Archive for the ‘Government’ Category


Lack Of Civility A Bigger Danger Than Firearms

January 16, 2013
Lack Of Civility A Bigger Danger Than Firearms

When I attended primary and secondary school — during the 1940s and ‘50s — one didn’t hear of the kind of shooting mayhem that’s become routine today.    Why? It surely wasn’t because of strict firearm laws. My replica of the 1902 Sears mail-order catalog shows 35 pages of firearm advertisements. People just sent in their money, and a firearm was shipped.

Dr. John Lott, author of “More Guns, Less Crime,” reports that until the 1960s, some New York City public high schools had shooting clubs where students competed in citywide shooting contests for university scholarships.    They carried their rifles to school on the subways and, upon arrival, turned them over to their homeroom teacher or the gym coach and retrieved their rifles after school for target practice.    Virginia’s rural areas had a long tradition of high-school students going hunting in the morning before school and sometimes storing their rifles in the trunks of their cars that were parked on school grounds.

Often a youngster’s 12th or 14th birthday present was a shiny new .22-caliber rifle, given to him by his father.

Old-Fashioned Values    Today’s level of civility can’t match yesteryear’s.    Many of today’s youngsters begin the school day passing through metal detectors. Guards patrol school hallways, and police cars patrol outside.    Despite these measures, assaults, knifings and shootings occur. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2010 there were 828,000 nonfatal criminal incidents in schools.

There were 470,000 thefts and 359,000 violent attacks, of which 91,400 were serious. In the same year, 145,100 public-school teachers were physically attacked, and 276,700 were threatened.    What explains today’s behavior vs. yesteryear’s?    For well over a half-century, the nation’s liberals and progressives — along with the education establishment, pseudo-intellectuals and the courts — have waged war on traditions, customs and moral values.    These people taught their vision, that there are no moral absolutes, to our young people. To them, what’s moral or immoral is a matter of convenience, personal opinion or a consensus.    During the ’50s and ’60s, the education establishment launched its agenda to undermine lessons children learned from their parents and the church with fads such as “values clarification.”

So-called sex education classes are simply indoctrination that sought to undermine family and church strictures against premarital sex.    Lessons of abstinence were ridiculed and considered passe and replaced with lessons about condoms, birth control pills and abortions.    Further undermining of parental authority came with legal and extralegal measures to assist teenage abortions with neither parental knowledge nor consent.

Customs, traditions, moral values and rules of etiquette, not laws and government regulations, are what make for a civilized society. These behavioral norms — transmitted by example, word of mouth and religious teachings — represent a body of wisdom distilled through ages of experience, trial and error, and looking at what works.    The importance of customs, traditions and moral values as a means of regulating behavior is that people behave themselves even if nobody’s watching.

What About Civility?   

Police and laws can never replace these restraints on personal conduct so as to produce a civilized society. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society.    The more uncivilized we become the more laws that are needed to regulate behavior.

Many customs, traditions and moral values have been discarded without an appreciation for the role they played in creating a civilized society, and now we’re paying the price.    What’s worse is that instead of a return to what worked, people want to replace what worked with what sounds good, such as zero-tolerance policies in which bringing a water pistol, drawing a picture of a pistol, or pointing a finger and shouting “bangbang” produces a school suspension or arrest.

Seeing as we’ve decided that we should rely on gun laws to control behavior, what should be done to regulate clubs and hammers?    After all, FBI crime statistics show that more people are murdered by clubs and hammers than rifles and shotguns.


The Little Red Hen

April 20, 2012

The Little Red Hen

– by Doug Smith –

attributed: Summit Sun 8 July 1971

Little Red Hen

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about and uncovered some grains of wheat.  She called her barnyard neighbors and said, “If we work together and plant this wheat, we will have some fine bread to eat.  Who will help me plant the wheat?”  “Not I,” said the cow.  “Not I,” said the duck.  “Not I,” said the goose.  “Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.


The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain.  “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.  “Not I,” said the duck.  “Out of my classification,” said the pig.  “I’d lose my seniority” said the cow.  “I’d lose my unemployment insurance,” said the goose.

Then it came time to bake the bread.  “That’s overtime for me,” said the cow.  I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the duck.  “I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the pig.  “If I’m the only one helping, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen.  And she did.

She baked five loaves of fine bread and held them all up for the neighbors to see.  They all wanted some, demanded a share.  But the red hen said, “No, I can rest for a while and eat the five loaves myself.”

“Excess profits,” cried the cow.  “Capitalistic leech,” screamed the duck.  “Company fink,” grunted the pig.  “Equal rights,” yelled the goose.  And they hurriedly painted picket signs and marched around the little red hen singing, “We shall overcome,” and they did.

For when the farmer came, he said, “You must not be greedy, little red hen.  Look at the oppressed cow.  Look at the disadvantaged duck.  Look at the under-privileged pig.  Look at the less fortunate goose.  You are guilty of making second-class citizens of them.”

“But….but,” said the little red hen.  “I earned the bread.”

“Exactly,” said the wise farmer.  “That is the wonderful free enterprise system; anybody in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants.  You should be happy to have this freedom.  In other barnyards, you’d have to give all five loaves to the farmer.  Here you give four loaves to your suffering neighbors.” And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked: “I am grateful.  I am grateful.”

But her neighbors wondered why she never baked any more bread.


CAIR wants lawmaker to meet with Islamic leaders

January 25, 2010


Senator’s call to profile angers ‘Muslim Mafia’

CAIR wants lawmaker to meet with Islamic leaders to explain

Posted: January 23, 2010

By Art Moore


Sen. James Inhofe, R, Okla., at hearing Thursday

The Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Oklahoma chapter is calling on Sen. James Inhofe, R.-Okla., to meet with Muslim leaders to discuss his statement during a congressional hearing in favor of using religion and ethnicity as factors in profiling airline passengers.

“It is disturbing to hear a member of the United States Senate suggest that entire religious and ethnic groups should automatically be considered terror suspects,” said CAIR-OK Executive Director Razi Hashmi. “Our nation’s leaders have a duty not to exacerbate the growing anti-Muslim sentiment in American society.”

Read the rest of this entry ?


Gitmo North

November 19, 2009

Gitmo North

IBD: 19 Nov. 2009

War On Terror: Sen. Dick Durbin calls a plan to transfer 100 Guantanamo detainees to northwest Illinois “a dream come true.” It would paint a bull’s-eye on America’s heartland in time for the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

It seems the question of where to put the Guantanamo detainees is being settled as we speak, with liberal Democrats in the very blue state of Illinois welcoming them with open arms and outstretched hands for the federal dollars that will come with them.

Federal officials last Friday inspected the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., a town of 500 on the Iowa border, with the thought of transferring as many as 100 Gitmo inmates there. The prison, built to house 1,600 prisoners, now holds around 200, and has fallen victim to state budget problems.

At press conferences held in Chicago, Moline and Rockford, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who took over from the disgraced Rod Blagojevich, and Illinois’ senior U.S. senator, Dick Durbin, stumped for the plan, calling it “a dream come true.” We call it a nightmare on Main Street.

Read the rest of this entry ?


