Opposing Obama - - Or His Policies - - Is Racist?

Guest Columnist Kevin Martin weighs-in on the issue...enjoy:

There Is Nothing Racist About Opposing Socialism

by Kevin Martin

First of all there is nothing racist in opposing, “Socialism” no matter the skin color it comes in as we are a Constitutional Republic.

“Excuse me,” but Socialism in itself is rooted in racism as it uses class envy and the power of government to take from those who have achieved success and give to the masses without choice or repercussion.

I thought Democrats and Social Liberals were all about choice, so I get it now. If you are opposed to a Socialist, who happen to be Black then it must be based on his race rather than his ideology.

I am not going to be lecture by press which is made up of mostly Social Liberals on what is and is not racism in America. This is the same press that smears people no matter their skin color or gender, who they have ideology disagreements with even proof or repercussion.

Many Socialists in the press feel that a majority Americans is simply stupid for their own good and we have to be told what is best for us. The Press is even willing to withhold damning evidence in an effort to elect officials and drive public opinion along the lines they want thru selective outrage.

We even now have Socialist Democrats such as Congressmen Barney Frank Congressmen Jack Murtha and Senator Harry Reid picking up on the supplied talking points from their allies in the press and Congressmen Murtha has even taken to throwing his own constituents under the bus by labeling them without charge or proof as, “racists and rednecks.”

If Democrats like Murtha, Frank and Reid are so damn concerned about some of their constituents possibly being racist, then they should resign from represent them, as they are suppose to be the Party of Civil Right, yet the Democrat Party can trace their roots back to the Ku Klux Klan and even have a former Klansmen as a elder U.S. Senator.

Yet these Socialist Democrats seem to operate from a Sense of Entitlement and Barack Obama is no exception as any questions about his past association have been considered by the press and his fellow Socialists as off limits and anyone who talks about those associations is smeared as a “racist” without charge or proof.

“Do you think the press would give a Conservative or Republican, the same free pass they have to Senator Obama for his past associations with Socialists, Racists and even Terrorists?” Does this not make Senator Obama a hypocrite as he and his fellow Socialist Democrats have blocked Republicans Judicial Nominees over the last 7+ years on charges of questionable past associations.

Yet, we are told by Socialists, “That past associations should not matter when you running for President as catchphrases and promises of Pet Government do. Now we have a smooth talking Socialist that wants to lead our government over the next 4-8 years with a Supermajority of fellow Socialists in the Congress, but ask your this, “Could some these Socialists get “a Security Clearance” to be a civil servant and if not would that to be racist?

In the last 20 years Socialism has been rejected in most of Europe, Africa and Asia, “Does according to the likes of those who are supporting Obama make these nations, now racist?”

A Socialist Government and a Constitutional Republic can’t exist in the same nation as power can’t be taken from the people and given to the government in a Constitution Republic no matter what color or how smooth talking the Socialism maybe. Socialists use the power of government to remain in power and oppress the will of the people at the same time, now if that is not racism against the masses, I don’t know what is and there is nothing racist in opposing on who promises this form of government.

What Kind Of "Change" Does Obama Have In Mind???

Barack Obama has been preaching "change" for nearly two straight years. And yesterday, in an appearance on "The Daily Show" on the Comedy Central Network, he said that he believes that most Americans are "conservative" - - not in an ideological sense necessarily, but in terms of being resistant to change.

Yet, in "hard times," Americans, so Obama believes, are more open to "change."

So what does he have in mind?

We'll talk about it tonight. Also, Al Queda has "issued a statement" (I'm not sure what exactly it means for a terrorist group to "issue a statement") saying that "they" (whoever "they" are) want President Bush and Republicans to be thoroughly humiliated in our next election.

Does that mean that the Democratic Party is the party of Al Queda?

Join me on "The Austin Hill Show".......1-888-630-WMAL.

Okay, So, It's A Prediction...

Evans and Novak have weighed-in with their predictions for the U.S. election outcomes...

Their data is HERE. It is what it is. If nothing else, it gives hope that the Democratic Party won't have a complete green light to go "hard left" with policy positions.

However, I still think we will not know who the President-elect is on Tuesday night. I think we're headed for a rough night...maybe several of them, next week.

More to come....

Does A Candidate's "Family" Matter?

News has surfaced from journalists in England (NOT American journalists) that Barack Obama's Aunt is living in poverty in Boston.

The story is HERE.

The Aunt of our "Spread The Wealth Around" Multi-Millionare Senator Barack Obama, and the second Obama relative found to be living in abject poverty (remember George Obama who lives "in a hut" on "less than a dollar a month?" A British media outlet broke that story, as well).

Does this matter? Does it set well with Americans, when a would-be President wants to "crack down" on people who make too money, yet he himself is a multi-millionare who can't lend a helping hand to his own relatives living in squallor??

We'll talk about this, plus the latest from the "Obama/PLO videotape" that the LA Times is sheltering, tonight from 8-10pm Eastern.

Log-on to listen at http://www.theaustinhillshow.com/, and to join the program call 1-888 - 630-WMAL from anywhere in the continental United States.

Breaking: The Source Of The Obama/PLO Video Tape...

Ali Abunimah is the likely original source of the oh-so secret Obama/Khalidi/Ayres Tape. The LA Times' Wallsten likely Plagiarized noted blogger Debbie Schlussel. At least that's what Schlussel says herself. Read her details, HERE.



We also are seeing on the blogosphere that there is a $150,000 reward being offered for the Obama/PLO tape...details are HERE.

More info as it becomes available.....

So, Now $150,000 A Year Is "Rich," And Warrants A Tax Hike

A story in this morning's New York Post tells us that Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate Joe Biden has now lowered the magic "threshold of taxation." For months the Obama campaign has insisted that under Barack's economic plan, Americans making less than $250,000 a year would get a "tax cut."

Sadly, Americans making $250,000 a year or more would be subject to sharp tax increases. And the implication here is that the multi-millionaires Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that if you earn (notice I didn't merely say "have," but "earn" - - most of us don't just simply "have" or "get" money, we work for it, we "EARN" it) $250,000 a year or more, you deserve to have a larger portion of your earnings taken away.

But wait, there's more.......NOW, V.P. Nominee Biden has lowered that magical tax hike threshold to $150,000 a year more more! See the story in the New York Post, HERE.


