Saturday, December 19, 2009
A Failed Presidency, Headed For Disaster
FAILED PRESIDENCY
Subject: Another Failed Presidency
An article from American Thinker by Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson. In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China .
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.
But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on?
No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, and Reagan.
But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, and is historically illiterate and woefully small minded for the size of the task--all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience.
In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: "For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too."
Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.
Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along.
Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."
"When you subsidize poverty and failure, you get more of both." - James Dale Davidson, National Taxpayers Union
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown
Subject: Another Failed Presidency
An article from American Thinker by Geoffrey P. Hunt
Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson. In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China .
But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.
But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on?
No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, and Reagan.
But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, and is historically illiterate and woefully small minded for the size of the task--all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience.
In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: "For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too."
Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.
Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along.
Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."
"When you subsidize poverty and failure, you get more of both." - James Dale Davidson, National Taxpayers Union
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown
Friday, December 18, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Gary Unmarried Marine Corps Brother
This is a real Marine in the show Gary Unmarried.. his name is Rob Riggle Jr. He does a GREAT job here on this show.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Monday, November 30, 2009
The Scientists Involved in Deliberately Deceiving the World on Climate
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, November 30, 2009
Liberal is an anagram of braille. Appropriate because they appear unable to see or read about the climate science scandals.—Tim Ball
The “Ad Hoc Committee Report on the ‘Hockey Stick’ Global Climate Reconstruction commonly known as The Wegman Report said, “Based on the literature we have reviewed, there is no overarching consensus on MBH98/99 (The infamous hockey stick paper). As analyzed in our social network, there is a tightly knit group of individuals who passionately believe in their thesis. However, our perception is that this group has a self-reinforcing feedback mechanism and, moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that they can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.” Wegman identified most of the people involved with the leaked information from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) – “climategate”. They are still reinforcing each other and refuse to acknowledge the severity of their actions. Mainstream media helps by downplaying the significance or deliberately closing their eyes. It’s deeply disturbing to learn scientists have deliberately twisted science for social and political ends. I watched it happen, now I can set out the history and identify those involved.
In a measure of bureaucratic involvement Univeristy Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) President Rick Anthes’ opening slide ridiculed McIntyre and McKitrick who broke the hockey stick. “The reply, by Wigley and Jones, is a monument of obfuscation, irrelevance and spite.” (Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick October 2, 2005). This was followed by a quote that said, “This doesn’t sound like the Tom Wigley we know and love…What’s going on here.” Well, Mr. Anthes the avuncular Wigley fooled most of the world. I know. I watched him.
I’ve written about poor climate science and political machinations. Now disclosure of the scientists involved at the CRU and beyond allows me to describe who and how they did it with the support of Maurice Strong. He established the political framework through formation of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These scientists provided the science through the IPCC. Strong took their claims to the green movements through the 1992 Rio Conference. Strong’s powerful connections in Canada were apparently used to involve Environment Canada (EC) in development of the IPCC and CRU connections. These bureaucrats drew in other government agencies who easily convinced politicians desperate to appear green. Gordon McBean, Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) at EC, chaired the 1985 Villach Austria meeting when formation of the IPCC was planned. Here are the two major players in the CRU scandal, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, in Villach in a series shown at Wigley’s career Symposium.
Figure 1: Phil Jones, Current Director of the CRU and Tom Wigley the power behind the scenes.
Source:
Jones’ innocent look belies his actions. In one email he wrote to Michael Mann: “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow—even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Lamb worked every day almost to the end, but the real power was emerging in the person of Tom Wigley (Figure 2). Lamb knew what was going on because he cryptically writes in his autobiography, “Through all the Changing Scenes of Life: A Meteorologists Tale” how a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation came to grief because of, “…an understandable difference of scientific judgment between me and the scientist, Dr. Tom Wigley, whom we have appointed to take charge of the research.”
Figure 2: Wigley and H.H.Lamb, founder of the CRU.
Source :
Wigley is the grandfather figure and in control throughout as the emails illustrate. They seek his advice as in this email, which ends, “I hope these very hasty ramblings are helpful” The originator was seeking ideas for a National Academy of Sciences plan.
Other comments are more direct and frightening. Bishop Hill summarizes, “Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn’t matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too.”
In another push to have someone removed Wigley supports Michael Mann’s attack on the journal editor of Geophysical Review Letters (GRL) who published McIntyre’s 2005 paper. Again Hill’s summary, “Mann has challenged GRL editor-in-chief over the publication. Mann is concerned about the connections of the paper’s editor James Saiers with U Virginia [does he mean Pat Michaels?]. Tom Wigley says that if Saiers is a sceptic they should go through official GRL channels to get him ousted.) [Note to readers - Saiers was subsequently ousted]” This quote illustrates the problem for the public. Unless you understand the science and the events the comments make little sense. Apart from comments like how to avoid Freedom of Information (FOI) requests it is easy to divert attention.
A Channel 4 (UK) documentary released in 1990 titled “The Greenhouse Conspiracy” is relevant today.
PBS refused to show it arguing it was biased. I saw a pirated version with senior management of a public utility who wanted explanation and commentary.
Wigley’s appearance explains why CRU and National Centre for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) were indebted. In response to a question about the research, he coyly says he has many research students to fund. This attitude, that the end justifies the means, pervades his commentary in the exposed emails. He’s the intellectual force but more important the bagman as this photo from the Symposium implies.
Figure 3: No wonder Prince Charles says we have 100 months left, he has a ‘reliable’ source.
Figure 4: Jones, Santer and Wigley at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Source:
Santer was lead author of Chapter 8 for the 1995 IPCC Report and involved in the first major controversy. He altered contents of the Chapter so it agreed with the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) without consent of other authors. The emails show how the Reports similarly achieved political not scientific objectives.
Of course, IPCC rules were carefully written to achieve this end.
Figure 5: Major players in early and later days of the IPCC.
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/symposium/ ” title=“Source”>Source:
The people in the picture are connected with East Anglia or the IPCC. In another photo (Figure 6) they are unsure of source or time but it puts Wigley and Jones together early with leading figures like Syukoru Manabe, whose computer model was the basis of the IPCC models, and Bert Bolin first chairman of the IPCC (now deceased).
Figure 6: Critical players in CRU and IPCC
Source:
All the people in the emails are listed in the various author lists of each of the IPCC Reports. For example, the 2007 list includes these names Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth, Tom Karl, Keith Briffa, Jonathan Overpeck, Andrew Weaver, Martin Parry among others.
Naturally, they are responding in feeble and predictable ways. For example UCAR President Rick Anthes said, “E-mails, by their nature, are quickly and sometimes thoughtlessly written and therefore open to misinterpretation and misrepresentation,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that this illegal hacking and invasion of privacy has generated such headlines and bad will. It doesn’t alter the fundamental scientific fact that emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are changing our climate.”
So it’s the hacker’s fault; a common theme from Jones and others. Ignore the fact Anthes’ statement is completely wrong and a circular argument based on the false information of CRU and IPCC. They all claim the comments are out of context. Wigley picks a devastating email to say, “This e-mail was directed to Phil Jones only, and Phil knew exactly what I was talking about,” So do I, Tom! “It does not at all refer to making some arbitrary correction to existing data in order to make such data fit some preconceived ideas about global warming.” Yes it does. Wigley knows that most people including the mainstream media will not understand and liberals won’t want to see. They’ve used this lack of understanding all along.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17364
Liberal is an anagram of braille. Appropriate because they appear unable to see or read about the climate science scandals.—Tim Ball
The Public and Mainstream Media Still Don’t Grasp the Implications.
Tentacles of Climategate will reach far as information is divulged. People will rush to get on or off the bandwagon depending on their involvement. As a first hand observer, I must outline the history, identify the people involved and provide context.The “Ad Hoc Committee Report on the ‘Hockey Stick’ Global Climate Reconstruction commonly known as The Wegman Report said, “Based on the literature we have reviewed, there is no overarching consensus on MBH98/99 (The infamous hockey stick paper). As analyzed in our social network, there is a tightly knit group of individuals who passionately believe in their thesis. However, our perception is that this group has a self-reinforcing feedback mechanism and, moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that they can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.” Wegman identified most of the people involved with the leaked information from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) – “climategate”. They are still reinforcing each other and refuse to acknowledge the severity of their actions. Mainstream media helps by downplaying the significance or deliberately closing their eyes. It’s deeply disturbing to learn scientists have deliberately twisted science for social and political ends. I watched it happen, now I can set out the history and identify those involved.
Cabal; A Secret Political Clique or Faction
As recently as June 19th 2009, they gathered and reinforced each other at a Symposium to honor (?) Tom Wigley.In a measure of bureaucratic involvement Univeristy Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) President Rick Anthes’ opening slide ridiculed McIntyre and McKitrick who broke the hockey stick. “The reply, by Wigley and Jones, is a monument of obfuscation, irrelevance and spite.” (Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick October 2, 2005). This was followed by a quote that said, “This doesn’t sound like the Tom Wigley we know and love…What’s going on here.” Well, Mr. Anthes the avuncular Wigley fooled most of the world. I know. I watched him.
I’ve written about poor climate science and political machinations. Now disclosure of the scientists involved at the CRU and beyond allows me to describe who and how they did it with the support of Maurice Strong. He established the political framework through formation of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These scientists provided the science through the IPCC. Strong took their claims to the green movements through the 1992 Rio Conference. Strong’s powerful connections in Canada were apparently used to involve Environment Canada (EC) in development of the IPCC and CRU connections. These bureaucrats drew in other government agencies who easily convinced politicians desperate to appear green. Gordon McBean, Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) at EC, chaired the 1985 Villach Austria meeting when formation of the IPCC was planned. Here are the two major players in the CRU scandal, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, in Villach in a series shown at Wigley’s career Symposium.
Figure 1: Phil Jones, Current Director of the CRU and Tom Wigley the power behind the scenes.
Source:
Jones’ innocent look belies his actions. In one email he wrote to Michael Mann: “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow—even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Wigley Takes Control of CRU
While doing my doctoral thesis, I went to CRU for a meeting with the founder Hubert Lamb, justifiably considered the father of modern climatology. These events would mortify him because his diligence and integrity were beyond reproach.Lamb worked every day almost to the end, but the real power was emerging in the person of Tom Wigley (Figure 2). Lamb knew what was going on because he cryptically writes in his autobiography, “Through all the Changing Scenes of Life: A Meteorologists Tale” how a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation came to grief because of, “…an understandable difference of scientific judgment between me and the scientist, Dr. Tom Wigley, whom we have appointed to take charge of the research.”
Figure 2: Wigley and H.H.Lamb, founder of the CRU.
Source :
Wigley is the grandfather figure and in control throughout as the emails illustrate. They seek his advice as in this email, which ends, “I hope these very hasty ramblings are helpful” The originator was seeking ideas for a National Academy of Sciences plan.