Janet Porter: Pink Slip Campaign

November 18, 2009

Finally, our message is being heard

Exclusive: Janet Porter tells of congressmen sharing impact of pink-slip campaign 17 Nov. 09 By Janet Porter

The public has spoken. Nearly 5 million pink slips have already flooded Congress, and today members of both the U.S. House and Senate are standing to acknowledge it. Amidst a backdrop of pink slips, members of Congress will host a press conference at 11 a.m. at the House Triangle outside the U.S. Capitol today.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Steve King, R-Iowa, Tom Price, R-Ga., and Chris Smith, R-N.J., are among those who are planning to be present at this event.

Joseph Farah, CEO of WorldNetDaily, and I will be there as well, standing with Americans against the hostile government takeover of health care, energy and speech.

As Joseph Farah will point out at the press conference: “Placed end to end, the ‘pink slips’ would stretch from the District of Columbia to the Sears Tower in Chicago. If stacked, the pile of pink would be taller than the Sears Tower itself.”

With the government takeover of health care and energy already passed in the House and awaiting votes in the Senate, it’s encouraging to know that our message is finally being heard – and not a moment too soon.

Unfortunately, it’s too late for our freedom of speech, as so-called “hate crimes” legislation already passed Congress and was signed by Barack Obama into law as a part of the defense budget. That is why I stood with pastors like Rick Scarborough of Vision America, Mat Staver and Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel, Oklahoma Pastor Paul Blair, San Diego Pastor Jim Garlow, Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Bishop Earl Jackson of Stand America, and others on the steps of the Department of Justice yesterday afternoon speaking out against the law that has already laid the foundation for the Criminalization of Christianity, as I warned about in my book by that same title.

Rick Scarborough spoke for all of us when he said, “This is a sad day for America. While a small minority of homosexual activists are celebrating, thousands of pastors, priests and rabbis are lamenting their loss of First Amendment freedoms. I for one refuse to bow before this unjust and unconstitutional law, and I intend to continue to preach the whole counsel of God as revealed in the Scriptures.”

Why does it matter so much? That’s something that was addressed at the press conference by Grace Hamilton, a former lesbian who was reached by the message of the Gospel and left the homosexual lifestyle, as have thousands like her.

Another speaker was Paul Diamond of the Christian Legal Centre in London, who flew from England at his own expense to communicate how the “hate crimes” law has been used to silence the church in Britain – much like in Canada, where those who quote Bible verses are suffering fines and jail time. Canadian Pastor Stephan Boisson, for example, was fined $5,000, ordered to renounce his faith and banned from expressing the biblical perspective on homosexuality. But this law doesn’t just affect pastors; it will criminalize the beliefs of millions of ordinary people who may now be afraid to speak even their pro-marriage positions lest it spark a federal “hate crime” investigation.

While we did not succeed in stopping the government assault on our free speech, the battle will continue with a legal challenge in the courts. Hopefully, it will be overturned as was the case with the Pennsylvania “hate crimes” law that was responsible for sending 11 people to jail – including two grandmothers who faced 47 years behind bars for the “hate crime” of passing out Gospel tracts on the public streets of Philadelphia. Members of the “Philadelphia 11” were also present at yesterday’s conference. Did you see anything about it on the news? [??]


While the battle for free speech has moved to the courts, there’s still time to act before we lose the ability to receive lifesaving treatment and be forced to pay the largest tax increase in history for heating our homes and driving to work. By forwarding everyone you know the link you will help stand against the other government assaults on our health care and energy and demand an end to the deficit spending.

While the tea parties and town halls seem to have fallen on deaf ears, thankfully, the pink-slip message is starting to be heard. Pink slips amounting to nearly three times the size of the Washington Monument have already been delivered to Congress – that’s about waist high in each office on Capitol Hill.

Rep. Tom Price said, “They’re talking about it, but they’re only talking about it behind closed doors and in the elevators as they go up and down and in very whispered tones. Because, what you hear are people saying, ‘How many of those did you get or how many people came to your office today?’ And ‘what are you going to do and how are you going to vote on this?'”

Sen. DeMint stated that “these pink slips are getting to people right now. It’s the only reason people haven’t passed something [the health care bill] in the Senate. … Keep it up and let’s keep trying to draw attention to it.”

I couldn’t agree more. Once you send Congress a set of pink slips, then, if you don’t see coverage of today’s congressional press conference, call the media outlets and ask them why. You can find the network, newspaper and wire service numbers by clicking on this link provided by the Media Research Center.


Another Radical Judge

November 12, 2009

If you love liberty, help stop this ill-equipped “judge” from going any further.


Another Radical Judge

IBD: 11 Nov. 2009

11 11 09

Federal Bench: Yet another judicial nominee seeks to impose the “empathy” standard on the courts. He thinks judges should base rulings on a plaintiff’s status, legislate from the bench and amend the Constitution.

Indiana federal judge David Hamilton stands poised to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to assume a seat on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals serving Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. He’s a former fundraiser for Acorn and a former leader of the Indiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

He is also another in a series of activist judges who believe the U.S. Constitution is not etched in stone but made of clay, ready to be molded into anything they want. He shares the beliefs of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Edward Chen, nominee for the Northern District of California, that laws can be made from the bench and that empathy, not original intent, should be a judge’s guide.

“Part of our job here as judges is to write a series of footnotes to the Constitution,” Hamilton says. “We all do that every year in cases large and small.”  [He doesn’t know the Constitution]

And that’s precisely the problem. The law should be applied equally and evenly irrespective of who the plaintiffs or defendants might be. Otherwise, equal protection under the law goes out the window.

In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Hamilton said that “empathy” was “important” in fulfilling a judge’s role. “Empathy is the ability to understand the world from another person’s point of view,” he said.

But the only “point of view” a federal judge needs to understand is that of the Founding Fathers.

According to Hamilton, “A judge needs to empathize with all parties in the case — plaintiff and defendant, crime victim and accused defendant — so that the judge can better understand how the parties came to be before the court and how legal rules affect those parties and others in similar situations.”

And here we thought justice should be blind and not wear its heart on its judicial robes.

Hamilton, who was nominated to the district court bench by President Clinton even though he had no judicial experience and was rated as “not qualified” by the ABA, has a history of overturned rulings and admonishments by colleagues and superiors about exceeding his authority.

After Hamilton blocked the enforcement of Indiana’s informed consent abortion law, the Seventh Circuit disagreed, saying: “No court anywhere in the country … has held any similar law invalid in the years since (the Supreme Court ruled in Planned Parenthood vs.) Casey. Indiana is entitled to put the law into effect and have that law judged by its own consequences.”

Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit scolded Hamilton, noting he was the only judge in the country who had blocked enforcement of a law “materially identical” to laws that the Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit and the Fifth Circuit had held constitutional. Under Hamilton’s version of the “living Constitution,” even Supreme Court precedent is irrelevant.

As Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has pointed out in a letter to colleagues, Hamilton also has a problem with any expression of religion in the public square — however innocuous — but not with all religion.

Hamilton’s ruling in the 2005 case, Hinrichs v. Bosma, “prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ … yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah,” Sessions also noted. We wonder if Hamilton has a problem with “God save the United States and this Honorable Court,” being uttered as the U.S. Supreme Court enters the courtroom to hear arguments.

