Saturday, July 31, 2010

Democrat Maxine Waters facing charges?

According to the Associated Press/Washington Examiner:

A second House Democrat, Rep. Maxine Waters of California, could be facing an ethics trial this fall, further complicating the midterm election outlook for the party as it battles to hold onto its majority.

People familiar with the investigation, who were not authorized to be quoted about unannounced charges, say the allegations could be announced next week. The House ethics committee declined Friday to make any public statement on the matter.

Waters, 71, has been under investigation for a possible conflict of interest involving a bank that was seeking federal aid. Her husband owned stock in the bank and had served on its board.

Friday, July 30, 2010

Democrats and raw political power

A secret memo was released today showing that Democrats are actively looking for ways in which Barack Obama can grant Amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens without having to go through Congress. Presumably this would eventually feed into a pool of millions of potential Democratic voters.

The Democrats are pushing for "card check" which is when employees vote on whether to become unionized or not. Card check takes away the right of employees to cast secret ballots which makes them subject to intimidation by union thugs. Democrats are in bed with union bosses and assume that the more union workers they have receiving their benefits, the more Democratic votes they can count on.

Accusations of voter and census fraud by organizations like ACORN are numerous (one can only guess at how many instances go unreported or unknown). ACORN is, of course, a lap dog for the Democrats and a valuable resource for increasing Democratic votes.

When the Obama Justice Department refused to punish New Black Panther thugs who were convicted of voter intimidation, the administration send a strong message that future voter intimidation by Leftist thugs may be tolerated as long it increases votes for Democrats.

Making the "rich" carry more and more of the tax burden, while ensuring that a greater and greater percentage of Americans do not pay taxes at all, will eventually make it possible for the majority of Americans--who pay no taxes--to receive more and more "free benefits" at the expense of the rich. This is designed to increase votes for Democrats who promise such giveaways.

For example, making more and more Americans dependent on the Democrats for "free" health care is designed to ensure that those dependent on such free health care--or other such Democratic handouts--continue to vote Democratic.

Now that Democrats control the House, Senate and White House, they plan to use every underhanded trick in the book to ensure that they never again loose that power. If they win Congressional elections this November and have two more years to rig the system, they may very well succeed.

One might almost wonder whether Democrats are engaging in deliberate "Chicago style" strategy to steal future elections. The cynic in me says that Democratic programs are not nearly as much about compassion as they are about raw political power.

Ethics committee recommends the least severe punishment for Rangel

According to the New York Post, "after an exhaustive two-year investigation," the ethics committee found that Democratic Representative Charles Rangel exhibited "patters of indifference or disregard for the laws, rules and regulations of the United States and the House of Representatives."

The House ethics committee has therefore "recommended that Rep. Charlie Rangel be reprimanded, which is the least severe punishment..." (emphasis mine).

So in other words, for crimes--which, if any of us had committed, we would undoubtedly be facing the prospect of serious prison time, Congressman Rangel may possibly get off with a slap on the wrist.

Apparently Rangel's Democratic cronies in Congress are more interested in pretending they have dealt with the problem so they can get it behind them before the election.

This is Nancy Pelosi's version of "the most ethical Congress in history." It is one of the reasons why so many Americans are so thoroughly disgusted with Congress.

Secret memo: Bypassing Congress on amnesty

According to Human Events, a secret memo has been leaked showing that the Obama administration is actively scheming to implement amnesty for illegal aliens without Congressional approval:
“The document shows the Obama administration scheming to allow millions of illegal immigrants to stay and work in the United States,” Smith said. “The Obama administration is conspiring to implement amnesty without any Congressional action.”
This administration is out of control. It seems to me that even Democrats in Congress should be troubled by such authoritarianism.

Hating Obama: The President and Snooki

On my Twitter this morning came a tweet saying, "Obama lies about not knowing who Snooki is?"

The link led to a discussion on the fact that Barack Obama was recently asked about Snooki on the View and he denied knowing who she was.

Later, someone was able to dig up an old archival video of Barack Obama at some gathering in which he was telling a joke that included the name Snooki. The story has even made the news. In fact, I've even read someone (jokingly, I hope) calling this "Snookigate."

Snookigate? Oh please! I'm quite sure Mr. Obama did not write the joke that mentioned Snooki. Just because he read the joke doesn't mean he actually knows who she is.

For conservatives to attack Obama on this makes conservatives look petty and mean-spirited. More importantly, it diverts attention from the real issues.

We need to keep our eye on the ball. We hate his policies. We do not hate the man (and if you do hate the man, you need to do some soul-searching and put your own house in order).

Thursday, July 29, 2010

No Child Left Behind in Minnesota

In the Minnesota governors race the Democratic candidate is running a commercial criticizing "George Bush's No Child Left Behind" law.

There is no mention of the fact that "No Child Left Behind" was championed by Ted Kennedy and received strong bi-partisan support in Congress.

I don't have a problem with negative campaign ads, but when a candidate--Democrat or Republican--airs factually dishonest ads, I have to question the integrity of the candidate.

I also find it amazing that after two years of Barack Obama, Democrats are still campaigning against George Bush!

"We are sort of a mongrel people"

According to "The Hill"
The president appeared on ABC’s morning talk show “The View” Thursday, where he talked about the forced resignation of Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod, his experience with race and his roots.

