least those relationships are strained.

I’ve had several friends who have tried to convince me “for my own good” of course that it doesn’t really matter what happened in the primaries that it’s over now and I should just move forward.

In my experience “moving forward” is not going to do anything other than condoning the fraudulent process that got us here and therefore rewarding and inviting more of the same. If they get away with it this time they will use more voter suppression tactics and threats and intimidation to subvert the process next time. You can count on it. If you give in to it you are feeding it and it will grow.

You do not fix a problem by ignoring it’s existence or by allowing it to go on unchecked.

I have other friends who say I just need to get over my anger. Hillary lost, she endorsed Obama end of story. He has a D beside his name what else do I need to know?

Did she really lose? Who won the popular vote? Who got the most votes of any primary candidate ever? Why do Caucuses only represent about 3% of the population but they are allotted delegates in the same manner as primaries which represent a much larger percentage of the population?

What was the final delegate count really? I mean BEFORE the forced and scripted roll call that was halted for a fake show of unity. The pledged delegate count was very close before Obama decided to restore Michigan and Florida to full vote status yet they never reported how that changed the actual delegate counts.

The media and the DNC swept all that under the rug since they were already busy planning how to spend the profits they intended to make on this Obama Gravy Train.

Not to mention the uncommitted delegates and the four Clinton delegates that were given to him in Michigan even though he was not on the ballot. Now that those were full votes it makes twice many delegates he gained by fraudulent methods. It’s twice as many delegates for Hillary too. She won both states hands down. 

I  don’t think that’s something I want to get over. The day when there is no outrage at cheating will be a cold day in Hell in my book and the books of many, many people in this country.

Truthfully for many of us it ceased to be about Hillary Clinton on May 31st, 2008. That was the day it became about so much more than Hillary vs. Obama it became about right and wrong. it was the shock of seeing our “leadership” distort the rules and pervert the process in order to spot Obama a few points because I guess they knew he would need them to “win” that created the outrage and the movement that is PUMA.

They have only themselves to blame. In a democratic society cheating will always cause outrage. You could say it’s the expected reaction even. The fact that it was carried out by our own side does not make it acceptable. I feel as strongly about it as I do Rev. Wright and his racist, anti-American rants. There is no context in which that is acceptable.

Most people in this country are decent, hardworking people who care very much about the difference between right and wrong. They work very hard to live by those values and to instill them in their children. Party makes no difference to those people but truth does. As does honesty, integrity, loyalty and compassion. These are things most people feel very strongly about regardless of their typical voting preferences. Things like these are deal breakers.

I have also heard the Roe v Wade argument to death. Won’t happen, we have a Dem controlled congress. The Supreme Court Argument. The Palin is pro-life argument. I don’t know many republicans that aren’t so why would they think this is news? I’ve heard them all.

I’ve also gotten a chorus of defensive stuff too over the exposure of Obamabot behaviour. For instance my last post that linked to Hillbuzz and the video of Democratic Underground posters and their EBay listing of Sarah Palin’s 4 month old baby. Of course the fact that this was on a Democratic blog and the posters were long time members with 1000+ posts each would NOT suggest to me that this is a Republican strategy. Someone is faking it to make the Dems look bad. No it would not suggest that to me at all but you be the judge. Some people! Eyes rolling!

The other things they do also like the recent discovery by the custodian at Invesco Field of 84 trash bags filled with American flags, Obama/Biden campaign signs, empty pizza boxes and other assorted trash. The custodian found them in the dumpster and called around eventually getting in touch with the Veterans and the Boy Scouts who sorted, rolled and recycled them by handing them out at a GOP campaign event. Flags that people did not want to keep were to be donated to be placed on Veteran’s graves.

The fact that Democrats who were touting this convention as the “Greenest Ever” would be so wasteful and that they would treat our flag with such disrespect is appalling to most people. I have heard though that this too must have been republicans, that everybody throws flags away, that they were supposedly “stolen” and intended for reuse. I’ve heard that it wouldn’t have been the Dems’ fault the custodian would be to blame. Obviously they didn’t read the part of the story where it said the custodian found them in the dumpster and I saw photos they were not being recycled they were in with the garbage.

Anybody remember when Obama went to Oregon and his people set up a port-a-potty on the memorial for a fallen police officer? That was probably republicans too. I know LOTS of republicans who go around volunteering to help set up for Obama events. (Sarcasm OFF.)

I can identify with that a tiny bit however because I know my friends are really just in denial. They do not want to admit to themselves that people could do these kinds of things and the idea that it could be members of the party you have held dear and worked hard for, been a loyal soldier for, well that’s a bitter pill to swallow.

I have a feeling though that swallow it they will. They have 54 days to let it sink in. 54 days to decide to do the right thing. I’m confident many of my friends will do just that because in the end they are decent, hardworking and compassionate people. They will not legitimize the atrocities that took place in the name of a win at any cost quest for power. They will not give their votes or their trust to those who cannot be trusted.

Obama and his supporters will understand in November when people go to the polls with determination to do what is right and what is best for our country.

In the end it is far less important who you vote for than who you vote against.

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

First I’m sick to death of the argument that McCain should have picked this woman or that woman if he wanted to pick a woman. The media pundits, talk show hosts and the Dems cannot stop criticizing McCain’s pick for VP.

Did they really think he was going to pick someone the Dems would pick? They say she’s no Hillary. Undoubtedly true but did anyone ever think he would pick Hillary? Or anyone like her?

They said Snowe or Hutchison have more experience but the fact is they don’t like her because she has a fresh appeal. She seems real and genuine and she seems like a big help to the GOP ticket. She seems like a winner.

All this outcry over John McCain’s choice for VP when we were barraged how many times by the media AND the DNC that nobody should try to pressure Obama into picking Hillary because it was his choice and that should be respected. His choice. Get over it. Who cares if she actually got more votes and had all the plans The One has been “chosen” and you WILL respect The One! Remember all those articles?

We’re constantly reminded of how The One should be respected. Yet I have as yet to see him earn it. I think he may have missed that lesson. Respect must be earned. It cannot be a give away. It cannot be demanded and forced.

He demands we respect him but wants us to disrespect McCain, a war hero and patriot as well as Sarah Palin because The One demands full fealty and he will not tolerate respect given to false notobama’s! I ask you is this the demeanor of a full grown man or a spoiled, petulant child?

Then the assumption that because Alaska has a smaller population, is rural ect. that it’s not like she runs a “real” state. I think Alaskans would disagree with that. It’s definitely a real state and a rugged one that not everybody could thrive in. Sure the population is not huge but as my friend Bill Demo at Hillary Clinton Forum says it’s a larger population than the state of Vermont.

Hmmmm nobody ridiculed Howard Dean (then Governor of Vermont) for running for president in 2004. If the population is the only relevant factor to being considered a “real” state I think the Dems have strayed far from their message there. I thought the Dems were for the little guys? Obama is not playing to the little guys or the blue collar Dems at all. In the end it will be that and the reprehensible tactics that lose the race for him. He thinks it’s just PUMAS. He has no clue.

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »