a place for mcj's founder, annie fields, to spout off so her head doesn't explode.

2011-11-16T09:17:00.001-05:00

please visit my new blog at www.saltusa.com

NEW blog site

2011-05-05T12:27:00.000-04:00

PLEASE visit my new blog at:

http://www.anniefields.com/blog

Unions, Thrift, P*ssed-off Octogenarians... Nothing much has changed...

2010-09-19T14:40:00.003-04:00

This is long, but it's worth it. It's an eye witness to the Great Depression venting about what he views as the cause of it. It's classic crusty New England... so I love it. The guy sounds just like my father does today... Who, as it happens... is also 80 years old.

God Bless them both.

"...Life histories were compiled and transcribed by the staff of the Folklore Project of the Federal Writers' Project for the U.S. Works Progress (later Work Projects) Administration (WPA) from 1936-1940. The Library of Congress collection includes 2,900 documents representing the work of over 300 writers from 24 states. Typically 2,000-15,000 words in length, the documents consist of drafts and revisions, varying in form from narrative to dialogue to report to case history. The histories describe the informant's family education, income, occupation, political views, religion and mores, medical needs, diet and miscellaneous observations. Pseudonyms are often substituted for individuals and places named in the narrative texts."

The United States Library of Congress, American Life Histories - Manuscripts from the Federal Writers' Project, 1936-1940 - Manuscript Division Library of Congress ~ http://lcweb2.loc.gov/wpaintro/wpahome.html

-----

12/22/38

NAME OF (WPA) WORKER Christabel Kidder

NAME AND ADDRESS OF INFORMANT: Frederick Savage-Harvard, Massachusetts

Mr. Frederick Savage... is eighty years old, but as strong and vigorous in appearance and manner as a man thirty years his junior. He is a handsome old man, tall, well-built with a keen eye that misses nothing, and a decisive manner tempered by a delightful sense of humour. Although his formal education stopped at the age of ten, Mr. Savage is a student, spending much of his time studying and reading. He is keenly interested in world and local affairs and is constantly writing diatribes on various and sundry subjects for the local papers. He has written and privately printed several books including the History of the Town of Harvard, where he spent his early life and where he has now returned after years of living in the West and South. He is a Yankee from way back and proud of it.

There is nothing wishy-washy about Mr. Savage. He says what he thinks and says it with decision. There is no reluctance or fear on his part of expressing opinions and giving advice. He knows all the answers and doesn't mind telling you so. His favorite theme is the "good old days" which he thinks had it all over the present when life is lived too fast and in too much of a muddle. Notwithstanding his decisive manner Mr. Savage is extremely personable. As a raconteur he has few rivals for his fund of anecdotes seem inexhaustible and his manner of telling the tales fascinating. ...He is very friendly, and eager to make you at home. There is little difficulty in interviewing him for he just talks and talks and talks , not always on subjects desired, but anyhow he talks.

Mr. Savage has had three wives. His present one is a native Californian, a dainty little creature with a soft voice and a gentle manner, who is completely dominated by her big husband. Her apologetic looks when "Frederick" cusses, only eggs him on to more frequent and more colorful phrases. At eighty and in the presence of his wife, Mr. Savage doesn't mind saying he likes the ladies and they like him. There's not a doubt that if the present Mrs. Savage were to follow her predecessors to the grave, Mr. Savage would be "on the market" for a fourth.

Mr. Frederick Savage settled himself in a deep armchair and started to talk. There was little need to ask questions, and to attempt to guide the conversation was impossible. Mr. Savage wouldn't be "steered." He said what he wanted to say, in the way he wanted to say it. His wife's various attempts to make him "conform" were brushed aside with bellows of impatience and the command to "quit jabbering and keep quiet."

He looked at me with keen eyes and announced:

"I can tell you the cause of this Depression. Don't know why everyone says, 'My, Goodness! How did this depression happen.' Easy to see how it came. Don't know why it didn't come sooner. In the first place I don't think that people today know the meaning of the word economy. At any rate, there's only a very few in the world who know how to practice it. The depression really began along in the early nineteen hundreds when these damned unions began to form. Most of the men employed in large manufacturing plants, including the railroads, joined in with some union so they could compel the companies they worked for to pay them higher wages. Right there, the good feeling was destroyed between the men that did the hiring and the men that worked for them. They commenced to have strikes, stand up strikes and sit down strikes. That wasn't good either for labor or for the owners of the mills, who had millions invested in their buildings and railroads. Both the laboring man and the financier spent their time figuring how they could beat each other instead of having good feeling. The owners began to pay out their money for all kinds of new machinery to do away with having so many men working. Then, you see, there were more men to work than there was work for them to do.. And things kept getting worse..and the bad feeling kept getting worse. And, as I say, no one practises economy today. And people aren't self reliant the way they used to be. There's the damn story in a nutshell.

Now there's lots of men who have the brains to think up plans, but they fail because they can't put them through. People are pleasure crazy today. A man lets his best thought-out-schemes come to nothing just because he puts them on one side because he wants to play golf or go to some fool shindig. I've travelled a lot in this country and I can tell you the majority of people are living beyond their income. They don't think they're living unless they have every damned thing hitched to them either by cash payment or the installment plan. When I was young, back in the sixties (1860‘s), there was no such thing as a 'standard of living.' Each man set his own standard of what he could afford in running his household or business. Course there were business failures once in a while but you didn't often hear of the average working man making a failure of life.

[Mr. Savage paused for breath but before I could get a word in, he was off.]

In this modern age people think they're progressing but they're not. No sir, not by a damn sight. The people in the towns, the cities and the states ain't so well off financially, morally physically or mentally as they were in the sixties (1860‘s) or seventies (1870‘s) when common sense was used in regulating everything.

Most people today are looking for someone to support them without work and if they keep that idea in their heads much longer most of us'll have to live in a cave or a dug-out or old shacks. A crust of bread and a handful of corn meal will look good to us. Work, work, work and hard work from sun-rise to sun-set, mixed with common sense, supports the people and the Government. And if they don't follow that rule, they're going soft and they'll decay. It ain't that human nature's changed much. Folks are just the same inside..just the same as when Adam met Eve in the Garden of Eden. It doesn't make any difference whether a woman wears wool, cottons or silk stockings, short or long dresses, hoop skirts or bustles or earrings, or diamonds, or has her dress held together with hooks and eyes or buttons or a lot of safety pins, she's just the same inside as she ever was. The only difference is she wants more because there's more in the world to want. The men are just the same, too. They all look, dress, and shave alike, their coats and pants and shoes and hats are all alike...but they want more, too. They don't want to work so hard and they want more for what they do. "Children should be taught to be self-reliant but they ain't. And they ain't taught to mind, either. I've heard a lot of damn fool mothers bribe their children to be good with candy. They're rude, too. A child should be taught to be kind and considerate to his father and mother and all elderly people. Kind words to elderly people is like candy to children. They appreciate it. Young people ought to remember that they'll be old, too, sometime. Most children are coddled too much and so they grow up expecting it. They ought to be made more self-reliant.

[Mrs. Savage, as tiny and quiet as her husband is tall and loquacious, broke in with the remark, "Yes, self-reliance is really the answer to most of our problems, don't you think."

“Hell, no," her husband let out a bellow (and continued)]

You got to have somethin' else. You got to have honesty, too. Honesty in dealing pays better than trickery in the end. It's funny but the meanest trickster in the world gets by because he pretends he's honest. We can't get away from honesty. It's the standard of living today just as it always was. My grandfather, Captain Charles Tyler Savage always told me that no one can serve you as well as you can serve yourself, and that you've got to learn everything that you expect to know. I was taught to be truthful and self-reliant and all the people I ever worked for were. I went to work on a farm when I was ten years old at five dollars a month. I worked sixteen hours a day, from four in the morning till eight at night and I never thought I was abused...

A man today would think he was killed if he worked as hard as I did... but what I'm getting at by all this, is that no one I ever worked for expected anyone to help them out of a tough spot. Men and women, worked hard, made long days and each and everyone of them had learned by hard experience that if they got stuck in the mud or a snowdrift they bad to dig themselves out or they could stay there. The Government wasn't cuddling people and giving to them and making them spineless then. In 1870 the farmers in Ohio had a wonderful crop of wheat. And they needed every cent they could get. They worked hard. Even the women and children cutting and setting up the wheat in stocks of twelve bundles each.

Then came most two weeks of rainy weather. The whole crop was almost a total loss for every kernel of wheat had a sprout on it. They never asked or expected the Government or anyone else to help them out. In 1873, when I was in Akron working on a large farm the crops were entirely eaten up by grasshoppers. They even ate the cotton lining all out of my vest when I left it on a rail fence. Not a farmer thought of the Government helping him out. In 1876 I was working on a large tobacco farm in Northfield, Massachusetts, side of the Connecticut river. The man I worked for had sixteen acres. He kept four men by the month and several more by the day. It cost a lot of money to raise and care for and fertilize sixteen acres of tobacco. It was already to harvest in one or two days. Then came a hail storm and every leaf of that tobacco was riddled. The loss was ten thousand dollars but the man took it and didn't

expect the Government to help him. [Mr. Savage paused, then pounding the table dramatically, shouted,] There's just three things that make men great, intuition, honesty and initiative and our Government has taken those virtues away from millions of laboring men and from thousands of business men. Now you take this Social Security thing and the Old Age Pension. It ain't right. It'll take all the initiative and git-up-and-git out of young folks. If they know they'll have something to lean on when they're old, they won't work and believe me, a man who doesn't work for it, shouldn't get it.

There's an old saying that a man is the architect of his life and believe me, it's the truth. For a long contented life, first of all you have to work hard, be honest, honest to yourself, toward others and to God. The success of life isn't just accumulating the almighty dollar, but to be independent and able to look every man in the face and say, 'I don't need anybody's help. I can do it myself.' That's what's the matter with the young people today. They can't do it and they don't seem to care.

[“But Frederick there's a great many people today who can't help being in the position they're in. It isn't their fault if they're out of work and have to depend on others. We should be sorry...." little Mrs. Savage's quiet refined voice was drowned out by a blast from her husband.]

Hell, who said I wasn't sorry for them. Course I'm sorry for the poor fools. I don't mean its their fault -- that is not entirely. They just didn't use their heads getting tied up with unions and crying for government aid. I don't believe in unions -- never saw any good in 'em and never belonged to one in my life. And Hell, I don't believe in the Government feeding the men and their families when they're out of work by their own will. It's got so no man can sell his labor for what its worth without joining a union. You hear a lot of talk about things being un-American. By God, that's un-American if anything is. And it's un-American for Washington to be telling the business men what to do and how to do it. America isn't a free country anymore like it was when I was young and when people not only supported themselves but the Government too. I tell you if a man will work and not avoid it and will economize, he'll get along.

...Now you take a woman moving into a new house. Ninety-nine out of a hundred wouldn't think of moving into a house unless it has hard wood floors. Then what do they do -- Hell, they rush out like the devil's after them to buy fancy rugs to cover the floors all up. And they're always bellowing about lots of air and sunshine and then they put draperies up and pull down the shades for fear the sun'll fade the-rugs and the curtains. Hell! And they all belong to a lot of clubs where they're supposed to do a lot of intellectual talking and listening and what do they do when they get home. Discuss the latest world situation or how to bring up their kids? Not on your life. The damn fools can only tell you what some other woman had on and how they wish they could have the same thing.

...I try to live right each day look to God for guidance. I tell you you may be smart enough to fool people but you can't fool yourself or God, for he's given each one of us a conscience, and for your own good and the good of others, use it. Travel made me see God much clearer than I ever did before. Only a great Power that we can't comprehend could make the Grand Canyon... When I used to sit up on (a) cliff... and see the Pacific all so blue and look up Mission Valley for some forty miles and across the valley to the mountains, I knew there was a God and he was a good God. I sit for hours sometimes and think of God -- and I'm thankful for his Loving care..."

[Mr. Savage's rapid transition from dogmatic blustering to this solemn thoughtfulness left us gasping. Before we could collect our wits, a neighbor drove into the yard with a load of wood. In an instant Mr. Savage was on hip feet and out the door swearing a streak. Mrs. Savage running after him with a warm coat and hat was lost in the bedlam. The interview was apparently over for this time.]

Dangerous Precedents. "Desert is not a right." "Backyard gardens."

2010-07-18T05:58:00.002-04:00

We all knew it was a tax, so it's really no surprise Obama would have Holder argue it as such in his legal defense of the monstrous health care law, but take that together with Kagan's refusal to answer "No" when asked whether the Supreme Court had the right to tell you what to eat added to Michelle telling us "Desert is not a right." through the lens of what follows and you get a sense of how much smarter this crowd thinks they are than you...

...and how dangerous this much power is for them (or anyone) to have over you.

Let me introduce you to a gentleman farmer, one Roscoe Filburn, from the Depression Era. His Supreme Court case is *exactly* the one Obama's DOJ is using to argue the legality of the health care law. (It's one of ten precedents they cite.)

From the Austin Free Press, an article opposing a farming bill, HR875, lays out Wickard V. Filburn. It makes reference to an article the Huffington Post had published in favor it:

"... Looking at the case of Wickard V. Filburn, we can see how a seemingly innocuous bill (like HR 875) can (lead to) draconian (food) circumstances ...

The summary of the case of Wickard V. Filburn is really quite simple. The Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1938 (AAA) set quotas on the amount of wheat that could enter interstate commerce and created penalties for overproduction. Farmer, Roscoe Filburn, met his quota for wheat but failed to include in his quota the amount of wheat that he grew for his own consumption. Secretary of Agriculture, Wickard, ordered Filburn to destroy his excess crops and pay a fine. Filburn refused to pay and filed suit claiming that AAA was acting unconstitutionally seeking to limit local commercial activity, which went beyond the purview of Congress under the Commerce Clause....Shockingly, the Supreme Court held (in Wickard V. Filburn) that “wheat not intended in any part for commerce but wholly for consumption on the farm, are within the commerce power of Congress.” The Supreme Court reasoned that although the amount of wheat that Filburn would not purchase from the market (because he had provided for his own needs) may be trivial in this particular circumstance, it does not remove him from the scope of federal regulation because, his circumstance, when taken with similar others, could be far from trivial. This basically set the precedent that, under the act, the government is legally entitled to prevent individuals from growing wheat for their own consumption (beyond the designated quota) because, if too many people were to do this, it would negatively impact the interstate wheat market – which was precisely the fear outlined by the concerned citizen in the Huffington Post..."

"...One of the main arguments in the Huffington Post in support of HR 875 is that it... could not possibly affect small (family or even backyard) farms and farmer’s markets..."

Now let's extrapolate this out to what these kinds of powers could actually mean in the wrong hands. This is not to say that anyone would do this, just that this would give our federal government the legal right to do it. From a December 29, 2009 article from Associated Content:

The specific wording in the bill defines a "food production facility" as any "farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal feeding facility" with the possibility (regardless of how remote) that it could be expanded to include any place that grows food, even a backyard garden... Proponents of the H.R.875 bill state there is nothing in the wording that would lead to making backyard gardens illegal. On the opposite side, it is believed that the wording is so broad that opponents to the bill insist this will also include all organic farms, small or family farms, and including backyard gardens at any location - even if it is not considered a typical farm.

Now here we are to this morning's New York Times article where Obama's DOJ is preparing its constitutional defense of health care on Wickard v. Filburn:

In its legal briefs, the Obama administration points to a famous New Deal case, Wickard v. Filburn, in which the Supreme Court upheld a penalty imposed on an Ohio farmer who had grown a small amount of wheat, in excess of his production quota, purely for his own use.

The wheat grown by Roscoe Filburn “may be trivial by itself,” the court said, but when combined with the output of other small farmers, it significantly affected interstate commerce and could therefore be regulated by the government as part of a broad scheme regulating interstate commerce.

Spooked yet? I don't think Madison and Jefferson, when crafting our founding documents throwing off the tyranny of King George III had in mind that America would allow even a whisper of constitutional language that would even hint at powers so broad that the federal government could have this kind of power of you. In fact, reasonable people would argue that it was exactly that kind of power our 18th century ancestors were fleeing, yes?

