Obama call for campaign money.......

I believe THIS is an excellent way for Obama to raise campaign cash...... Just have the media get the news out that he's fearful of being outspent and needs more money.  It's a terrific way to squeeze  money out of his base without his campaign spending any money, don't you think? 

I also got to thinking about how Obama can pretty much say what he wants about all of this and nobody's really checking, nobody holds his feet to any fires.

But, my main point here being his mentioning the Koch Brothers with the clear and obvious disdain all leftwingers show while the best kept secret ever is  George Soros' probable enormous support of Obama.   Yet, when Conservatives mention George Soros and any connection to Obama, the Left goes into overdrive ridiculing, asking how we're sure of any connection, etc., etc., etc.   (I even have to say 'probable' because very little information comes out of Soros or the leftwing causes he supports with very big money....with the groups Soros is known to report, it's not a leap to think he's not supporting Romney!)

A troubling thing is that Obama, in that linked article above,  mentions the Koch Brothers by name...Does that strike you as unseemly and a little unpresidential?  He also knocks FOX fairly often and particular conservative pundits by name, which seems like a new 'presidential habit' and one I think which demeans the office of the president.   In italics are particular sentences I wanted to address:

"We just can't be outspent 10 to 1," Obama said. "That's what happened in Wisconsin recently. The Koch brothers and their allies spent more than the other side's entire campaign, our side's entire campaign.

Z:  How about admitting that maybe the people who voted gave a lot more money in pursuit of success?

An Obama campaign official confirmed the veracity of the recording to ABC News, describing the meeting as a "routine finance call." (Obama uses a non-taxpayer-funded phone for political calls from the plane, the official said.)

Z:  If it's "routine," why the article?  Using a non-taxpayer-funded phone is the appropriate thing to do.  Is it the Obama campaign officials who should 'confirm the veracity' of that or is this more of Holder assigning his own guys to investigate himself?   These days, the media hears anything from Obama's White House and says "oky doky!" 

The Romney campaign is expected to report raising more than $100 million in June. Obama campaign officials said they don't expect the president to match that number, but declined to offer specifics on their monthly haul.

Z:  But they'll mention to the penny what Romney has brought in and, remember, Romney raised a heck of a lot of money in the first few hours after the Supreme Court decision......Obama's saying his numbers went up then, too, but his campaign won't say how much.    They're never accountable but they'll hold Romney to it.

"We might not out-raise Mitt Romney," Obama wrote Saturday morning in an email with the subject line "This is important." "But I am determined to keep the margin close enough that we can win this election the right way."


And then there's THIS article which starts with:  George Clooney has signed on for another special guest appearance as the Barack Obama re-election campaign takes its summer fundraising tour across the Atlantic in pursuit of Euro-cash.   By the way, will Palestinians be operating phone banks for Obama this time around, too?


Is THAT what's meant by "the right way?"    Right way versus..............???

z

Herman Cain and the Koch Brothers

I'm not sure I understand this and maybe you can help.......The leftwingers ignore Soros's connections to so many leftwing causes but let the Koch Brothers back Herman Cain and  it needs the examination and misleading conjecture in the link?    Nobody's researched who paid for Obama's college educations,  how he got to be the editor of the Law Review,  how he ever got two books published when he had done absolutely nothing remarkable in his life to that point;  nobody pays attention to the ties  between him and Soros, we're supposed to believe that the Malik Shabazz who visited the White House "isn't THAT Malik Shabazz" and SO much more, but Herman Cain's connection with Conservative backers is a problem?

It's almost comical to hear even my own leftwingers here at geeeZ bring up the KOCH BROTHERS whenever there's the slightest negative thing about Obama that they can't deny...... as if the Koch Bros are some kind of disgusting evil people.   Soros is pretty disgusting and destructive to a lot of us, too, but while the Right connects the dots to him and Obama and so many very leftwing groups, the Leftist media's busy with the scissors cutting the connections.   Where's an article in the mainstream media linking him to Obama? :-)

Does Herman Cain deserve to be maligned because Rightwing Millionaires are helping him?  Obama had huge funding from Wall St millionaires......If that's such a terrible thing, why didn't he turn it down?