Also note.....yesterday on Newstalk 550 KFYI in Phoenix, AZ, Host Michele Larson was talking with Barry Young (on "The Nearly Famous Barry Young Show") about Obama's assertion that his economic adviser, Warren Buffett, has repeatedly told him that his tax hike plans (which include a near doubling of the capital gains tax rate) are "okay" and "won't hurt the economy."

Larson pointed out that maybe, just maybe, there's a significant difference between earning $250,000 a year, and having a multi-billion dollar stockpile like Warren Buffett has - - and hence, maybe Warren's doesn't see things from the "I'm rich with my 250 grand a year" perspective...

And isn't this obvious? Why doesn't anybody else in the media see Obama's scheme here: Rich Man Obama takes advice from Rich Man Buffett on how to make sure that other Americans don't get "too rich."

This is a case of the "wealthy class" seeking to rule over the "peasants." It is the beginnings of a caste system. It is absurd. It is UN-American.

I believe Larson's discussion with Young on this subject was in the 9am hour of Tuesday's show - - get the podcast HERE.

How Do You Suppose Election Night Will Go?

Today's Washington Post details a "controversy" in Virginia over counting the ballots of military personnel stationed overseas. VA Attorney General Bob McDonnell will weigh-in on tonight's show, discussing how he brought the matter to resolution.But still, there are doubts across the country as to how accurately ballots will be counted - - and plenty of people who seem to be intentionally disrupting the voting process.Also........my colleague Fred Grandy of the Grandy and Andy Morning Show at 630 WMAL suggested this morning that McCain cannot win the presidential election, so he should spend his remaining campaign time stumping for Republican congressional candidates rather than campaigning for his own, lost cause.Yet, at the close of this very day, the latest Gallup Tracking Poll has McCain and Obama statistically in a dead heat again. In fact, all three major tracking polls show McCain on the way up - - again - - and all within a 5 percentage point margin.Should McCain REALLY throw in the towel?We'll talk about it tonight, on The Austin Hill Show. 1-888-630-WMAL is the toll free number where you can join the discussion.
Tuned by Gram at 10/28/2008 04:33:00 PM 0 Performance upgrades

How Will Things Go On Election Night, Anyway???

Journalism? What's That???

Last night on "The Austin Hill Show" I talked about the "winners" and "losers" thus far in this election cycle, among the American media. I also read a bit from a striking new column making its way through the blogosphere from Tech Journalist (I hesitate to call him that, because he does far more than write about "tech," yet that's what he's most widely known for) Michael S. Malone. Read the column in its entirety, HERE.

Malone levels a - - shall we say, "stinging indictment" - - of what has become of "journalism," and warns of the consequences.

If Malone's assessment of the job "journalists" have done with the election is accurate - - and I believe that it is - - it is even more startling to think of how Americans might become even less informed if, indeed, a President Obama and a Democratically controlled Congress attempted to regulate media content, and in so doing decimated various forms of "alternative media" - - talk radio specifically.

And speaking of "regulating media content" - - F.C.C. Commissioner Michael Copps was interviewed in Baltimore and asked about the possible reinstatement of "The Fairness Doctrine." He made it clear that, in his view, the "version" of the Fairness Doctrine that was repealed in the 1980's would like not return.

But that leads us with the possibility of a "different version" of the Fairness Doctrine, or perhaps a different type of media content regulation.

I've been suggesting for many months that we could be headed for an era of "comprehensive media reform" (read my remarks on that, HERE).

The remarks of Commissioner Copps would seem to suggest that "comprehensive media reform" might be in the works, eventually (read Copps' remarks HERE.).

Can We Please Go "Old School" On Our Economic Thinking?

I've said many times that we live in an era of "economic illiteracy." With that in mind, I'm pleased to present - - and I hope you will contemplate - - the wisdom of Dr. B.B. Robinson...


Finding Financial Security Through Old-School Wisdom



Isn't it rich when something that was drilled into your head when you were a child starts making perfect sense? For me, it was Proverbs 4:7 - "Wisdom is the principal thing, therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting, get understanding." During the current economic crisis, this advice is especially relevant.

Black Americans appear to have been disproportionately affected by the subprime loan crisis. Consider that, according to a study by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, subprime mortgage loans were more prevalent than prime loans among blacks in 98.5 percent of 331 metropolitan areas surveyed in 2003. Why were subprime loans so prevalent? Where were the warnings? Passage of the Community Reinvestment Act - which essentially required increased diversity in lending - and other easy money lending policies were catalysts for increased subprime lending. Motivated by profit, mortgage companies aggressively marketed subprime loans to financially-questionable Americans, black and white, who snapped them up. Business is about contracts, and subprime mortgages were contracts stacked against the uninitiated and unaware.

After becoming sick due to the consumption of subprime loans, the nation is now turning to economists for healing. If economists are supposed to be able to prescribe a cure, why didn't they warn us about them at the outset? Specifically, where were the black economists? Why didn't they sound the alarm so that black Americans could avoid the subprime loan trap in the first place?

For many black economists - and white economists for that matter - it was not a case of knowing and not telling. It was more a case of not realizing the problem until it was too late. Like other disciplines, economics is compartmentalized. Unless one specializes in financial economics, one wouldn't necessarily be familiar with or focusing on developments in the financial markets. Too many black economists instead specialize in labor economics and focus on employment discrimination. These black economists do a lot of getting, but they aren't getting a balanced understanding.

Subprime mortgages were a creation of the financial sector. As a member of the National Economic Association, an association of black economists, I know that the number of black financial economists is miniscule. Black economists missed the warning signs. Now, who's responsible for saving those harmed in black America? How about individual responsibility?

Those in trouble should fend for themselves. Don't look for black economists to come to the rescue. They didn't in the past, so why expect them now? Thankfully, there is a means to get out of this crisis. It's easy to say, "That stuff is too complicated - only the experts understand it." How, then, did the experts learn it? They either taught themselves or were taught. But, even with good teachers, it is often better to do your own research and develop your own methods of problem solving.

The idea that one should not practice on their own behalf - that is, serve as your own doctor or lawyer - does not necessarily apply to financial matters. Learn the basics. Keep to simple practices. Avoid complex investment schemes such as derivatives and subprime loans unless you completely understand them. If you follow sound economic and financial principles, you can help solve any financial crisis you may face. Avoid the "suffering servant," "victim" and "I-need-an-expert" mentalities.