God help us all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=1&ref=politics

http://theaustinfreepress.com/AreSmallFarmsinDanger3F.aspx

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2523695/will_your_backyard_garden_become_illegal.html?singlepage=true&cat=17

Chairman of National Black Panther Party's Version of DOJ's Case

2010-07-11T08:46:00.005-04:00

The Chairman of the National Black Panther Party explains what happened, as only he can, with the voter intimidation charges we've heard so much about of late (not on ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, NPR, New York Times etc... but from media with stones, Fox, talk radio, and Drudge.) Oh, and even though Canada denied him entry because they regarded him a merchant of hate in May of 2009, he was welcomed into the White House on July 25, 2009, visitor records show.

This is a partial transcript of the video below:

"... We decided that on election day that we would go out to the polls because of what? Because they said they was goin' be stoppin' black people from comin' to vote. We knew that they didn't want a black man in office ... We wanted to make sure that the police wasn't harrassin' our people ...It's just that the New Black Panther Party sometimes... we tend to do it kinda strong... and sometimes it can even be too black and too strong ... King Samir Shabaaz ... just was a little bit too strong and he was caught out there at the polling place with a nightstick ... and the John McCain campaign ...jumped all over the issue and all over the brother ...The United States Justice Department still under George Bush ...immediately charged (us) ...The Justice Department leadership changed into the hands of a black man ...Eric Holder ...and they threw most of everything out ...They said King Samir can't go back to the polling place until two thousand twelve and I'm sure King Samir don't give a damn (laughter) whether he go back (laughter) he say he don't believe in the white man's votin' system anyway so he don't give a damn... and for the record... King Samir is welcome back in the New Black Panther Party..."

Here's a link to the video at The Daily Caller:

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/10/not-only-are-the-new-black-panthers-above-the-law-apparently-they-are-the-law/

Another First Amendment Skeever in the White House

2010-07-09T08:36:00.001-04:00

"...Radio jamming, which was proposed to try to suppress these hateful broadcasts ...something as seemingly innocuous as radio jamming ...Knowing that even talking about radio jamming, there's a clog-up; that you're not going to get very far ...There was no noise clamoring for anything other than radio jamming from the rest of us ...It's not enough simply to be passively in favor of a value-driven U.S. foreign policy ...Tony Lake ...National Security Adviser of the United States ...said, 'Look, I hear you, I hear about radio jamming...' ...So radio jamming gets debated, and the response is, 'Well, you know, if we actually jam hate radio, it violates freedom of speech...'"

Samantha Power in a 2003 PBS interview about African genocide. Yet another liberal whose first instinct is to CRUSH free speech as though the exchange of ideas is TOXIC rather than the essential DNA of liberty.

Who's Samantha Power? She's the one who called Hillary Clinton a "monster" during the campaign, which got her canned, then immediately hired once Obama won, on the National Security Council.

Bonus? She's married to Cass Sunstein. Who's he? The last stop before law touches you. He's the regulatory czar. He crosses the t's and dots the i's on law before it leave the door and actually starts functioning in real life. He takes the laws and says "Okay. The law says we have to do this... How?" He's the nuts and bolts guy. So if the legislation is full of squishy language like "may" or "fair" or "reasonable" HE DECIDES what that means. Sunstein's the guy that thinks all sites on the internet should be FORCED to link to opposing opinion. Know what that means? If you don't do it, the federal government would have the power to act on that... Do you *really* want the federal government to have that much power over you? REALLY?

God help us all.

Link to the entire interview is here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ghosts/interviews/power.html

'Now you will see what it means to be ruled by the black man, cracker'

2010-07-08T07:36:00.000-04:00

This is a transcript I just took directly off Fox Morning News of an interview with Bartle Bull, a man with big, huge, massive credibility and direct involvement in the actual events of Philadelphia Black Panther incident November 2008. It is not complete with every syllable, but below is about 90% of what he said, fairly and accurately represented. I *triple* checked that I got every word right, down to the littlest preposition. I didn't leave anything important out, just sort of "warm up" words as he got to his major points that were either repetitive or just kind of "filler" if you know what I mean.

"... (Black Panther) King Shabir Shabaaz, as he is now calling himself, said to me 'Now you will see what it means to be ruled by the black man, cracker' ...Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King did not die to have uniformed thugs dressed like storm-troopers carrying weapons block the doors of polling places... The critical thing here was that the previous week on October 27, the New York Times reported that ACORN had registered over 400,000 illegal fraudulent voters so what these guys were doing was they were protecting the illegal ACORN voters... The difference in this election was it's the first time in our lifetime that the Department of Justice and the Federal Government put the weight of the Government is not being used to support voters and poll watchers now the weight of the Federal Government is being used to support the intimidators. That has never happened before, even in the darkest days of the 1960's..."

July 8, 2010, Bartle Bull, New York State Campaign Manager for both Robert Kennedy and Jimmy Carter, Civil Rights attorney, and Election Day 2008 Poll-Watcher at Philadelphia precinct where Black Panthers were present. Bush DOJ filed charges of voter intimidation in January 2009. In the spring of 2010, just prior to sentencing, the charges were, for all intents and purposes, completely dropped.

Joe Scarborough of Morning Joe on MSNBC & I have a Twitter Exchange

2010-07-07T10:45:00.001-04:00

I wake up this morning and someone has tweeted that Joe Scarborough of MSNBC's Morning Joe has called Nevada senate candidate Sharon Angle a "jackass." Given how much arrogance & contempt we've seen coming from politicians and media for the American people lately, and knowing what a noxious ideological bubble Joe lives in in Manhattan in general and MSNBC in particular, this struck me as plausible that he would let that fly. Having been a broadcaster for twenty years (just music, not news/talk, but I get the concept of hours spent day after day with a hot mic) I understand that a career ending remark can happen at any time. God knows, this does not rise to the level of career ending, but it's at the very least, ungentlemanly, and at most, a momentary lapse in his responsibility as a "credible" analyst of political news. Let me state for the record, I have no particular interest, nor have I closely followed the Nevada senate race except that I hope Harry Reid is sent packing. I imply no endorsement of Angle here. Don't know. Don't care, except to the extent as just stated. So! I tweet the first tweet listed below out, purposely putting "@JoeNBC" in it so that, if he hasn't blocked me (I don't know, don't particularly care who blocks me, so I figure, what the heck. It's like throwing spaghetti at the ceiling. He might see it. Might not. But I know he's an active twitterer because I follow him and other people who are themselves or are affiliated with "liberal" media so that I can, as always, learn something new and fact check my own assertions/beliefs/philosophies.) Then the gauntlet, such as it is, is evidently thrown down, then shortly, picked up by our pal, Joe Scarborough...

ANNIE: Did @JoeNBC *really* call Angle "jackass"? Has he been getting PR lessons from Pete Stark? C that h20 going down drain? LAST of MSNBC's cred

A little later, presumably having seen the previous tweet, and now on a different subject, Joe sends out the following tweet, then I reply and that starts the exchange:

JOE: Politicians in both parties continue to pursue a Wilsonian foreign policy that is radical and dangerous for America's future.

ANNIE: Uh... #GlennBeck's been on Woodrow Wilson's toxic policies for nearly 2 years now Joe. Welcome, again, late, to the party. Gawd...

JOE: So Beck's been talking about Wilsonian policies for 2 whole years?Gee Whiz! He's only 14 years late. You too, cowgirl.

Then Joe sends out another tweet to all (not just me) that I see and I reply again:

JOE: When the US changed it's Afghanistan goal from killing al Qaeda members to building a country, our leaders guaranteed an endless war.

ANNIE: Uh... again... Nation building, what Obama likes to call "colonialism" is EXACTLY what O is doing w/his p*ssy ROE. He's a COWARD.

JOE: Read your tweets ang realize that arrogance combined with ignorance is an unbecoming combination. "Gawd"? Really?

Now we're having Mitt Romney moment when the lady is "unbecoming." Granted, I admit, using the word "p*ssy" even with an asterisk, is, indeed, un ladylike. My bad. But I beg the mercy of the court that I am confined to 140 characters in twitter so a little shorthand, softened with an asterisk, is allowed. Again, he's now shifted the argument from the matter at hand, to trying to discredit me, personally. This is standard in liberal circles. They do it all the time when out of factual gas. I will admit to being viciously sarcastic, but I have never, ever called Joe "ignorant." I don't regard him such. I just think he's wrong. Also, it's well known in Twitter circles that complaints on spelling are the last refuge of scoundrels. It's a complete waste of time, and again, a diversionary tactic. Twitter allows 140 characters, so the usual rules of spelling are not in play. Additionally, I explain my purposeful misspelling of the word "God" for "Gawd" in a later tweet, which you will see. So! I fire off four tweets in quick succession then he tweets back again:

ANNIE: Once, just ONCE, could you tweet something with a clue in it? You are monolithically late, wrong, out of touch. Get out of Manhattan

ANNIE: Start reading ALL the London papers EVERY DAY, because your MSM ISN'T DOING VETTING/REPORTING. they ARE.

ANNIE: Read the Financial Times (of London, too). Read Business Insider. Read Investors Biz Daily. DO YOU GODDAMNED JOB, JOE!!!!!!!!!

ANNIE: This isn't about PARTY Joe. Bush's policies were *functionally* progressive. He was a DISASTER on MOST levels. PLEASE PLEASE WAKE UP

JOE: See Annie, that's your problem. You hate Obama's Wilsonian policies but toucans Beck went along with Bush's adventurism.

ANNIE: "Bush's adventurism"? What? There's a euphemism. STOP THINKING ABOUT PARTY. Think PRINCIPLES-strip away ALL NOISE-THINK PRINCIPLES

JOE: Unlike you and talk show right wing extremists hacks, I oppose Wilsonian policies regardless of who is in power. #consistent

That was his last tweet to me. I replied with the following few more and, thus, it was over...

ANNIE: I don't CARE who is in power. The GEICO lizard would get my vote if he would bring a bill of enumerated powers to the floor!

ANNIE: I listen 2all sides, CLEARLY. watch MSNBC regularly (as much as I can stomach) I read EXTENSIVESLY-transcripts/unexpurgated sources

ANNIE: Stop stop stop thinking of Republican or Democrat. THEY ARE ALL ONE BIG NOISE NOW. Look at their ACTIONS... ACTIONS, Joe. ACTIONS.

ANNIE: BTW: I hv been harshly sarcastic w/my characterizations of u but I never, ever, ever, called u "ignorant"/*insulted* u way u did me.

ANNIE: ...Last thing... "Gawd" is meant to be an effort not to take the Lord's name in vain... Though I am NOT affiliated with ANY church.

Oil Spill Assessment You Haven't Heard Before

2010-06-19T07:04:00.002-04:00

Must see video via Bloomberg. This guy is like my Dad, who is a bottom-line, no nonsense Yankee pragmatist. Matt Simmons is a 30 year vet of the oil industry and tells it like it is here that the Deepwater Horizon's "casing" is blown, thus the relief well will not work, the well is spewing 120,000 barrels per day, and that the only option to stop it is to blow a small nuke, as has been done successfully before. (You have to sit through a vapid one minute promo on self-referential Manhattan narcissists and then it begins.)

"barack petroleum"

2010-06-15T20:31:00.001-04:00

It's his mess now... Feel free to use this at will, if you like it.

Congressman ASSAULTS Peaceful College Student!

2010-06-14T08:19:00.000-04:00

Revisiting Obama's Words from October 2008

2010-06-09T11:53:00.002-04:00

I read the transcript of the 10.07.08 CNN Presidential Debate, (Nashville, TN, Tom Brokaw, Moderator) this morning, and was struck by how creepy some of these statements of Obama's seem now that we know his world view.

10.07.08 CNN, Presidential Debate, Nashville, TN, Tom Brokaw, Moderator
Obama Excerpts:

"...When George Bush came into office, our debt -- national debt was around $5 trillion. It's now over $10 trillion. We've almost doubled it ...What I've proposed, (is) cutting more than I'm spending so that it will be a net spending cut ..We've got to show that we've got good habits, because if we're running up trillion dollar debts that we're passing on to the next generation, then a lot of people are going to think, 'Well, you know what? There's easy money out there.'" (I don't even need to elaborate, do I?)

"...You are going to have to make sure that your child has health care, because children are relatively cheap (emphasis added) to insure..."
(Speaking about mandates... damned chilling knowing he is a devotee of the Complete Lives System)

"...There has never been a nation in the history of the world that saw its economy decline and maintained its military superiority..." (So that's why he's trashing the economy...)

"...We can't coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions of dollars and then he's making peace treaties with the Taliban and militants..." (Speaking about Pakistan, but could just as easily apply to some of his despot buddies...)

"...We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it..." (He's really on that one, huh?)

Obama World Citizen

2010-06-02T16:47:00.002-04:00

Duxbury Beach (MA) Driftwood

2010-06-01T18:35:00.002-04:00

I actually took this in July of 2001... but was reminded of it recently. It's part of a series of pictures of a fantastically large piece of driftwood on a fantastically perfect summer day in New England... In those last innocent days before 9.11.01. I'll post some more in the series later, but for now, appreciate the skin like quality of the wrinkling at the base of the curve not only on the left which is obvious, but on the right as well. Let the calming colors of the soft sands and blues, and leggy sensuality of the shape and feel the (unusually dry, not humid) warmth of the day...

Awake, Asleep

2010-05-28T07:42:00.011-04:00

1."My job right now is just to make sure that everybody in the Gulf understands, this is what I wake to in the morning and this is what I go to bed at night thinking about."
05.27.10 President Obama on Oil Disaster

2."President Obama wakes up in the morning and he goes to bed at night thinking about how to make people's lives better- how to create that enivronment for creating jobs..."
01.20.10 White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs regarding President Obama & Employment

3.“As President, my greatest responsibility is the security of the American people. It is the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning. It’s the last thing I think about when I go to sleep at night. “
09.11.09 President Obama marking 8th Anniversary of September 11 attacks.

4."As President, my greatest responsibility is the security and safety of the American people. As I've said before, that is the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning, it's the last thing that I think about when I go to sleep at night. And I will not hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests."
08.17.09 President Obama on Afghanistan & Pakistan

5."... I read your letters. The stories I hear are the first thing that I think about in the morning; they're the last thing I think about at night. They're the focus of my attention every waking minute of every day."
07.23.09 President Obama on Employment

6."In the midst of all these challenges, however, my single most important responsibility as President is to keep the American people safe. It's the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning. It's the last thing I think about when I go to sleep at night."
05.21.09 President Obama on Guantanamo

7."I will be judged as commander-in-chief on how safe I'm keeping the American people. That's the responsibility I wake up with and it's the responsibility I go to sleep with."
04.29.09 President Obama on Enhanced Interrogation

8."I come here as a Mom whose girls are the heart of my heart and the center of my world -- they're the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning, and the last thing I think about when I go to bed at night."
08.25.08 Michelle Obama at Democrat National Convention

Thanks to Sean Hannity, Brett Baier, and Free Republic for their excellent reporting on this, from which I shamelessly borrowed!

Obama's Green Mafia Gets More Ink

2010-05-09T17:17:00.022-04:00

Wednesday 05/06/10 Investors Business Daily getting even closer to an outright charge of criminal abuse of power in this piece on Obama's $10 trillion "green" corruption scheme. Complete text below & in screenshot at bottom. Highlights are mine.

Original link to article: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=532610

Europe's Carbon Mafia, and Ours
Corruption: The carbon trading system being pushed here has spawned crime and fraud across the pond. Cap-and-trade is not about saving the planet. It's about money and power, and absolute power corrupting absolutely.

All across Europe authorities have been conducting raids, rounding up individuals involved in a new version of Climate-gate. This time the data aren't corrupted. Europe's Emissions Trading System is. The system is so sick, it's turned out to be a scam built upon a scam.

Twenty-five people have been arrested in raids by British and German authorities as part of a pan-European crackdown on carbon credit VAT tax fraud.