When asked about his background, which includes a black father and white mother, Obama said of African-Americans: "We are sort of a mongrel people."
Can you imagine the rabid furor that would follow if Condolezza Rice, Clarance Thomas, or Michael Steele had made such a comment? Every mainstream media outlet in the country would be demanding their immediate resignation.

University expels student for Christian beliefs

According to the Washington Examiner:
A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday’s ruling, according to Julea Ward’s attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.
This is "tolerance" as defined by Leftists and gay activists!

At one time "liberalism" involved the ideas of tolerance and open-mindedness--of not censoring opposing viewpoints. Universities held themselves up as bastions of liberal thinking.

What we see at this university, however, is not liberalism, but religious bigotry and fascism.

It is hard to believe that we've come to a place in America in which a public university funded with your tax dollars would even try to expel students for Christian beliefs, much less get away with it!

Thanks to Left wing professors, journalists, judges and politicians, American freedoms are rapidly being stripped away. If American do not stand up stand up and say, enough is enough, our grandchildren (and maybe even our children) will no longer live in a free country.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

It is not illegal immigration. It is an invasion!

According to Brietbart:
The Pew Hispanic Center used Census Bureau data to estimate that the United States had 11.1 million illegal immigrants in March 2005. The center used monthly population estimates to project a current total of 11.5 million to 12 million.

The report estimates that 850,000 illegal immigrants have arrived in United States each year since 2000.

We need to stop referring to this as an illegal immigration problem. 850,000 people pouring across our borders is not an illegal immigration problem. It is an invasion! And it is rapidly becoming a national security problem.

It is bad enough when the federal government refuses to fulfill their legal obligation to enforce federal laws but when they take legal action to prevent the states from protecting their own citizens, we have a very, very serious problem.

The President is sworn to protect the Constitution of the United States. Doesn't protecting the Constitution of the United States involve protecting the United States? Can the next House of Representative start impeachment proceedings against the President for failure to uphold his oath of office?

Obamacare and federal funding for abortion

I just heard the following audio clip on the Hugh Hewitt show:
There are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness. But I want everyone to know what health insurance reform is all about. You've heard that this is all going to mean government-funding of abortion. Not true. This is all — these are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation (Barack Obama).
Please read it again. This idea that Obamacare will provide for federally funded abortions is absolutely "not true." Those who say such things are spreading "fabrications". They are "bearing false witness." They are lying. We have President Obama's solemn word on that.

But according to the American Spectator:
A new report by the Congressional Research Service reveals that the national health care law allows for federally-funded abortions, despite Democrats' claims to the contrary.
I'm really at a loss to understand why anyone believes anything this President says anymore.

Monday, July 26, 2010

The failure of Democrats' financial policies

According to a article by the Heritage Foundation published today:

When President Obama sold his $862 billion economic stimulus to the American people, he promised that, if enacted, it would prevent unemployment from ever rising above 8%. With unemployment currently at 9.5%, the American people are now well aware that the President’s stimulus has been a complete failure. But Friday’s report was the first time this Administration was forced to admit just how long Americans will have to suffer for their failed economic policies. According to Friday’s report, the Obama administration now projects thatunemployment will average 9% throughout all of next year and 8.1% throughout 2012.

And if that news wasn’t bad enough, the report pegs this year’s budget deficit at $1.471 trillion, or 10% of the entire U.S. economy. In nominal dollars, it’s the largest deficit in American history;

The Democrats' financial policies are a complete failure. They are running us into bankruptcy! Why on earth would anyone elect a Democrat to Congress in November?

Spencer: Obama's Lockerbie Problem - Jihad Watch

Spencer: Obama's Lockerbie Problem - Jihad Watch

Excellent Questions!

Sunday, July 25, 2010

America's Ruling Class by Angelo Codevilla

Wow! "America's Ruling Class--and the Perils of Revolution" by Angelo Codevilla--is without a doubt, one of the most enlightening and outstanding articles I've read in a long time!

It condemns both Republicans and Democrats alike and lays bare what is really going on in America. Like the proverbial frog in the increasingly heated pot of water, we are much closer to boiling than most people realize. The article ends with suggestions for taking back America.

Please, please take the time to read the entire article. Until then, here are a few excerpts (they are only a small part of the entire article):

As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties...agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors' "toxic assets" was the only alternative to the U.S. economy's "systemic collapse." In this, President George W. Bush and...John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America. They explained neither the difference between the assets' nominal and real values, nor precisely why letting the market find the latter would collapse America. The public objected immediately, by margins of three or four to one.

When this majority discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term "political class" came into use. Then, after those in power changed their plans from buying toxic assets to buying up equity in banks and major industries but refused to explain why, when they reasserted their right to decide ad hoc on these and so many other matters...the American people started referring to those in and around government as the "ruling class..."

Today's ruling class...was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters -- speaking the "in" language -- serves as a badge of identity.

By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God "who created and doth sustain us," our ruling class prays to itself as "saviors of the planet" and improvers of humanity.

The cultural divide between the "educated class" and the rest of the country opened in the interwar years. Some Progressives joined the "vanguard of the proletariat," the Communist Party. Many more were deeply sympathetic to Soviet Russia, as they were to Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany.

Hence more power for the ruling class has been our ruling class's solution not just for economic downturns and social ills but also for hurricanes and tornadoes, global cooling and global might wonder whether enriching and empowering individuals of a certain kind can make Americans kinder and gentler, much less control the weather. But there can be no doubt that such power and money makes Americans ever more dependent on those who wield it.