Endeavor to learn the basics of the financial system, as it will give you a better chance of weathering the storm. Not only will this course allow you to gain knowledge, but also get you the proper wisdom and understanding necessary to survive and thrive economically.

# # # B.B. Robinson, Ph.D. is a member of the national advisory council of the black leadership network Project 21. You can visit his website at www.blackeconomics.org. Comments may be sent to Project21@nationalcenter.org.

Can This Year's Presidential Race End Peacefully?

Earlier this year (July 20th to be precise) I published a column entitled “If Obama Loses In November, Will America Suffer?” In it, I referenced the many things that were being said and written about the historical and cultural significance of Obama’s candidacy (especially the many things that Obama has written about his “life’s journey,” and the extraordinary declarations that he has made about his own historical significance). I then contemplated what might happen if, despite all the “significance” of his candidacy, Obama were to actually lose the election.

As I pointed out in that column, many influential friends of mine from both political and business circles, and from both the East and West Coasts, were telling me that they feared “trouble in the streets” if Obama lost the election. That was in July. And now, as we begin the last full week before the election, I can’t help but think that we’re even closer to “trouble in the streets,” regardless of the election’s eventual outcome.

I say ‘eventual outcome,” because I do not anticipate that we’ll actually know who the President-elect is on election night. I may be wrong about this, and the Obama camp’s predictions of a Reagan-styled landslide may come to pass. But I expect a “close score” on this one, and for election night to be clouded with claims of voter fraud, and demands for investigations and ballot re-counts, all of which will likely delay the declaration of a “winner” for several days.

As for “civil unrest,” it appears quite clear to me that many of our fellow Americans are planning for this. A report that appeared in a recent edition of the Washington publication “The Hill” indicated that law enforcement agencies throughout the country are beefing-up their resources, in anticipation that there could be civil unrest on election day and the days that follow. The report included quotes from several agency spokespersons, many of whom seem to be saying, essentially, “we don’t expect trouble - - but the S.W.A.T. team will be on high alert just in case…”

Other law enforcement agents indicated that this year’s presidential election has attracted a level of “youthful enthusiasm” comparable to that usually reserved for high-profile sporting events, and noted that, even when a team wins a championship (say, a Superbowl, or a big collegiate competition), the hometown crowd often trashes its own surroundings in “celebration.” Whether or not you accept this “sports team wins big” analogy, law enforcement professionals are making these observations, and it is worthwhile for the rest of us to make note of them.

And law enforcement folks aren’t the only ones anticipating election night “action.” At the liberal activist website MWCNews Dot Net (media with conscience), the following rhetoric appeared in a “report” filed last week:

“If your television declares John McCain the president elect on the evening of November 4th, your television will be lying. You should immediately pick up your pre-packed bags and head straight to the White House in Washington, D.C., which we will surround and shut down until this attempt at a third illegitimate presidency is reversed.”

The implications of such language are obvious - - a McCain presidential victory simply will never exist, and anyone who might declare that such a thing exists will be lying.

Later in the piece, the author writes:

“If Obama officially wins, McCain is likely to challenge it, charging the Obama campaign with some of the very crimes engaged in by McCain himself. Our reaction should be exactly the same in the event of a McCain challenge as in the event of a McCain ‘victory.’ We should not sit back for even a split second and wonder how it will work out…We should be prepared already to immediately travel to Washington, D.C., head straight for the White House, occupy Lafayette Square Park, the Ellipse, and surrounding streets, block entrances, and shut the place down until Obama is recognized as the president elect or we are guaranteed a credible election with universal registration and hand-counted paper ballots. We may be there for days or weeks or months…We must show each other, and the nation, and the world that we have had enough, that we will not stand for one more stolen election, that we will not give in to fear, lies, theft, and intimidation…”

Additionally, Rolling Stone magazine published a piece last week written by the “esteemed” Robert Kennedy Jr. Kennedy claims that Republican “operatives” around the country - - Secretaries Of State, Lieutenant Governors, County Clerks, and other elected officials - - have a well-coordinated system of disenfranchisement in place, even better than in 2004, and will be arbitrarily throwing-out untold numbers of ballots so as to “give it” to McCain.

I suspect we'll be in for a rough night in November - - and maybe several of them.

New Details In The Obama Birth Certificate Scandal

On Friday evening's show, I spoke with News Anchor/Reporter Ramsay Wharton,
of KGMB-TV 9 in Honolulu.

Ramsey explained on-air with me that as she has examined the Obama birth certificate, she has discovered her own discrepancies. Most notably, the document lists the father of Senator Obama as being "African." According to Wharton, the vernacular of that time suggests that Barack Hussein Obama Sr. would have more likely been listed as "negro" (even though he was from Kenya).

She also finds peculiarities in the formatting of the document, formatting that would seem to be inconsistent with the common means of formatting that were used back in the early 1960's.

It leaves one to wonder why Obama doesn't simply answer the questions, and produce a "vaulted" (non-duplicate) copy of the birth certificate and get the issues cleared-up once and for all.

Nonetheless, Wharton indicated that the news team at KGMB-TV9 will be doing their own investigating of this matter, and I will likely speak with her again on-air during Monday evening's show.

So, Who Do You Believe?

Some polls indicate that Obama has a double-digit lead, whereas others show that Obama and McCain are in a virtual dead-heat.

Yahoo News summed it up pretty nicely HERE.

But you and I are left with the question "who's right and who's wrong?"

We'll talk about it tonight.

Also.......in light of the negative attention drawn over his "spread the wealth" comments 3 weeks ago, Obama as asked this week if he regretted the comments. He said "NO."

And his wealth-spreading plans involve steep tax hikes in nearly every sector of the American economy, along with dramatic restrictions on otherwise free-trade.

Of course, in response to the stockmarket crash of 1929, America raised taxes and imposed tough limitations on trade..and the "Great Depression" ensued.

So....why is it a good time to raise taxes now, in the midst of a global economic slowdown?

Join me tonight on The Austin Hill Show (click HERE for streaming audio and audio on demand); to join the program call 1-888 630-WMAL.