U.K. officials announced raids on 81 offices and homes, nabbing 13 people in England and eight in Scotland. The operation involved 450 investigators from Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs office.

German authorities raided 230 locations, including the headquarters of Deutsche Bank in Frankfurt and the offices of RWE, one of the largest energy firms in Europe. The German operation involved 1,000 investigators targeting 50 companies and 150 suspects.

The amount of money involved in carbon trading is huge and the temptations vast. While our Congress demagogues about banks and their "complex financial instruments," they are simple compared to cap-and-trade, which as we have noted involves essentially the buying and selling of air. Throw in an oppressive value-added tax and you have a recipe for corruption and fraud.

Last December, Europol, the European criminal intelligence agency, announced that Emissions Trading System fraud had resulted in about 5 billion euros in lost revenues as Europe's carbon traders schemed to avoid paying Europe's VAT and pocket the difference. In announcing the raids, the agency said that as much as 90% of Europe's carbon trades were the result of fraudulent activity.

"Carbon markets are highly susceptible to fraud, given their complexity and the fact that it's not always clear what is being traded," says Oscar Reyes of Carbon Trade Watch.

Climate change has been found to be a fraud. Now the system to fight it has been. Yet it's that system the administration and others want to establish here through cap-and-trade legislation such as Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer.

As we also have noted, the mechanism for such phantom carbon trading here has already been established in the form of the Chicago Climate Exchange. The Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the seed money to start CCX when Barack Obama sat on its board.

CCX founder Richard Sandor estimates the climate trading market could be "a $10 trillion dollar market." It is an invitation to fraud that would make Europe's ETS scandal seem like petty theft.

In 2000, according to Joyce Foundation records, $347,600 was allocated to Northwestern University's Kellogg Graduate School of Management, where Sandor was a research professor, "to design a Midwestern pilot program for the voluntary trading of carbon dioxide and other emissions that cause climate change."

Now President Obama would make such carbon trading mandatory, limit total emissions and make carbon as valuable a commodity as booze during Prohibition.

The Joyce Foundation's two grants totaled just over $1 million. CCX has proved very lucrative for Sandor, whose 8 million shares in the exchange has grown to more than $260 million even before a national cap-and-trade system like Europe's is established.

Al Gore, who recently increased his carbon footprint by spending $8.9 million on an oceanview villa near Santa Barbara, Calif., sitting on 1.5 acres with a swimming pool, spa, fountains, five bedrooms, nine bathrooms and no fewer than six fireplaces, is co-founder of Generation Investment Management LLP, the fifth largest shareholder in CCX.

The largest shareholder is, uh, Goldman Sachs. Other CCX founders include former Goldman Sachs partner David Blood, as well as Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris, also of Goldman Sachs. Presumably they know a lot about playing shell games with other people's money.

What has happened in Europe is going to happen here and may already have begun. We, too, can save the earth for fun and profit.

24hrs=2min's "Mommisms" SCREAMING Funny!

2010-05-09T08:18:00.001-04:00

Obama Celebrates "Cinco de Quattro"

2010-05-06T19:25:00.001-04:00

Look, to be antiseptically fair, I almost didn't post this because any reasonable reading of it will tell even the most ardent Obama dissenter why this gaffe was a gaffe that anybody could make but the fact that it was an Obama gaffe and not the gaffe of any conservative of any name but most particularly "Bush" or "Palin" is what make the *crickets* surrounding its non-reportage noteworthy.

Obama jokes that the Latin Americans he is hosting for an event in the White House a day early for Cinco de Mayo event are there to celebrate "Cinco de Quattro" which is not only wrong, but wrong in a completely a**backwards way. If anyone named "Bush" or "Palin" had done it you wouldn't be trolling some middle-aged disc-jockey's blog to see it. It would have been burned into your brain on a continuous loop on MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC.

Is it Any Wonder Nobody Watches These Clowns?

2010-05-06T15:21:00.008-04:00

This is a screen capture of CBS News website at just before 3pm Thursday 05/06/10. See the problem? Let me help you. It's the headline. Still stumped? Ready?

There was no Department of Homeland Security in 1999. It was created after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Murrow must be rolling over in his grave. This page went up at 5:22pm on May 5. Down in the comments section (not captured here, sorry) someone had posted as early at about 11am on May 6 that they noticed the error, too, which makes it even worse, because that means that at least four hours had passed from the time that comment was left to when I happened upon the site and saw the error. So it went overnight without anyone catching it, then all the way until after the CBS morning news had reported it and beyond. Adding to the circus like inanity of the webpage, also not captured here, unfortunately, is the smiling visage of that cougar herself, one Miss Katherine Couric of the clacking heels and faux perkiness.

Never mind the content of the headline which tells us that Janet Planet & O are asleep at the friggin' switch, even in the wake of their public declarations to have a "stem to stern" look-see at DHS after the underwear bomber at Christmas time.

Maybe we could borrow 60 minutes tick-tick-tick stopwatch from down the hall there at CBS to clock how long it will take before they fix the error. You can check here.

Lawyers, Lawyers, Lawyers...

2010-05-02T07:53:00.000-04:00

How much you wanna bet we'll find some Obama linked lawyers to this firm? Hmm? From AmLaw Daily, unexpurgated article below.

April 30, 2010 4:55 PM
Simpson, Shearman on ICE's Deal for Europe's Leading Emissions Exchange
Posted by Zach Lowe

There may not be many companies that stand to gain as much from financial regulatory reform as IntercontinentalExchange Inc., which already operates a clearinghouse for credit-default swaps and would stand to receive lots more business should federal law require more derivatives move through clearinghouses or exchanges.

But ICE continues to look forward, and today it announced plans to acquire Climate Exchange PLC, which operates the leading emissions trading platforms in both Europe and the U.S., according to the Wall Street Journal and lawyers who worked on the deal. The deal is valued at $603 million and is contingent on shareholder and court approval in the U.K., where Climate Exchange is based, lawyers say.

A team from Shearman & Sterling represented ICE, which is not a surprise, because the firm helped create the derivatives clearinghouse (called ICE Trust) in early 2009 and has advised the company on several other transactions. (Shearman partner Bradley Sabel was named one of The American Lawyer's Dealmakers of the Year for 2009 for his work on the creation of ICE Trust.)

Slaughter and May represented Climate Exchange, lawyers say. The Shearman team has been working on the deal in earnest for about two months, though the two companies have been close for years, says Lois Moore, who led the Shearman team along with Barney Reynolds. (ICE owned a small stake in Climate Exchange before this deal.) Climate Exchange controls about 90 percent of the market in emissions allowance trading in Europe and had been waiting patiently for the U.S. to implement a cap-and-trade system that could create a booming market here, the WSJ says. In the meantime, Climate Exchange's main U.S. subsidiary, the Chicago Climate Exchange, operates a U.S. exchange through which companies can trade emissions contracts in various gasses, the WSJ reports.

Jeff Twentyman led the Slaughter and May team on the deal, lawyers say. He was not immediately available for comment.

Original post here.

CNBC on CCX

2010-05-02T07:37:00.004-04:00

Unexpurgated story below:

Carbon Could Be No. 1 Commodity: Exchange Chief Sandor

Published: Monday, 26 Apr 2010 | 12:49 PM ET
By: Natalie Erlich
Writer/Producer

“Carbon, when it becomes worldwide, will be unambiguously the largest commodity in the world,” Sandor said in an interview. “The world emits 35 billion tons; it’s priced at $20; that’s $700 billion. Put a 10-20 multiple like you do on futures, [and] you’re talking about $10 trillion at maturity.” Sandor, who was a major player in the formation of the interest-rate futures market, created the Chicago Climate Exchange [CCX] as a market-based solution to global warming. Time Magazine named him “Hero of the Planet” in 2002, and the “father of carbon trading” in 2007.

“In ’89-’90 someone came to me and said, ‘you commoditize interest rates, do you think you can commoditize air?’” he said. “You could cap the emissions that any utility has, and if they go below that cap, they can sell their emissions, their rights to emit— and if you can go above it, you can buy someone else’s. So it drives compliance.”

The exchange is the world’s first and North America’s only voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system, providing third party verification by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority [FINRA]. Its subsidiary, the Chicago Climate Futures Exchange is the world’s first environmental derivatives exchange that trades carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxides and nitrogen oxides.

Although the United States remains one of few industrialized nations not following the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty intended to reduce global warming, the country’s voluntary emissions market remains sizable. At 700 million tons of carbon, CCX is about one-third of Europe’s cap-and-trade program. In fact, that amount is larger than Germany's industrial footprint, according to the exchange. However, this comes at a time when the U.S. climate bill sits on the brink of collapse, which could also have repercussions for the voluntary market.

“A lot of the voluntary investors were getting in because they wanted to get ahead of the curve,” said Terence Gallagher, an independent carbon strategist. “And now people are on the sidelines waiting to see what’s going to happen so you’re going to see less people willing to take the plunge and get into the voluntary market.”

The Senate was expected to unveil legislation today but the bill became stalled after a key GOP ally pulled his support because of an unrelated immigration reform dispute. The CCX has no comment on the situation at this time.

Another hurdle facing the carbon market is fragmentation on the national and international levels. While Europe currently has two types of credits which are generated in Kyoto signatory countries, the United States is divided between the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative [RGGI] and the California Action Climate Reserve, said Gallagher.

“There’s too many markets,” he said. “It’s not there until we get a standard product that’s tradable across all different countries.” China, another nation often scrutinized for its large carbon footprint has also taken considerable interest in emissions trading, said Sandor.

“I have more ease in explaining cap and trade in China at universities, than I do in the United States,” he said. “There is an undergraduate emissions trading club in Peking University.”

In fact, the CCX has partnered with China’s largest oil and gas producer and supplier CNPC and the City of Tianjin to develop sulfur dioxide emissions and water pollutants markets. The exchange has also teamed up with China’s central bank to establish a research institute in Chicago and Beijing to advance corporate and industrial use of emissions markets.

“They have their eye on the ball,” said Sandor. “I had lunch with the chairman, Governor Zhou, and he’s like their Ben Bernanke. And Governor Zhou knows more about cap-and-trade than half or 75 percent of the people I know anywhere. So when a central banker can talk chapter and verse about emissions trading, it’s telling you something.”© 2010 CNBC.com

TOPICS:China | Politics & Government | Alternative Energy | Energy
Original post here.

OK when LIBERALS do it...

2010-05-02T06:59:00.008-04:00

You know you are a soulless whore utterly without principles when you have to make stuff up about Tea Party people but liberals clearly, blatantly, brazenly, shamelessly hold signs like this and nobody reports it. They'll offer as an excuse that all are at the Correspondents' Dinner but you know that wouldn't make a speck of difference....God I hate these (media) people. I can't even hide my contempt for them anymore....Thank you to Gateway Pundit for posting them. Unexpurgated column below:
Immigrants Carry “Death to US Imperial-Fascists” At NYC May Day Rally…

Media Silent

Posted by Jim Hoft on Saturday, May 1, 2010, 10:17 PM
There was a pro-illegal immigrant protest in New York City today at Union Square.Andrew Berman was there and posted several photos from the anti-American rally.

This violent sign – “Death to US Imperial-Fascists” – probably won’t make the news tonight.
Suddenly, it’s fashionable to carry swastikas again.

Of course, the state-run media won’t say boo about these Nazi signs. After all, there’s a conservative pictured on the sign.

Location of the original post at Gateway Pundit here

Obama's $10T Corruption as Reported LAST SUMMER in a Little Local Newspaper

2010-05-01T07:38:00.007-04:00

I found more reporting on Obama's $10 trillion dollar corruption scandal involving Goldman Sachs, Cap & Trade and CCX that Glenn Beck reported this week and nobody else picked up ~~ The Times-Union Newspaper in little Warsaw Indiana had this article nearly a year ago. It went, understandably, unnoticed.~~Glenn Beck does the same thing with millions of viewers this past week and.... still nothing, but at least Media Matters calls him a "crazy conspiracy theorist." They were not able to refute one single *substantial* fact in the story, just some b.s. straw man garbage but nothing, whatsoever substantial in anyway that would change the fundamental nature of the story. Of course, lunatic kool-aid drinking liberals think MM got him real good and feel all butch about it, but the rest of us know better... Good grief.~~If you've missed this thing entirely you can catch you up here and here and here.

7/17/2009 11:29:00 PM
Follow Money To See Who Wins In Cap And Trade
Gary Gerard
Times-Union General Manager
Somebody once said that if you really want to get to the bottom of an issue all you really need to do is follow the money.

So let's follow the money with regard to the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Bill. That's ACES for short. Honestly, I think there is a whole bureaucracy in Washington coming up with acronyms.

The bill is more commonly known as the cap and trade bill. (I like tax and raid better.) The bill's center piece is a carbon-use surcharge that will be levied by the government to any entity that exceeds arbitrary carbon caps set by the government.

The money collected will be used - ostensibly - to fund "green" energy programs.

It's a twisted Robin Hood kind of deal. States like Indiana - where virtually all of our power generation comes from coal and manufacturing drives the economy - will be taxed to the hilt. Prices for everything will rise - especially utility rates - and jobs will be lost as manufacturers adjust for increased energy costs.

Places like California - where Silicon Valley types stare at computer screens coming up with green technology - will reap the benefit.

But in between, there has to be a vehicle to barter these carbon credits.

This is the follow the money part.

Enter CCX - the Chicago Climate Exchange. Go here chicagoclimatex.com to check it out.

Here are some excerpts:

Welcome to Chicago Climate Exchange: We are a financial institution whose objectives are to apply financial innovation and incentives to advance social, environmental and economic goals through the following platforms.

CCX is North America's only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.

The commodity traded on CCX is the CFI contract, each of which represents 100 metric tons of CO2 equivalent. CFI contracts are comprised of Exchange Allowances and Exchange Offsets. Exchange Allowances are issued to emitting members in accordance with their emission baseline and the CCX Emission Reduction Schedule. Exchange Offsets are generated by qualifying offset projects.

Chicago Climate Futures Exchange (CCFE) is a landmark derivatives exchange that currently offers standardized and cleared futures and options contracts on emission allowances and other environmental products. CCFE is a wholly owned subsidiary of CCX.

CCX is 10 percent owned by the Generation Investment Management (GIM), a investment firm founded & chaired by Al Gore.

This firm was co-founded by the former Treasury Secretary under President George W. Bush and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson.

Make no mistake. CCX and CCFE will play a critical role in the tax and raid deal President Obama is pushing through Congress. And the founders stand to make a bundle. More than a bundle, a boatload, a metric boatload.

Interestingly, there was this Joyce Foundation in Chicago. On the board of directors, at the inception of CCX, was this guy named Barack Obama.

The Joyce Foundation, according to Fox News, gave more than $1 million in two separate grants that were "instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange."

At the time - 2001 - Obama was a professor at the University of Chicago Law School.

Also of note:

CCX's largest shareholder is Goldman Sachs.

Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman.

The Joyce Foundation gave money to John Ayers' Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers.

Fox News reports, "The President of the Joyce Foundation in 2000, when the foundation made its first grant to the Climate Exchange, was Paula DiPerna, who is now executive vice president of the Chicago Climate Exchange in charge of corporate recruitment and public policy, as well as president of CCX International.

"DiPerna left the foundation in November 2001 and joined the Exchange. It was the same year in which the foundation gave its second and much larger grant to the exchange. The Exchange finally launched in 2003."

OK, that's enough. I think you get the picture.

While he's serving on the board of a Chicago charity, Obama helped fund CCX which will be a huge player in the tax and raid scheme he's trying to push through Congress. At the same time he makes a bunch of his Chicago cronies crazy rich.

There's a lot more connecting of dots going on with CCX. I'm barely scratching the surface. You can read more here:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/obama-helped-fund-carbon-scheme/

Or just Google Chicago Climate Exchange. Be sure to check out Environmental Financial Products, LLC, an outfit owned by Richard Sandor, and its connections to CCX.

The value of Sandor's 8 million shares in CCX has grown to more than $260 million already and tax and raid isn't even mandatory - yet.

Yeah, that's some change you can believe in. And by change, I mean the jingly kind in your pocket.