I have no horse in the Koch Brothers race...I don't care who they are but I'm glad that they're rich and help like-minded people...when was that a crime?
Meanwhile, Cain was excellent on Piers Morgan last night...anybody see it?
z

A Puppet we can believe in?

I've rarely seen this much in one article which so well encapsulates all that we bloggers have TRIED to get Americans to wake up to, so I had to post it here:  Please, if you have the guts, send it to people still believing in the "dummy"(and I use this term because of the terminology in the article) and still not at least wondering who his "ventriloquist" is.  Thanks.

This is an article which has different attributions, so I hesitate to credit one or the other, but it looks like someone named Alan Caruba from THIS BLOG did write it.  Whoever wrote it deserves credit:

"I have this theory about Barack Obama. I think he's led a kind of make-believe life in which money was provided and doors were opened because at some point early on somebody or some group (George Soros anybody?) took a look at this tall, good looking, half-white, half-black, young man with an exotic African/Muslim name and concluded he could be guided toward a life in politics where his facile speaking skills could even put him in the White House.

In a very real way, he has been a young man in a very big hurry. Who else do you know has written two memoirs before the age of 45? "Dreams of My Father" was published in 1995 when he was only 34 years old. The "Audacity of Hope" followed in 2006. If, indeed, he did write them himself. There are some who think that his mentor and friend, Bill Ayers, a man who calls himself a "communist with a small 'c'" was the real author.

 

His political skills consisted of rarely voting on anything that might be deemed controversial.. He went from a legislator in the Illinois legislature to the Senator from that state because he had the good fortune of having Mayor Daley's formidable political machine at his disposal.

He was in the U.S. Senate so briefly that his bid for the presidency was either an act of astonishing self-confidence or part of some greater game plan that had been determined before he first stepped foot in the Capital.. How, many must wonder, was he selected to be a 2004 keynote speaker at the Democrat convention that nominated John Kerry when virtually no one had ever even heard of him before?

He outmaneuvered Hillary Clinton in primaries. He took Iowa by storm. A charming young man, an anomaly in the state with a very small black population, he oozed "cool" in a place where agriculture was the antithesis of cool. He dazzled the locals. And he had an army of volunteers drawn to a charisma that hid any real substance.

And then he had the great good fortune of having the Republicans select one of the most inept candidates for the presidency since Bob Dole; and then John McCain did something crazy. He picked Sarah Palin, an unknown female governor from the very distant state of Alaska . It was a ticket that was reminiscent of 1984's Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro and they went down to defeat.

The mainstream political media fell in love with him. It was a schoolgirl crush with febrile commentators like Chris Mathews swooning then and now over the man. The venom directed against McCain and, in particular, Palin, was extraordinary.

Now, nearly a full 2 years into his first term, all of those gilded years leading up to the White House have left him unprepared to be President. Left to his own instincts, he has a talent for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. It swiftly became a joke that he could not deliver even the briefest of statements without the ever-present Tele-Prompters.

Far worse, however, is his capacity to want to "wish away" some terrible realities, not the least of which is the Islamist intention to destroy America and enslave the West. Any student of history knows how swiftly Islam initially spread. It knocked on the doors of Europe, having gained a foothold in Spain ..

The great crowds that greeted him at home or on his campaign "world tour" were no substitute for having even the slightest grasp of history and the reality of a world filled with really bad people with really bad intentions.

Oddly and perhaps even inevitably, his political experience, a cakewalk, has positioned him to destroy the Democrat Party's hold on power in Congress because in the end it was never about the Party. It was always about his communist ideology, learned at an early age from family, mentors, college professors, and extreme leftist friends and colleagues.

Obama is a man who could deliver a snap judgment about a Boston police officer who arrested an "obstreperous" Harvard professor-friend, but would warn Americans against "jumping to conclusions" about a mass murderer at Fort Hood who shouted "Allahu Akbar." The absurdity of that was lost on no one. He has since compounded this by calling the Christmas bomber "an isolated extremist" only to have to admit a day or two later that he was part of an al Qaeda plot.