What A Stupid "Mistake"

Some people just don't get it, when it comes to the technology in our lives. John McCain's brother Joe was stuck in traffic for fifteen minutes....and what does one naturally do when one is stuck in traffic for 15 minutes? Call 9-11 on one's mobile telephone, and then when the 9-11 operator questions the "emergency" nature of your call, you tell the operator "F-You," with, of course, no thought that the operator might trace your call and discover your identity....that's what!

See the video report from DC's WJLA-TV HERE.

And while I've heard reports that Joe was listening to "The Austin Hill Show" on 630 WMAL in his car at the time of the unfortunately stupid incident, I'm still trying to get confirmation on those reports.....stay tuned (or logged-on).

Is It Even Possible For This Year's Presidential Race To Come To A Peaceful Conclusion???

Yes, I'm serious about this question. I hate to admit, but I honestly don't think so. I believe that, no matter what happens on election night, we still will not know who actually is the President-elect (I suspect we'll be re-counting ballots for a few days beyond that). But worse, still, I suspect we'll experience some level of "civil unrest" - - hopefully not a "high" level, but some, nonetheless.

One blog is reporting HERE that a McCain "win" would be, be definition, "theft," and there are plans for "resistance" should this happen.

Another blog aledges that Rev. Jesse Jackson has, along with other Democrats, "pledged" to riot of McCain wins.

And even if you don't believe that, activist groups (like this one HERE) have organized for the specific purpose of not allowing a Democratic Party loss this year.

And law enforcement agencies around the country are bracing for civil unrest, regardless of who wins the presidential race.

Even today, there have been two reports of violence against McCain supporters.

In one case, a 20 year-old female McCain supporter was mugged, and when her assailant noticed a McCain sticker on her car, he struck her to the ground and carved a "B" on her face.

And in another incident, a Florida State Republican Party operative had his home "shot up."

And we're 12 days away from knowing how the voting is going to go.

What happens on election night - - and thereafter?

We'll talk about this...as well as ponder the question "why DOES Obama insist on raising taxes in the midst of an economic downturn?"

For show audio, visit http://www.theaustinhillshow.com/.

To join the show between 8 and 10pm Eastern, call 1-888-630-W-M-A-L.

Now We Know What Biden Was Thinking...

At least, I think we now know part of what Biden was getting at, when he stated that "President Obama" will, in the first six months of his presidency, face an international crisis. Click this link HERE:

Haaretz is, essentially, a mainstream media outlet in the nation of Israel. Reports there have surfaced tonight (Thursday morning there) that Iran is planning an attack on Israel.

So...since Biden is claiming that Americans might not think Obama is doing the right thing, as he responds to the coming "international crisis," is that to say that a President Obama would not seek to defend Isarel against Iran?

We'll talk about that tonight...and, we'll contemplate this question: In light of U.S. Senator Bingaman's hope to re-instate the "Fairness Doctrine," is America's media necessarily "unfair?"

For audio, go to http://www.theaustinhillshow.comTo join the show, it's 1-888-630-WMAL.

Crackdown On "Conservative" Media...

Senator Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico, made it clear: the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" SHOULD be re-instated. The goal, obviously, is to crackdown on "conservative" media, because on cable-tv and talk radio, "conservative" content wins with audiences. The choices of free people, free people freely making consumer choices from among a bevy of choices offered to them by the free market economy, has produced an outcome that is undesirable to Democrats, so.....it's time to crackdown on conservative media. That is the plan of the Democratic Party, once they win the White House, and strengthen their domination of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives.

Listen to the audio of Senator Bingaman being interviewed on the subject, at Radio Station KKOB / Albuquerque, at our homepage, www.AustinHill.Net .

The Economy, Or National Security???

What is the most top-of-mind issue in the current presidential election cycle? Is it the economy, or national security, or both or neither one?

In the days following the Republican National Convention (the convention from which McCain and Palin got quite a significant "bump" in the polling data), the top issue for voters regarding the next president seemed to be trustworthiness.

And on that issue, McCain seemed to have an edge over Obama.

But that was in September.

Then towards the end of September, President Bush spoke to the world and essentially said that, if the Congress didn't pass legislation to stabilize the financial markets, then the world would soon come to an end.

And panic ensued.

And the eyes of American voters were focused almost solely on the threat of economic collapse.

And Obama rose dramatically in the polls, while McCain shrunk.

Now, we've seen a few days in a row of, at least, a more stabilized Wall Street, and - - whether your saw it or not - - some positive economic news.

So what are Americans focused on now, as they get ready to vote (or are already voting) in the presidential race?

We'll talk about this, and more. Listen at www.TheAustinHillShow.Com .

To join the show, it's 1-888-630 - W - M - A - L.

So Why Do We Want Him To Be President?

If Joe Biden's prediction from last Sunday - - that an international crisis will emerge in the "first six months" of the Obama presidency, a crisis that will "test" Obama's leadership - - then why should any American want him to be President?

That's the question I'd like to ask Biden, Obama, and now, Madeline Albright.

The former Secretary of State was interviewed on CNN about Biden's assertions (you can see the video HERE) and claims that Biden is right - - "President Obama" will be "tested."

Nobody has predicted that the election of John McCain to the presidency would necessarily bring about an international crisis within his first six months of office. But that's what is being more-less guaranteed, with the election of Obama.

Why? Why should America "go there?" Why would we, the people, desire to elect a candidate who will bring about an international crisis?

More on this, later today..

What In The World Is Biden Saying???

Cryptic...that's a good word to describe Joe Biden's comments at a campaign fundraiser in Seattle over the weekend. He seems to have been caught off-guard, as though he forgot that media professionals were in the room. Read it for yourself, HERE.


What is he getting at,when he says that President Obama will, with certainty,. have his "mettle tested" within the first six months of his presidency? Does Senator Biden have some foreknowledge of a plan by our enemies? Is he withholding information from the American people? Is it such sensitive information that he never should have mentioned it in the first place?

And what are these "unpopular decisions" that Biden is referring to, decisions that Biden is suggesting? Would a President Obama lead us into unilateral disarmament? Would he form an official alliance with the PLO? What is "Slow Joe" alluding to???

Join me tonight, on The Austin Hill Show, as we discuss it.

The Threat Is Real...

There is an interesting and important new report in the New York Post today, regarding the Democrat''s likely intentions to "regulate" talk media next year.