Judges such as Hamilton, Chen and Sotomayor believe the courts should be used as instruments of social justice and not to discern the intent of those who wrote the U.S. Constitution. They believe their “life experience” should be the final arbiter of justice.

We don’t believe Hamilton deserves a promotion any more than Chen does or Sotomayor did.


Tom Sowell: Dismantling Of America

October 28, 2009

The Dismantling Of America, Piece By Piece

By THOMAS SOWELL IBD: 28 Oct. 2009

Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many “czars” appointed by the president, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50% or 90%?

Did you think that another “czar” would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers — that is, to create a situation where some newspapers’ survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?

Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called “experts” deciding who could and could not get lifesaving medical treatments?

Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life-and-death decisions about your loved ones?

Does any of this sound like America?

How about a federal agency giving schoolchildren material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.

How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.

We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies. What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brownshirts of dictators than like anything American.

How far the president will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.

Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to “change the United States of America”; the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.

Jeremiah Wright said it with words: “God damn America!”

Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted.

Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.

Among the people appointed as czars by President Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen the public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.

Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn’t know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?

Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government — people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America’s influence in the world.

Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration’s enemies list.

Nothing so epitomizes President Obama’s own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year — each bill more than a thousand pages long — too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed.

That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question — and the biggest question for this generation.


Russia’s ‘Nyet’ And America’s Naivete

October 15, 2009

America needs someone a lot smarter than Hillary!

Russia’s ‘Nyet’ And America’s Naivete

IBD: 15 Oct. 2009

Clinton in Moscow: Looking for Putin?

Clinton in Moscow: Looking for Putin? View Enlarged Image

Geopolitics: America’s new clout from the Nobel Peace Prize somehow didn’t persuade Russia to help pressure soon-to-be-nuclear-armed Tehran. But then, for nearly 20 years Moscow has been helping Iran go nuclear.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week jetted straight from Northern Ireland, where she told the divided political factions, “No one ever said it was going to be easy,” to Moscow, where someone should have told her, “No one ever said it was going to be possible.”

Weren’t the pieces supposed to be in place for Moscow to respond to U.S. “leadership” and join in new sanctions against Iran?

Russians just praised as a “responsible move” the U.S. decision to back out of the long-range missile defense system we promised Poland and the Czech Republic.  The president of the United States just won the Nobel Peace Prize because he “created a new climate in international politics.”

Yet Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was too busy even to be there for Secretary Clinton’s visit, traveling to China instead. Maybe Moscow hasn’t heard about the new climate.

But Putin’s regime apparently has heard that now “dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts,” as the Norwegian Nobel Committee put it. Indeed, as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stressed, even the threat of sanctions against Tehran would be counterproductive.

No wonder the secretary of state emerged from her Moscow talks trying to put a good face on things. She followed the Russian lead that further sanctions would be premature. In truth, she was downplaying a clear failure to get Moscow to be tougher against the Islamofascist regime.

Let’s get real here: Why would Russia do any such thing? First, it would be viewed as a U.S. geopolitical victory and a Russian geopolitical defeat. Second, Russia, beginning in the early 1990s, helped build and continues to sustain Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The U.S. seems to be taking the advice of a New York Times editorial in June 2005 suggesting that “rallying Russia constitutes a key part of any successful containment strategy vis-a-vis Iran.” The Times contended that “Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile advances could put roughly 20 million people in the south of Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine at risk by as early as next year,” and it warned of Russian fears of “nuclear blackmail from the Islamic Republic.” The paper’s conclusion: “Washington might soon find that, with the proper inducements, it has a more receptive audience in Moscow than ever before.”

But lost in Hillary’s face-saving and the Times’ naivete is the possibility that Russia doesn’t fear the prospect of a nuclear Iran at all, but rather believes it would be in its long-term geopolitical interest.

A mix of incendiary rhetoric and feigned promises to help against Iran got Moscow what it wanted in the U.S.’ scrapping of the proposed missile defense in Eastern Europe. But we’re not getting reciprocal Russian help against the Iranian nuclear monster that Moscow is helping to build.


Snowe’s Storm

October 14, 2009

Spec  Col Snow

Remember the names: Specolsnowgram

Snowe’s Storm

IBD: 14 Oct. 09

Politics: After hemming and hawing for weeks, Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe did what many knew she’d do: support the abominable Baucus health care overhaul.

The GOP has a big problem. Some who march under its banner don’t really accept the basic philosophy it espouses — one of low taxes, small government and support of the Constitution. Snowe is one of those.

Her decision to vote “aye” on the Baucus bill, which passed out of the Senate Finance Committee on an otherwise partisan 14-9 vote, was called a “surprise” by some. It wasn’t.

She’s done this for years, undercutting her party and lending support to the opposition. Don’t look for some transcendent reason.

“My vote today is my vote today,” Snowe said, clarifying nothing. “It doesn’t forecast what my vote will be tomorrow.”

Nothing like standing firmly on principle.

What’s galling is Democrats could have passed this without Snowe’s help. By lending her voice and senatorial prestige, she weakened her party’s otherwise resolute stance against the health care bill. In short, she gave Democrats badly needed bipartisan cover to ram Baucus — or something worse — down all our throats.

As we’ve said before, the Baucus bill will lead, inevitably, to higher taxes, lower-quality care, rationing and the intrusion of government into the most sensitive decisions we make. The Congressional Budget Office estimates it will cost $829 billion over 10 years, but economists expect costs to soar north of $1 trillion.

There are lines in the sand for both parties, and this bill should be one. A person can’t support Baucus and still say he or she’s for small, or limited, government. This is Leviathan writ large.

The GOP has this problem with lots of its members — including Snowe’s fellow Maine senator, Susan Collins. And don’t forget Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, who abandoned his party for the Democrats as soon as it was politically expedient to do so.

By the way, Specter, Collins and Snowe, * all voted for the stimulus. So you can partly thank them when your taxes shoot sky high.

South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, who’s joining Democrats in support of cap-and-trade, is another example. Cap-and-trade is one of the worst bills in history — doing literally nothing to curb carbon dioxide emissions while slapping American families with an estimated $1,700 in added taxes each year. Graham’s for it.

The GOP must be wondering: With members like these, who needs Democrats?



October 9, 2009

New Soliloquy: To Be (LBJ), Or Not To Be


The genius of democracy is the rotation of power that forces the opposition to be serious — particularly about things like war, about which until Jan. 20 of this year Democrats were decidedly unserious.

When the Iraq War (which a majority of Senate Democrats voted for) ran into trouble and casualties began to mount, Democrats followed the shifting winds of public opinion and turned decidedly anti-war. But needing political cover because of their post-Vietnam reputation for weakness on national defense, they adopted Afghanistan as their pet war.

“I was part of the 2004 Kerry campaign, which elevated the idea of Afghanistan as ‘the right war’ to conventional Democratic wisdom,” Democratic consultant Bob Shrum wrote after President Obama was elected.

“This was accurate as criticism of the Bush administration, but it was also reflexive and perhaps by now even misleading as policy.” Which is a clever way to say that championing victory in Afghanistan was a contrived and disingenuous policy in which Democrats never seriously believed, a convenient two-by-four with which to bash George Bush over Iraq — while still appearing warlike enough to fend off the soft-on-defense stereotype.