And you thought only evil Republicans were scheming and greedy.

http://www.timesuniononline.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=225&ArticleID=41385

The Times-Union newspaper office is located at the corner of Indiana and Market streets in downtown Warsaw.

Mailing Address:
Times-Union
P.O. Box 1448
Warsaw, IN 46581-1448

Telephone
574.267.3111
Sports/News Fax - 574.267.7784
Advertising Fax - 574.268.1300

E-mails:
News - news@timesuniononline.com
Sports - sports@timesuniononline.com
Classified Ads - classified@timesuniononline.com
Display Advertising - advertising@timesuniononline.com
Circulation - circulation@timesuniononline.com

"Crime Inc" or "The Chicago Mob's Excellent Adventure to the White House"

2010-04-30T20:49:00.003-04:00

If you missed the Glenn Beck show this week (or believe him to be a fat, crying, rodeo clown with zero credibility so you always miss it) then you missed Monday's & Thursday's jaw dropping, stupefying, damned near death-defying expose he did on Obama's little ten trillion dollar footsie game with a hitherto innocuous CCX (Chicago Carbon Exchange) and one not so innocuous Goldman Sachs. There are other players, notably Albert Gore. The whole pile of dough hinges on a little bill known as "Cap & Trade." Note: our entire gross domestic product is roughly fourteen trillion. If this thing goes, it will mean ten trillion.... per year.

Getting the picture how big and bad and dirty this is? Does it clean it up at all to know that the whole thing got started the day after Obama was elected Senator in 2006 and culminated with a private Oval Office meeting with Goldman Sach's poobah Blankfein about ten days before the congressional spanking they took for their oh so bad behavior? Beck was curious about the timing, too.

And then got curiouser and curiouser...

See his Thursday show notes/video here.

SOME incredibly talented individual put together this four page PDF of the CCX scandal. Don't know who, but the link to the original site of the pdf is below. Someone on Twitter linked to it. WOW.

Original source of the four brilliant panels above:

http://rustlesandglimmers.wellconstructedsentence.com/C20080917223028/E20100428115053/Media/CCX%20Scandal.pdf

$10 Trillion Tale of Corruption from 2006 Chicago to Oval Office

2010-04-28T19:36:00.012-04:00

If you missed the fuss on Monday (04.26.10) Glenn Beck kicked up about Obama's $10T footsie with G.Sachs which started literally the day he became a Senator in 2006 and led all the way to an Oval Office meeting not three weeks ago, see details here. What follows is the best & most prestigious article yet on what may bring down a President. Investors Business Daily's trail of corruption...Unexpurgated.

Investor's Business Daily
April 28, 2010
The $10 Trillion Climate Fraud
Cap-And-Trade: While senators froth over Goldman Sachs and derivatives, a climate trading scheme being run out of the Chicago Climate Exchange would make Bernie Madoff blush. Its trail leads to the White House.

Lost in the recent headlines was Al Gore's appearance Monday in Denver at the annual meeting of the Council of Foundations, an association of the nation's philanthropic leaders.

"Time's running out (on climate change)," Gore told them. "We have to get our act together. You have a unique role in getting our act together."

Gore was right that foundations will play a key role in keeping the climate scam alive as evidence of outright climate fraud grows, just as they were critical in the beginning when the Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the seed money to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it trades is, essentially, air. More specifically perhaps, hot air.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) advertises itself as "North America's only cap-and-trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide." Barack Obama served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002 when the CCX startup grants were issued. As president, pushing cap-and-trade is one of his highest priorities. Now isn't that special?

Few Americans have heard of either entity. The Joyce Foundation was originally the financial nest egg of a widow whose family had made millions in the now out-of-favor lumber industry.

After her death, the foundation was run by philanthropists who increasingly dedicated their giving to liberal causes, including gun control, environmentalism and school changes.

Currently, CCX members agree to a voluntary but legally binding agreement to regulate greenhouse gases.

The CCX provides the mechanism in trading the very pollution permits and carbon offsets the administration's cap-and-trade proposals would impose by government mandate.

Thanks to Fox News' Glenn Beck, we have learned a lot about CCX, not the least of which is that its founder, Richard Sandor, says he knew Obama well back in the day when the Joyce Foundation awarded money to the Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University, where Sandor was a research professor.

Sandor estimates that climate trading could be "a $10 trillion dollar market." It could very well be, if cap-and-trade measures like Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer are signed into law, making energy prices skyrocket, and as companies buy and sell permits to emit those six "greenhouse" gases.

So lucrative does this market appear, it attracted the attention of London-based Generation Investment Management, which purchased a stake in CCX and is now the fifth-largest shareholder.

As we noted last year, Gore is co-founder of Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offsets of dubious value that let rich polluters continue to pollute with a clear conscience.

Other founders include former Goldman Sachs partner David Blood, as well as Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris, also of Goldman Sachs. In 2006, CCX received a big boost when another investor bought a 10% stake on the prospect of making a great deal of money for itself. That investor was Goldman Sachs, now under the gun for selling financial instruments it knew were doomed to fail.

The actual mechanism for trading on the exchange was purchased and patented by none other than Franklin Raines, who was CEO of Fannie Mae at the time.

Raines profited handsomely to the tune of some $90 million by buying and bundling bad mortgages that led to the collapse of the American economy. His interest in climate trading is curious until one realizes cap-and-trade would make housing costlier as well.

Amazingly, none of these facts came up at Senate hearings on Goldman Sachs' activities, which may be nothing more than Ross Perot's famous "gorilla dust," meant to distract us from the real issues.

The climate trading scheme being stitched together here will do more damage than Goldman Sachs, AIG and Fannie Mae combined. But it will bring power and money to its architects.

Link to original site of article at IBD is here.

Corruption in Oval Office

2010-04-27T06:30:00.040-04:00

My quick summary: Literally the day after Obama became a Senator, the wheels were set in motion for Obama / CCX / Cap & Trade / G.Sachs to lead to TEN TRILLION dollars PER YEAR profit. IT'S ALL THERE. Just follow the money... Glenn Beck's Monday 4.26.10 show drew a straight factual line from 2006 Chicago all the way to the White House. A President steering public policy for profit is an abuse of power...an impeachable offense.

Wednesday Morning Update: Pajamas Media (I know, I know... ) did some work on this a few days before Beck aired his Monday show. Link here.

Tuesday Evening Update: Human Events has a backgrounder from 2007 w/info on CCX & more here. A website I was unfamiliar with until just moments ago seems to have a good list of links to help source this. I have not verified them, but it's the first site I've found w/a LIST attempting to do that! American Parchment

Tuesday morning update: Barbara Hollingsworth at Washington Examiner was one of Beck's sources for his show and the article he references is here. Canada Free Press, Financial Times of London (Exhuastive, extensive coverage w/excellent pop-up search matrix) and **2 Examiner.com articles here & here**(different from the one mentioned above) have supporting reporting other foreign press CONFIRM.

PLEASE NOTE: Examiner.com's articles are the most "consumer friendly." Hollingsworth's is most on point. You might want to start with those two, then CFP. FT is only for waaaay serious junkies. That's some heavy, heavy reading... ;)

UNEXPURGATED Text from Beck's Monday evening expose below.

Glenn Beck: Why Goldman Is Willing to Take the Heat

April 27, 2010 - 3:48 ET

Watch "Glenn Beck" weekdays at 5 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel

Faith, hope and charity: We used to seek God's blessings on the country, we used to pursue maximum freedom to solve problems and we'd rely on one another in times of need.

Now we're being pushed towards what progressives have always found hope in: Dependency on regulations and administrations. Average Americans find that approach to be red tape. Our Founding Fathers found it to be slavery.

So it kind shocks me when there's no outcry to news stories like this one reported in the Financial Times over the weekend: The "U.S. is preparing to pivot from domestic regulatory reform to push for a tough new international capital regime."

Excuse me?

We're talking about the foundation of international financial regulations and global governing. It's a trial balloon being floated out there and I guess it was a success because the response was complete and total silence.

Is it just me who thinks this is a bad idea? Am I alone? I guess so, because even Republicans are OK with this one. How could that happen? Easy: It's those evil, greedy Sith lord Wall Street executives! Like the ones at Goldman Sachs, who are appearing before the almighty Senate Tuesday to get grilled by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (sounds scary) about their so-called attempts to manipulate and profit off the crash of the housing market.

They'll get chewed out and made an example of by people like Chris Dodd, who joined in the chorus of Goldman haters on "Meet the Press" on Sunday:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

SEN. CHRIS DODD, D-CONN.: Here we are, 17 months after someone broke into our house in effect and robbed us... and we still haven't changed the locks on the doors.

LARRY SUMMERS, WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIC ADVISER: These off-balance sheet, nontransparent vehicles with what people call implicit guarantees, invite these kinds of problems.

SEN. RICHARD SHELBY, R-ALA.: We have to end once and for all the casino atmosphere on Wall Street, where they're gambling, basically, on synthetic ideas and so forth — with somebody else's money.

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

You're right, Chris: You have to change those locks. But the other thing to make sure of is that the people you are calling to change the locks aren't the same ones who were involved with the robbery in the first place.

Yes, Dodd and his buddies will chew out Goldman, but if they are the root of all evil, why do these people all still work in the administration?

• William C. Dudley, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; was a partner and managing director at Goldman

• Gary Gensler, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; spent 18 years at Goldman

• Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Tim Geithner; former Goldman lobbyist

• Philip Murphy; nominated for ambassador to Germany; former Goldman executive

• Diana Farrell; deputy director of the National Economic Council; formerly with Goldman

• Emil Michael; White House fellow; former investment banker with Goldman

There's just a few. And if Goldman really are the bad guys, we have bigger problems than just regulation, because we have to talk about global warming as well.

I got a tip from a watchdog — and by the way, if you are new to the program and don't know what a watchdog is, that's you. We've got millions of watchdogs e-mailing in tips and stories big and small and we welcome every single one of them. We get to as many as we can and even report on some of them, like this one about the Chicago Climate Exchange.

In case you didn't know the Chicago Climate Exchange existed — it does and it started trading in 2003. It's billed as: "North America's only cap-and-trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide." Members agree to a voluntary but legally binding agreement to "meet annual Green House Gas emission reduction targets."

What's cap-and-trade? A scheme designed to transfer wealth from the companies that have to the companies that have not through the regulation of invisible gases. Remember, it was ENRON who lobbied heavily for this type of system, because they knew how to swindle a profit out of it.

Environmentalists like Obama want this system because it will make prices skyrocket and people will be forced to use less energy. But I don't want to put words in his mouth, I'll let him say it:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATE BARACK OBAMA: Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Got it? So the main beneficiaries will be big corporations and proponents of the redistribution of wealth. You are the loser here because you pay more for energy. But you can feel good because you saved the planet.

Uh-huh.

Not to mention, other places — like Europe — who have tried to implement green initiatives (like Spain) and then base markets on it are suffering the consequences. Because, as Time unwittingly described the creation of Chicago Climate Exchange, it "creates something out of nothing." There is no value behind the market; it's like Pets.com except now its solar panels.

So who would want to create something like this?

In 2000 and 2001, Chicago Climate Exchange received start-up grants from the Joyce Foundation. The Joyce Foundation is like the George Soros' TIDES Foundation. In fact, it's actually bigger than TIDES and even funds TIDES. Think of it as a place where uber-rich and powerful liberals like to dump their money into, so the cash can be spread around to their pet projects without a direct link.

The Joyce Foundation supports such luminaries as John Ayers (William Ayers' brother).

There was one influential member on the board of the Joyce Foundation at the time the Chicago Climate Exchange got its seed money; someone instrumental in steering the funds towards the creation of the Chicago Climate Exchange. They were on the board from 1994-2002. The founder of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Richard Sandor, said that he "knew (this person) well," which is perhaps how the money was awarded to the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, where Sandor was a research professor. I'll get back to that person in a minute.

Sandor saw big things in a climate exchange market. How big?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLOOMBERG REPORTER: So how big do you think this market could be?

RICHARD SANDOR, CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE: I think it's a $10 trillion a year market.

REPORTER: Say that again?

SANDOR: $10 trillion a year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

A $10 trillion a year market? That's a lot to go around. In comparison, the value of U.S. company shares on major U.S. and foreign stock exchanges equities market was $15 trillion in 2009. There's a lot of money riding on this climate legislation. But remember: It's all about saving the Earth.

London-based Generation Investment Management sees the earning potential as well. That's why they purchased a stake in Chicago Climate Exchange and are the fifth largest shareholder. The cofounder of the London-based firm? Former Vice President Al Gore. I say cofounder because some of the other founders include David Blood (former Goldman executive), Mark Ferguson (Goldman) and Peter Harris (Goldman).

In 2006, the Chicago Climate Exchange got a nice boost of confidence when an investor stepped to the plate and ponied up to purchase 10 percent of the combined company. Cofounder of the Chicago Exchange said the investment was big and welcome news. The investor? Goldman Sachs.

Oh and I almost forgot: The person at the beginning of it all? The one on the board of the Joyce Foundation that secured the initial funding for this project? Barack Obama.

This is so weird. It's almost like those our government says are responsible for the financial collapse are the ones directly involved in the "solutions." So much for "changing the locks," Chris.

OK, now let's look at this. What you have is a structure. This is the building: the Exchange. You've got the structure, all the players.

So what are we missing? Well, we're missing the bill and the technology to make it happen; the machinery to make it happen.

You are trading air; it's hard to keep track of air. The good news is, the bill is being worked on by Republicans and Democrats. That's cap-and-trade.

The machinery, the device? A patent for such a device was worked on by CO2e.com CEO Carlton Bartels. Shortly after he filed for the patent on his system to trade residential carbon credits, he was killed in the 9/11 attacks. Bartels wife then shopped the idea around and was able to find a buyer. The buyer ended up being a guy who wasn't really a good guy, he committed massive accounting fraud and manipulated earnings in his company in order to make huge bonuses.

That person was Franklin Raines, who just happened to be the CEO of Fannie Mae at the time. The patent was eventually approved by the U.S. Patent and Trade Office on Nov. 7, 2006 — coincidentally the day after Democrats took control of Congress. Thanks to Barbara Hollingsworth of the Washington Examiner for pointing this out to us.

So now, Fannie Mae, who is congressionally mandated to "make housing more affordable," is poised to reap billions on a system that has nothing to do with housing except for that it would make housing costs go up.

That's great.

Remember when Fannie purchased risky mortgages from banks, bundled them together and sold to investors as mortgage-backed securities? And then the housing market was absolutely destroyed? Well, former Fannie VP Scott Lesmes was responsible for that bundling.

Well, here's the good news: Not only will this new carbon trading "system" try the exact same bundling method (except with air); they are using the exact same guy: Scott Lesmes.

But, please, don't worry. The only ones involved in this are the corrupt Franklin Raines, Mr. redistribution of wealth Barack Obama, and all the people who the House and Senate are currently saying are the bad guys. Other than that, this should work out great.

It's almost like Goldman is willing to take a little heat now, in order to get a little piece of the $10 trillion green pie later. I challenge the media: Will anyone pick this story up? Will anyone question this and the timing of it all?

All of a sudden illegal immigration has leap-frogged global warming? Is it because Goldman has to take hits to get the global government structure done? And then they get the payoff? Or will you continue to say oh, he's crazy and not talk about the facts.

— Watch "Glenn Beck" weekdays at 5 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel

Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics

Woodward & Bernstein... and Beck!

2010-04-26T20:19:00.001-04:00

What Glenn Beck revealed tonight will end Barry's presidency. If it doesn't, it means the fourth estate has died, and thus, the Republic has died. WOW. Transcript below from tonight's show.

Why Goldman Is Willing to Take the Heat
Monday , April 26, 2010

By Glenn Beck

Faith, hope and charity: We used to seek God's blessings on the country, we used to pursue maximum freedom to solve problems and we'd rely on one another in times of need.

Now we're being pushed towards what progressives have always found hope in: Dependency on regulations and administrations. Average Americans find that approach to be red tape. Our Founding Fathers found it to be slavery.