The writer of the report, Brian Anderson, has just recently published a book on the subject, and I take his very seriously his perspective on the matter.

I've written on this subject before, and I take it very seriously. I happen to think that the Democratic Party will NOT attempt to reinstate "the Fairness Doctrine," in so many words. But will attempt to "reform" media in a variety of ways, so as to acheive the same result as the "Fairness Doctrine" might accomplish. Anderson alludes to this idea, as well. And my article on the matter is HERE.

This is a serious, and potentially very dangerous situation.

I'm keeping my eyes on this, and will have much more to say about it, very soon.

Governor Palin, "Joe The Plumber," And The Real Middleclass

Why has a guy named Joe from Holland, Ohio, been a hot topic among the two dominant presidential campaigns?

Could it be that there are millions of other Americans just like him, and we pose a challenge for politicians of all stripes - - especially Democrats?

Of course, I’m referring to Joe Wurzelbacher, the plumber from Ohio who, caught on video questioning Barack Obama about his tax hike plans on October 11^th, was told by the Senator that “when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Since the publicizing of that video on Youtube Dot Com, Joe has appeared as a guest on the CBS Evening News, Fox News channel’s “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” And ABC-TV’s “Good Morning America.” Joe was also referenced more than 20 times at the third and final presidential debate last week, as John McCain looked into the tv camera and assured Joe that he won’t raise Joe’s taxes, and then repeatedly criticized Obama’s plan to “spread the wealth.”

A week later, the candidates are still talking about this guy. McCain and Palin speak supportively of Joe the plumber, and express their intentions to keep Joe’s tax burden low. And amazingly, presidential candidate Barack Obama and vide presidential candidate Joe Biden, with people around the globe watching their every move, have taken to belittling, impugning, and maligning their fellow American, the very-middleclass Joe Wurzelbacher.

Insisting that his tax plan will only raise taxes on those earning in excess of $250,000 a year, Obama has repeatedly scoffed at Joe the plumber, asking “how many plumbers make a quarter of a million dollars?” And Biden joked on “The Tonight Show” with Jay Leno that he wants to help real plumbers who are “actually licensed.”

Obama and Biden may both be surprised to know that, in many states, individual plumbers can practice their craft under the auspices of someone else’s license - - like, for example, the owner of the plumbing company that employs them. They may also be shocked to learn that, yes, plumbers and owners of plumbing companies can, and often do earn $250,000 a year or more. We still call them “small businesses” - - and they are some of the very businesses that will be endangered should the Obama-Biden economic plan become law.

But why is Obama, the multi-millionaire graduate of an elite Ivy League school, spending his precious campaign time trying to discredit one blue collar, middleclass man from the swing state of Ohio? Perhaps it is because Wurzelbacher threatens Obama’s assumptions about America.

Joe Wurzelbacher symbolizes the American middleclass in ways that we simply haven’t seen it symbolized in the media for a long time. So far as we know, Wurzelbacher has no direct or familial connections to the epicenters of American power - - elite schools, Fortune 500 companies, Washington politicians, and so forth. But this doesn’t leave Joe feeling like a victim.

Indeed, the hard working “Joe the plumber” apparently views himself as upwardly mobile, and fears that his government will punish him financially once he achieves his idea of “the American Dream.” To be sure, Wurzelbacher never told Obama that he earns over $250,000 a year (that’s Obama’s own misrepresentation of the facts). On the contrary, Joe said that he intends to, in the future, generate that level of income.

But perhaps most importantly, Wurzelbacher (and those of us like him) doesn’t get any satisfaction from tax policies that impugn those above him on the social ladder. We are horrified, not enchanted, by Obama’s third-world style class warfare and politics of envy. We aspire to achieve as the millionaire’s in our midst have achieved (even the millionaire named Barack). And we also understand that to economically malign one category of Americans, is to malign us all.

Governor Sarah Palin represents this middleclass paradigm beautifully. And she articulates the middleclass vision better than anyone else in the current race.

But regardless of whether or not the McCain/Palin ticket wins next month, the independently-minded American middleclass has been awakened, thanks in no small part to Joe, and Sarah. Consequently, Obama, Biden, Pelosi and company will find it far more difficult to enact their socialist vision for America.

Why Is "Joe" Still Such A Hot Topic???

Joe Wurzelbacher, the "plumber" from Ohio who John McCain made famous in this week's presidential debate, described himself to a reporter as "a flash in the pan." While admitting that he and his son were both enjoying his few "minutes of fame," he anticipated that his media stardom would soon go away.

Frankly, I thought he'd be old news by tonight. The people that he represents won't go away, but honestly, I thought the phenomena of Joe Wurzelbacher, the individual person, would be less phenomenal tonight.

But that's not the case.

And tonight we'll talk about why "Joe" is still a big subject in the headlines.

Listen-in at www.TheAustinHillShow.Com

To join the show by telephone, it's 1-888-630-9625.

About Those "Plungers"...

The discussion last night on the The Austin Hill Show regarding a "Million Plunger March" in Washington has tipped-off some interesting discussion at Free Republic - - here is the link:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2107850/posts

I'll have more to say about this shortly.

Matt Drudge is still "reporting" the "shock poll" from Gallup, showing McCain and Obama in a statistical dead heat among "likely voters." Go to this page

This data is buried, even on Gallup's website....but it exists. I'll have more on that later, as well.

Thank You, Max In Arlington...

Max was the Austin Hill Show listener who recommended a "Million Plunger March" through the streets of the District...Why plungers? Well, "Joe The Plumber" is still big in the news. And a plunger illustrates how so many of us would, in Max's terms, "to expunge our government of all this socialist crap!"

I think there are millions of Americans who feel as Max does. And yes, maybe we actually can organize something here in the nation's capitol.

But take heart. Americans, in some number, ARE beginning to question Obama's claims about taxes.

And some people are suggesting that Obama made a HUGE mistake with his "spread the wealth" nonsense.

Perhaps Americans are collectively beginning to wake up and smell the french roast...

So, What Concerns You Most About This Election?

It's been a big day for campaign news. We now know that the FBI is investigating claims of voter registration fraud by the ACORN community activist organization, in at least five different states.

The "Joe the plumber" phenomena has become mainstream media fodder, and, thus, Obama's plans to raise taxes have become more widely known.