Other comments are more direct and frightening. Bishop Hill summarizes, “Tom Wigley says that von Storch is partly to blame for sceptic papers getting published at Climate Research. Says he encourages the publication of crap science. Says they should tell publisher that the journal is being used for misinformation. Says that whether this is true or not doesn’t matter. Says they need to get editorial board to resign. Says they need to get rid of von Storch too.”
In another push to have someone removed Wigley supports Michael Mann’s attack on the journal editor of Geophysical Review Letters (GRL) who published McIntyre’s 2005 paper. Again Hill’s summary, “Mann has challenged GRL editor-in-chief over the publication. Mann is concerned about the connections of the paper’s editor James Saiers with U Virginia [does he mean Pat Michaels?]. Tom Wigley says that if Saiers is a sceptic they should go through official GRL channels to get him ousted.) [Note to readers - Saiers was subsequently ousted]” This quote illustrates the problem for the public. Unless you understand the science and the events the comments make little sense. Apart from comments like how to avoid Freedom of Information (FOI) requests it is easy to divert attention.
A Channel 4 (UK) documentary released in 1990 titled “The Greenhouse Conspiracy” is relevant today.
PBS refused to show it arguing it was biased. I saw a pirated version with senior management of a public utility who wanted explanation and commentary.
Wigley’s appearance explains why CRU and National Centre for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) were indebted. In response to a question about the research, he coyly says he has many research students to fund. This attitude, that the end justifies the means, pervades his commentary in the exposed emails. He’s the intellectual force but more important the bagman as this photo from the Symposium implies.
Figure 3: No wonder Prince Charles says we have 100 months left, he has a ‘reliable’ source.
The IPCC Connection
Wigley is prominent in the IPCC from the start. Graduate students are prominent names in the emails and the IPCC. Phil Jones is the focus as current Director of the CRU, but as Figure 1 shows he was alongside Wigley from the start. Another prominent CRU graduate is Benjamin Santer seen here with Jones and Wigley. Figure 4: Jones, Santer and Wigley at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Source:
Santer was lead author of Chapter 8 for the 1995 IPCC Report and involved in the first major controversy. He altered contents of the Chapter so it agreed with the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) without consent of other authors. The emails show how the Reports similarly achieved political not scientific objectives.
Of course, IPCC rules were carefully written to achieve this end.
Figure 5: Major players in early and later days of the IPCC.
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/symposium/ ” title=“Source”>Source:
The people in the picture are connected with East Anglia or the IPCC. In another photo (Figure 6) they are unsure of source or time but it puts Wigley and Jones together early with leading figures like Syukoru Manabe, whose computer model was the basis of the IPCC models, and Bert Bolin first chairman of the IPCC (now deceased).
Figure 6: Critical players in CRU and IPCC
Source:
All the people in the emails are listed in the various author lists of each of the IPCC Reports. For example, the 2007 list includes these names Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth, Tom Karl, Keith Briffa, Jonathan Overpeck, Andrew Weaver, Martin Parry among others.
Naturally, they are responding in feeble and predictable ways. For example UCAR President Rick Anthes said, “E-mails, by their nature, are quickly and sometimes thoughtlessly written and therefore open to misinterpretation and misrepresentation,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that this illegal hacking and invasion of privacy has generated such headlines and bad will. It doesn’t alter the fundamental scientific fact that emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are changing our climate.”
So it’s the hacker’s fault; a common theme from Jones and others. Ignore the fact Anthes’ statement is completely wrong and a circular argument based on the false information of CRU and IPCC. They all claim the comments are out of context. Wigley picks a devastating email to say, “This e-mail was directed to Phil Jones only, and Phil knew exactly what I was talking about,” So do I, Tom! “It does not at all refer to making some arbitrary correction to existing data in order to make such data fit some preconceived ideas about global warming.” Yes it does. Wigley knows that most people including the mainstream media will not understand and liberals won’t want to see. They’ve used this lack of understanding all along.
Government Funding Enlarges the Monster
Political exploitation will delay condemnation. Business and political opportunities created by CRU and IPCC, both heavily funded by government, will not yield easily. I spoke with five farm groups in Alberta recently and at one a company selling carbon credits gave a presentation. The person involved said he didn’t care about or even want to discuss the science. He saw a business opportunity. Farmers saw income. I told them the cost of carbon strategies would put money in their left pockets by taking a greater amount out of their right pockets. Sadly, I’ve known all along it’s based on false and falsified science. Now the world knows.http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17364
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Dr Charles Kauthammer On Obama
Dr. Charles Krauthammer
>
> Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News . He is an M.D. and a lawyer and is paralyzed from the neck down. A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand but 1st. The ramifications are staggering for us, our children and their children.
>
> Last Monday was a profound evening, Dr. Charles Krauthammer spoke to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views . He is a fiscal conservative, and has received a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post.
>
>
> The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have summarized his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free.
>
>
> ******************Summary of his comments:**********************************************************
>
> 1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming
> individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask.
> The taking down of the Clinton dynasty was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them.
> Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.
>
> 2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton . He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!
>
>
> 3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along.
>
> He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain orCanada .
>
> 4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada . God forbid!
>
> 5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store.
> But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries.
> This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.
>
> 6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States, but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!
>
> 7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.
>
> 8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. Republicans are pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and state's rights.
>
> 9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyperinflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn't work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.
>
> 10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.
>
> 11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's
> happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.
>
> Do yourself a long term favor, send this to all who will listen to an intelligent assessment of the big picture. All our futures and children's futures depend on our good understanding of what is really going on in DC, and our action pursuant to that understanding!! It really IS up to each of us to take individual action!! Start with educating your friends and neighbors.