Brilliantly crafted and perfectly cynical, the “Iraq War bad, Afghan War good” posture worked. Democrats first won Congress, then the White House. But now, unfortunately, they must govern. No more games. No more pretense.

So what does their commander in chief do now with the war he once declared had to be won but had been almost criminally under-resourced by Bush? Perhaps provide the resources to win it?

You would think so. And that’s exactly what Obama’s handpicked commander requested on Aug. 30 — a surge of 30,000 to 40,000 troops to stabilize a downward spiral and save Afghanistan the way a similar surge saved Iraq. That was more than five weeks ago. Still no response. Obama agonizes publicly as the world watches. Why? Because, explains National Security Adviser James Jones, you don’t commit troops before you decide on a strategy.

No strategy? On March 27, flanked by his secretaries of defense and state, the president said this: “Today I’m announcing a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.” He then outlined a civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. [?]

And to emphasize his seriousness, the president made clear that he had not arrived casually at this decision. The new strategy, he declared, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.”

Conclusion, mind you. Not the beginning. Not a process. The conclusion of an extensive review, the president assured us, that included consultation with military commanders and diplomats, with the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, with our NATO allies and members of Congress.

The general in charge was then relieved and replaced with Obama’s own choice, Stanley McChrystal. And it’s McChrystal who submitted the request for the 40,000 troops, a request upon which the commander in chief promptly gagged.

The White House began leaking an alternate strategy, apparently proposed (invented?) by Vice President Biden, for achieving immaculate victory with arm’s-length use of cruise missiles, predator drones and special ops.

The irony is that no one knows more about this kind of warfare than Gen. McChrystal. He was in charge of exactly this kind of “counterterrorism” in Iraq for nearly five years, killing thousands of bad guys in hugely successful under-the-radar operations.

When the world’s expert on this type of counterterrorism warfare recommends precisely the opposite strategy — “counterinsurgency,” meaning a heavy-footprint, population-protecting troop surge — you have the most convincing of cases against counterterrorism by the man who most knows its potential and its limits.

And McChrystal was emphatic in his recommendation: To go any other way than counterinsurgency would lose the war.

Yet his commander in chief, young Hamlet, frets, demurs, agonizes. His domestic advisers, led by Rahm Emanuel, tell him if he goes for victory, he’ll become LBJ, the domestic visionary destroyed by a foreign war. His vice president holds out the chimera of painless counterterrorism success.

Against Emanuel and Biden stand David Petraeus, the world’s foremost expert on counterinsurgency (he saved Iraq with it), and Stanley McChrystal, the world’s foremost expert on counterterrorism. Whose recommendation on how to fight would you rely on?

On Aug. 17, in front of an audience of veterans, the president declared Afghanistan to be “a war of necessity.”

Does anything he says remain operative beyond the fading of the audience applause?


Congress’ Ugly Intimidation Of An Industry

October 9, 2009

Americans angry with the charades of WAXMAN and STUPAK.

Their lies, deceit, tactics, wrath, witch-hunts, harassment, intimidation, smoke + mirrors, threat, silence, terrorize, cajole, eliminate, destroy, confrontation, bait-and-switch

Congress’ Ugly Intimidation Of An Industry

By STEVE FORBES IBD: 8 Oct. 2009

For anyone who missed it, we witnessed in recent weeks one of the broadest misuses of congressional power in recent history.

Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and his colleague Bart Stupak are openly engaged in a campaign of harassment and intimidation against 52 of America’s largest health insurance providers.

They seek nothing less than to silence all voices opposed to their government-run health care proposals.

Just days after AHIP (America’s Health Insurance Plans), the industry trade group for American health insurers, sent Waxman a letter voicing opposition to many components of his proposed health care overhaul, he responded with his own version of a political shock-and-awe campaign, a frightening example of raw intimidation.

On Aug. 17, 52 insurers received a letter from Waxman and Stupak demanding they provide intricate details on executive and employee compensation, release the names of all members of their boards of directors and hand over detailed lists of expenses for all off-site meetings and retreats over the past five years.

It does not take a member of Congress to notice that this information is irrelevant to the health care debate. The only possible purpose behind these requests is to force private insurers to back down now — lest they be confronted by the full wrath of congressional subpoenas followed by lengthy, expensive and pointless hearings that amount to political witch hunts.

What’s next? Perhaps Waxman and Stupak would also like detailed personal information on any employees who are known or suspected communists. It all smacks of the ugly methods employed by Sen. Joe McCarthy more than a half-century ago.

Of course, Waxman and Stupak claim that the information they seek is relevant to health care reform. Yet they target only insurers. Hospitals, physician groups, pharmaceutical companies and other parts of the health care complex are untouched.

Could this possibly be because insurers possess one of the few organized voices in opposition to their proposals, and this voice is being heard by more and more Americans?

Behind Waxman’s and Stupak’s grandiose conception of their own power is clearly the hope that these tactics will distract the public from the many pitfalls of their health care proposals.

The public option that some congressional democrats have been promoting with such intensity is quickly losing favor among the public. According to the most recent polls, more voters clearly oppose a government-run option than are in favor.

So what better way to help Americans forget that they oppose your policy than to turn your committee chambers into a soapbox, conjure up a new villain and refocus criticism away from your proposal and onto something else entirely?

Luckily for America, few people are falling for their smoke and mirrors. Already the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and even some prominent Democrats are questioning these tactics.

As Politico recently reported, one prominent Democrat lobbyist recognized that Waxman’s request was guilty of “overreach” with “broad potential to backfire.” Thus Waxman’s bait-and-switch strategy may well fail. He doesn’t realize that most Americans are fair-minded and not easily distracted by congressional versions of Roman Gladiator games.

Waxman and Stupak clearly do not understand that the best policy will be one that takes into account the concerns, proposals and considerations of relevant participants from all sides of the political spectrum, and all facets of the health care world. Shunning or intimidating an easy villain will do nothing to ensure that Americans receive health care reform that actually works, and genuinely improves lives.

Democrats and fellow members of Congress need to put a stop to the charades of Waxman and Stupak, and order the Energy and Commerce Committee back on the task of putting together some very important legislation.

The greatest service the rest of us can do is to ignore these charades and political games entirely and remain focused on real policy and real results.

• Forbes is president and chief executive of Forbes and editor-in-chief of Forbes magazine.


Send Congress a PINK SLIP

October 1, 2009


Send Congress a PINK SLIP: visit:


Cartoon: Chavez Sulfur Comment

September 28, 2009


Abject Surrender In Dead Of Night

September 21, 2009

Abject Surrender In Dead Of Night


IBD: 18 Sept. 09

Strategic Defense: With Iran on the verge of a deliverable nuke, the administration tells our allies in the dead of night that we will scuttle missile defense plans in Eastern Europe to please the Russians.

Czechs are used to betrayal by their Western allies. It was at Munich in 1938 that British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain sealed their doom in exchange for a piece of paper promising “peace in our time.”

The fact that this further gutting of missile defense came on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland on Sept. 17, 1939, is an eerie coincidence.