Laws and regulations nowadays are longer than ever because length is needed to specify how people will be treated unequally. For example, the health care bill of 2010 takes more than 2,700 pages to make sure not just that some states will be treated differently from others because their senators offered key political support, but more importantly to codify bargains between the government and various parts of the health care industry, state governments, and large employers about who would receive what benefits (e.g., public employee unions and auto workers).... The financial regulation bill of 2010, far from setting univocal rules for the entire financial industry in few words, spends some 3,000 pages (at this writing) tilting the field exquisitely toward some and away from others. Even more significantly, these and other products of Democratic and Republican administrations and Congresses empower countless boards and commissions arbitrarily to protect some persons and companies, while ruining others.

Thus in the 1990s and 2000s, as Democrats and Republicans forced banks to make loans for houses to people and at rates they would not otherwise have considered, builders and investors had every reason to make as much money as they could from the ensuing inflation of housing prices. When the bubble burst, only those connected with the ruling class at the bottom and at the top were bailed out.

The ruling class knows that Americans must learn to live more densely and close to work, that they must drive smaller cars and change their lives to use less energy, that their dietary habits must improve, that they must accept limits in how much medical care they get, that they must divert more of their money to support people, cultural enterprises, and plans for the planet that the ruling class deems worthier. So, ever-greater taxes and intrusive regulations are the main wrenches by which the American people can be improved (and, yes, by which the ruling class feeds and grows).

Similarly, in 2008 the House Ways and Means Committee began considering a plan to force citizens who own Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) to transfer those funds into government-run "guaranteed retirement accounts." If the government may force citizens to buy health insurance, by what logic can it not force them to trade private ownership and control of retirement money for a guarantee as sound as the government itself?

Thus in 2009-10 the American Medical Association (AMA) strongly supported the new medical care law, which the administration touted as having the support of "the doctors" even though the vast majority of America's 975,000 physicians opposed it. Those who run the AMA, however, have a government contract as exclusive providers of the codes by which physicians and hospitals bill the government for their services.

The union gets 2 percent of the workers' pay, which it recycles as contributions to the Democratic Party, which it recycles in greater power over public employees.
*** has become conventional wisdom among our ruling class that they may transcend the Constitution while pretending allegiance to it. They began by stretching such constitutional terms as "interstate commerce" and "due process," then transmuting others, e.g., "search and seizure," into "privacy." Thus in 1973 the Supreme Court endowed its invention of "privacy" with a "penumbra" that it deemed "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." The court gave no other constitutional reasoning, period.

By 2010 some in the ruling class felt confident enough to dispense with the charade. Asked what in the Constitution allows Congress and the president to force every American to purchase health insurance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi replied: "Are you kidding? Are you kidding?"

The ruling class...believes that the Christian family (and the Orthodox Jewish one too) is rooted in and perpetuates the ignorance commonly called religion, divisive social prejudices, and repressive gender roles, that it is the greatest barrier to human progress

That is why such as Hillary Clinton have written law review articles and books advocating a direct relationship between the government and children, effectively abolishing the presumption of parental authority. Hence whereas within living memory school nurses could not administer an aspirin to a child without the parents' consent, the people who run America's schools nowadays administer pregnancy tests and ship girls off to abortion clinics without the parents' knowledge. Parents are not allowed to object to what their children are taught. But the government may and often does object to how parents raise children.

The ruling class's manifold efforts to discredit and drive worship of God out of public life -- not even the Soviet Union arrested students for wearing crosses or praying, or reading the Bible on school property, as some U.S. localities have done in response to Supreme Court rulings --

convinced many among the vast majority of Americans who believe and pray that today's regime is hostile to the most important things of all.


While both Democrats and Republicans are responsible for this fiasco, this "ruling class" mentality only affects some in the Republican Party (usually the RINO's and so-called "moderates") while it thoroughly pervades every aspect of the Democratic Party. Given the thoroughly anti-Christian nature of the "ruling class," it is beyond my understanding, therefore, how Christians who are serious about their faith can vote Democrat.

White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

In December 1988 a Boeing 747 flying from London to New York was blown up in the sky in a terrorist attack killing over 250 people on board. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi was convicted of the bombing and sentenced to life in prison

Many people were outraged when, in August 2009 Megrahi was released from prison on "compassionate" grounds since Megrahi has prostate cancer. He went home to Libya where he is still alive today. One of his doctors said he could live for another 10 years!

Compassionate grounds?! He slaughtered over 250 people! What kind of evil allows a monster like this to walk free?

Did I mention that even though President Obama publicly said all Americans were surprised and angry by the release, an article published today alleges that the Obama White House indirectly backed the release of this evil Muslim terrorist?

Friday, July 23, 2010

Economy in recovery?

I just saw a news clip showing President Obama and Vice President Biden proclaiming that we are on the road to recovery.

This as may come as a surprise to those who know that

1) the federal deficit is expected to increase again this year beyond 1.4 TRILLION dollars,

2) 103 banks have closed so far this year alone (we're only half way through the year) putting us on track to far exceed last year,

3) unemployment rate is 9.3% (it was 6.5% when Obama took office and if I remember correctly, the Democrats swore that their billion dollar stimulus package would keep it from going above 8%).

CNN, Sherrod and the smearing of Fox

CNN and Shirley Sherrod have been having a field day condemning Andrew Brietbart' and Fox News. I think it is important to note that whatever condemnation may be due to Andrew Brietbart or Fox News, even more condemnation is due to the Obama administration.