>
> Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News . He is an M.D. and a lawyer and is paralyzed from the neck down. A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand but 1st. The ramifications are staggering for us, our children and their children.
>
> Last Monday was a profound evening, Dr. Charles Krauthammer spoke to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views . He is a fiscal conservative, and has received a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post.
>
>
> The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have summarized his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free.
>
>
> ******************Summary of his comments:**********************************************************
>
> 1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming
> individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask.
> The taking down of the Clinton dynasty was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them.
> Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.
>
> 2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton . He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!
>
>
> 3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along.
>
> He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain orCanada .
>
> 4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada . God forbid!
>
> 5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store.
> But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries.
> This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.
>
> 6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States, but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!
>
> 7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.
>
> 8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. Republicans are pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and state's rights.
>
> 9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyperinflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn't work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.
>
> 10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.
>
> 11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's
> happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.
>
> Do yourself a long term favor, send this to all who will listen to an intelligent assessment of the big picture. All our futures and children's futures depend on our good understanding of what is really going on in DC, and our action pursuant to that understanding!! It really IS up to each of us to take individual action!! Start with educating your friends and neighbors.
Foxes In Charge Of The Hen House
The foxes are now in charge of the hen house....
Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse...
Tomorrow, the wolves will be herding the sheep
Obama Appoints two 'Devout Muslims' to homeland
security posts.
Doesn't this make you feel safer already?
Obama and Janet Napolitano Appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development Source announcement: Homeland Security Press Room.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is proud to announce that the DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).. http://www.adc.org/
Just wondering...
"Devout Muslims" being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions...
That should make our homeland much safer, huh?
Wasn't it men of the "Devout Muslim Faith" that flew airplanes into some U.S. Buildings not too long ago?
Yeah, I thought so
That should make our homeland much safer, huh?
Wasn't it men of the "Devout Muslim Faith" that flew airplanes into some U.S. Buildings not too long ago?
Yeah, I thought so
And the Major who killed the soldiers at Fort Hood was a "Devout Muslim." How many more will die because of these people.
What IS this president thinking?
What IS this president thinking?
Why are we just now hearing about it???
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Obama Who??
NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA
Alan Peters
Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.
Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me.
I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia. Ever! Nobody recalls him. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not kidding."
Root adds that he was also, like Obama, "Class of '83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him.
At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me.
No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?
It's very strange." Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Allyn_Root#column-one
Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.
Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me.
I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia. Ever! Nobody recalls him. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not kidding."
Root adds that he was also, like Obama, "Class of '83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him.
At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me.
No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?
It's very strange." Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Allyn_Root#column-one
School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a Political
Science major (in the same class as President Barack Obama WAS SUPPOSED TO
HAVE BEEN IN)
With Hurricanes At Thirty Year Low, Gore Turns To Photoshop
The King of cap and trade simply airbrushes them in to his new book to create a more scary earth
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, November 19, 2009
http://www.prisonplanet.com/with-hurricanes-at-thirty-year-low-gore-turns-to-photoshop.html
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, November 19, 2009
With the increasingly discredited notion of man-made global warming crashing and burning on a daily basis, climate alarmists are being forced to accelerate their fearmongering to unprecedented levels. With the evidence failing to match up to the doomsday proclamations, Al Gore has turned to photoshop in order to make a CO2-choked earth look scary enough to sell his cap and trade scam.
The latest example of climate cult fakery comes in the form of the front cover of Al Gore’s new book, Our Choice; A Plan To Solve The Climate Crisis.
Shortly after the devastation of Katrina, Al Gore was busy making a correlation between hurricanes and global warming in an effort to drive home his claim that higher global CO2 emissions cause an increase in extreme weather events. The cover art for Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, features an image of a hurricane rising out of a smoke stack.
Seemingly underwhelmed that there have been no major hurricanes since Katrina, along with the fact that global hurricane activity is now at a thirty year low, Gore came up with an ingenious method of solving the problem of the lack of scary depictions of frightening hurricanes to display on his book – simply airbrush them in!
Ryan Maue, hurricane expert from the University of Florida writes:
The cover opens and closes half and half — so you only see one hurricane…as in the press release photo or the one on Amazon.
But this is the real picture sequence from the book which I looked at Borders today and took cell-phone pictures, original (before the retouching by some “artist”) Note all of the Arctic ice and the size of the Florida Peninsula…
And the final product:
A midget Southern Hemisphere cyclone is off the coast of Florida, another hurricane is sitting on the equator off the coast of Peru — and the Arctic Ice is gone (perhaps it is summer) and the Florida Peninsula is half gone
There are other differences I am sure you can find — but the hurricanes are just nonsense…
Despite the fact that CO2 levels are at their highest for 15 million years, just like global temperatures, hurricane activity has dropped off dramatically, as the graph below illustrates.
Gore has now dropped the presentation from his slideshow claiming a link between CO2 emissions and hurricanes.
There is a clear correlation between the natural ebb and flow of global temperatures and hurricanes, but none whatsoever with human CO2 emissions. As many skeptics have attempted to highlight, in the face of official intimidation and quasi-religious decrees that “the debate is over,” temperature levels prompted by natural factors leads the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, not the other way around.
With his invention of scary hurricanes for the purposes of his book, Gore is merely following his new ethos that “Simply laying out the facts won’t work,” in the attempt to corral a highly skeptical public into believing claims about man-made global warming.
This represents another grasping at straws as Gore adapts his propaganda into the form of a religious sermon in a desperate effort to claw back rapidly evaporating poll numbers that show 20% of Americans have changed their minds over the last three years and become man-made global warming skeptics.