Just after midnight I was informed in a telephone call by President Barack Obama that (his) administration had decided to pull out from the planned missile defense shield installations” in the Czech Republic and Poland, the Czech Republic’s interim prime minister, Jan Fischer, said at a Thursday news conference.

Coming after the Russian invasion of Georgia and Moscow’s efforts to destabilize that prospective NATO member as well as Ukraine, it bolsters Russia’s efforts to rebuild the old Soviet Union’s sphere of influence and sends the message that the U.S. can’t be trusted as an ally that can keep its promises.

In March, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski noted that Poland had taken “something of a political risk” in agreeing to the deployment of 10 ground-based interceptors on its territory.

“When we started discussing this with the United States,” he said, “the U.S. assured us they would persuade the Russians that it was purely defensive and it would be a noncontroversial decision.” We lied.

The Poles and Czechs had sensed this betrayal coming in a deal with a belligerent Russian aggressor willing to wage war with the former Soviet state of Georgia, as well as threaten the Ukraine and use pipeline warfare to starve energy-dependent Europeans of natural gas.

“We hope we don’t regret our trust in the United States,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said to an audience of senior world politicians and other leaders at the recent Brussels Conference.

The motives behind this naive move are said to be the administration’s beliefs that Iran is nowhere near posing a credible missile threat to Europe or the U.S. and that Russian cooperation promised if we did this is critical to restrain Tehran’s nuclear program.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not ease our allies’ fears when he said at a NATO meeting in Krakow, Poland, on Feb. 20: “I told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile program, there would be no need for the missile sites.” But there is one, and there is a need for missile defense to proceed.

The Heritage Foundation noted in July that Iran “has the capability to strike at Israel and Southeastern Europe, including NATO members such as Greece, Bulgaria and Romania.” Germany’s intelligence agency, the BND, said in July that Iran would have the means to produce a nuclear weapon within six months. It continues to upgrade its long-range Shahab series. The threat is real and growing rapidly.

Iran is working hard to improve its missile capabilities. Last November, it successfully test-fired the Sajjil-2, a solid-fuel, high-speed missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles). In February, Iran demonstrated its global reach with the launching of its Omid satellite. A country capable of orbiting a satellite is capable of putting a warhead anywhere on this planet.

President Obama says the administration will now work on a “new missile defense architecture in Europe (that) will provide stronger, smarter and swifter defenses of American forces and America’s allies.” Yet what he has called “unproven” missile defense took a $1.2 billion hit in the administration’s 2010 defense budget, a decrease of about 15%. So don’t hold your breath.

Fact is, missile defense systems like the ground-based interceptors that were destined for Poland have already proved to be eminently workable and successful. According to the Missile Defense Agency, since 2001 there have been 37 successful hit-to-kill intercepts out of 47 attempts, an astounding 80% success rate. We have even shot a decaying and dangerous spy satellite out of the sky.

While we gut our missile defense, Russia is quite ready to deploy and even export theirs to thugs around the world. It recently deployed an S-400 anti-missile division near its border with North Korea should an errant Taepodong head its way. Its work on missile defense continues full throttle.

Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez last week secured a contract with Moscow for new S-300 missile defense systems and T-72 tanks. The S-300s are likely to be used to guard the nuclear power plant Moscow agreed last November to help Chavez build. “We’re going to develop nuclear energy with peaceful purposes,” Chavez says.

This, of course, is the same thing the mullahs of Iran said when the Russians built a nuclear power plant for them at Bushehr. Just ignore the centrifuges behind the curtain. Two thugocracies afloat on a sea of oil building nuclear reactors with Russian help. Hmmmm.

Last November also saw the visit to Venezuela of a Russian naval squadron led by the nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser Peter the Great and the destroyer Admiral Chabanenko. The Chabanenko later became the first Russian warship to transit the Panama Canal since World War II.

The overly cautious experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency, the world’s top atomic watchdog, are now in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a classified IAEA report seen by the Associated Press.

It’s quite possible that the new year will arrive with an Iran armed both with a nuclear weapon and the means to deliver it, much like its role model and partner in missile development, North Korea, which is a threat all unto itself.

In the face of a growing North Korean threat, we cut back the deployment of ground-based interceptors there from 44 to 30. In the face of an imminent Iranian threat, we have scrapped this successful system altogether. This is an abject surrender to the former Soviet Union and appeasement of the worst kind.

The bottom line is that this administration went eyeball to eyeball with the Russians, and this time it was America that blinked.


Cartoon: Cold Shower

September 21, 2009


PHOTOS: 9/12 D.C. Protest Signs

September 17, 2009


912racecardrace card 9/12 / conservcompend


czar critique targeting women & van jones 9/12 / flickr: KCIvey



San Diego Tea Party/ unattributed (not 912 photo)

Homophobic Posters/ t-shirts

912homophobe9/12 poster/ flickr: mar is sea

homophobiaaprilwsalterS. Walter (pre-9/12 April tea bag)

racisthomophobicweirdnesspre-912/unattributed (homophobic imagery, racist overlay)


Tea Party Protest Poster for download use on 9/12/ Full Monte Cristo

SDC10357t-shirt mention sexuality/flickr: meet the crazies (poster =threat rev)

Black Criminality

blackcriminal912photoflickr 912 photos

slittingsamthroatAprilefavaraApril protest Obama slits Uncle Sam’s throat/ e. favara (not 912 image)

Taxpayer RallyAP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

SDC10371Flickr Meet the Crazies

aprilteapartyTX: Tea Party (April)/ Michael (not 9/12 photo)

txtppervTX: Tea Party (April)/ Michael (not 9/12 photo)

SDC103399/12 rally dc/ flickr: meet the crazies

Death threats/ gun references

912lynchmobreference to burning out black ppl frm towns/?

tphangthemcriminal & threat posters from August Anti-HCR rally/ Washington Independent (not 9/12 photo)

912gunthreatNRA hat gun threat 9/12 /skellam

2009 Taxpayer March on Washington by Throwingbull.
flickr: throwingbull


“Official Tea Party Supplies”/patriot depot (used @ multiple rallies)

deathrefmalletR. Mallet


gunmanAP/ Joel Page Williams (pre-9/12 protest; health care protest)



Rick aguirre (pre-9/12 April tea bag Fl)


flickr 912 photos


flickr 912 photos


flickr 912 photos


flickr 912 photos



April Tea bag Protest/ unattributed (not 912 photo)

912gunflag“Come and Take it” / A. Aliferes

“Black Devil”

blackdevil912photo912 Photo (also Katrina denial)

blackdevil2912photoflickr 912 photos


flickr 912 photos (reference to avoiding kings who will lure you away)

Animal/Monkey/primitive References

zooobamaflickr 912 photos

teapartysign1smDenver Tea Party/ “Progressive” Now Colorado (not 9/12 photo)

090724 us hc racistanti-health care poster used in many rallies/ Free Republic (not 9/12 photo)

Confederate Flags/ Legitimacy Questions

IMG_0938flickr meet the crazies

confedflagsflickr 912 photos

txteapartyliersTX; Tea Party April/ Michael (not 9/12 photo)

slavery/servant messages

912slavprojection9/12 poster / ?