Think about it. Rightly or wrongly, journalists--whether Brietbart, or Fox, or CNN, or the New York Times--report the news as it breaks. News, by its very nature is fragmentary and often has to be corrected as more information comes in (which is exactly what Fox did).

Employers, on the other hand, cannot responsibly just fire someone without some kind of due process--and that is exactly what the Obama administration's Department of Agriculture did (in fact, Ms. Sherrod herself insists that she was told the order to fire her came down from the White House).

So are Ms. Sherrod, CNN and other Leftist journalists condemning the Obama administration with the same ferocity as they condemn Fox and Brietbart?

Of course not, and that should tell you a lot about what is really going on here. As Rahm Emanuel says, "never let a serious crisis go to waste."

CNN, Shirley Sherrod advocating censorship?

Here a CNN anchor asked Shirley Sherrod if Andrew Brietbart should be shut down. She says yes.

John Nolte responds saying,

Never once, not even in private — not even as the entire corrupted media was savaging Sarah Palin’s family and reporting on the status of a private citizen’s plumber’s license — not even as the whole of the MSM was spreading lies told by the Congressional Black Caucus about the Tea Party hurling racial slurs — not even after reading what we already knew to be true on JournoList — and not even now as we watch all the hypocritical sanctimony surrounding Sharon Sherrod drip from the same MSM lips that refused to broadcast videos proving the Tea Party had been defamed by members of Congress — never once have I heard a fellow Vast Right-Wing Conspirator even hint at the idea of silencing, quieting, or shutting down the other side.

As a former Leftist I do, however, understand the knee-jerk leap to fascism. Being a Leftist sucks when it comes to political debate. You really only have two choices to try and convince others that yourprogressive ideas and values aren’t toxic, and that’s emotionalism, lies, or both.

As a former Leftist, Nolte warns "When the Left threatens the 1st Amendment, it's not hyperbole and its not a joke. If they had the power to do it they would do it."

Please read Nolte's very short but outstanding article on Big Government.

CNN anchors see the need to censor bloggers

In this video, CNN anchors rant against those terrible, anonymous internet bloggers who destroy the reputation of people like Shirley Sharrod. In fact these CNN anchors go so far as to imply that the government should crack down on such bloggers! (I guess Freedom of Speech should only be granted to Leftist journalists).

Speaking of Leftist journalists, isn't it interesting that in this five minute discussion neither of these mainline anchors mentioned 1) the fact than journalists on the anonymous "journolist" conspired to smear conservatives as racists for no other reason than the fact that those conservatives were reporting on Barack Obama's ties to Jeremiah Wright, 2) Leftist journalists on the "journolist" conspired to smear Sarah Palin. 3) According to the "journolist" Left wing journalists actively tried to get the government to pull the broadcasting license for Fox News!

So Leftists tried to censor talk radio with their Orwellian "Fairness Doctrine." Some of them actively tried to get the government to censor Fox News. Now mainstream journalists discuss the need to censor bloggers. Apparently "progressive" is another Orwellian term for "fascist."

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Tucker Carlson Responds to Angry Journolisters | The Weekly Standard

Tucker Carlson Responds to Angry Journolisters | The Weekly Standard

Planned Parenthood lies caught on tape

Everyone should see this short video. Your tax dollars go to spreading these lies!

Ignoring boundaries altogether

At a luncheon for National Design Award winners Michelle praised fashion designers saying,
"All of you have spent your lives pushing boundaries — we know a little bit about pushing boundaries — or just outright ignoring them altogether."
I couldn't help wondering if she was talking about the Constitution.

Paycheck Fairness Act

According to CNSNews:
The Obama administration is backing legislation that includes regulations requiring U.S. businesses to provide to the government data about employee pay as it relates to the sex, race and national origin of employees.
In an orchestrated effort that included a statement by President Barack Obama and an event at the White House featuring Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, the president and his cabinet endorsed the Paycheck Fairness Act.
According to the article Obama said that women make only 77 cents for every dollar men earn. Economist Thomas Sowell has demonstrated that this is simply not true. When this figure does not take numerous factors into consideration.

For example, women are far more likely than men to take significant time off their jobs (sometimes years or decades) to raise children. While they are at home, their counterparts--men and women--who chose to remain in the workplace have been getting pay increases and promotions which skews the averages. When such factors are taken into consideration, the difference in pay between men and women is negligible.

Does Obama not know this, or is he deliberately lying to foist yet another big government socialist intrusion on America?

Paycheck fairness Act indeed! What's next? Telling businesses what they must pay people in each job? Is there anything this administration would not want to regulate?

The more regulation, the less freedom. Under the Obama administration we are losing our freedom like never before in American history.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Liberals advocating censorship and death

More and more is coming out about the "Journolist", a discussion group of Left wing journalists. Their's is not just a biased perspective. It is outright hatred!

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for National Public Radio (update: Spitz was a producer for NPR affiliate KCRW for the show Left, Right & Center), that isn’t what you’d do at all.

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”

Other journalists openly endorse the idea that the government should shut Fox News down! In the past, Liberals were those who strongly advocated freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They fought against censorship in all forms.

But here we have a group of Left wing journalists who are apparently openly advocating government censorship of media with which they disagree! These are not liberals. They are fascists.