Rush Limbaugh Quotes
| Wednesday Quotes: Your Conservative Rock |
| November 18, 2009 |
 |
"Attorney General Holder says justice has been delayed for the victims of USS Cole. The Cole was bombed in 2000, when Eric Holder was the deputy attorney general!" "Layoffs are beginning at the Associated Press. I guess that means there are probably no more Sarah Palin books to fact check out there." "It's stupid to run out and say that the goal of the jobs summit is not job creation; then what the hell is it? Well, it's a propaganda meeting! It's for Obama to save some face and shift the blame!" "Let me ask you something: After all these supposed fat cats get their compensation slashed to the bare bone, is your life going to be any better? See, the Democrats are counting on satisfying you simply by fulfilling your desire for revenge." "We haven't suffered any moral failing here in "Remember all the conventional wisdom: 'Hey, Rush, don't worry about Bush signing campaign finance reform. The Supreme Court will never find it constitutional.' Meanwhile, today we have campaign finance reform -- which is why when there's conventional wisdom, you'll find ol' El Rushbo running in the opposite direction." "Now, if these clowns, these terrorists, are convicted without having been Mirandized, what does that precedent set? Can't they then be denied to us in the future under this precedent?" "Who in the world is going to want to join the intelligence agencies now with the possibility that their work is going to be made public and brought into court? This is sick stuff." "You know, John, I want to give you something. I can hear the stress and the nervousness in your call. I am going to give you a bunch of HoMedics massagers. At least while you're looking for a job now, you can get a massage at the same time on us." "Whether Obama is diabolical, deceitful, or just plainly incompetent doesn't matter. The end result is the same: rotten." |
|
"Now, I do not believe Obama's naive. He's a Saul Alinskyite. He knows exactly what he's doing here -- that's what's so insidious about it." "Obama said that creating jobs is 'not the goal of a coming White House forum on jobs and economic growth. The president told "Well, look at this, folks! Sarah Palin, on with The Oprah on Monday, gave The Oprah her highest ratings in two years. And I don't think there was a tear shed in that show, was there?" "On December 3rd we're going to do our own unemployment forum, and we're going to do what Obama won't do: we're going to talk to those of you who are unemployed, exclusively, and we're going to hear what you think needs to be done." "Dick Durbin claims that no one complained about the Moussaoui trial being in a civilian court, but that's not true, and that trial was a circus. People may have forgotten that, but I haven't." "Even while executing broadcast excellence flawlessly, I still continue to do show prep because I, El Rushbo, a man who everybody would like to be, can multitask." "Recovery.gov is a comedy of errors, and also totally predictable, folks. Another government bureaucracy that acts like a bureaucracy and doesn't know what it's doing? Big shock!" "Remember one of the things about Club Gitmo: 'Oh, we have to shut it down because it's a tool for recruiting more terrorists!' I guess they don't care about that now." "Barack Obama's failure for the "I know some trial lawyers down here, and I sent a note to one other day: 'When are we going to get together for dinner?' And my trial lawyer friend said: 'I can't do it today because I'm in a medical malpractice seminar at a local hotel.'" "By the way, whatever happened to the swine flu? All those stories about death and destruction and the sick... We just don't see it. It must not be a panic or emergency out there anymore." "Sarah Palin has locked out the media for a future speech. They're going to be fit to be tied, but don't forget: Algore never permits the media into any of his speeches, either, and they don't cry a tear about that." "The views expressed by the host on this program are documented to be almost always right 99.3% of the time. I don't think anybody in media ever has had such an astronomically, unbelievably high percentage of opinion accuracy as my most recent accuracy audit suggest." "We do not have a rotten image in the world. We're on the way to acquiring one, however, because we are going to willingly give away what it was that made this country exceptional." "The left is so perverted; I'm sure they have plenty of judges who would probably consider themselves heroes to find the "Eric Holder has, in my opinion, a huge conflict of interest regarding these 9/11 trail decisions. You know why? Eric Holder's law firm has had a significant role already in defending over a dozen of these terrorists. This is deadly serious stuff, folks." "Senator Lindsey Grahamnesty raised concerns today that Eric Holder was imperiling national security, but a little side note: Lindsey Grahamnesty voted to confirm Eric Holder as attorney general." "I know a lot of guys who look like they need mammogram, but I'm not going to name any names." |
|
 |
Watch Obama Tell About His Islam Believes
This video shows what direction Obama wants to take this country. He says we are not a Christian Nation, Islam is taking it's place. The direction he wants to take this country.
If you have doubts this may change your mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
If you have doubts this may change your mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
MyHeritage.org: Putting One-Fifth of America on Welfare
 | FEATURED VIDEO Heritage economist J.D. Foster comments on Sen. Harry Reid's plan to tax the wealthy to pay for Obamacare. More videos » |
Putting one-fifth of America on welfare
The Left's health care "reform" plan will dramatically expand eligibility for Medicaid, a poorly-functioning program created in the 1960s to help low-income families.Heritage Foundation expert Conn Carroll explains:
The Health care "reform" bills advancing in the House and Senate would expand Medicaid by making this government-run health plan available to all adults with incomes at or below 150% of the poverty line. The change would dramatically multiply eligible recipients, with 46 states seeing increases of at least 20%, including 16 posting jumps of 50% or more. Almost 21% of the entire U.S. population would be eligible for Medicaid and seven states and the District of Columbia would have eligibility rates of at least 25%.
Meanwhile, Heritage Vice President Stuart Butler debunks liberal myths about the proposed "trigger," which would create a government-run health care "public option" if other reforms fail to work. This mechanism, he explains, provides few incentives to experiment with new approaches and its criteria would be hard to measure.