He is a man who could strive to close down our detention facility at Guantanamo even though those released were known to have returned to the battlefield against America . He could even instruct his Attorney General to afford the perpetrator of 9/11 a civil trial when no one else would ever even consider such an obscenity. And he is a man who could wait three days before having anything to say about the perpetrator of yet another terrorist attack on Americans and then have to elaborate on his remarks the following day because his first statement was so lame.

 

The pattern repeats itself. He either blames any problem on the Bush administration or he naively seeks to wish away the truth.

Knock, knock. Anyone home? Anyone there? Barack Obama exists only as the sock puppet of his handlers, of the people who have maneuvered and manufactured this pathetic individual's life.

When anyone else would quickly and easily produce a birth certificate, this man has spent over a million dollars to deny access to his. Most other documents, the paper trail we all leave in our wake, have been sequestered from review. He has lived a make-believe life whose true facts remain hidden.

We laugh at the ventriloquist's dummy, but what do you do when the dummy is President of the United States of America ?

Z:  And, believe me, it gives me NO pleasure to feature an article which uses the term 'dummy' for a president of these United States.     But, so many questions..

z

Mr. Soros and the Koch Brothers..........finally, truth some will never hear.

I am beginning to realize, more each and every day, that many Americans just don't care what the truth is;  they posture and whine and nothing's getting done.  "FOX is biased!  Glenn Beck's a liar!"  etc etc....ridiculous, hackneyed, silly.  One group criticizes someone, and the other group comes back with "Ya, but YOUR GUY......."    As many bloggers have, I've exposed quite a lot about George Soros, but instead of listening and being curious enough to check into it from those who doubt our linked information, we hear "WHAT ABOUT THE KOCH BROTHERS!?"   It's become silly, constant, predictable.  So, when a friend sent me the following article, I knew Lasky says it better than I do, and am hoping that even leftwingers wake up with the information below.  Compare/contrast;  wake up, grow up, we have a country to save.  And fast.
Please, if you don't have time to read the whole article, please at least read what I've put in bold and red; this is important stuff to know:

AMERICAN THINKER
August 31, 2010Covering up for George SorosBy Ed Lasky

The sinister, omnipresent moneybags of the American left, George Soros, knows that distraction and misdirection make for a good defense. So do his many lackeys and sympathizers in the American media.

Recently, the left has built up two conservative billionaire brothers as their latest bogeymen. I am referring to the libertarians Charles and David Koch, who fund, among other groups, Americans for Prosperity. First Barack Obama lambasted them, and his minions in the media dutifully followed. Jane Mayer's 10,000-word article in the New Yorker, titled "Covert Operations: the billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama," has been widely cited in other liberal media.

In reality, the brothers have long funded a variety of causes years before anyone had ever heard of Obama. Regardless, Mayer's article was criticized as shameful by others, including a trenchant bit of criticism by Mark Hemingway in the Washington Examiner. One of Hemingway's points was right on target: Mayer's barely visible coverage of George Soros, sugar daddy of the Democratic Party and an early, ardent and generous supporter of Barack Obama. Hemingway excerpts a paragraph from Mayer's article and notes some omissions:
But this passage from Mayer's piece is also worth noting, as a measure of the article's bias:

Of course, Democrats give money, too. Their most prominent donor, the financier George Soros, runs a foundation, the Open Society Institute, that has spent as much as a hundred million dollars a year in America. Soros has also made generous private contributions to various Democratic campaigns, including Obama's. But Michael Vachon, his spokesman, argued that Soros's giving is transparent, and that "none of his contributions are in the service of his own economic interests."

The idea that Soros' giving is transparent is laughable -- he's given millions to the Tides Foundation, a byzantine organization notorious for obscuring finding sources on the left ... Further, Soros was very influential in setting up the Center for American Progress think tank and many other liberal organizations in the last decade. If any billionaire has waged war against a president recently, it's Soros' campaign against Bush. To dismiss any concerns about Soros' political spending while saying that the Koch brothers are at the center of a dark conspiracy is absurd.

Mayer just let the claim that Soros has no monetary interest when he gives money stand unchallenged -- and that was shameful. Where was the famed New Yorker fact-checking department? Did they get laid off?