racistobamaimage9Ted Szukalski (image used during election & 912 protest)

9-12 Tea Party (10) by ryanreedphotography.
multiple categories 9/12/

slavery912photoflickr 912 photos

youworkforus912photoflickr 912 photos

whiteslaverysignapriljesserussellApril tea bag protest/ J. Russell (not 912 photo)

txtpprojTX: Tea Party (April)/ Michael (not 9/12 photo; also fits under projection since these maybe debtors prison ref)

Welfare Queens

welfarobamasign posted after April Tea Bag Protest/ Unattributed (not 912 photo also includes threat)


flickr 912 photos

912welfaresimplefree loaders 9/12 / M. Bryant

tplansingmichLansing Mich Tea Party/Melanie Ann (not 9/12 photo)

tptxTexas Tea Party/unattributed (not 9/12 photo)

tptx2Texas Tea Party/unattributed (not 9/12 photo)

tplouisSt. Louis Tea Party/ unattributed (not 9/12 photo)

tpentitlementSign Sold for Tea Parties by Free Sign (@ 9/12 and other rallies)

912welfareget a job 9/12 dc/ flickr: jen.booth

Projection: Hitler, Supremacy, Conspiracy


“Official Tea Party Supplies”/patriot depot (used @ multiple rallies)

assimilation912photoflickr 912 photos

blackpower912photosflickr 912 photos





nazi6tonyramaoAP/Tony Romao



Obama “not a democrat” / M. Bryant


Taxpayer RallyAP Photo/Jose Luis Magana


SDC10375flickr meet the crazies

IMG_0936flickr meet the crazies

birther912photoflickr 912 photos


flickr meet the crazies

tplincolnLincoln Tea Party (April)/ (not 912 photo)



“Protest Supplies” /”People’s Cube” (sold @ rallies; encouraged for 4th of July Tea Parties)


9/12 protest/ flickr: meethtecrazies


List of 9/12 Tea Party Protest Signs

September 17, 2009

List of 9/12/09 Washington D.C. Tea Party Protest Signs

  • The Constitution – the other document they don’t read
  • Vote NO on all his Marxist plans
  • Healthcare – you play – you’ll pay
  • Stop Obama spending spree
  • I’m sick and tired of Obama’s health plan
  • RIP – U.S. Constitution
  • AARP sold out senior citizens
  • TEA: Taxed Enough Already
  • Obama is very slow at learning
  • Where did all these socialists come from – there aren’t that many rat holes
  • Barack: a block head / dumb as a rock
  • Bankrupt America “Yes We Can”!
  • Socialism: Just say No!
  • Obama care is a Clunker!
  • Stop meddling
  • Take America back
  • Do your homework next time you vote!
  • Leave my family alone
  • Keep your hands off
  • Stop meddling with my liberty – my country
  • “Stimulate” tax cutting
  • Extortion from the workers to pay for the bankers
  • You gave my money to wealthy corporate executives
  • Global Warming bill burns more cash than Health Care
  • We can’t afford even one – but the Congress wants both
  • Charity is given in America in greater amounts than any country in the world
  • Islamist “charity” pays for suicide bombers

American charity doesn’t ‘buy’ terrorists

  • “Cashing in”
  • Give small business this UN spent “$700 Billion” unspent(?) stimulus money
  • Don’t spend any more ‘stimulus’ dollars
  • 65% of all ‘new’ employment comes from small businesses
  • We should stop playing favorites
  • Stop writing more tax bills
  • One in 10 dollars spent = obesity

Let them carry their own weight

Send the parents to “fat camp”

A bunch of big fat wimps!

  • “You Lie” – Rep. Joe Wilson R-SC
  • 9 Principles 12 Values = 9/12
  • Take the Hill America
  • The 9/12 Project
  • Hands off my kinds liberty
  • You have run out of OUR money
  • CHANGE we can’t AFFORD
  • Our Government is corrupt
  • Marxist
  • In God we Trust – NOT Government

Not THIS Government

  • In God we trust – NOT – THIS FALSE MESSIAH
  • Anti-spending – Pro-government – when the people rule.
  • This is about Freedom
  • In GOD we trust – Not in the OBAMINATION in the White House.
  • 12 September We will never forget
  • Obama bin Lieing
  • End the Fed
  • I’d rather be waterboarded than have ObamaCare
  • Left Stream Media
  • Left Run Media
  • There is no mainstream media anyway
  • Yellow Stream Media – B.O. Media
  • Fibber McGee Pelosi
  • Hey – Work for us
  • Leave Washington First
  • Racists in the White House – I’M SICK OF IT!
  • Obama! Your mamma was a white woman
  • Bury ObamaCare with Kennedy
  • I didn’t vote for this Obamination
  • You Lie!
  • Racist in Chief
  • Muslims are moving in and taking over
  • Drill Here – Drill Now
  • Van Jones smeared by the Truth – Obama Lies
  • Karl Marx was NOT a founding father
  • Do you hear us now?
  • Revolt against socialism
  • Read my lipstick – No more taxes
  • The only racists are in the White House
  • “The more they corrupt the state – the more it legislates.” – Tacitus
  • Ask Santa Anna how it went for the last President who tried to take away Texans Rights?.
  • Adrian, Texas – Great people – wonderful Americans
  • Thomas Jefferson called for a nation of prayer.  We must restore God in HIS rightful place.  He is great!  Men + Women seriously concerned about religious liberty . We must stand up – That’s why we are Darwinistic.  We are made in the Image of God”  –
  • Congress Is the one who’s sick
  • Congress needs healthcare – they are all sick
  • Texas leads the way
  • This CHANGE sucks
  • Art.1 Sec.8 – All taxes uniform
  • Get rid of THAT senate and THAT Congress
  • All BILLS originate in the HOUSE!
  • No More Tyranny
  • Obama doesn’t belong in the WHITE HOUSE
  • You are not owed what I’ve earned.

Vote Them Out in 2010

September 17, 2009

9/12 Washington D.C. Tea Party

September 17, 2009

Conservative Woodstock Rocks the Capital

Patriotic anti-big-government taxpayers blast through the million protester mark

September 12, 2009, Washington, D.C.

ABC News reports that two million Americans flooded D.C. in what people in the crowd were calling “a conservative Woodstock” Like the liberal Woodstock of the ’60s, thousands were rumored stranded on freeways. Some walked in to DC, ditching their cars and busses. I walked with a 5 deep 6 block long column of protesters from Pennsylvania Avenue who had walked miles from where they had to leave their busses. Networks including Fox News continued through the time I’m writing this at 8 p.m. local Eastern time reporting that “tens of thousands” showed up. Whasup with that?  When will we get some reliable reporting out of the corporate media types?

This event had been promoted as a taxpayer “tea party” but the crowd’s concerns were wide ranging, from outrage at ACORN and Obama’s socialist cadre known as Czars, to Obama’s untruthfulness. Protesters also displayed signs mocking Nancy Pelosi and others for smearing the grassroots movement as “astroturfers” and as an angry mob.