The Senate version of the health care bill, which has been written in secret, will probably be revealed this week, Heritage's Brian Darling explains. The House narrowly passed its bloated big-government bill earlier this month.
Rove names Feulner a top conservative
Writing on Forbes.com, former presidential adviser Karl Rove named Heritage Foundation President Ed Feulner the sixth most powerful conservative.Feulner is helping build the conservative movement at a critical time, Rove argues:
For more than 30 years, the president of the Heritage Foundation has been overseeing the conservative movement's premier think tank. Now he's injected new energy into the institution, and in a sign of confidence, is encouraging other center-right policy groups, like the American Enterprise Institute, to bring fresh conservative perspectives to policy battles.
Other Heritage work of note
- Under current law, the death tax is set to be completely eliminated in 2010—but if Congress fails to act it will shoot back up to 55 percent in January 2011. Heritage economist Bill Beach outlines seven reasons why Congress should permanently repeal the death tax instead of enacting short-term fixes. Some charities actually think the death tax is good for them, and are urging Congress to prevent the death tax from zeroing out. But as Heritage economist Bill Beach explains, a death tax rate of zero would benefit non-profits more by encouraging economic growth and creating disposable income.
- A new federal transportation bill, Heritage's Ron Utt explains, would "mark a dramatic, harmful change in federal transportation policy" by increasing taxes and the size of government, embarking on social engineering efforts and discouraging private investment. Conservatives, Utt argues, should work instead to abolish the federal highway program altogether and return transportation tax and spending decisions to the states.
In other news
- In Japan this weekend, President Obama bowed to the Japanese emperor--though Heritage's Lee Edwards argues it was more of a kowtow.
- More than 440 nonexistent Congressional districts received more than $6.4 billion in "stimulus" funds, according to Recovery.gov, the official website tallying the spending program's progress. Find out more about these dubious figures on the Foundry.
- A federal panel has recommended that women be screened for breast cancer less often. If the federal government gets more involved in health care, such guidelines may be used as the basis for regulations that ration care.
- "A new study finds university students in coed housing are 2.5 times more likely to binge drink every week," according to LiveScience.com. "And no surprise, they're also likely to have more sexual partners, the study found. Also, pornography use was higher among students in coed dorms."
- Labor unions want the federal government to spend taxpayer money on loans to business.
Coming up at Heritage
To attend these or any other events at Heritage please RSVP at Heritage's website. Or you can view these events live online. All times are Eastern.- On Wednesday, November 18 at noon, Professor Brian Domitrovic joins a panel of experts to discuss his new book on the benefits of supply-side economics.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Ft Hood's 9-11
Fort Hood's 9/11
Islamist terror strikes US again
Last Updated: 2:50 PM, November 6, 2009
Posted: 1:36 PM, November 6, 2009
Ralph Peters
On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting "Allahu Akbar!" committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.
What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Ft. Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of non-denominational shoplifting.
This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it’s an act of terror. Period.
When the terrorist posts anti-American hate-speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program, and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit — well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."
But the president won’t. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there’s no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.
And the Army won’t. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America-haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."
And the media won’t. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops — despite their crocodile tears.
Maj. Nadal Malik Hasan planned this terrorist attack and executed it in cold blood. The resulting massacre was the first tragedy. The second was that he wasn’t killed on the spot.
Hasan survived. Now the rest of us will have to foot his massive medical bills. Activist lawyers will get involved, claiming "harassment" drove him temporarily insane. There’ll be no end of trial delays. At best, taxpayer dollars will fund his prison lifestyle for decades to come, since our politically correct Army leadership wouldn’t dare pursue or carry out the death penalty.
Maj. Hasan will be a hero to Islamist terrorists abroad and their sympathizers here. While US Muslim organizations decry his acts publicly, Hasan will be praised privately.
And he’ll have the last laugh.
But Hasan isn’t the sole guilty party. The US Army’s unforgivable political correctness is also to blame for the casualties at Ft. Hood. Given the myriad warning signs, it’s appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Ft. Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.
Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would’ve been gone with the simoon. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.
Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. 31 soldiers were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don’t roll in this maggot’s chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.
There’s another important issue, too. How could the Army allow an obviously incompetent and dysfunctional psychiatrist to treat our troubled soldiers returning from war? An Islamist whacko is counseled for arguing with veterans who’ve been assigned to his care? And he’s not removed from duty? What planet does the Army live on?
For the first time since I joined the Army in 1976, I’m ashamed of its dereliction of duty. The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another. Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him. Get ready for the apologias. We’ve already heard from the terrorist’s family that "he’s a good American." In their world, maybe he is.
But when do we, the American public, knock off the PC nonsense?
A disgruntled Muslim soldier murdered his officers way back in 2003, in Kuwait, on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Recently? An American mullah shoots it out with the feds in Detroit. A Muslim fanatic attacks an Arkansas recruiting station. A Muslim media owner, after playing the peace card, beheads his wife. A Muslim father runs over his daughter because she’s becoming too Westernized.
Muslim terrorist wannabes are busted again and again. And we’re assured that "Islam’s a religion of peace."
I guarantee you that the Obama administration’s non-response to the Ft. Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Ronald Reagan Quote
..................................... Ronald Reagan
Obama has done it again this time bowed down to the Emperor of Japan
Off of Power Line Blog -
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/11/024948.php
We criticized Barack Obama when he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. Americans do not bow to royalty. When the royal is the ruling tyrant of a despotic regime, the wrong is compounded. Obama's bowing to the King was deeply offensive.