Liberals really need to examine themselves and recognize how very far they have drifted from their own ideals.

Please read the entire post on The Daily Caller.

Racism in the financial overhaul bill

Today, President Obama signed a sweeping, 2000 page financial overhaul bill. According to the Heritage Foundation, this "will be a jobs program for those who specialize in forcing racial and gender quotas on private enterprise."

So much for Martin Luther King's dream that his children would grow up in a world in which people are judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. What is it about "discrimination" that the Left does not understand?

As Greg Gutfeld noted, the same ones "who said Obama would lead us into a post-racial world are the ones fueling the racial division."

Christians and Civil Disobedience

If you are a committed Christian (as opposed to a "cultural Christian, i.e. Christian-in-name-only), please consider taking a stand by signing the Manhattan Declaration.

They "are the same ones fueling the racial division"

It has now come out (in the "Journolist" scandal) that during the election campaign a Left wing journalist named Spencer Ackerman was quoted as telling other Left wing journalists:
If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction. (Big Journalism)
I couldn't sleep last night and while channel surfing came across some guy named Greg Gutfeld on a program called "Red Eye." He was commenting on the "Journolist" scandal and said, "The same creeps who said Obama would lead us into a post-racial world are the ones fueling the racial division."

Mr. Gutfeld certainly hit the nail on the head.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Demands to revoke Fox News licence

Tucker Carlson has exposed the "Journolist," which is essentially a conspiracy of Left wing journalists. First there was the revelation of an attempt during the Obama campaign to smear right wingers as racist for trying to expose Obama's connections with Jeremiah Wright.

Now comes the story about Leftist journalists demanding that the FCC revoke Fox's broadcasting license.

A free press is a crucial part of Democracy. It is what keeps government accountable. When our free press becomes a lap dog of the government and actively seeks to smear and destroy news sources that are detrimental to their "cause", Democracy is in big trouble.

On the other hand, I grew up in the day when ABC, NBC and CBS were all that we had and somehow we survived (though we would have survived much better if Fox had been around to expose the likes of LBJ who, as I understand it, quite literally stole his congressional election through election fraud).

Regardless of whether Fox News is "fair and balanced" or not, at least they give another side to the story and they often reports stories that the government lapdog press won't report at all. We also have the internet.

No wonder the Left wing journalists wanted to shut down Fox, and the Democrats want to regulate talk radio and the internet.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Racism in the USDA?

She didn't do all she could for him because he was white? She brought him to one of "his kind."

So much for Dr. King's dream that one day people would be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.

If she had been white, she would be the lead story of every media outlet in the country. She would also be looking for a new job today.

UPDATE: In the news this morning (7/20): To their credit the NAACP has now condemned this woman's racism. She has now been forced to resign.

UPDATE 2: The USDA lady in this story is Shirley Sherrod. The video is very damning but there is apparently more to the story.

Ms. Sherrod was describing something that happened 24 years ago, before she even worked for the U.S.D.A.! She was apparently describing her own transition from from racism, to understanding that poverty is not about race. She says if the entire speech had been shown, this point would have been clear.

It would be nice if the entire speech were on tape (perhaps it is) but until that time, I think we need to give Ms. Sherrod the benefit of the doubt--especially since the point she is now making is actually hinted at on the YouTube clip.

Ms. Sherrod should not have been fired for describing how she personally--24 years ago!--came to see that poverty is not about race. So until further evidence comes forward--My sincere apologies to Ms. Sherrod for implying that she is racist.

Stimulating the Pakistani economy

According to an article in the New York Times, "Out of more than 170 million Pakistanis, fewer than 2 percent pay income tax."

According to MSNBC, the Obama Administration just announced 500 million in new aid for Pakistan.

That's your tax dollars at work!

Pro-Sharia on the Supreme Court?

According to the Center for Security Policy:
The author of the New York Times bestseller The Grand Jihad, Andrew McCarthy has put the Senate Judiciary Committee on notice: There is a serious problem with the nomination of Elena Kagan to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court: "...As Dean [of the Harvard Law School] she became the champion of Shariah."

Shariah is the name given by the authorities of Islam to the barbaric, totalitarian and supremacist code that its adherents seek to impose on all of us. It calls for the murder of homosexuals, the mistreatment of women, the flogging and stoning of those accused of adultery, the killing of apostates and girls who defile their family's "honor" by dating non-Muslims or wearing pants or make-up, etc.

Barack Hussein Obama may not be a Muslim but he certainly seems to be an Islamic sympathizer. He bowed down before the king of Saudi Arabia. After Jihadists slaughtered nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11 and have made numerous attempts to kill Americans since that time, Obama had the nerve to apologize to Muslims for America! Obama has snubbed one of our best allies in the world--Israel--in favor of appeasing radical Muslims regimes. And now he nominates a Sharia-friendly professor to the Supreme Court!

If someone had written a novel about this 10 years ago, publishers would have rejected it for not being realistic enough.

Please read the entire article a the Center For Security Policy.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Big brother to keep records on your weight?

According to CNSNews:
New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records--that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year--must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.
When I was in the Air Force we had to "make weight" every year according to some pre-determined government standards. I had an Air Force buddy who had a beer belly and made weight easily, but because I had been a weightlifter in high school it was everything I could do to make weight even though I was not fat.

If you didn't make weight, you were eventually out of a job so I went to one of the Air Force doctors about it. He admitted that I was not overweight but there was nothing he could do. So while my buddy was on the couch gulping down his beers, I was running and starving myself to make weight (and I did finally get down to my government-approved weight).