I think this gathering should be appreciated as the extremely important historical event that it is. This is the first great conservative anti-statist manifestation in American history. The conservative movement, which developed in the post-WWII, Cold War environment has now fully matured into the most significant political movement of the 21st century. I believe that this day could be referred to in the not too distant future as the day that changed America. This was the day the great silent conservative majority finally found its voice.

Many of the attendees were quite meek and timid and were unsure of exactly what to expect, this being the first time in their lives they’d been involved in a protest movement. Their fears evaporated early in the day and I saw people reveling in the camaraderie , the joy and sheer civility that was exhibited at the entire event. Chants of “Freedom, freedom, freedom”, “No more czars! No more czars!” carried through the air without the slightest hint of rancor or incivility which is the norm at the leftist rallies I have photographed over the years.


The two photos above show a tiny fraction of the two million ABC estimates attended. I saw signs and heard lots of comments comparing this event to Woodstock. At the time this photo was taken, around 1:00 p.m., Pennsylvania Avenue was still jammed completely, and the mall was packed from the Capitol Building past the Washington Monument. See aerial photos here.


Protesters came from every state in the union. This man came from San Antonio, TX. He said that he was really sorry he hadn’t brought his family. He stated that being a black conservative he was afraid to expose his children to what he expected would be a lot of liberal abuse. He was thrilled with the tenor of the event and the fact that no liberals were present to harass him. He spoke about how incredibly intolerant the left is to black individuals who don’t bow to the party line.

Mike Pence (R-Indiana) was one of the speakers who addressed the crowd: “After years of fighting runaway government on this hill, you people look like the cavalry to me..I believe we are on the verge of a great American awakening.”


San Diego radio host Mason Weaver said from the podium: “I came here because I thought you might want to hear a black man speak without a teleprompter…This government is trying to make a nation of dependent people. Americans have always been independent people…This is not a Republican thing, it’s not a Democrat thing. It’s not a black thing or a white thing. It’s an American thing…We the people are telling them ‘No more! We’ve had enough!”


In the very center of the photo, above the Silence is Consent – Can You Hear Us Now sign, you can see Pennsylvania Ave., which at this time is totally blocked with protesters who cannot move forward to the Capitol area. Sorry, full up.


There were notable differences though, in the behavior of these attendees. Although the legend of Woodstock is that there was a friendly atmosphere of camaraderie, the truth is that most people were there for the drugs, sex and rock and roll. Today in D.C. there was a true kinship amongst these people based on shared values and intellectual understanding of what America is and how its future is imperiled by big radical government.

No one was having sex in the Reflecting Pool let alone the mud, and I saw no one projectile vomiting on the steps of the Capitol. There were no warnings to avoid the bad acid which would send you on a trip to the hospital. Not just a different era, but a different level of civilized behavior and thought. Oh, and by the way, these people didn’t leave tons of garbage behind when they left. Actually they left no trash behind at all.


We are the mob!



Support Class Envy! Redistribute Wealth.

_MG_0284x Madam Speaker: Kiss Our Astroturf!


The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Obama Himself     – – –    Compassion is Voluntary, Not Compulsory!


WALNUT – Workers Against Lazy Non-Producers United Together — the conservative answer to ACORN. Didn’t have to ask them if they were receiving any taxpayer money like radical left-wing ACORN. Different DNA!


Proud members of the “Angry Mob” and they’re armed with their votes.


Your wallet…the only place Democrats are willing to drill!  – Don’t share my wealth – share my work ethic!


Right-wing extremist armed with the constitution.


Who are the commie czars?


Marxism – the opiate of the asses – Posters from the Peoples Cube are proliferating amongst protesters.


Stop Making Profit! — Report all Capitalist Activities to

World’s #1 Crypto-Marxist. Endorsed by Fidel Castro: “The most powerful progressive candidate to the U.S. presidency.” – GRANMA, Havana, May 26, 2008

Dictator Castro did indeed endorse Obama! Note that he used the word progressive to describe Barack? Well that’s because the Libs gave the word liberal such a bad smell by their behavior and policies over the years that they had to abandon it. They started referring to themselves as progressives and figured no one would notice the word’s communist pedigree. It means progress on the road to socialism and Castro understands it that way. Well shazzam Martha, look at that! The president really is a progressive. How TOTALLY AWESOME!! GOD BLESS THE PATRIOTS!!

Above is an aerial shot of the street leading to the capital.  The rest of the country need to see and know

this.  It’s up to us to let them know!….  Please forward to all your addresses.

Nancy Pelosi has accused patriotic tea-party goers of “carrying swastikas” implying that they are Nazi sympathizers or worse. This event was knee deep in hammers and sickles and words like “socialist” “communist” and “Marxist”. It continues to fascinate me how the Democrat Party tolerates this without ever commenting on it. When will the MSM ask the questions about his The High One’s communist buddies and endorsers? And why do people who absolutely loath the USA, like Castro, Chavez, Ortega, and Michael Moore worship at the alter of Obama? Well at least the communists who endorse him have no qualms about telling it like it is.


Ever present at Tea Parties are Sons of Liberty re-enactors. The couple on the left is from Tennessee and the young lady on the right is not but she joined in the photo. The clothing for the couple was hand stitched by the lady on the left. And boy do they love America.


Cartoon: Congressional Rebuke?

September 16, 2009


Reid On The Rocks

September 15, 2009

Reid On The Rocks

IBD: 14 Sept. 09

Politics: The senator who called the president a liar and never apologized may have worn out his welcome in his home state. Harry Reid may be riding the liberal agenda into political oblivion.

In 2004, Republicans defeated Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle largely on the theme that he neglected his home state in favor of national party interests. The GOP is hoping that in 2010 lightning will strike a second time, and Nevada polls indicate it may be more than wishful thinking.

In 1998, Reid beat John Ensign by a hair-thin 428 votes. Ensign would go on to win Nevada’s other Senate seat two years later. Interestingly, Politico notes that Reid’s in-state approval rating stands at just 36% — statistically indistinguishable from the 35% approval rating of Ensign even after Ensign disclosed an affair with a former staffer.

Part of it has to do with Reid’s rise to Senate minority leader and then majority leader in 2006. His constituents increasingly feel left behind. Sherman Fredrick, publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, wrote in 2006:

“Sen. Reid’s undoing came early in his last term when he became a big shot in the Democratic Party and quickly morphed into someone Nevada voters did not recognize — his political girlfriend in the House, uber-liberal Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California.”

The ever-tactful Reid responded, “I hope you go out of business” — a hope that, if fulfilled, would drive Nevada’s record unemployment rate still higher and fly in the face of the political adage that you never argue with people who buy ink by the barrel.

As Reid pursues cap-and-trade, a medical overhaul and the rest of the leftist agenda, Nevadans are increasingly asking: What about Nevada? Reid is a high-profile incumbent in a state that’s becoming an economic basket case.

Nevada has the third highest jobless rate in the country at 12.5%. For 31 months, it’s had the highest foreclosure rate of any state, and Las Vegas has the highest foreclosure rate of any major U.S. city.

Nevadans feel stimulus money has not benefitted the state despite Reid’s effort to push a high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and Las Vegas to ferry Hollywood’s liberal high rollers to Nevada’s casinos.