When the story emerged from the shadows of the Internet, Ben Smith ran an item on Politico with the White House denying the bow. "It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah," said an Obama aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Bill O'Reilly ran a bemused segment on it once the White House denied what Obama had done.
A reporter asked Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs about the bow. Under his own name and on the record, Gibbs denied what any fool could see. Indeed, one astute observer commented on CNN that "Ray Charles could see that he bowed."
Obama has now done it again. Andrew Malcolm asks (and reports): "How low will he go? Obama gives Japan's Emperor Akihito a wow bow."
Obama's breach of protocol is of a piece with the substance of his foreign policy. He means to teach Americans to bow before monarchs and tyrants. He embodies the ideological multiculturalism that sets the United States on the same plane as other regimes based on tribal privilege and royal bloodlines. He gives expressive form to the idea that the United States now willingly prostrates itself before the rest of the world. He declares that the United States is a country like any other, only worse, because we have so much for which to apologize.
In the photo above, retrieved by Malcolm from Army archives for his post on Obama's bow, Douglas Macarthur is pictured with Emperor Hirohito. Malcolm observes that Macarthur "treated Emperor Hirohito respectfully but, as his body language in this black and white postwar photo demonstrates, was not particularly deferential."
Macarthur was a faithful representative of the only country in history founded on the proposition that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." When Macarthur stood beside the Emperor, he subordinated himself to his country. Macarthur not only believed in the proposition that all men are created equal, he sought to teach it to others. Japan was a case in point.
Malcolm thus misses the essential difference between Macarthur and Obama. Obama is not particularly deferential either. Obama is a man of extraordinary arrogance. He seeks fundamentally to transform the United States. With him, a new age begins.
JOHN adds: The context of Obama's bow is worth noting. He has now carried his apology tour to Japan; his speech in Tokyo was largely an attack on his own country's recent history and policies:
As usual in such speeches, Obama cast himself as the hero who has redeemed his country's sordid past. Describing himself as "America's first Pacific President," he said:
PAUL adds: Mark Steyn suggests it's time for Valerie Jarrett to speak truth to bower.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/11/024948.php
We criticized Barack Obama when he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. Americans do not bow to royalty. When the royal is the ruling tyrant of a despotic regime, the wrong is compounded. Obama's bowing to the King was deeply offensive.
When the story emerged from the shadows of the Internet, Ben Smith ran an item on Politico with the White House denying the bow. "It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah," said an Obama aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Bill O'Reilly ran a bemused segment on it once the White House denied what Obama had done.
A reporter asked Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs about the bow. Under his own name and on the record, Gibbs denied what any fool could see. Indeed, one astute observer commented on CNN that "Ray Charles could see that he bowed."
Obama has now done it again. Andrew Malcolm asks (and reports): "How low will he go? Obama gives Japan's Emperor Akihito a wow bow."
Obama's breach of protocol is of a piece with the substance of his foreign policy. He means to teach Americans to bow before monarchs and tyrants. He embodies the ideological multiculturalism that sets the United States on the same plane as other regimes based on tribal privilege and royal bloodlines. He gives expressive form to the idea that the United States now willingly prostrates itself before the rest of the world. He declares that the United States is a country like any other, only worse, because we have so much for which to apologize.
In the photo above, retrieved by Malcolm from Army archives for his post on Obama's bow, Douglas Macarthur is pictured with Emperor Hirohito. Malcolm observes that Macarthur "treated Emperor Hirohito respectfully but, as his body language in this black and white postwar photo demonstrates, was not particularly deferential."
Macarthur was a faithful representative of the only country in history founded on the proposition that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." When Macarthur stood beside the Emperor, he subordinated himself to his country. Macarthur not only believed in the proposition that all men are created equal, he sought to teach it to others. Japan was a case in point.
Malcolm thus misses the essential difference between Macarthur and Obama. Obama is not particularly deferential either. Obama is a man of extraordinary arrogance. He seeks fundamentally to transform the United States. With him, a new age begins.
JOHN adds: The context of Obama's bow is worth noting. He has now carried his apology tour to Japan; his speech in Tokyo was largely an attack on his own country's recent history and policies:
In a slap at President George W. Bush, Obama spoke of the importance of "multilateral organizations [that] can advance the security and prosperity of this region."It is untrue that "in recent years" the United States was "disengaged" from multilateral organizations in the Pacific region, but Obama's serial apologies require no basis in fact.
"I know that the United States has been disengaged from these organizations in recent years. So let me be clear: those days have passed," Obama said during the first major address of a four-country Far East swing, which will continue from Japan to Singapore, China and South Korea. ...
The White House wants to signal U.S. re-engagement with Asia, and the speech was designed to provide an overture to Asia similar to the outreach to the Arab world in the president's famous Cairo address.
As usual in such speeches, Obama cast himself as the hero who has redeemed his country's sordid past. Describing himself as "America's first Pacific President," he said:
He sought to strike a balanced tone, saying, "We will not agree on every issue, and the United States will never waver in speaking up for the fundamental values that we hold dear - and that includes respect for the religion and cultures of all people. Because support for human rights and human dignity is ingrained in America. But we can move these discussions forward in a spirit of partnership rather than rancor." ...Ashamed of his country but arrogant about himself--what a disgusting combination.
"Since taking office, I have worked to renew American leadership and pursue a new era of engagement with the world based on mutual interests and mutual respect," he said. ...
"From my first days in office, we have worked to strengthen the ties that bind our nations," he said.