Welcome to Obamacare where some bureaucrat in Washington will decide whether you are overweight without even looking at you. Will the next step be to penalize you accordingly?

Isn't it interesting how the Obama administration is increasingly attacking the health risks of being overweight while Obama himself continues smoking and his policies actually promote unhealthy sexual behaviors that lead to AIDS and other STD's?

Freedom of worship vs. Freedom of Religion

President Obama and Hillary Clinton are using the expression "Freedom of Worship" rather than "Freedom of Religion." The change may sound innocent or even accidental but it is not. The change is deliberate and it is dangerous.

So what's the difference? The article says it well:
Let's be clear, however; language matters when it comes to defining freedoms and limits. A shift from freedom of religion to freedom of worship moves the dialog from the world stage into the physical confines of a church, temple, synagogue or mosque. Such limitations can unleash an unbridled initiative that we have only experienced in a mild way through actions determined to remove of roadside crosses, wearing of religious t-shirts and pro-life pins as well as any initiatives of evangelization. It also could exclude our right to raise our children in our faith, the right to religious education, literature or media, the right to raise funds or organize charitable activities and the right to express religious beliefs in the normal discourse of life.
If you read only one article this week, please read "Minor changes in language could mean major changes in religious freedom."

Obamacare and the Constitution: Another lie?

This morning Fox and Friends did a piece on Obamacare. When Obamacare was being promoted, conservatives charged (among other things) that the money that would be assessed by the Government for Obamacare was a violation of Obama's promise to raise taxes on the middle class.

Obama was asked about this in an interview and he specifically said that the money charged for his health care program was not a tax.

Now that Obamacare has passed, over twenty states have filed lawsuits claiming that the federal government simply does not have the authority under the Constitution to force anyone to buy federal health insurance.

Apparently the Obama administration realizes that this is true so how are they responding? They are now claiming that the penalties charged for not getting health insurance are taxes and the government does have the Constitutional right to raise taxes.

So Obamacare penalties are not taxes when Obama wanted to promote the program to the American people, but they are taxes when Obama needs to legally defend the program.

Just one more reason to suspect that this President will say and do anything to get his agenda passed, regardless of whether what he has to say is true or what he does is Constitutional.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Cop Orders Kids to Stop Praying Outside Supreme Court | The FOX Nation

Cop Orders Kids to Stop Praying Outside Supreme Court | The FOX Nation

This is not the America I grew up in.

RealClearPolitics - Obama Sabotages the Defense of Marriage Act

RealClearPolitics - Obama Sabotages the Defense of Marriage Act

Hezbollah's American Pep Squad - HUMAN EVENTS

Hezbollah's American Pep Squad - HUMAN EVENTS

Racism, TEA Parties and the Left

The Left regularly condemns the TEA Parties as racist regardless of the fact that little solid evidence can be produced to support such a charge. True, a Congressman said that racist language was hurled his way as he walked through a TEA Party demonstration but although a $100,000 reward has been offered for any video of this, no one has come forward, in all likelihood because it never happened.

But suppose it did. Suppose there were some racists in the TEA Parties. First, it would be very difficult to know for sure whether they were really supporters of the TEA Party rather than Leftists using “Saul Alinsky tactics” in an effort to discredit the TEA Party.

But let’s assume there are some genuine racists in the TEA Party. The Left has used this tiny fringe (that may or may not exist) to brand the entire TEA party as racist. I find this fascinating (Ok, disgusting, really).

In 911 Islamic terrorists slaughtered nearly 3,000 innocent Americans while thousands of Muslims cheered in the streets in the Middle East. In Iraq a brutal dictator slaughtered his people by the thousands but when America (rightly or wrongly) worked to set up a Democracy there in which Iraqis could have freedom, thousands of Muslims fought to the death to ensure that their fellow Iraqis did not get this freedom. The same thing is now going on in Afghanistan.

Thousands of Muslims all over the world protest (and issue death threats) when someone publishes cartoons about Muhammad. Entire countries (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, et al.) oppress women—sometime violently.

Indeed, in some Muslim countries, Muslims would literally be risking their lives just to convert away from Islam. Those who advocate violence in the name of Islam may be a minority, but that minority numbers in the millions (and often, the object of their violence is other Muslims)!

And yet, Americans who use terms like Jihadist, Islamist or Islamic extremist to distinguish peaceful Muslims from those who support violence, are often branded by the Left as racists or Islamophobes.

In other words, the Left doesn’t want us to use terms like Jihadist or Islamist to refer to the millions of Muslims who support violence, because that supposedly implies that all Muslims are violent, and yet the Left is more than willing to use a handful of racists in the TEA Party (who may or may not exist) to label the entire movement as racist!

If the TEA Parties are really so racist, how is it that members of the African American, Hispanic and Asian communities feel right at home at TEA Party protests? In fact, if the TEA Parties are really so racist, how is it than an Asian-American like Michele Malkin or an African-American like Star Parker could be so adored by members of the TEA Party?

It is very telling that the NAACP recently condemned racism in the TEA Parties but failed to condemn racism in the Black Panthers controversy over intimidation of white voters.

Let’s be clear. At their core, the NAACP, Jeremiah Wright followers, the Black Panthers (old or new), the Nation of Islam, etc. are really just about “black supremacy,” and black supremacy is just as despicable and every bit as heinous as white supremacy.