Let me expand on Hemingway's commentary, in light of the view that somehow Soros's giving has zero to do with his financial interest -- or, as his spokesman spins, "none of the contributions are in the service of his economic interests." New York Times theatre critic turned frothing attack dog columnist of the left Frank Rich has started promoting this theme: Soros is Santa Claus or Mother Theresa. This Sunday, Rich had his typical invective-filled column -- also railing against the Kochs -- and then gave us this whopper:

Soros is a publicity hound who is transparent about where he shovels his money and "like many liberals -- selflessly or foolishly, depending on your point of view -- he supports causes that are unrelated to his business interests."

What planet do Mayer and Rich live on? Soros obviously has his financial interests in mind when he gives, and he knows how to use his billions to make more billions by tapping his friends in high places in the Democratic Party.

For example, Soros has made a boatload of money off his huge investment in the Brazilian oil company, Petrobras, a company that has benefited mightily from its deep offshore oil reserves. Barack Obama had the U.S. Export-Import bank extend billions of dollars of loans to underwrite Petrobras's offshore oil development. Soros positioned himself to reap big gains just days before his pal in the White House pushed for billions in loans to Petrobras -- a company from a country that can certainly tap the financial markets on its own to raise funds to tap oil off its shores. The company did not need easy money from American taxpayers. Yet there was Soros, who somehow was prescient enough to roll the loaded dice in taking a major stake in Petorbras. He got a double-dip type of return when Barack ("never let a crisis go to waste") Obama shut down deep-water oil exploration off America's own energy-rich coasts -- further enriching the prospects for Petrobras and George Soros.

Strike one.

Soros's pet think-tank, the Center for American Progress, constantly pushes green schemes. Democratic politicians are on board, as well. This group includes Barack Obama who, runs after one electric battery, solar power plant, and windmill after another (when he is not on the links or listening to live music at the club he created in the East Room of the White House). How generous have Obama and the Democrats been to the green schemers? The grand champion of budget-busting departments has been the "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Program," which received $1.7 billion in 2008 and $16.8 billion in 2009, a 1,014% increase in just one year. Media reports over the past year or so have tied numerous Democratic donors to these "ventures." They have been richly rewarded with taxpayer dollars.

What a great scheme! Give thousands to Obama and various Democrats and get billions back in our taxpayer dollars. Who is a big investor in "clean energy," by the way? Why, none other than George Soros, who announced back in October 2009 that he would invest at least $1 billion in "clean energy." The Center for American Progress is closely tied to the Obama administration (see "Soros-Funded Democratic Idea Factory Becomes Obama Policy Font") and serves as its hiring hall, not to mention as the fourth or fifth branch of government (or so it seems -- I have the Center for American Progress as a Google search term, and the employees of that tank are all over the media landscape, as well as D.C.). Soros knows how to use leverage, and the millions he put into the Center for American Progress (and into the election of Barack Obama and other leftist Democrats) will reap big returns -- at our expense -- in the years ahead.

Strike two.

Whatever happened to all the hullaballoo regarding hedge funds? Back in 2008 and early 2009, Democrats were busy blaming Wall Street, hedge funds, and Republicans for the financial crisis. We were promised that hedge funds would be regulated to the point of harmlessness, that their investors would have to be disclosed, their positions monitored, their leverage controlled. What happened to those promises? Well, that did not suit hedge fund managers -- not at all. So the promises went away.

And who was one of the biggest hedge fund titans out there? Why, it happens to be none other than George Soros, who made billions in 2008 from the financial and housing collapse and then made billions more in 2009 as the Democrats bailed out Wall Street. Who was the major beneficiary of hedge fund campaign money in 2008? Barack Obama, eclipsing the long-time champ in this area, Christopher Dodd, the Senator from Connecticut (Hedgefundland) who chaired the Senate Banking Committee. In 2008, I noted that Obama was "The Hedge Fund Candidate."
Obama, Dodd, and fellow Democrats just forgot that crusade against hedge funds, and Soros continues to rake in billions. George Soros -- who is the number-one funder of so-called 527 groups (such as MoveOn.Org) -- gets his money's worth whenever and wherever he puts it to work. He finds his best leverage in the Democratic Party.

Strike three.

And a bonus pitch.