Polls have shown Reid’s two potential challengers, Danny Tarkanian, son of legendary UNLV basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian, and state GOP Chairwoman Sue Lowden, with double-digit leads.

Nevada is an increasingly Democratic state, and Reid is counting on his party’s edge in registration. But a Mason-Dixon poll in August found Tarkanian leading Reid by 32 points among independents, with Lowden leading by 22.

Reid’s reputation as a curmudgeon doesn’t help. On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” on Dec. 5, 2004, the late host Tim Russert asked: “When the president talked about Yucca Mountain and moving the nation’s nuclear waste there, you were very, very, very strong in your words. You said, ‘President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada, and he betrayed the country.’ Is that rhetoric appropriate?'”

As to Yucca Mountain, the proposed spent nuclear fuel storage facility in Nevada, Reid answered: “It’s something that is being forced upon this country by the utilities, and it’s wrong. And we have to stop it. And people may not like what I said, but I said it, and I don’t back off one bit.”

Rep. Joe Wilson, call your office.

Reid based his charge on the fact that in 2000 Bush said he would not push for Yucca Mountain without “sound science” to back it up, but then went ahead. Bush went ahead because there was sound science to back up Yucca as a safe storage facility necessary if nuclear power was to provide clean nonpolluting power for our energy future.

Harry Reid’s own political future may also be running out of energy.


Roland Burris

September 15, 2009


Roland Burris, a former Illinois comptroller and attorney general shown here in July announcing he won’t run for a full U.S. Senate term in 2010, is one of nearly 4,000 retired Illinois state workers getting pensions of at least $100,000 a year. Burris, 72, has received $1.4 million since he retired in 1995 at age 57. His pension, which has risen nearly 50% since then, is now $121,747.

$400,000,000 / year for retired pols


No Getting Past Race In America

September 9, 2009

IBD: 2 Sept. 2009

Civil Rights: Eric Holder’s Justice Department plans to hire more than 50 new civil rights lawyers to ferret out racism in American society. And you thought you were getting a post-racial presidency.

At his inauguration, President Obama said, “because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself.”

Who could not be moved at hearing a newly sworn-in president note that “a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.”

Indeed, one of the most alluring aspects of his campaign was the frequent message that putting him in the White House would be part of America’s departure from its ugly racist past.

In his much-celebrated speech on race in Philadelphia in March of last year, he spoke of “my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people.” He accused his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, of having “a profoundly distorted view of this country — a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America.”

And he added: “Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems.” He complained that Wright “spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country .. . is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past.”

In an attempt to allay the concerns of some white voters, candidate Obama even said that “to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns — this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.”

This election was going to be different, he said, “this time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag.”

The closest he came to suggesting that an Obama administration would mean a new army of civil rights lawyers at the Justice Department was one well-buried line about enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system.”

If Rev. Wright had been named attorney general instead of Eric Holder, maybe he would try to hire 100 new predatory lawyers, instead of 50-something of them as Holder is planning.

The idea is still the same: America “is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past” — the very opposite of what the president said he believed about “the decency and generosity of the American people” — so we need the federal government to police our ingrained, intractable racism in every nook and cranny of society.

Holder, with the president’s blessing, will now set out to undo the Bush administration’s altogether proper emphasis on individual cases of obvious, intentional discrimination, and return the federal government to a 1970s race-war mentality.

The thinking behind this was exemplified by Joseph Rich, a career lawyer at Justice’s civil rights division for nearly four decades. Testifying to a House Judiciary subcommittee in 2007, Rich complained that “in a five-year period the department brought no voting cases and only one employment pattern or practice case on behalf of African-Americans. And no voting cases on behalf of Native Americans.

“At the same time,” Rich added, “there were several reverse discrimination employment cases brought and the first-ever case on behalf of white voters alleging discrimination by African-American Democratic Party operatives in Mississippi.”

To the entrenched legal establishment of the federal government, racism is ever and always a one-way street — as well as a problem that never diminishes without the bullying of government lawyers. That is “a profoundly distorted view of this country,” and the president last year assured us that he did not subscribe to it.




September 4, 2009

Do you feel as if America has become a helpless victim of everyone in the world who believes we are unable to defend ourselves?

Our Constitution is being torn asunder by our President, our Congress and our Senate.   NONE of which can be trusted.

U.S. Constitution. Article 3 Section 3- “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.  No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forgeiture except during the Life of the Person attained.



Could The Feds Seize The Internet?

September 3, 2009

Does anyone trust Obama with “The power to define and declare” anything?

Could The Feds Seize The Internet?

IBD: 3 Sept. 2009

Security: A Senate bill lets the president “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “nongovernmental” computer networks and do what’s needed to respond to the threat. Didn’t they just collect our e-mail addresses?

We wish this was just a piece of the fictional “Dr. Strangelove” that fell to the cutting-room floor, but it’s not. It is a real piece of disturbingly vague legislation sponsored by Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine.

Senate Bill 773 would grant the administration emergency powers (where have we heard that before?) in the event of a cyberemergency that the president would have the power to define and declare.

Wait a minute. Didn’t the left recently weep and gnash its teeth over President George W. Bush’s wireless surveillance of communications between real, live terrorists who want to kill us and their American contacts? Would Congress have given Bush such a sweeping power?

Have we already forgotten the administration wanting Americans to spy on their neighbors and report “fishy” communications opposing health care to Didn’t oodles of our e-mail addresses wind up in the White House from which then came unsolicited e-mails supporting ObamaCare?

A working draft of the legislation, which is in its second incarnation, obtained by an Internet privacy group, would grant the secretary of commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed critical to the nation’s infrastructure “without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access.” Where’s the ACLU?

Sen. Rockefeller says he wants to prevent a “digital Pearl Harbor,” and so do we. We have written extensively about the threat posed by foreign hackers and governments such as Russia and China to our power grids and the like. Chinese hackers have even penetrated Pentagon computer networks. We are also mindful of sacrificing a little liberty in the name of security and winding up with neither.

“The cybersecurity threat is real,” said Leslie Harris, president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, which obtained the draft of S. 773, “but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.”

Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Mother Jones the bill was “contrary to what the Constitution promises us.” According to Granick, granting the Commerce Department oversight of “critical” networks such as banking systems would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution’s prohibition against unlawful search and seizure.

Like the health care bill, there are several versions of S. 773; what people have seen is vaguely written. The bill does not clearly define what a cyberemergency or critical network is. Nor does it explicitly define the powers of the president in such an emergency or what he is prevented from doing. That is left up to the administration in power.

Section 201 of the bill permits the president to “direct the national response to the cyber threat” for “the national defense and security.” The White House is supposed to engage in “periodic mapping” of private networks, and these companies “shall share” requested information with the federal government.

The federal government would be empowered to access any information on the Internet and find “choke points” where hackers and governments, including our own, might be able to control, or stop, the flow of data and information. Your Internet service provider would be required by law to supply federal bureaucrats with whatever network, account, usage and history information they deem appropriate.

To further keep an eye on things, the bill establishes a federal training and certification program for cybersecurity professionals and requires that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been properly trained by the government and awarded that government license. The private sector can’t be trusted to do the job.

But don’t be afraid. It’s for your own good. Big Brother will watch over you.