The Ohio Secretary Of State has appealed to the United States Supreme Court, for direction on how to handle up to 200,000 fraudulent voter registrations.

And the economy, and the stock market, are on a "roller coaster ride" right now.

Join me as we talk about it all, tonight from 8-10pm Eastern. Listen at
www.TheAustinHillShow.Com and participate at 1-888-630-WMAL.

...And There Are Millions Of Us, Just Like Him...

"Joe The Plumber" is the new symbol of the hard working middleclass in America.

And thank God for him.

Despite the best intentions of Barack Obama and other liberals, the American economy cannot easily be characterized by two categories, "the rich" (who by definition deserve and "need" a tax increase) and "everybody else" (who be definition deserve to have some of the wealth possessed by "the rich").


Joe Wurzelbacher, the plumber from Holland, Ohio who confronted Obama on a campaign stop earlier this week, illustrates this beautifully.

By his own acknowledgement, Wurzelbacher is "middle class," yet he seemed to indicate that, because of his extraordinarly hard work as a business owner and operator, he is upwardly mobile. He pointed out to Obama that the Senator's tax hike proposals would hurt him, and his business.

Obama's response was to say that he didn't want to "punish" Joe's "success," but that he wanted to "spread the wealth around."

And after John McCain picked-up on the story last night and (finally) opened-up the issue to debate, the American discussion on economics and "fairness" has now changed. Despite what Obama told Joe the plumber, a person is "penalized" when their tax burden is increased.

I'll be discussing this issue, and the other issues surrounding last night debate, on the Salt and Demetri Morning Show at 96 Rock FM Radio in Raleigh, NC this morning, 8:35am Eastern.

Click HERE for a link to the radio station website.

FInally!!!

Mac was back tonight. Maybe too little, too late, but I don't think so. After a weak, sleepy, stumbling start, he got fired-up.

The "Joe the plumber" critique was solid. McCain put Obama on the defensive, over his radical, redistributionist economic plans.

Additionally, McCain was unapologetically pro-life, pro-capitalism, pro "choice" on healthcare.....AND finally, McCain questioned Obama's trustworthiness and willingness to create alliances with a terrorist named Bill Ayers.


I just wish Mac would have done this 2 debates ago.....

Can McCain Turn Things Around?

That seems to be the question I'm being asked from listeners and readers all over the country.

While some national polls have Obama so far ahead that there would seem to be no "catching up" for McCain, others, like the latest from Zogby, would suggest otherwise.

One thing for sure - - if there is a chance that McCain can still come back, he needs to regain his "straight talk" momentum and call it as he sees it, regarding Obama.

Can McCain authentically and convincingly point-out realities about Obama's alliances with a domestic terrorist in Chicago? Or with a a thuggish "community organization" called A.C.O.R.N.?

Or how about some "straight talk" about Obama's new welfare program, that is disguised as his "tax reform plan" (he's proposing to simply take more money away from wealthier Americans, and give money away to less-wealthy Americans - - it IS wealth redistribution after all)?

What does McCain need to do if he has any hope at all of turning things around?

We'll talk about it tonight, from 8-9pm Eastern, and then end the program early so as to air the debate itself.

Join us - - www.TheAustinHillShow.Com

Call It A "Robin Hood Moment"

Charles Hurt at the New York Post accurately ascribed the "Robin Hood" comparison to Barack Obama's recent comments about his intent to "spread the wealth around." Read it HERE.

And David Brooks at the New York Times offered this analysis of what is hapenning before our eyes, and what is to come, right HERE.


And think about this: what questions would you like McCain and Obama to be asked at tonight's third and final presidential debate?


To be continued....

The Obama/ACORN Activists Are "On Duty"....

With respect to the issue of voter registration fraud, I DID ask the question "who do you blame for this?" on tonight's edition of The Austin Hill Show.


If you listen to 630 WMAL much at all, you know that we pride ourselves in being highly interactive with our audience. And interactive we were Tuesday night.

The Obama/ACORN activists were quick to jam-up the phone lines, and were quick to explain why the voter registration fraud incidents are really "no big deal."

"John McCain once spoke at an ACORN sponsored event, so he's complicit with ACORN as much as Obama is."

"Obama is way out ahead in the polls, and he's going to win anyway, so what difference do a few illegally registered voters make?"

"How do we know that these illegally registered voters will actually vote?"

The excuses and retionalizations were numerous and non-stop.

My friend Sean Hannity stated on his show earlier today that "Conservatives are in exile" right now. I agree. I also believe that American Democracy is under seige right now.

Be strong and courageous.

Who Do You Blame For This?

We'll take-on this question on tonight's show, from 8-10pm Eastern. Click HERE for realtime streaming audio, and on-demand show audio.

What is "this" that I'm speaking of? Voter Registration Fraud....investigations of such atrocities are underway right now in a minimum of 13 different states....how could any American who understands democracy feel good about this? And how many of our fellow Americans DON'T understand democracy?

Join me tonight....

VOTER FRAUD ALERT

I don't care what British Editorialist Brad Friedman has to say about voter fraud in America being a hoax.....

Our democracy is facing a serious crisis, and here are a just a few reports of fraud cases from the "swing states:"


A male teenager is paid to register 73 times - - with ACORN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVapPVz0VG8

A 7--year old girl registers to vote (plus video of the Ohio teenage male who registered 73 times) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNUZyRjxlBs

A teenaged female fradulently registers to vote in Ohio --http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYtItWkUuQg

And here's another "doozey" -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31kC9h9AeD4

Stay tuned - - we WILL address this matter on this evening's show....

Jesse Jackson Alert!

As the world finds itself with a serious case of "Obamania," guest Editorialist Stephen Roberts provides some perspective on Rev. Jesse Jackson...



Jackson Getting It Both Ways Means Some Get Nothing

by Stephen Roberts, M.Div. (bio)

Anyone believing "you can't have it both ways" doesn't know Reverend Jesse Jackson.
Jackson has flip-flopped on important issues, finding alleged civil rights justifications on both sides. While politically advantageous to Jackson, the practice leaves him with a troubling legacy
Before he developed presidential ambitions, the pro-life movement had an ally in Jackson. In 1977, Jackson wrote in Right to Life News: "The question of 'life' is The Question of the 20th century." He further wrote that "life is the highest human good because life is sacred," asserting that abortion is fundamentally immoral.