So it kind shocks me when there's no outcry to news stories like this one reported in the Financial Times over the weekend: The "U.S. is preparing to pivot from domestic regulatory reform to push for a tough new international capital regime."

Excuse me?

We're talking about the foundation of international financial regulations and global governing. It's a trial balloon being floated out there and I guess it was a success because the response was complete and total silence.

Is it just me who thinks this is a bad idea? Am I alone? I guess so, because even Republicans are OK with this one. How could that happen? Easy: It's those evil, greedy Sith lord Wall Street executives! Like the ones at Goldman Sachs, who are appearing before the almighty Senate Tuesday to get grilled by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (sounds scary) about their so-called attempts to manipulate and profit off the crash of the housing market.

They'll get chewed out and made an example of by people like Chris Dodd, who joined in the chorus of Goldman haters on "Meet the Press" on Sunday:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

SEN. CHRIS DODD, D-CONN.: Here we are, 17 months after someone broke into our house in effect and robbed us... and we still haven't changed the locks on the doors.

LARRY SUMMERS, WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIC ADVISER: These off-balance sheet, nontransparent vehicles with what people call implicit guarantees, invite these kinds of problems.

SEN. RICHARD SHELBY, R-ALA.: We have to end once and for all the casino atmosphere on Wall Street, where they're gambling, basically, on synthetic ideas and so forth — with somebody else's money.

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

You're right, Chris: You have to change those locks. But the other thing to make sure of is that the people you are calling to change the locks aren't the same ones who were involved with the robbery in the first place.

Yes, Dodd and his buddies will chew out Goldman, but if they are the root of all evil, why do these people all still work in the administration?

• William C. Dudley, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; was a partner and managing director at Goldman

• Gary Gensler, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; spent 18 years at Goldman

• Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Tim Geithner; former Goldman lobbyist

• Philip Murphy; nominated for ambassador to Germany; former Goldman executive

• Diana Farrell; deputy director of the National Economic Council; formerly with Goldman

• Emil Michael; White House fellow; former investment banker with Goldman

There's just a few. And if Goldman really are the bad guys, we have bigger problems than just regulation, because we have to talk about global warming as well.

I got a tip from a watchdog — and by the way, if you are new to the program and don't know what a watchdog is, that's you. We've got millions of watchdogs e-mailing in tips and stories big and small and we welcome every single one of them. We get to as many as we can and even report on some of them, like this one about the Chicago Climate Exchange.

In case you didn't know the Chicago Climate Exchange existed — it does and it started trading in 2003. It's billed as: "North America's only cap-and-trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide." Members agree to a voluntary but legally binding agreement to "meet annual Green House Gas emission reduction targets."

What's cap-and-trade? A scheme designed to transfer wealth from the companies that have to the companies that have not through the regulation of invisible gases. Remember, it was ENRON who lobbied heavily for this type of system, because they knew how to swindle a profit out of it.

Environmentalists like Obama want this system because it will make prices skyrocket and people will be forced to use less energy. But I don't want to put words in his mouth, I'll let him say it:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATE BARACK OBAMA: Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Got it? So the main beneficiaries will be big corporations and proponents of the redistribution of wealth. You are the loser here because you pay more for energy. But you can feel good because you saved the planet.

Uh-huh.

Not to mention, other places — like Europe — who have tried to implement green initiatives (like Spain) and then base markets on it are suffering the consequences. Because, as Time unwittingly described the creation of Chicago Climate Exchange, it "creates something out of nothing." There is no value behind the market; it's like Pets.com except now its solar panels.

So who would want to create something like this?

In 2000 and 2001, Chicago Climate Exchange received start-up grants from the Joyce Foundation. The Joyce Foundation is like the George Soros' TIDES Foundation. In fact, it's actually bigger than TIDES and even funds TIDES. Think of it as a place where uber-rich and powerful liberals like to dump their money into, so the cash can be spread around to their pet projects without a direct link.

The Joyce Foundation supports such luminaries as John Ayers (William Ayers' brother).

There was one influential member on the board of the Joyce Foundation at the time the Chicago Climate Exchange got its seed money; someone instrumental in steering the funds towards the creation of the Chicago Climate Exchange. They were on the board from 1994-2002. The founder of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Richard Sandor, said that he "knew (this person) well," which is perhaps how the money was awarded to the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, where Sandor was a research professor. I'll get back to that person in a minute.

Sandor saw big things in a climate exchange market. How big?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLOOMBERG REPORTER: So how big do you think this market could be?

RICHARD SANDOR, CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE: I think it's a $10 trillion a year market.

REPORTER: Say that again?

SANDOR: $10 trillion a year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

A $10 trillion a year market? That's a lot to go around. In comparison, the value of U.S. company shares on major U.S. and foreign stock exchanges equities market was $15 trillion in 2009. There's a lot of money riding on this climate legislation. But remember: It's all about saving the Earth.

London-based Generation Investment Management sees the earning potential as well. That's why they purchased a stake in Chicago Climate Exchange and are the fifth largest shareholder. The cofounder of the London-based firm? Former Vice President Al Gore. I say cofounder because some of the other founders include David Blood (former Goldman executive), Mark Ferguson (Goldman) and Peter Harris (Goldman).

In 2006, the Chicago Climate Exchange got a nice boost of confidence when an investor stepped to the plate and ponied up to purchase 10 percent of the combined company. Cofounder of the Chicago Exchange said the investment was big and welcome news. The investor? Goldman Sachs.

Oh and I almost forgot: The person at the beginning of it all? The one on the board of the Joyce Foundation that secured the initial funding for this project? Barack Obama.

This is so weird. It's almost like those our government says are responsible for the financial collapse are the ones directly involved in the "solutions." So much for "changing the locks," Chris.

OK, now let's look at this. What you have is a structure. This is the building: the Exchange. You've got the structure, all the players.

So what are we missing? Well, we're missing the bill and the technology to make it happen; the machinery to make it happen.

You are trading air; it's hard to keep track of air. The good news is, the bill is being worked on by Republicans and Democrats. That's cap-and-trade.

The machinery, the device? A patent for such a device was worked on by CO2e.com CEO Carlton Bartels. Shortly after he filed for the patent on his system to trade residential carbon credits, he was killed in the 9/11 attacks. Bartels wife then shopped the idea around and was able to find a buyer. The buyer ended up being a guy who wasn't really a good guy, he committed massive accounting fraud and manipulated earnings in his company in order to make huge bonuses.

That person was Franklin Raines, who just happened to be the CEO of Fannie Mae at the time. The patent was eventually approved by the U.S. Patent and Trade Office on Nov. 7, 2006 — coincidentally the day after Democrats took control of Congress. Thanks to Barbara Hollingsworth of the Washington Examiner for pointing this out to us.

So now, Fannie Mae, who is congressionally mandated to "make housing more affordable," is poised to reap billions on a system that has nothing to do with housing except for that it would make housing costs go up.

That's great.

Remember when Fannie purchased risky mortgages from banks, bundled them together and sold to investors as mortgage-backed securities? And then the housing market was absolutely destroyed? Well, former Fannie VP Scott Lesmes was responsible for that bundling.

Well, here's the good news: Not only will this new carbon trading "system" try the exact same bundling method (except with air); they are using the exact same guy: Scott Lesmes.

But, please, don't worry. The only ones involved in this are the corrupt Franklin Raines, Mr. redistribution of wealth Barack Obama, and all the people who the House and Senate are currently saying are the bad guys. Other than that, this should work out great.

It's almost like Goldman is willing to take a little heat now, in order to get a little piece of the $10 trillion green pie later. I challenge the media: Will anyone pick this story up? Will anyone question this and the timing of it all?

All of a sudden illegal immigration has leap-frogged global warming? Is it because Goldman has to take hits to get the global government structure done? And then they get the payoff? Or will you continue to say oh, he's crazy and not talk about the facts.

— Watch "Glenn Beck" weekdays at 5 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel

Obama's Private Army

2010-04-26T16:39:00.002-04:00

Mika Gets to Be Smartest One in the Room

2010-04-21T04:25:00.008-04:00

This is priceless. Morning Joe guest, liberal Joan Walsh, evidently having a senior moment & forgetting what all the lights & cameras are doing around her, wonders aloud who speaks for the left "like Rush," and co-host Mika, who daily supports the network's demonstrable lefty cheerleading (GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt, which owns NBC/MSNBC is a White House advisor to the President & would assert, I'm sure that GE's ZERO tax bill for 2009 is purely co-incidental) knows the answer but for obvious reasons cannot admit it publicly: MSNBC, you dope! - LOL

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Left these Clips on Floor

2010-04-20T05:52:00.002-04:00

Maddow Madhatters cowering under their green cotton sustainable forest beds after being propagandized into believing that Tea Party ready to commit acts of domestic terrorism like Tim McVeigh. She didn't have any proof to support those assertions but the sheeeeeeple belieeeeeeeved she did. Guess she forgot this:

Wall Street "Crisis" Next on Obama Mfg Line

2010-04-18T07:51:00.001-04:00

Unexpurgated Article

April 15, 2010

David Limbaugh: New Column: PARP: TARP On Steroids

There seems to be no limit to the Obamacrats' appetite for expanding federal power and for fabricating and exploiting crises, which must never be allowed "to go to waste."

They always have a rationale for plausibly denying their federal power grabs. But like Obama's other big agenda items, the financial overhaul bill currently in the Senate is exactly that..

Most Americans instinctively didn't like TARP -- the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program. Even those who believed it was a necessary evil to avert financial catastrophe regarded the use of government funds to bail out companies as distasteful. They considered the government's subsequent assumption of control over TARP companies as even more distasteful.

But at least they were told it would be "temporary." Just as Obama said, "I don't want to run auto companies," he said he didn't want to run banks. Right.

Apparently learning the wrong lesson from the public's outrage at their shoving through Obamacare against the people's will, Obamacrats have adopted the same model to push through their financial overhaul plan, which Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner boastfully describes as "the strongest financial reforms since those that followed the Great Depression." Have you noticed with these statists that everything has to be dramatic -- the "greatest crisis," the "most comprehensive health care plan," the "strongest financial reforms"? Believe me; we believe you. We get it. You don't like the America we like, and you want to radically change it.

Obama has fully embraced the bill, the essential blueprint for which he laid out last June with portentous language signaling that he was going to treat this problem, too, as a crisis that needs urgent and Draconian measures. Geithner said: "The damage of the crisis was just too acute. We are trying to move very, very quickly while the memory of the crisis is still in the forefront of people's memory."

True to form, Obamacrats pushed this 1,300-page bill through committee in a 21-minute partisan markup. The bill's principal sponsor, Sen. Chris Dodd, warned Republicans that if they resist the bill, they'll suffer the same fate they did on the health care bill, which the National Legal and Policy Center's Carl Horowitz aptly paraphrased as, "Get in our way, and we'll mow you down." (If you watched the news this week, you might have seen how they've already savaged Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for daring to oppose the bill.)

The White House is also adopting the same divisive strategy it used in promoting Obamacare. It has picked scapegoats to vilify, "big Wall Street banks" (you will recall Obama has called them "fat-cat bankers"), and pitted them against the American people, saying they want to preserve the "status quo." Jen Psaki explicitly framed the debate in those terms on the increasingly partisan White House blog. Check it out: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/04/13/false-criticisms-obscure-clear-choices.

Initially, even many Democrats were skeptical, such as Rep. Brad Sherman, who called the plan "TARP on steroids" and told Geithner, "You've got permanent, unlimited bailout authority." "Permanent," to be sure, which is why Horowitz dubbed the bill "PARP."

Among the Republicans' concerns about the plan is that it would create a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with autonomous rule-making authority and the power to examine firms with $10 billion in assets. The bill would also create a new $50 billion fund to be used to "restructure" firms in emergency financial predicaments. According to Heritage Foundation expert David C. John, the bill would give the government "open-ended" power to "exercise discretion" based on "unspecified factors" to determine whether firms represent a "systemic risk." Think about that. A vast new bureaucracy subject to political pressures, not the bankruptcy courts, would be making these vital decisions without clearly defined standards. We musn't saddle the rule-makers with rules.

Imagine the temptation a statist-run administration would have under such broad authority to step in and break up firms on its whim or take control of them and inject them with funds subsidized by a punitive tax -- with the Orwellian label "Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee" -- on big banks. The banks will foot the bill simply because the Obamacrats believe that profitable concerns should be punished for their surplus values. Just more "spreading the wealth around."

John argues the bill would incentivize banks to make unsound loans because it would remove the checks and balances creditors normally provide by, for example, demanding higher interest rates on loans from highly leveraged institutions. If the banks were not allowed to fail, the creditors would be more willing to lend to them. Wasn't it "uncreditworthy" loans mandated by do-gooder Democratic policies that largely led to the financial meltdown in the first place?

Be on notice: Rapacious Obamacrats are hellbent on shoving this bill through. Even at the risk of being mowed down, we must vigorously oppose it.

KGB Expert 25 Years Ago Describing TODAY

2010-04-18T06:52:00.000-04:00

KGB expert TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO describing EXACTLY what's going on RIGHT NOW. Opening theme goofy but don't that throw you. After that it's just the KGB guy talking with video & images of today. WOW.

Internships? Obama says it's SLAVERY & Wants it STOPPED

2010-04-17T13:35:00.008-04:00

This is just such a wrong-headed idea it's hard to know where to begin. Obama want's to trash the college internship system. College internships are pretty simple: Student pays the college for it just like a regular course, business gets some free grunt help, and students to do the thing that is the hardest for a kid with no relevant experience to do: get in the front door to prove themselves good workers! There's no question it's a win-win for everyone, so leave it to a liberal to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Obama's wrapping this in the guise of saving these kids from so called un-educational tasks or making room for the unemployed and that's total and utter cr*p. These are not jobs that would otherwise be filled, so the unemployment angle is scratched. It's because they are fetch & carry jobs that they would not be salaried but to suggest that that work is useless to a student misses the point entirely! It's the tangential experience that matters: the knowledge of the inner workings of the industry and more precious than gold, the opportunity to be a good doobie and get some phone numbers of people who will at the very least recommend you and at most hire you!

Note: I witnessed the intern programs for twenty years in Philadelphia, San Francisco and Boston in the radio stations I broadcast on. Every single one of these kids was the envy of all their college friends because they got inside the front door of a radio station. Maybe internships at accounting firms won't be so highly prized, but I would imagine that any kid able to get in any door in any industry recognizes that the one thing a wet behind the ears college senior wants more than anything is a chance to prove themselves in the industry of their choice and the internship program is that chance.

Molly Henneberg - FOXNews.com - April 17, 2010
Obama Administration Considers Cracking Down on Unpaid Internships

The Labor Department says most times it's illegal for millions of students to spend a summer, semester or year learning the inside of a private sector industry for school credit – but no pay.

The Obama administration is planning to crack down on companies that don't pay interns.

The Labor Department says most times it's illegal for millions of students to spend a summer, semester or year learning the inside of a private sector industry often for school credit – but no pay.

Unpaid internships are considered legal only if they are truly structured educational experiences for the benefit of the intern rather than the company and offer no promise of a job after the internship ends.

Labor lawyers argue that businesses need to review what they ask interns to do.

"If they're performing administrative tasks, clerical tasks, answering phones, getting copies – things that would otherwise displace a regular employee, then the Department of Labor may find that to be more looking like an employee than an intern," said Kara Maciel, a labor attorney at Epstein, Becker and Green, adding that those internships should be paid.

But business lobby groups note the economy is so tight, companies may have to cut back on or eliminate intern hiring if they have to be paid – especially small businesses – causing students to miss valuable opportunities that bolster their resumes.

"They will likely not be able to pay for it," said Barbara Lang, vice president and chief executive of the DC Chamber of Commerce. "Unless government is going to provide some subsidy along with these requirements, they won't be able to provide these experiences anymore."

Supporters say the law should be enforced and companies should not get free labor. They also want to level the playing field between interns who can afford to work for free and those who can't.

"If you can't have an unpaid internship because you need to work, you're poor, or your family just doesn't have the means, you're cut out and that's wrong," said Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.