I have written quite a bit about the riches we have in America in the form of shale gas. Soros has investments in the energy industry that would be harmed if our cheap and plentiful reserves were tapped to their full extent. Among his holdings are a huge one in InterOil that has big reserves of natural gas in New Guinea. Democrats are now trying to shut down our shale gas industry by attacking "fracking" -- a method that is used to extract the gas from the shale rock that holds it. There is plenty of evidence that fracking is safe and sound -- it has been used for many years. Nevertheless, the industry is under attack by Democrats in Congress such as Ed Markey, by Obama's EPA, by the Center for American Progress, by Pro Publica -- an outfit created and funded by Soros pals Herbert and Marion Sandler -- and recently by MoveOn.org. Soros must be getting desperate, as Americans crave cheap natural gas, to bringin MoveOn.org, which has heretofore focused on the purely political sport of bashing Republicans and electing as many left-wingers as it could -- including, of course, the biggest of them all, Barack Obama.

One could go on. Soros is an enterprising man and legendary investor. He figured out sooner and better than anyone else how to buy political power and bend politicians to his will. He is not a goody-two-shoes, as partisans on the left try to portray him. He has benefited hugely from leverage, and the best leverage he enjoys is when he "gives" money in ways that are really investments (payoffs, bribes?) in disguise. Shame on Mayer, Rich, and others who hide this history. They also are all but puppets in the hands of George Soros.
Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.
z

Soros: How far will he go for the next election?

PLEASE read THIS WHOLE ARTICLE and digest it and send it to people you know would want to see it.  Americans need to know just how far the Democrats will go in the coming elections.  I warn you, this will make your stomach churn.   Here are some excerpts:
 
A small tax-exempt political group with ties to wealthy liberals like billionaire financier George Soros quietly helped elect 11 reform-minded progressive Democrats as secretaries of state to oversee the election process in battleground states and keep Republican “political operatives from deciding who can vote and how those votes are counted.”
Known as the Secretary of State Project, the organization was formed by liberal activists in 2006 to put Democrats in charge of state election offices, where key decisions often are made in close races on which ballots are counted and which are not.

The group’s website said it wants to stop Republicans from “manipulating” election results.

“Any serious commitment to wresting control of the country from the Republican party must include removing their political operatives from deciding who can vote and whose votes will count,” the group said on its website, accusing some Republican secretaries of state of making “partisan decisions.”
SOSP has sought donations by describing the contributions as a “modest political investment” to elect “clean candidates” to the secretary of state posts.
Named after Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, so-called 527 political groups — such as SOSP — have no upper limit on contributions and no restrictions on who may contribute in seeking to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office. They generally are not regulated by the FEC, creating a soft-money loophole.

See the inferences?   Very cunning, isn't it.   I was hoping to see mention in this article about the horrid ways Republicans have stolen votes and committed fraud;  but, alas.   Imagine if a Republican group was known to be doing what this liberal one is?    Imagine the outrage in the media?

It goes on to say:

Democrats accused Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, both Republicans, of manipulating the elections in favor of GOPcandidates — charges Mrs Harris and Mr Blackwell denied.
“Does anyone doubt that these two secretaries of state … made damaging partisan decisions about purging voter rolls, registration of new voters, voting machine security, the location of precincts, the allocation of voting machines, and dozens of other critical matters?” SOSP asked on its website.

Oh, yes, a lot of people doubted that!  And, in that climate of hate and mistrust and anger and leftwing media power, no Democrats could prove otherwise?  The Democrats couldn't prove anything but this Soros-backed project, SOS, is formed and blames that  for its inception?   Is anybody buying that?  REALLY?

The article goes on and on and you'll want to read it, you must read it to be informed and active.  Please sign up for working the polls in November 2012.  I've already related several stories of Democrats running my precincts, and have other important information of voter fraud from the left HERE, HERE, HERE, ESPECIALLY HERE and HERE, THIS AMAZING ONE!, and THIS YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST READ .  

Please, let's REALLY get clean voting back into this country..........we can see what's being done against it.  Republicans, nay, ALL AMERICANS,  should want to go back to NO early voting days (Europeans vote on weekends to make sure people can vote, why can't WE?), no "provisional ballots," and voting with an ID that's swiped and can't be presented at another precinct,  but......it's too much to do, too expensive...and our democracy hangs in the balance, as you can see in this article.