In fact, groups like the Nation of Islam and the Black Panthers really share the same basic motivation as those in the KKK—irrational hatred. Their differences are only skin deep.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Islam, religion of peace?

Western secular liberals are fond of saying that Islam is a religion of peace. These secularists are generally clueless when it comes to matters of religion.

If you want to know about Islam, don't get your information from Western secular elites, go to one of this generation's foremost leaders of Islam: The Ayatollah Khomeini. The current generation of Iranian leaders believe the same thing--only they are developing nuclear weapons!

Our government--both Bush and Obama administrations--want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend what the Ayatollah says is not true--like children who cover their ears and sing la la la la la la la when they don't want to hear something.

But Khomeini's philosophy comes directly from Muhammad himself and is increasingly being reflected in more and more Islamic leaders and countries.

We need a President and members of Congress who understand this view of Islam and take it seriously.

What is Sarah Palin thinking?

Is this true? What is Sarah Palin thinking with this endorsement?

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 - Obama Plans to Cut Up to 40 Percent of Nukes - Obama Plans to Cut Up to 40 Percent of Nukes

Surrender sovereignty to a "planetary regime"

According to Fox Nation:
White House science czar John Holdren has called for the U.S. to surrender sovereignty to a "planetary regime" armed with military power to enforce population limits upon nations and prevent perceived dangers from global eco-disasters, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.
One has to wonder whether ideology like this isn't behind the whole global warming movement.

Monday, July 12, 2010

U.S. National Debt Clock

Check this out: The U.S. National Debt clock. This is what so-called "compassionate" Republicans and liberal Democrats are doing to us. What George Bush started, Barack Obama has put on steroids!

I heard a news clip this morning in which a former Clinton aide said essentially that unless we take drastic action national bankruptcy is inevitable.

Newt Gingrich recently said that this next election will be the most significant election in American history. I think he is right.

U.N. fails to condemn North Korea

While the U.N. quickly attacked Israel when it stopped the Turkish flotilla trying to run the legal Gaza blockaide, the U.N. has failed to condemn North Korea for sinking a South Korean submarine killing 40 people.

Why are we spending so much money propping up this criminal organization? We need to pull all of our money, cancel our membership, and kick their sorry bottoms out of New York. Maybe the building could be converted into an apartment complex or something.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Voter fraud cost Hillary Clinton the nomination?

This morning Fox News reported on a documentary film entitled "We will not be silent, 2008" directed by lifelong Democrat, Gigi Gaston. Ms. Gaston alleges widespread voter fraud and intimidation by Obama supporters against Hillary Clinton in the primary election.

The documentary alleges that "Senator Clinton, by all accounts, except caucuses, won the Primary Election and, therefore, should be the 2008 Democratic Nominee. That didn't happen, due largely to illegitimate and illegal acts."

I, of course, have no idea whether the allegations are true but they are serious enough--they strike at the very heart of Democracy--that the charges should be investigated by the [Obama] Justice Department or the [Democratic] Congress.

Yeah, right. Like that's going to happen! The foxes are in charge of the hen house.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Origin of life computer programs

I've been reading an outstanding book on the origin of life called Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer. It analyzes all the attempts to explain the origin of live purely by chance/natural selection/necessity.

I'm now on a section in which describes and critiques the numerous computer programs which have been designed to show how life could have originated by chance/natural selection/necessity alone (programs often hyped as proving that life could have originated by chance/natural selection/necessity alone). At one point the author who is a biologist provides an anecdotal insight on these programs:
"One of my friends is a retired forty-something programmer, who was formerly one of Microsoft's elite architect-level programmers. He also has a special interest in origin of life and evolutionary algorithms. He said something interesting to me about these programs: 'There is absolutely nothing surprising about the results of these algorithms. The computer is programmed from the outsed to converge on the solution. The programmer designed the code to do that. What would be surprising is if the program came didn't converge on the solution. That would reflect badly on the skill of the programmer. Everything interesting in the output of the program came as a result of the programmer's skill--the information input. There are no mysterious outputs.
(NB: The quote is from chapter 13. I'm quoting from my iPad so I don't have the exact page number)

Friday, July 09, 2010

Sarah Palin: Mama Grizzlies

The year of the woman!

Presbyterians vote to all non-celibate gays as clegy

According to KSTP:
Presbyterian leaders voted Thursday to allow non-celibate gays in committed relationships to serve as clergy, approving the first of two policy changes that could make their church one of the most gay-friendly major Christian denominations in the U.S.
Proving once again that there are no passages of Scripture so clear but that apostate church leaders--more interested in pleasing man than pleasing God--cannot twist (or ignore) to support their politically correct agendas.

Thursday, July 08, 2010

Another phony anti-Muslim hate crime

Hamas-linked CAIR trumpets another "anti-Muslim hate crime" that was faked by a Muslim - Jihad Watch

San Francisco bans soft drinks

I just watched a fascinating interview between Magyn Kelly of FoxNews and Meme Roth of the National Action Against Obesity.

Ms. Roth was defending San Francisco's recent ban of soft drinks in vending machines on city property saying that the government pays for the insurance for its government workers and that their obesity is costing the government money, therefore, the government has the right, indeed, the obligation to control what these government workers eat.