In that same article, Jackson pointed out the implicit racism of population control, finding it "strange" that people "start talking about population control at the same time that black people in America and people of color around the world are demanding their rightful place as human citizens."

Jackson also likened abortion to slavery, comparing abortion proponents' arguments about a right to privacy to the defense of a past injustice: "If one accepts the position that life is private, and therefore you have the right to do with it as you please, one must also accept the conclusion of that logic. That was the premise of slavery."

Jackson's abortion opposition was brilliant and eloquent, but he betrayed his own eloquence for enhanced partisan viability. Writing about the 1988 presidential race, Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy noted: "No other candidate this season, fallen or still standing, has shifted positions as radically as Jackson on abortion."

Civil rights was Jackson's rationalization for his radical shift. At a 1989 rally, he called the pro-abortion agenda a "fight for the right to self-determination," surmising that "people have choices" endowed by God - including the choice to terminate a pregnancy and end a life.
Now, Jackson flip-flops on the lending issues, particularly "redlining." The term describes how areas on a map - poor and usually minority communities - are restricted from investment options such as mortgages.

Lenders restricted lending, fearing defaults on loans. Jackson considered this racial, and supported laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act to prohibit redlining. But these protections gave rise to lending practices that included the terms "subprime," "interest only," "no collateral" and "adjustable rate."

It was Jackson, hosting the CNN program "Both Sides," who praised former NationsBank CEO Hugh McColl in 1998 for promising $115 billion in housing loans to low-income communities. McColl noted that his institution, which later merged with Bank of America, was "able to uncover wonderful people that were not [previous] bank customers." At a 2000 Property/Casualty Insurance Joint Industry Forum, Jackson praised this new willingness to lend, saying, "At first it was by regulation, now it's by profit motive."

Jackson apparently couldn't even agree on a compromise. Illinois lawmakers created the "Predatory Lending Database Pilot Program" in 2005 to target select zip codes in the Chicago area plagued by bad mortgages. The program mandated credit counseling for people seeking risky loans or possessing bad credit ratings. One participant, who sought a $50,000 home equity loan, later told the New York Times, "The counseling helped me understand this was on the excessive side."

Jackson, however, told the Chicago Tribune the program had "the smell of apartheid." His opposition, and the protests of others, led to the program ending after just a few months.
When it all came crashing down and people began losing their homes, Jackson changed his tune. At the Reuters Housing Summit in February 2008, he condemned the institutions he once praised, charging: "They began to stereotype and target and cluster whole communities. It's kind of like reverse redlining."

Be it lending or life, Jackson is a chameleon, ready to adapt to whatever political environment he finds himself in. As this double-minded man is blown and tossed by the waves of time and public opinion, should he be trusted?

Stephen Roberts, M.Div. is a research associate for the Project 21 black leadership network and seminary graduate. Comments may be sent to Project21@nationalcenter.org

As I Was Just Saying - - "Everyone Gets A Trophy"

As I wrote here yesterday, and as I spoke about on The Show last evening, it seems that millions of Americans have emerged into a mindset of "less competition."

Today John Tamny of www.RealClearMarkets.Com has posted a column on what he describes as the "everyone gets a trophy" economy.

Nobody wants to come out and say "we need a society with less competition," or "America should become less competitive." But when people are so disdainful of struggle and failure and hardship, they are essentially aguing a case for less competition, because by definition, competition means that there are both winners and losers.

So......perhaps we'll take up this matter again tonight on the show.

Also, keep your eyes out for more "voter fraud" news.....a columnist in the U.K. swears that all these investigations of voter fraud involving the A.C.O.R.N. organization are false - - all of them.

Yet, McCain and company have serious, and, I believe, legitimate concerns about what is, and is not, going on.

Stay close...there's more coming up....

Life just shouldn't be uncomfortable...

..That seems to be the prevailing mindset among many Americans, particularly younger Americans, today. On Monday evening's show (www.TheAustinHillShow.Com ) we talked about how this mindset, as exemplified by a caller to the show last Thursday evening (10/09/08) named Akin from Maryland, is impacting the presidential race.

Akin said, in no uncertain terms, "if you work hard, you shouldn't have to struggle...you shouldn't have to worry about how to pay your bills."

No regard for what kind of good or service you provide to the economy....no regard for the level of skill involved in your work....if you "work hard," you should have a comfortable life.......working in a restaurant, or working at the surgeon's table.......it doesn't matter........you "work hard," you should be "comfortable.."

Well, isn't that just the kind of mindset that Mr. Obama is appealing to these days?

Yes, I'd say so......and although "these people" wouldn't think of it in this way, what they really are looking for is a country, an economy, a world, where there is less competition.........no "winners," no "losers".........everyone gets the same amount of everything......everyone is "comfortable...."

Monday night's show will be posted in "on demand" format by early Tuesday morning....listen to it when you can....some of the callers are staggering........

Competition = Bad???

Is it time to make America "less competitive?"

Fear over the economy, and a volatile stock market, along with Barack Obama's pledge that, when he becomes President, he'll make sure that America begins to "share the wealth" (see the video HERE)...all these items, and more, compel me to take-on this question on the show tonight.

Also.......does anybody really care if Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President? The big, old-fashioned media is ignoring it, nonetheless, doubts persist as to whether or not Obama was born in the United States...I'll play audio excerpts of this new video from Democrat Attorney Phil Berg, and have you answer the question yourself.

Visit www.TheAustinHillShow.Com for both livestreaming, and "show on demand."

And I'll see you tonight at 8pm Eastern..................

Just In From The "Isn't This Obvious?" Department

Barry Young and Michele Larson host one of the most enlightening and entertaining radio shows in America at Phoenix Arizona's Newstalk 550 KFYI.

While talking about the stock market, and the "panic" surrounding the stock market and the economy, Barry made the point on today's show that despite claims that Americans have "lost 3 trillion dollars" of wealth because of declining stock prices, in reality this is not literally true. A stockholder only loses money when he/she sells shares at a price lower than what he/she paid for them.

And Michele made the point today that anytime a person buys stocks, they assume a level of...are you ready for this......RISK!!!

DUH! Isn't this obvious?