Eisenbrey says the law does not apply to nonprofit organizations or the federal government. But Rep. Darrell Issa thinks it should.

The California Republican sent a letter to the White House asking for "a listing of the number of unpaid interns and volunteers at the White House… along with a short description of their duties."

He believes the White House should live up to its own standard.

"If the government can't do it, certainly it's not fair to ask the private sector to do it in this case," he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/17/obama-administration-considers-cracking-unpaid-internships/

My Tax Dollars went to NPR and all I got was MOCKED and now a PULITZER

2010-04-13T12:44:00.015-04:00

The man who produced NPR's "Learn to Speak Tea Bag" won a Pulitzer today. What's wrong with that? Am I just humorless? Thin-skinned? Jealous? Not even close. Not the issue. Not by a long shot.

Late last fall NPR, National Public Radio, funded by your tax dollars launched a wholly incorrect cheap shot at Tea Party "Learn to Speak TeaBag" ("Tea bag" being a crude sexual reference). It went viral on the internet, was looped on MSNBC and reported on by Fox. Let me be clear: I have no troubles with anybody saying anything about anybody - unless it's taxpayer dollars being used to propogandize the very Americans who fund their payroll- Then I got a problem because it is a fundamental abuse of the public trust and federal power.

It's the flip side of the same coin which resulted in Obama's book club buddy Chavez imprisoning the head of a TV station, the last standing media outlet to dare to criticize him, which if we were to produce our own little cartoon video would translate to mere fact telling. That was three weeks ago and I've not heard word one from Obama condemning that action. Not a peep from him or anyone in his administration taking up the torch of liberty like every other president before him who has witnessed such abuse. Neither, parenthetically, did "the NPR buck stops here" President Obama admonish the agency he technically oversees for the cheap shot at tax payer expense. We can only presume that because the propaganda was a net gain to him, he had no problem with using federal government dollars to produce it.

Obama's negligence, yet again, to urge a higher standard of dissent, with or without abusive use of tax dollars, is not new. His community organizing arm, OFA, enlisted the help of the tax payer funded National Endowment of the Arts to propagandize on behalf of his agenda... More on that later.

Like the Nobel, the Pulitzer has fallen into irretrievable disrepute. It's so far gone beyond merit and into pure inbred, intellectual masturbation, it's barely worth getting upset anymore...

Reid Promises Immigration Reform 'Just Like We Did Health Care Reform' -- Politics Daily

2010-04-12T11:23:00.001-04:00

Reid Promises Immigration Reform 'Just Like We Did Health Care Reform' -- Politics Daily

Perspective Check for the Hysterical

2010-04-12T08:27:00.000-04:00

This has been circulating around the 'net for years, but saw it again this morning. Worth a read.
To Those of You Born 1930 - 1979
TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED THE 1930's, 40's, 50's, 60's & 70's!

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant.

They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-base paints..

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, locks on doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had baseball caps not helmets on our heads.

As infants & children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, no booster seats, no seat belts, no air bags, bald tires and sometimes no brakes

Riding in the back of a pick- up truck on a warm day was always a special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and not from a bottle.

We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and no one actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, white bread, real butter and bacon. We drank Kool-Aid made with real white sugar. And, we weren't overweight. WHY? Because we were always outside playing...that's why!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day.
And, we were O.K.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride them down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times,we learned to solve the problem.

We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's and X-boxes. There were no video games, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD's, no surround-sound or CD's, no cell phones, no personal computers, no internet and no chat rooms, WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.

We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.

We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them.

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!

These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever.

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned how to deal with it all.

If YOU are one of them, CONGRATULATIONS!

PERFECT Example of FACTS vs. FEEEEEELINGS

2010-04-12T06:52:00.001-04:00

I was reminded of this clip from last August just this morning on Twitter. It's a perfect example of what happens when facts meet feelings. Michelle Malkin, discussing her 400 page book packed with example after example of how Obama hasn't met his own standard of "clean" politics is met with "But what about Bush-What about Bush-What about Bush" They are completely incapable of offering any rebuttal on the merits of the facts before them. It's all, as Malkin says, moral equivalency, which is the refuge of the intellectually bankrupt.

Just ONE of the Obama Executive Orders that Should SCARE the HELL out of YOU

2010-04-10T10:01:00.012-04:00

I remember reading about this when it happened but this is the best summary of this Executive Order I've seen. It ought to scare the hell out of everyone. BTW: There's mention of NORTHCOMM in this and I seem to remember some dirty dealing during the Health Care debate that included some maneuvering regarding them. I will update as I find out.

Martial Law in America: No Longer Just a Possibility! by Gary D. Barnett (Excerpted Article Below)

February 15, 2010

Gary D. Barnett is president of Barnett Financial Services, Inc., in Lewistown, Montana.

In January of this year, President Barrack Obama, the professed “leader” of the free world, signed Executive Order 13528. This order, which establishes a“Council of Governors,” these appointed directly by the president, is for the expressed purpose of building a national/domestic police partnership. The opening statement of this order reads:

“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property”

This executive order was issued for one purpose only, and that is to build a “legal” partnership between the federal government’s national military force and the domestic police state so that they become one and the same. But in reality, this “partnership” would be controlled by the executive branch of the federal government; this being the most dangerous kind of fascism. Nothing could be more treacherous or more of a threat to liberty than for one man, the president of this now “United State,” to have the power to control and use in domestic matters the entire federal military, the National Guard, the Reserves, the Coast Guard and all state police organizations. This would effectively give the president the power to establish Martial Law over the entire country at any given time of his choosing.

One reading of Section 2 of this order which outlines the functions should be enough to scare the living daylights out of even the most strident supporter of government. It says:

Sec. 2. Functions.

The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such views, information, or advice shall concern:

(a)	matters involving the National Guard of the various States;
(b)	homeland defense;
(c)	civil support;
(d)	synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and
(e)	other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities.

Besides the fact that virtually every major agency of force, both federal and domestic, is listed here, the one standout is the inclusion of the United States Northern Command or “NORTHCOM.” On October 1st, 2008, the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team, an elite combat squad returning from Iraq, became the first active-duty military unit to be dedicated and deployed for domestic duties. They are under direct control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of NORTHCOM. In addition, 20,000 more federal troops are to be added before 2011. Of course, this violates the Posse Comitatus Act and the original Insurrection Act; those two acts that forbid the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement, but since when has the constitution or written law ever stopped this out-of-control government from doing as it pleases? Any restriction on the use of federal troops in domestic affairs however, has now basically been rendered moot. That is due to new wording in the Insurrection Act that allows for federal intervention in cases of “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition.” This is simply an open-ended invitation for the feds to be able to implement Martial Law any time and any place and for any reason they choose.

If any of you out there think of this as some sort of conspiracy theory, you may be exactly right. The government does seem to be conspiring to gain the power to control by military force the citizenry of this country. It seems very clear to me, and there is a voluminous amount of evidence to support the conclusion that a government conspiracy is in fact already in place.With the changes I’ve listed above and the new executive order signed by Obama on January 11th, 2010, the stage is set for the federal government to take over this country, and by force, should “we the people” get out of line. Considering the horrible economic situation we’re in, the high and growing rate of unemployment, the constant increase of brutality by the police, the unwarranted searches and seizures, the nearly complete loss of civil liberties and continuous wars, could anyone honestly believe that a state of Martial Law is not only possible but probable?

Every move we make is monitored. Every call we make can be traced. Every email we send can be captured. Every financial transaction we do is data-based. We can’t travel even in our own country without being strip-searched and abused by the cretins at TSA. And if the government decides for no reason at all to label us as “enemy combatants,” they can throw us in prison and torture or kill us without even the benefit of trial. So why would anyone think that this government could not and would not take the next step in its progression of control? That next step is Martial Law, and once implemented might turn out to be the final step in ending our history of freedom!

Blaming Others For Differences In Performance - Investors.com

2010-04-08T20:31:00.000-04:00

Blaming Others For Differences In Performance - Investors.com

When Children Sit at the Grown Up Table & Mouth Off

2010-04-06T14:43:00.016-04:00

This was BEAUTIFUL. I happened to see it live and the total, utter humiliation Zsa-Zsa er Arianna Hufington suffered at the hands of Rudy Guiliani & Joe Scarborough was damn near "political porn" as a favorite local radio host might describe it! These insufferably smug, intellectually moribund, and thoroughly corrupt Progressives are utterly unused to being challenged by anyone. Just witness the look of astonishment on Zsa-Zsa's face.... then recline like a cat in a warm sunny window. This is a rare moment of truth on MSNBC. Luxuriate in it.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rudy Giuliani and Joe Scarborough Humiliate Arianna Huffington

Arianna Huffington stuck her foot in her mouth during Tuesday's "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, and ended up being totally humiliated by host Joe Scarborough and guests Rudy Giuliani and Mort Zuckerman.

As the subject of Florida's Senate race was broached, Huffington decided to attack the former Mayor of New York City rather than address the qualifications of Republican candidates Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio.

"Your judgment in people has not been stellar -- Bernard Kerik, anybody, so the fact that you're supporting Rubio now, I don't know exactly how seriously we should take it," irrelevantly spouted the liberal publisher.

Marvelously, some of the gentlemen on the panel didn't appreciate the cheap shot including Giuliani himself who finally said, "I come on here just to talk about Marco Rubio, you're attacking me on Bernie Kerik, you're attacking me on how I ran my presidential race. I imagine you're going to attack me on what I did in the Little League when I was a child"

PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT:

RUDY GIULIANI: Arianna, I'm also, I'm also responsible largely for the turnaround of New York City. I took over, I took over a city that had 2,000 murders a year, I left a city with four or 500 hundred murders a year. I took over a city with 1.1 million people on welfare, I left a city with 500,000 people on welfare. I took over a city with a $2.3 million deficit, I left a city with a $3 million surplus. I hired a lot of good people to do that...It's just a cheap shot.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: That's a cheap shot!...I want to stop. I want to stop right now. I want to talk also about Bernie Kerik for a second. I know no one else will agree with me. This is just me talking and nobody else. Bernie Kerik did a hell of a job also keeping New York City safe. Two, it's an unpopular thing to say, Bernie Kerik made mistakes, a lot of people make mistakes. I was glad Bernie Kerik was standing behind Rudy Giuliani September 11. And the bottom line is Arianna, if Rudy Giuliani did not run for President of the United States, Bernie Kerik would be walking the streets today, because the second Rudy Giuliani started running for President of the United States, the long knifes came out and they started searching everybody's record and they found somebody who had made some bad mistakes. [...]

MORT ZUCKERMAN: If there is one thing that the mayor deserves a lot of credit for is that he turned around the living conditions of New York by really reinforcing law and order, and particularly backing the police, and doing what he, a fundamental transformation of life in this city.

ARIANNA HUFFINGTON: That's not either, or. You are not judging the mayor's entire history. We're talking about something very important, something very specific. And we're talking also about this knee-jerk attempt to criticize the administration on everything, especially the position of the president on terrorism from a man who said you don't know if waterboarding is torture. I don't know if you still hold that position.

GIULIANI: Well, first of all, we have a perfect right to talk all about that, but you're comment about Bernie Kerik was totally irrelevant to it and just a cheap shot. [...]

SCARBOROUGH: Can I ask also how we got from Marco Rubio to waterboarding, Arianna? That is a wild (?), you have taken this conversation and hijacked it.Exactly, and that's what liberal media elites like Huffington do in these situations. The discussion was Crist versus Rubio, and Huffington instead wanted to just tar the record of someone backing one of the candidates:

HUFFINGTON: It's all about what the mayor stands for. What the man stands for means that we can look at who he supports from that perspective. This is a man...

SCARBOROUGH: Do you want to take waterboarding as the issue you embrace, because I know a guy sitting in the United States Senate now that said it polled pretty damn well in Massachusetts.

HUFFINGTON: What does this have to do with anything?

SCARBOROUGH: It has everything to do with everything. You're saying that his position on waterboarding disqualifies him to endorse a guy in Florida, and I'm telling you if waterboarding is popular in Massachusetts, it's probably pretty popular in my home state of Florida.

HUFFINGTON: So what? So it doesn't disqualify him from supporting anybody he wants. It means that I don't have to take his support particularly seriously. That's all I'm saying.

SCARBOROUGH: I don't think he gives a damn whether you support his candidate or not because you're not going to support him anyway, right?

HUFFINGTON: I'm not saying whether I'm going to support his candidate. I'm saying we're having a conversation about whether who he supports makes a difference.

SCARBOROUGH: It does in Florida.

HUFFINGTON: I mean, this is a man who also spent $50 million in the presidential race and got one delegate.

SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a second. Arianna, I've got to say this. Just stop. If we're going to do this, Arianna, I, understand, we're going to talk about your race in California.

HUFFINGTON: I never, I mean, my...

SCARBOROUGH: You ran for governor of California, and it was a complete flop. I still want to hear your ideas, and I don't always go back to your failures here or your failures there. But for some reason, you're doing it with Giuliani. And I, by the way, I would be defending somebody on the Left if someone on the Right was doing the same thing to them.

GIULIANI: The reality is you criticized the Tea Party movement and the right-wingers for getting terribly personal and terribly irrelevant and racist, and you're the worst offender. I mean, I come on here just to talk about Marco Rubio, you're attacking me on Bernie Kerik, you're attacking me on how I ran my presidential race. I imagine you're going to attack me on what I did in the Little League when I was a child. I mean, this is an over the top, emotional reaction as opposed to an intellectual discussion of whether Rubio or Crist would be the better senator.

Exactly, and this is what Huffington and her ilk do whenever they're on the same set as someone on the Right.

Fortunately, much as what occurred when she tried to take on [0] Fox News's Roger Ailes in January, she ended up being soundly humiliated.

Nice job, gentlemen. Bravo!

Source URL:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/04/06/giuliani-scarborough-and-zuckerman-humiliate-arianna-huffington

Just One Day w/Obama: Iran Nuke "inevitable" so NO MORE USA NUKES... What?

2010-04-06T07:11:00.002-04:00

Life long democrat Pat Caddell flirting with actual, demonstrable TREASON on the part of Obama, here. I don't know how anybody of any political persuasion can think it's SENSIBLE to announce "No more nukes" to our enemies on the SAME DAY the President SAID that a nuclear Iran is INEVITABLE... Never mind that we have military on the ground in TWO war zones right now. And not just no nukes, no nukes even in SELF-DEFENSE. If this isn't TREASON what the hell is?

Won't See this in an OBAMA 2012 Ad..

2010-04-05T13:58:00.001-04:00

Huh. Curious what happens when The Messiah isn't protected by sycophantic or paid acolytes lined up like Stepford wives behind him at a speech. People who work, pay taxes, and shell out what's left after confiscatory taxes for a quintessentially American afternoon at the ballpark BOO, HISS, AND JEER HIM. You will NOT SEE Obama in ANY public setting EVER AGAIN that is not TIGHTLY CONTROLLED. Count on it.

Health Care for ILLEGALS next / by Ralph Peters

2010-04-04T07:46:00.009-04:00

Ralph Peters is the author of the new book Endless War: Middle-Eastern Islam vs. Western Civilization.
~President Barack Obama’s greatest crime against our flag and the republic for which it stands isn’t his administration’s health-care theft bill. That’s mere shoplifting compared to what’s coming next.

Obama and the leftwing of the Democratic Party intend to turn ten to eleven million illegal immigrants into voters as expeditiously as possible, giving them a permanent national electoral majority based upon a beholden Lumpenproletariat. If they succeed, our country will face mob rule.

No individual who broke the law to enter this country should ever be allowed to decide who becomes our president, governor, senator—or town council member. If there is one message patriotic Americans must act upon during the remainder of Obama’s reign, it’s this: No voting rights for illegals.

No other issue of our time matters remotely as much—not our lukewarm struggle with Islamist terror or even our metastasizing deficits. This isn’t about tax increases or where to hold terror trials. It’s about preserving our democratic institutions for law-abiding citizens.