If this group is so upstanding and wants openness and honesty, how's about helping elect Republicans with outstanding, sound reputations, too?  Or are Republicans the only stinking filthy lying voter fraud party?  :-)  Imagine anybody not (Hint: I doubt that the men in the image here are Republicans)  See HERE and HERE.

By the way, if anybody can find information about this Secretary of State Project in the NY Times or Washington Post, I'd like to see it: I Googled, but the information is only in Conservative venues.  Funny, I'd have thought...for transparency and honesty, that.............well.................   (what was I THINKING?)

This country is perilously close to CHANGE nobody HOPED for.............................but Soros.

z

"A Conference to change the world economic system"...Soros, at it again. Only worse this time

Our 'friend' George Soros is planning a big conference, have you heard?  I hadn't, either, until someone sent me THIS LINK (quotes in italics below are from the linked article).   Oh, yes, the guy who said "the main enemy of the open society, I believe, is no longer the communist but the capitalist threat" is taking no chances.........according to The Business and Media Institute.


The event is bringing together "more than 200 academic, business and government policy thought leaders' to repeat the famed 1944 Bretton Woods gathering that helped create the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Soros wants a new 'multilateral system," or an economic system where America isn't so dominant....and, of course, more than two-thirds of the slated speakers have direct ties to Soros. ....

Soros emphasized that point, that this needs to be a global solution, making America one among many. "The rising powers must be present at the creation of this new system in order to ensure that they will be active supporters."  (Z: think Obama or Geithner will disagree?)

Dan Gainor is a wonderful writer, please read the whole link....HERE it is again.  It's so important we read these things because we're not getting them from the mainstream media, that is FOR SURE.   

Do you think Soros is unstoppable and can win?   I'm thinking America's in just the right economic position for him to succeed in his "multilateral system where we're not dominant.....Methinks those days of American dominance are over and, after all, our professors at universities teach that this is better so there won't be much argument.  

Well, "world after to Soros", be very careful what you ask for.    What are your thoughts?

z

Glenn Beck is an AntiSemite..?

Please read THIS.......it's amazing.   For having quoted George Soros (extremely interesting link, by the way), a Jew, Beck is now considered by the liberal media an AntiSemite...wow.  Beck has never said anything other than quote what Soros has himself said about himself.............and yet, Beck must show remorse, when Soros has none?  I think, considering the topic,  Soros' lack of remorse is a bit more huge than any Beck needs to show.
Then read THIS piece from The Daily Beast, maybe the most dishonest, agenda-driven story I've maybe ever seen. 
As Beck pointed out yesterday on his show, holding up reams of paper "you think our lawyers haven't checked all of this out?"   He doesn't say anything without backup, he never suggests anything without facts and figures........he's OPINION, not NEWS, but, brother, is Soros strong enough to bring him down?  he's sure trying.  Can't have anybody thinking anything negative about George Soros now, can we!  Can't have the masses THINKING, after all.
This blog isn't going to solve this problem.........FOX, the Anti Defamation League, and much larger entities than my blog are addressing it.........but it sure should be noted that lies are prevailing.   And freedom of thought?  Perish the thought, according to the far Left's hero, George Soros.
geeeeZ

The Soros Scheme ......... WAKE UP!

This might be the most important article on what's happening in our world that you have ever read. As usual, it's taking the Canadian media to tell Americans the truth.
PLEASE READ THE LINKED ARTICLE AND SEND IT AROUND. Even your liberal friends might open their eyes and ears to this truth, if you have the nerve to send it around. Of course, you'll get a lot of "OH, that must be on FOX". Please, it is not on FOX and, anyway, remind them that sloughing off information just because it might be on a conservative news venue is dangerous to truth and transparency. This is a huge problem in America today. The Left drew the lines, Alinsky style, and now nothing Conservative could EVER be beneficial. This has to change or we're in even bigger trouble than we think we're in because it means people won't THINK or WAKE UP. Here's one paragraph from the article:

Soros had backed Obama for president in 2008, saying that he had “the charisma and the vision to radically reorient America in the world.” His prediction seems to be eerily coming true.

Please send this around. We have a country to save.

z thanks, Pris