The true answer is "no, this is not obvious!" The concept of economic risk has become foreign to a culture that has become familiar with ever-increasing prosperity and opportunity, and this culture needs to be reminded about RISK in a big, big way.

I'm not sure of Barry Young and Michele Larson are re-educating their listeners to basic truths about the economy, or educating some of their listeners on these matters for the very first time.

No matter, the show makes for highly enlightening and entertaining radio listening.

As far as I know, the show is NOT YET available in an archived, on-demand format.

But listen realtime Monday through Friday, 8-10am Arizona Time (currently Arizona is on Pacific Time, and will switch later in the Fall to Mountain Time).

Streaming audio is at www.KFYI.Com.

Meet the cast of the show HERE.

And Now, Back To Our Regularly Scheduled Programming...

Many, including myself, believe that if the stock market begins to stabilize this week, then economic panic will subside, and, therefore, American voters will begin to more closely scrutinize the character of the candidates AND take a more critical view of their respective economic plans....

McCain has struggled (and that's putting it mildly) to articulate the virtues of economic choice (as in "health care choice") and low taxes.

But despite all his rhetoric about a "middle class tax cut," Obama's policy is officially to eliminate the so-called "Bush tax cuts for the rich," to raise taxes on those he calls "rich," and re-distribute that wealth into the hands of the not-so-rich.

VP running mate Joe Biden explained that quite clearly 4 weeks ago on the "Good Morning America" tv show, stating "we want to take money (no recognition of whose money it actually is that he's taking) and put it in the pockets of the middle class..."

Well, now Obama has changed his position on raising taxes on the rich.....and why? Could it be that some significant number of Americans aren't thrilled by that prospect, and recognize the damage that could do to the overall economy?

And could it be that, if not now, then soon, Americans will begin to care about Senator Obama's ties to an organization called "A.C.O.R.N.," a group that is the subject of multiple investigations of voter registration fraud in multiple states?

And could it be that Americans begin to care about Mr. Obama's collaborative background with Chicago-area terrorist Bill Ayers?

And could it be that Americans really are curious about the story that just won't go away - - speculation that Obama was not actually born in the United States, and his refusal to produce an original birth certificate document to prove otherwise?

Last week we had some fascinating discussions at 630 WMAL, between myself and callers explaining that the terrorist and voter fraud ties really AREN'T an important issue; and all people really care about is the economy; and yes, it IS time to raise taxes on the rich - - that would only be fair.

Visit www.TheAustinHillShow.com to listen to archives of last week's programs.......and listen live, realtime tonite from 8-10pm Eastern to find out how things might have changed from last week.........

Why NOT Raise Taxes On "The Rich?" Don't They Have Enough Money Already???

Is American capitalism becoming a thing of the past? No, not hardly. Evidence to the contrary can be found in the strangest places - - even within the presidential campaign of Senator Barack Obama.

First the bad news. In the past two weeks, American stocks have lost approximately 25% of their value. In dollar terms, we‘re talking about a loss of roughly $3.16 trillion, which is more than four times the controversial $700 billion “rescue” plan that the United States Congress hesitantly approved a few days ago.

Additionally, none of the moves made by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson have produced their desired outcomes, at least not yet. The money markets remain “frozen,” and the free-flow of credit has not yet resumed.

But consider carefully how they have responded to the crisis. The new policies from both the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury have been structured so as to actually support the prices of financial assets. This contrasts with the stock market drop (I’ll refrain from calling it a “crash” since there seems to be some controversy over the technical definition of that term) of October 1987, when, President Reagan’s tax cuts not withstanding, U.S governmental policy was in many ways working against the stock market.

And notice the global response to the crisis. Finance ministers and heads of central banks were quick to pursue a coordinated response with the U.S., and Chairman Bernanke led the way. The outcome was an international round of interest-rate cuts (not interest rate increases), which included the major central banks of Europe, and with the exception of Japan, the central banks of Asia, including those in China.

Now, the crisis is not over, the long-term impact to our economy is not yet knowable, and it’s easy to kick Bernanke, Paulson, and Bush while the chips are down. But don’t miss the big picture.

In previous crises, the instincts of policy makers have most often been to tighten monetary policy, and to implement more governmental control over economic resources. Today, policy makers around the world instinctively want to loosen monetary policy, and to encourage more economic resources to flow into the coffers of private individuals and institutions. Now, more than in previous eras, it is understood that the real hope for economic productivity is found in the private sector, and not in the halls of governments.

This may be a subtle point, and it is certainly a point that is overlooked by most of the media. But it is an important point nonetheless, and serves as further evidence that global sensibilities today lean more in a capitalistic direction than they did in earlier generations.

And now, back to the White House race. If John McCain is having a difficult time getting traction with his message of keeping tax rates low (and he is), Barack Obama is having a difficult time selling Americans on the supposed virtues of high taxes. But how could this be so?


For most of his nearly 21-month presidential campaign, Senator Obama has made a cottage industry out of hating free market enterprise. He has proposed governmental limits on corporate executive salaries. He has repeatedly expressed indignation over “excessive” corporate profits. He has promised to “reign-in” free trade, and has promised to instill “economic justice” in America (he has never clarified what he means when he says “economic justice,” but he has made it clear that America’s economy is necessarily unjust).

And more than any other economic idea, Obama has throughout his campaign reiterated that it is time to end “Bush’s tax cuts for the rich.” The term itself is misleading, in as much as earlier this decade President Bush and the U.S. Congress cut taxes across the board, not merely for “rich people.” But never mind the facts, Obama has hit political homeruns by putting a bullseye on the backs of America’s highest income earners.

Yet last week Obama backed-off from eliminating Bush’s dastardly “tax cuts for the rich,” insisting that, because of Bush’s ailing economy, it won’t be feasible to raise taxes on the wealthy right away. But why not? His sudden change of heart tells us two things: A) some significant portion of the American electorate is NOT enchanted by his politics of class warfare and envy; and B) just like those of the world’s finance ministers, the instincts of many Americans lead them to understand that wealth creation and productivity comes from the private sector, not from government - - not even from an Obama government.

American capitalism is alive and well, and it won’t be dying-off any time soon. Americans now need to decide whether it is best to elect a President who will nurture the world’s preferred economic system, or one whose passion it is to weaken it.