Inevitably, objections to handing immigration criminals the vote will be denounced as racist, anti-immigrant, inhumane and so on. Unable to argue on logical grounds, the left will resort to savage name-calling. And, of course, illegal immigrants will be compared to the legal immigrants of yesteryear, as if our laws are just burdensome annoyances that insist on silly distinctions.

As for the left’s all-purpose charge of racism, any illegal immigrant—Irish, Guatemalan or Nigerian—must never be granted the right to vote in a US election. “Illegal” means “not legal.” It means “criminal.” This is not a matter of nuance, and it isn’t color-coded.

(The single exception I would make would be to grant full citizenship to illegal immigrants who serve honorably in our military for a minimum of five years—but the left would hate that, too.)

As for being anti-immigrant, that’s nonsense, too. Legal immigration remains a great strength of our country (I’ve argued for years for more visas and a path to citizenship for hi-tech wonks and other highly skilled workers). Any immigrant who plays by the rules to enter this country, adjusts to our public values and obeys our laws should be allowed to earn the full rights of citizenship on schedule. But no phony waiting periods, or token fines, or pay-your-back-taxes scams can be allowed to buy voting rights for those who broke our laws to steal into our homeland.

And the “inhumane” charge is sheer hypocrisy. If the Democratic leadership and its organized protest mobs (such as the hate-group La Raza) genuinely cared about the plight of illegal immigrants, they’d argue only for a form of residency. Illegals themselves aren’t the ones demanding the vote. They’d be delighted just to be able to stay here. It’s political activists who claim to speak for them who make voting rights “a test of our nation’s sense of justice.” Playing the pity card, they pretend that legalization is all about keeping families together. It’s not. It’s about eleven million bought-and-paid-for votes. Anyway, millions of illegal immigrants weren’t worried about the unity of their families when they abandoned their homes for the USA.

But reason won’t matter. Anyone who challenges the free gift of voting rights to illegal immigrants is going to be charged as a bigot by the left. It’s an accusation that those who love our country will just have to shrug off.

Conservatives and independents are going to have to decide with precision what they’re going to fight for in this struggle. That means starting out by recognizing that we’re not going to line up eleven million illegals in a column of fours and march them back across the border. They’re here. Most are going to stay.

The crucial fight ahead is over those voting rights. Every other question arising from this issue is trivial in comparison. Those who love this country must focus on that single mantra, repeating it until the votes-for-illegals snake is dead: No voting rights for illegals, no voting rights for illegals, no voting rights for illegals.

The importance of this iron focus can’t be over-stressed, because left-wing activists in the administration and in Congress will try to lure our elected representatives into arguments over secondary issues, pretending to compromise on minor matters. There’ll be discussions over the deportation of criminal aliens, back taxes, waiting periods, health-care liability, fines and fees, and any other distractions that can be tossed into the mix. We must not let ourselves be drawn into debating such details as if the overall legalization process is a forgone conclusion.

What’s the right answer to the illegal-immigration crisis our government’s neglect has allowed to grow to such destructive proportions? Congress needs to create a new class of US residency for those illegals with no further criminal records and who can document a history of employment. That residency would provide basic social and economic rights. It would not give illegal immigrants the vote.

There is no reason, constitutional or moral, why Congress can’t do this. There are already multiple classes of non-citizen residents, from temporary workers to refugees. Of course, the Democratic leadership will howl and claim that anything short of full citizenship is an unacceptable injustice. But what would be unjust about allowing eleven million criminals (and yes, they are criminals, every one, by virtue of breaking the law to enter our home) to remain on our soil, with all of the daily privileges and protections accorded full citizens–except the right to choose those who govern the rest of us? Families (except of those who broke additional laws) would remain united. Workers could work openly (and pay taxes honestly). Children could go to school and apply for scholarships. They just couldn’t force their political prejudices on us—although their American-born children would acquire full voting rights, when of age.

This is a practical, ethical, patriotic and sensible approach. It will be attacked savagely by those who care more about blocks of votes than about the quality of human lives.

Born in 1952, I’ve lived through many national crises—more than a few of them exaggerated in their proclaimed importance at the time. But I view the question of voting rights for illegal immigrants as the most critical issue of my lifetime, as regards the protection of our republic. We had the American Revolution, not the French Revolution. We never have been, and never should be, ruled by mobs. But mob rule is the goal of today’s corrupt Democratic Party leadership. They view power as an end in itself. And they will do virtually anything to sustain, deepen and guarantee that power.

After a recent interview on security issues with talk-show host Laura Ingraham, we discussed this issue off-mike. When I said, “No votes for illegal immigrants,” Laura gave me that piercing look of hers and completed the line for me: “No votes for illegal immigrants—ever.”

This is the crucial battle of the Obama era. Independents, Republicans and Democrats of conscience must set aside all personal hobby horses and secondary issues, and avoid seductive compromises. To preserve the United States we love and revere, we must concentrate ferociously on one clear goal as the left attempts to subvert our future elections through the gift of votes to eleven million illegal immigrants: No vote for illegals—ever!

Original post here.

Obama Anti-Christ? Bible Code says "Yes"

2010-04-04T06:29:00.004-04:00

These things MUST be taken with MULTIPLE grains of salt. I just love the way people's minds work and how they "find patterns in the chaos." We needn't find long-form birth certificates or Bible Codes to know this guy is a fraud and up to no good, but while we're organizing our Articles of Impeachment, this is fun!

Click here to pop over to YouTube... Won't let me embed here for some reason. Must be the Devil!

Spooky.

2010-04-04T05:44:00.002-04:00

SEVEN Obama Lies in A ROW in ONE 1:46 Section of ONE SPEECH

2010-04-04T03:38:00.000-04:00

Thank you to the site African American Conservatives for this! WOW.

Where Hate Speech REALLY Lives

2010-04-03T08:27:00.000-04:00

Let's see where we stand at the end of a looooong couple of weeks of liberal hysteria. Despite $100,000 offer for proof from any one of the 40,000 people clearly seen in the crowd holding up cell phones and video cameras recording the entire proceeding, absolutely ZERO proof emerged for the allegation that the n-world was hurled, the f-word was hurled and just yesterday, the allegations from the congressmen themselves were withdrawn. Case closed on all of it, including the childish spitting charge. It was desperately irresponsible for MSNBC, et.al. to go 24/7 certain they had Tea Party violence.

Then there's the inanity of a politician posting a map of battleground states with crosshairs on it as targeted opponents in an electoral race as somehow violent. This is the vernacular of campaigns and grown-ups know it. To suggest that it is somehow an incitement to violence is beyond the pale.

Then there's the obvious absence of what wasn't looped 24/7 that would have settled the whole matter: A Tea Party member bashing the crap out of someone with their sign... Or some such thing. Don't you think if they had it they'd show it non-stop? If they had proof, you'd see it looped on it's own cable channel for God's sake.

So let's see where actual hate speech really lives. Where identity politics really lives. You'll notice that conservatives, who are routinely accuses of being jack-booted racists, register policy complaints, not race complaints, as it routinely alleged. There are fringe lunatic exceptions, of course, but that's not who we are talking about. I'm talking about mainstream talking heads, like this one:

BREAKING: GOP wrong. HCR FULLY FUNDED

2010-04-01T07:30:00.002-04:00

This is the level of intellectual rigor that it takes to believe ANYTHING Obama tells you about ANYTHING to do with YOUR MONEY. You can't make this stuff up, seriously. This is REAL. Be afraid, be very, very afraid.... ;) I know this is old, and most of us have heard it before, but Libs just beg for this.

Dana Loesch Plain-Talkin' Coffee House Intellectuals

2010-03-29T21:32:00.003-04:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Hysteria & "Selling a Car We've Already Bought"

2010-03-25T21:06:00.008-04:00

Obama "selling" health care AFTER it's law just SCREAMS of this iconic scene from "Dave" when this hapless Secretary is chastised for spending precious tax dollars to make Americans "feel better about a car they've already bought."

America is hacked off. Hacked off about having our freedoms bought and sold and slipped under the door with Health Care Reform. Nancy Pelosi holding the wooden mallet robbed from the Flinstones' prop closet, walking through the crowd of the Tea Partiers she wept in fear of just months earlier (when she could have used the legendary tunnels under the Capital for less haughty ingress) was the perfect metaphor for what they have hammered us with.

Obama and his best friend, the TOTUS (Tele Prompter of the United States) are spending God knows how much money and adding who knows how much carbon to the non-existant Global Warming "crisis" giving a speech in front of carefully selected and paid ACORN operatives in Iowa City so he can ridicule the Republican Party (he did) and admit that he has been lying through his teeth all along about Universal Health Care ("It's coming.)

Meanwhile, back at #MSNBC, a steady parade of talking heads and democrats hysterical over crude voice mails, ugly emails, completely unsupported allegations of Tea Party sourced violence - Nothing more than any conservative public figure gets on a daily basis, but they're ginning it up into some kind of domestic terrorism from the Tea Party - UNBELIEVABLY reckless incitement of civil unrest and they will have blood on their hands if someone really gets hurt.

Jesse Jackson Jr. even video taped the entire episode where a black congressman was supposedly called the "n" word revealed NOTHING. Tape after tape that has turned up have revealed NOTHING.

So far, all we have are completely IMAGINARY ALLEGATIONS on the part of MSNBC and the left that the Tea Party is linked. NO PROOF has been shown. And Obama is SILENT about it.

But, boy, oh boy, he can sell a bill.... that... he's already signed into law. Reminded me of the scene from the movie "Dave."

"Selling a car we've already bought"

SEIU Chief "Obama says LOBBYING passed Health Care. THANK YOU"

2010-03-24T14:32:00.002-04:00

These people have to be pathologically insane, seriously. They don't even try to hide their corruption anymore. They just spew crap for the sycophantic media to lap up like dogs assured they will turn around dutifully and re-spew it unchecked to the breathless masses drunk on the kool-aid.

If it weren't so dangerous it would be a fascinating sociological study.

Obama Forgot Cam/Mic On AGAIN

2010-03-24T10:08:00.003-04:00

He's got a really bad memory, our President. Here he is demonizing the use of Executive Orders and the very same abuses of power he has spent the last year marinating in.

QUOTE: "Taking Steps to ...Control the People"

2010-03-24T06:49:00.002-04:00

A "Gaffe" in Washington D.C. is When a Politician Accidentally Tells the Truth - DON'T EVER FORGET IT

John Dingell admits that Obama taking steps to put legislation together to control the people

Either John Dingell has finally gone senile, or he had another rare moment of admitting the truth. Dingell, who has been a Michigan Representative since 1955 was on the WJR News/Talk 760 radio talk show with host Paul W. Smith on Monday morning, March 22, 2010. The nightbefore, Dingell had been a featured speaker at the Democrat Congressional leadership victory press conference after Obamacare passed the House. According to the American Thinker, in response to a question posed by Smith, Dingell said the following

Let me remind you this [Americans allegedly dying because of lack of universal health care] has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 [million] American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.

Slip of the tongue? The truth just seeping out? Or is Dingellberry just going senile. You can decide for yourself.

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2010/03/23/john-dingell-admits-that-obama-taking-steps-to-put-legislation-together-to-control-the-people/

What I Learned One Night Watching MSNBC & FOX

2010-03-23T22:10:00.004-04:00

Switching between Fox News Network and MSNBC this evening, the contrast couldn't be more sharp.

At the bottom the screen, under Rachel Maddow, is a graphic of the capital dome with a banner of flags (Think car dealership) with letters on each flag that spell "Block Party." Reasonable to assume that this was the network's way of celebrating passage of the Health Care bill today. Maddow is a commentator, so it's not like this graphic was under a "pure" news hour's show, under an "anchor" who is, by definition if not actual practice, supposed to be impartial, but having a network hang such a purely partisan banner even under a discussion show is pushing it. When I tune into a news discussion show I do so to learn something I didn't know before, not be fed propaganda. A banner like that tells me I am unlikely to hear anything negative about the legislation passed today. It would be like telling the birthday girl her dress is ugly, you know?

And what were they talking about? Those gun-toting Tea Partiers. Now, there still isn't any video proof or audio proof that either congressman was, in fact, called a "N-gger" or spat at as a "F-g" but MSNBC has played the tape of the congressman reacting to something clearly unpleasant that was said over and over again. Let me repeat: Though there is tape of it, absolutely no-one has been able to ascertain from it what as actually said. Now, I'm not suggesting that the congressman lied about being called the reprehensible "N" word, but so far, all we have is a politician's testimony. We don't have any idea who said it, if at all, thus, no idea whatsoever if they were a Tea Partier or not. Might have been Klan, who knows?

There is also zero evidence of the "spitting" incident. That is particularly disturbing, if it happened, and if it didn't. That's assault. Why the congressman wouldn't have Capital Police arrest, baffles me.

Rachel spent the entire segment showing pictures of gun-toting citizens. There were three side by side. Note: all the guns were in their holsters. Let me repeat that: all the guns were sidearms, secured in holsters. No-one was brandishing any weapons. I can make a safe assumption that if these weapons were held illegally, Rachel would have reported that. She did not. So what exactly do we have here?

An entire segment on a completely unsubstantiated feeling that Tea Partiers might get violent because they were lawfully observing their constitutionally protected right to fire arms, which, I repeat, were in their holsters. The left loves to worry about the right's blood pressure getting all out of whack on "fear mongering" that we are supposedly victim to, but if this isn't fear mongering, I don't know what is. She did not have fact one to support her assertion that the Tea Party was violent or about to get violent. Not one shred of evidence.

She led the segment by reporting on the brick thrown through Rep. Slaughter's glass at her upstate NY campaign office by.... somebody. Not a confirmed Tea Party member. Boy, they did their background on that guy (and still didn't turn up any Tea Party affiliation but lets not let facts get in the way)! (Would that they would put as much energy into keeping check on the antics of the occupants of the White House as they do every conservative that comes along) This guy was a... are you ready... a member of a group that supported enforcement of... are you sure, because this is really, really scary... this guy supported the Constitution! Gasp! Now, what he did was terrible and criminal and should be condemned for the act that it was and he should be punished under the law absolutely. But to support your assertion that he is a kook by pointing out his belief in the Constitution is... an upside down world.

When I popped back again, she had some lady on from the Midwest talking about some poor kid with some terrible disease who would be helped by the Health Care bill and what monsters all the opposition were to want to take it away from this kid... The implication was clear. Conservatives want sick children to die. In fact, conservatives want all poor, helpless, suffering people to die. We want body parts falling off in the street... on puppies... which we will kick... into nuns... in wheechairs... downhill...

You get the idea. Once again, they are indulging in... ready... wait for it... fear mongering! Aside from the lack of ntellectual rigor which led them to conflate the two issues: Need for reform, and bill itself, to assert that the constitutional challenges to the bill were rooted in the black hearts of conservatives does nothing to advance the argument and everything to play into the divide this nation is already sorely feeling.

Which leads me to Fox. Know what they were talking about?

The constitutional challenges to the bill. In detail. On the law. The merits. I learned some things about the constitution and the law I did not know before. There were 5 different law experts on.

What did I learn from Rachel? Be afraid of the Constitution in general and the second amendment in particular.

Bonus: One of the men carrying a sidearm in one of the three pictures featured side by side was the subject of one of MSNBC's most shameful episodes. They had taken tonight's still picture from a video they had shown last fall of a man at a Tea Party and, like tonight, the anchors were talking about potential violence. But back in the fall when they first showed this guy, zoomed in on his gun, the two anchors (I think it was Contessa Brewer and to be perfectly fair, it's even possible this was CNN... but the salient facts of the breach of journalistic ethics remains the same) speculated that there might be some white boys about to behave badly. The implication was clear: Tea Partiers were little more than Klan draped in a flag rather than a white sheet.

Oopsie... Turned out that that "white" guy with the sidearm was black - and the network knew it. They zoomed in on the sidearm purposely obscuring the man's skin color. It all came out within a matter of days but they were caught. The raw footage was undeniable. They didn't just make an error, they whipped it up, fried it in a pan, and served it on a breakfast tray.