Fast forward to when Obamacare runs private insurance companies out of business and we are all on government health insurance. There will likely be a push by Democrats like San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom and special interest groups--just like the one Ms. Roth represents--to tax, regulate, restrict, ban and maybe even punish consumption of foods they deem to be unhealthy.

As I wrote in the last post, although the Left complained endlessly against "legislating morality," it turns out they don't mind legislating morality at all. They just don't want anyone legislating against immorality.

Legislating morality

At one time "You can't legislate morality" was almost a mantra recited ad nauseum by those on the Left who opposed regulating such things as hardcore pornography, prostitution, drug use etc. They even opposed attempts to keep internet pornography from children in public libraries!

But when it comes to legislating against sweets, or tanning beds, or energy production, or fast food, or even the sale of pets, the Left apparently doesn't mind.

As it turns out, they were really not opposed to legislating morality after all. They just didn't want any legislation against immorality.

Wednesday, July 07, 2010

Steele was right: Afghanistan IS Obama's war

Michael Steele was right. Afghanistan IS Obama's war:
Afghanistan is every bit as much Obama's war as Vietnam was Lyndon Johnson's war. True, President Kennedy was the first to send troops to Vietnam. We had 16,000 troops in Vietnam when JFK was assassinated. Within four years, LBJ had sent 400,000 troops there.

In the entire seven-year course of the Afghanistan war under Bush, from October 2001 to January 2009, 625 American soldiers were killed. In 18 short months, Obama has nearly doubled that number to 1,124 Americans killed.
Please take time to read this excellent article which puts the Afghanistan war in perspective.

Suing Arizona but ignoring sanctuary cities

In a brief news clip tonight, someone pointed out that sanctuary cities openly break federal law and yet the federal government just looks the other way, and yet when Arizona seeks to enforce their new law which is very much like federal immigration law, Arizona gets sued by the federal government.

Whether we are talking about voter harassment, the so-called "motor-voter" law, or immigration, the Obama administration is very selective about which laws they will enforce and against whom they will enforce them.

When the federal government ignores and selectively enforces laws based on political correctness and other political considerations we are no longer a nation of laws but a nation of corrupt politicians.

Even as corrupt as the Nixon administration was, the Department of Justice under the Nixon administration had the integrity to stand up to a corrupt President. The Department of Justice under the Obama administration seems to be not much more than a lap dog or even a puppet for a corrupt President.

The less we are a nation of laws and the more we at the whim of corrupt politicians, the more our freedom is in danger.

Government takes control of BP website

According to the Washington Examiner,

The Department of Homeland Security has announced the government will assume control of the joint website between BP and various organizations in charge of providing information about the BP oil spill and recovery.
Where in the Constitution does the federal government have the authority to take control of the public communication of a private company?

Condoms for children

Please read this short but excellent article: Condoms for children. It makes the point:
What is more puzzling is the double standard, for if any other adult gave a 10- year-old a condom, he would be charged with the corruption of a minor. Provided by the school board, however, it is a public health service.
Precisely! Why can't the school board be held legally liable for the corruption of minors?

Just bias or is it corruption?

Anyone with half a brain knows that the media is biased (everyone is biased!) but one article questions whether it is just bias, or also corruption.

Good question.

Department of Justice promoting voter fraud?

Megyn Kelly just completed another interview with Department of Justice whistle blower, J. Christian Adam

In the 90's a law was passed, known as "Motor voter" which required that dead people, illegals, felons and duplicate names be taken off the voting rolls to prevent voter fraud.

In an interview with Megyn Kelly that just aired, Department of Justice whistle blower J. Christian Adams said that the Department of Justice, specifically the Deputy Attorney General, Julie Fernandez, issues a mandate saying that DOJ would not enforce this law.

So the Obama Department of Justice, not only dropped one of the most serious voter fraud cases in American history, now we find that they are actively promoting voter fraud by refusing to enforce a law specifically designed to stop voter fraud.

When our Justice Department is corrupt, America is in big trouble!

"Mr. President, what about the country?"

5,000 to 10,000 protest mosque at Ground Zero

On June 6th there was a rally of between 5,000 and 10,000 Americans at Ground Zero to protest the proposed building of a Mosque on that site. Where was the media?

You can read about this rally and see some of the posters here:

Some of the signs include:

"Sensitivity runs both ways. If you care, build it elsewhere"

"Building a Mosque at Ground Zero is like building a memorial to Hitler at Auschwitz"

"You can build a Mosque at Ground Zero when we can build a synagogue in Mecca"

"Sharia enslaves women and abuses kids"

Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Justice Department files suit against Arizona

Today the Justice Department formally filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona for having the audacity for passing a law that protects Arizona citizens--which is exactly what the federal law does if only the Obama Justice Department would enforce it!

This is the same Justice Department that, because of racism and political correctness, dismissed charges on what may arguably be one of the most egregious voter intimidation case in American history.

This Justice Department seems to be little more than a pawn in Obama's political machine--and that is truly scary.

Monday, July 05, 2010

NASA and separation of church and state

According to FoxNews, the head of NASA said that when he was appointed as head of NASA, on of the primary missions give to him by Barack Obama was to improve relations with the Muslim World.

Can someone explain to me how having a legal code like the Ten Commandments posted in a court house is a violation of the separation of church and state--but the President of the United States telling the head of NASA that one of his primary missions is to improve relations with the Muslim World is not?

The question now is, will the ACLU, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and similar organizations raise the roof--or are they really just anti-Christian organizations?