"Broadcast News" and Obama

2010-03-23T06:14:00.002-04:00

I've loved this movie from the very first time I ever saw it, especially since when I was coming up in radio in the late '80's then through the '90's I had a good friend from college who was doing the same in televison and eventually went on to be a personal producer for Peter Jennings, and she told me that "B.N." was a very accurate portrayal of what it was like (as was "Private Parts" for radio, BTW).

This speech on what the Devil will look like struck me as brilliant the moment I heard it and has stayed with me all these years. Every time I hear Obama speak I think of it. See if it resonates for you, too.

Representative Paul Ryan - New American Hero & Patriot

2010-03-22T18:14:00.005-04:00

Below is the unexpurgated text of Rep. Paul Ryan's impassioned and correct bid Sunday night (3.21.10) to call the disgraceful, Socialistic "health care" bill what it was. These are the words of a a man with the soul of a Founder. One who truly, deeply, understands the grand American idea. I indulged the freedom accorded to me in my own little digital slice of blogosphere here to highlight my favorite parts!
Madam speaker, there is a lot wrong with this bill. We know the problems with its cost. We know it doesnt really reduce the deficit. We know that it increases health care premiums. The CBO has given us all of this information and its clear that what we have is a bill chock full of gimmicks and hidden mandates.
So Im not going to get into all of that again.
But what I will ask is this: why has this decision become so personal to our constituents? Why are so many people swarming the Capitol over this? Why have we received 100,000 calls an hour from all over the country?
It is because health care affects every one of us. And yet, here we are, debating whether the government should have a bigger role in making those personal decisions.
So make no mistake about it. Were not just here to pass a healthcare bill. We are being asked to make a choice about the future path of this country.
The speakers to my left are correct: this is history. Today marks a major turning point in American history. This is really not a debate about prices, coverage, or choosing doctors.
This is ultimately about what kind of country we are going to be in the 21st century.
America is not just a nationality its not just a mass of land from Hawaii to Maine, from Wisconsin to Florida. America is an idea. Its the most pro-human idea ever designed by mankind.
Our founders got it right, when they wrote in the Declaration of Independence that our rights come from nature and nature's God - - not from government.
Should we now subscribe to an ideology where government creates rights, is solely responsible for delivering these artificial rights, and then systematically rations these rights?
Do we believe that the goal of government is to promote equal opportunity for all Americans to make the most of their lives - - or do we now believe that governments role is to equalize the results of peoples lives?
The philosophy advanced on the floor by the Majority today is so paternalistic, and so arrogant. Its condescending. And it tramples upon the principles that have made America so exceptional.
My friends, we are fast approaching a tipping point where more Americans depend on the federal government than on themselves for their livelihoods -- a point where we, the American people, trade in our commitment and our concern for our individual liberties in exchange for government benefits and dependencies.
More to the point, Madam Speaker, we have seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. The European social welfare state promoted by this legislation is not sustainable.
This is not who we are and it is not who we should become.
As we march toward this tipping point of dependency, we are also accelerating toward a debt crisis a debt crisis that is the result of politicians of the past making promises we simply cannot afford to keep. Déjà vu all over again.
It is unconscionable what we are leaving the next generation.
This moment may mark a temporary conclusion of the health care debate - but its place in history has not yet been decided. If this passes, the quest to reclaim the American idea is not over. The fight to reapply our founding principles is not finished, its just a steeper climb. And it is a climb that we will make.
On this issue - - more than any other issue we have ever seen here - - the American people are engaged. From our town hall meetings, to Scott Browns victory in Massachusetts, you have made your voices heard. And some of us are listening to you.
My colleagues, lets bring down this bill - - and bring back the ideas that made this country great!
Congressman Paul Ryan serves the 1st Congressional District of Wisconsin. For more information please visit:
http://www.house.gov/ryan/welcome.htm
http://www.americanroadmap.org
http://www.facebook.com/reppaulryan?r...
http://twitter.com/reppaulryan

Damn that YouTube Again!

2010-03-22T15:57:00.001-04:00

Obama will brush this away like a fly if he ever grows a set and lets Brett Baier interview him again. "Legislating is ugly work...blah, blah, blah" and his sycophantic idolaters will let him get away with it. If any conservative at any level of government broke half as many promises on tape as this guy...

Next: Minister of Propaganda (aka FCC "Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd) to shut down all dissenting voices on radio/TV/internet in the name of "fairness." It would solve this whole YouTube problem very neatly.

Next: Supreme Court?

2010-03-22T15:34:00.002-04:00

March 22, 2010

Is ObamaCare Headed for a Supreme Court Smackdown? by Michael Filozof
Now that the House Democrats have rammed ObamaCare down the throats of the nation by a vote of 219-212, the situation is indeed bleak. But Conservatives and Tea Partiers despondent over the fact that liberal Democrats just passed a massive encroachment on our liberties over their massive protests should take hope. James Madison saw this coming, and his forethought will give opponents of ObamaCare one last shot at killing it.

In Federalist #10, Madison wrote "Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." (Boy, did he ever get THAT right.)

Knowing that the nation's future leaders would include usurpers and potential tyrants, Madison sought a way to preserve individual liberty despite their efforts. He thus devised the system of the separation of powers. "[E]ssential to the preservation of liberty..." he wrote in Federalist #51, "it is evident that each department should have a will of its own" and "members of each department should be as little dependent as possible" on the other branches.

Passage of legislation by Congress and the signature of the President are not enough. The next step is judicial review by the Supreme Court, an independent and co-equal branch of government. (Already the states of Idaho and Virginia have vowed to sue the Federal government over ObamaCare, and the passage of the legislation will doubtless spawn hundreds of other lawsuits as well).

Madison was a brilliant enough thinker to understand that the separation of powers relied on more than each branch having the "necessary constitutional means" to resist the others. The separation of powers provided each branch with the "personal motives" to "resist the encroachments of others."

"Ambition," wrote Madison, "must be made to counteract ambition. The interests of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the [branch]."

Thankfully, the Court has an axe to grind with Obama.

Remember the State of the Union Address? In January, Obama took a cheap shot at the Supreme Court's courageous decision in the Citizens United case, upholding free speech and overturning key provisions of the "McCain-Feingold" law. Congressional Democrats whooped and jeered at the Court like obnoxious schoolboys. The Court was humiliated. Justice Alito shook his head in disgust and muttered that the President's remarks were "not true." In March, Chief Justice Roberts told an audience at the University of Alabama that the behavior of the President and the Congressional Democrats was "very troubling," and questioned why the Supreme Court should even bother to attend a "political pep rally." Roberts' remarks caused the White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to issue a snarky rebuttal, again condemning the Court's decision.

It is quite likely that the "individual mandate" in ObamaCare requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance against their will is unconstitutional. But after the State of the Union dust-up, the Court has more than just technical legal motives to take up the case. Madison lamented that reliance on personal motives and ambitions "should be necessary to control the abuses of government" but understood that this was a "reflection on human nature."

I'm hoping that Madison's understanding of human nature was correct, and that Justices Alito and Roberts are chomping at the bit for the chance to get back at Obama and his Congressional goons for the humiliation they inflicted on the Court. A decision striking down ObamaCare, authored by Justice Alito, would be the ultimate smackdown.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/is_obamacare_headed_for_a_supr.html at March 22, 2010 - 02:32:19 PM CDT

How Grown Ups View FACTS of this "Health Care Reform" Legislation

2010-03-22T08:05:00.009-04:00

1. There's money to pay for 16,000 to 18,000 new IRS agents to enforce compliance with the "Health Care Reform" law but:

a. NOT DOLLAR ONE for new doctor training for the 30,000,000 new patients this law will "cover."

b. NOT DOLLAR ONE for new clinics, hospitals, medical facilities of any kind to handle the 30,000,000 new patients this law will "cover."

c. NOT DOLLAR ONE for Research & Development to continue our dominance as the finder of cures for all that ails us.

This is about CONTROL, aka, a contraction of your freedoms. Remember a "gaffe" in Washington is when a politician accidentally tells the truth. Just yesterday, Rep. John Linder told the truth: "A lot of us have been saying for a long time that this has never been about healthcare. It's about government." That's a direct quote.

2. Any moron can make 10 years of tax collecting pay for 6 years of coverage, which is what this new law does. What happens the next 10 years?

3. Forcing insurance companies to cover all pre-existing conditions is a lovely moral imperative, but will bankrupt them all. What happens then? Any moron can figure it out. Single-payer government healthcare. Picture yourself lobbying Congress for your MRI... How's that going to go for you?

4. This is the first time in the history of the Republic that a we will have to purchase a commodity in order to be a lawful citizen. That's demonstrably UN-AMERICAN and a very, very dangerous precedent.

These immature, gimme girls & boys used to instant gratification and helicopter parents are gleeful that the sun still rose this morning despite all our cries "that world will end" if this bill becomes law. Even their need for the destruction of our country can't wait! Well, those of us with a few miles on us know these things take time. It's coming. We saw it already with the situation with Walgreens in Washington. Why do you think that happened? Because government run healthcare "rationed" care by dropping reimbursements so low that it became toxic to a free market enterprise like Walgreens. That situation is our canary in the coal mine. More and more and more private medical enterprise will fall.

Just because it's historic, doesn't make it good. 9.11 was historic.

Just because it's change, doesn't make it good. A rash is a change.

FACT: The number one reason given by people who show up in the ER give "My doctor couldn't see me fast enough." 83% of the people that use the ER have insurance which is, coincidentally, the same percentage of people in America that have insurance. Hows that waiting time going to be impacted when up to 1/3 of doctors leave the profession as the New England Journal of Medicine just recently wrote they might, and as noted above, no additional infrastructure for care is in place?

FACT: Who is the number one denier of claims? Private or Medicare/Medicaid. M&M deny more claims than ALL PRIVATE INSURANCE COMBINED. Helooooo..... That's rationing...

Other than the Military, what has the Federal Government EVER run that hasn't gone into unsustainable debt or complete ruin? Just name me one.

None of the people who supported this bill can answer these concerns. They seem to be incapable of separating the need for health care reform, from the "fiscal Frankenstein" (The wonderful Rep. Paul Ryan's phrase) that this bill is. Nobody wants body parts falling off in the streets. We just didn't want this particular bill. All the sob stories on the House floor were an insult to that legislative body. They were preaching morals, not debating the legislation at hand. It was an embarrassment to this great nation.

As is every Progressive in Washington, most especially Mr. Barack Obama.

Health Care Reform Worries

2010-03-22T06:42:00.001-04:00

OBAMACARE’S LETHAL THIRD RAIL SHOCK TO COME -

Another Birther Argument

2010-03-21T12:43:00.000-04:00

Media Lying About Racist Attacks VIDEO PROOF

2010-03-21T09:11:00.003-04:00

Once again, www.biggovernment.com committed the unpardonable sin of journalism and found out the ugly truth about the syncophants attendant to the Messiah (CNN/MSNBC/CBS/ABC/NBC/NYT) and even caught Fox flat-footed on this one. Their b-team over this weekend reported this crap too. Ah well, can't be right 100% of the time. Just 99%, which is 98% more than the other cables combined.

I don't doubt for a second that this story was planted by SEIU, ACORN, OFA, or all of the above. I also have no doubt that CNN/MSNBC/CBS/ABC/NBC/NYT won't lift FINGER ONE to uncover the truth about how this all happened and will once again, be forced to report the journalism of others when truth is uncovered. And it WILL BE. Just wait.

Link to complete article here. Video below shows NOTHING, repeat N-O-T-H-I-N-G untoward happened.

Rules Shmules. "We make 'em up as we go along."

2010-03-20T15:36:00.000-04:00

So glad a ranking member of the Rules Committee is so cavalier about it. Wouldn't want him to lose any hair...er...sleep over it.

Pizza Night under Obamacare

2010-03-20T15:24:00.002-04:00

"Slaughter" Then & Now

2010-03-19T14:35:00.006-04:00

Remember a few months ago when Zsa-Zsa...er.... Ariana Huffington did what appears to be endemic at MSNBC--twist, distort, and obfuscate the facts to make some sort of ridiculous point--this time over Glenn Beck's use of the word "slaughter"? These people are such soulless gasbags that if someone said "Hitler was a vegetarian" they would deem (pardon the timely pun of "deem") the utterer to be a Nazi sympathizer. (Hitler was a vegetarian. And by all accounts was faithful to Eva Braun... Those are facts. Doesn't change the other horrible, evil, inhuman, inexcusable, utterly despicable facts of his very existence, but the fidelity and vegetarianism are true.)

Well, Glenn has rightly been all over the anarchy taking place down in DC this weekend with the bloodless coup about to give us Cuban healthcare via the "Slaughter Rule."

Some men are born to greatness, other just step in it! Glenn... you have done both on a gargantuan, American, Patriotic scale!

Roger Ailes Warns Fox News Staffers Not To Attack Glenn Beck

2010-03-19T13:49:00.000-04:00

Roger Ailes Warns Fox News Staffers Not To Attack Glenn Beck

A Thousand Words

2010-03-19T10:58:00.000-04:00

Everything you need to know about who is who in this fight is captured in these two photos headlining Drudge right now. One is a "paid" operative with a paid for printed sign (See Obama's Organizing for America logo on top?). The other is a homemade sign (No Socialized Medicine) with people who I would bet my house have never marched in protest before (or not since the 60's) and are doing so for FREE and in honor of our FOUNDING PRINCIPLES.

Viral Video Transcript - Remembering WHO WE ARE AS AMERICANS

2010-03-19T08:06:00.002-04:00

This video has gone viral. I'm not one for watching these things, they feel too much like propaganda even when I agree with them (!) so feel free to just read the transcript below. You can watch the whole thing without volume because the text runs over the video through the whole thing...

Transcript – We The People by Nos Populus

Dear President Obama,

“We The People” have stated resolutely we reject your vision for our country. You claim you have not heard us.

“We The People” have assembled across America resisting your efforts to subvert our constitution and undermine our liberty. You claim you have not seen us.

Since you have not acknowledged our message, let us here present it once more for if as President Wilson said, “a leader’s ear must ring with the voices of the people,” the time has come.

Our greatest treasure is freedom – the absence of restraints on our ability to think and to act. The corollary of freedom is individual responsibility. We believe in the power of the individual.

A few years ago President Bush said, “History moves toward freedom because the desire for freedom is written in every human heart.” Let us add that we will preserve it only as long as devotion to freedom is expressed in the heart of our actions.

When President Lincoln dedicated Gettysburg National Cemetery he declared, “It is for us the living to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus so nobly advanced.”

That unfinished cause for which our soldiers willingly go to battle and for which so many have given their lives is a free United States of America. It has been nearly one hundred fifty years and the work President Lincoln spoke of is not finished. In fact, that work will never be finished.

Freedom is the capacity of self-determination. It is not an entity but a condition and conditions change. Freedom can expand, yet so can it contract.

You promised change when you took office, Mr. President, but subjugation is not change we wanted or will accept.

You have expanded government, violated our Constitution, confounded laws, seized private industry, destroyed jobs, perverted our economy, curtailed free speech, corrupted our currency, weakened our national security, and endangered our sovereignty.

By compromising our nation’s cultural, legal and economic institutions, you are ensuring that our children will never achieve the same quality of life as we enjoy today. Through generational theft you are robbing the unborn of opportunity.

This is not acceptable. Not in America. We did not become a strong nation through hope but rather through self-reliance.

No one better understands the relationship between individual achievement, dignity and strength than our armed forces. Through every war our soldiers have held this nation’s destiny in their hands. They have not failed us. They cherish freedom enough that they are willing to die for it.

Our duty to them and to ourselves is to treasure freedom enough to live up to it.

We accept the challenge, Mr. President. That is why we are assembling across the land to deliver our message to you as often and in every way we can. Dismiss us at your political peril.

Our great nation is a Republic. We will not accept tyranny under any guise. Your policy to redistribute the fruits of our labor is Statism and will not be tolerated.

By our honor, Mr. President, we vow forever to resist coercive government in America. Patriots will not stand silent as you attempt to dismantle the greatest nation on earth. “We The People” will defend our liberty. We will protect our beloved country and America’s exceptionalism will prevail.

God Bless the United States of America!

Sincerely,

We The People