PAUL adds: Mark Steyn suggests it's time for Valerie Jarrett to speak truth to bower.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Morning Bell: The State of Conservatism is Strong
Last night, elections were held in several states across the nation, and by most independent observations, the results served as a warning to liberals. Whether it was Republican victories in Virginia, New Jersey or even in typical liberal bastions like Westchester County, New York, the post-analysis was framed on what does this mean on Capitol Hill, and more importantly, what does this mean for the conservative movement. However, last night did not represent a new day for conservatives. On Monday, the same could have been said: the state of conservatism is strong.
The state of conservatism can be measured through its popularity, its policies and its people. Most observers would say Election Day 2008 was not a good day for conservatives. However, putting election results aside, President Obama campaigned as a centrist. Obama promised to address jobs, the economy, our national security and even hold teachers accountable for our children’s education. Obama promised that most of America would receive a tax cut. He promised to win a “necessary” war in Afghanistan. These are conservative principles.
While many Americans knew he would skew left on health care, the environment and diplomacy, they also took him at his word on his conservative window dressing. Matching reality to rhetoric, President Obama has made Jimmy Carter look conservative, promoting job killing policy after job killing policy. He has taken over nine months and counting to make a basic strategic decision on troop levels in Afghanistan, endangering our troops and our mission. This reality versus rhetoric is reminding the nation that conservatism is not merely a talking point but a first principle.
The Pew Research Center released a poll in May 2009 that was conducted in March and April when President Obama was still hugely popular. The poll showed that the overwhelming trend is toward conservatism, and not merely among Republicans. The number of Independents calling themselves conservative was increasing to 33%, up from 26% in 2005. The number of Democrats calling themselves conservative was up to 8%. In this poll 37% described themselves as politically conservative; almost double the number identifying as liberal (19%). The values of these respondents demonstrated an increasing trend away from big government as the solution and towards local and community based approaches.
These results were in line with a Gallup poll in June that showed Conservatives were the single largest ideological group (40%) and more recently on October 26, when Gallup showed that Conservatives maintain a two to one advantage over liberals (40%-20%). Conservatism wasn’t grounded in any one party or candidate. It was election neutral. In fact it was the only tri-partisan issue or philosophy overwhelming numbers of Americans seemed to agree on. The state of conservative popularity is strong.
This overwhelming conservative philosophy in America is the reason why failed liberal policies of the past are failing once again in 2009. President Obama promised jobs, but quickly learned that he can’t create 7 million jobs in government alone, although he tried. As of now, President Obama is 7.6 million jobs short of his promise to the American people, and that number is unfortunately growing. Obama’s response has been to support and liberal Cap and Trade bill that would kill millions of jobs. Obama signed a stimulus that not only hasn’t created jobs, but actually slowed down economic activity. Obama supports a health care plan that imposes mandates on employers to help fund it. Employer mandates would put 5.2 million low wage workers at risk of unemployment, and put another 10.2 million at risk of lower wages or reduced benefits.
Conservatives have been offering alternatives throughout. Conservatives support a health care plan that eliminates imaginary barriers from true competition by allowing insurance to compete across state lines, by allowing consumers to take their insurance from job to job, by giving them the same tax breaks the federal government gives big corporations. Conservatives understand that states are the best incubators for this reform. Conservatives have argued for reforming Medicare and other entitlements rather than growing their membership while cutting their benefits. Conservatives have proposed real energy solutions for America that include zero-emissions nuclear energy. Conservatives have proposed job creation through small business incentives and tax cuts. Conservatives have argued for a strong missile defense, rather than a raw deal for our eastern European allies, and a strong national security strategy that supports our troops and America’s leadership around the world. The state of conservative policies is strong.
And Conservatives have been seen and heard in 2009. They went to tea parties in April, town hall meetings in August, and to the U.S. Capitol in September. Pictures of multi-generational families spending the day together protesting big government expansion, increasing debt and deficits, and an apologetic footing by our President on the world stage. Conservatives have been re-energized to participate in the public policy process demanding transparency, dividing up 2,000 page bills among their friends and reading them, and pointing out where government has gone too far. The White House spent September 12 denying hundreds of thousands of conservatives were in their backyard. And last night, the White House promised again that they were paying no attention to the voices of the people. But conservatives are not universally being ignored, especially on Capitol Hill where conservative Republicans, Democrats and Independents are demanding bills be modified to represent the will of the people. The state of conservative people is strong.
Conservatives have a destiny. Conservatives can strengthen our economic and national security. Conservatives can offer real solutions to the nation’s challenges, without robbing Peter to pay Paul. Conservatives can continue to learn about the issues that affect their families, their communities, their businesses, and with this knowledge, they can affect real change. The Heritage Foundation has never been stronger, with over a half million members and growing. We thank you, and we invite those still waiting, to sign up to become a member now. Your conservative destiny starts here.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/04/morning-bell-the-state-of-conservatism-is-strong/
The state of conservatism can be measured through its popularity, its policies and its people. Most observers would say Election Day 2008 was not a good day for conservatives. However, putting election results aside, President Obama campaigned as a centrist. Obama promised to address jobs, the economy, our national security and even hold teachers accountable for our children’s education. Obama promised that most of America would receive a tax cut. He promised to win a “necessary” war in Afghanistan. These are conservative principles.
While many Americans knew he would skew left on health care, the environment and diplomacy, they also took him at his word on his conservative window dressing. Matching reality to rhetoric, President Obama has made Jimmy Carter look conservative, promoting job killing policy after job killing policy. He has taken over nine months and counting to make a basic strategic decision on troop levels in Afghanistan, endangering our troops and our mission. This reality versus rhetoric is reminding the nation that conservatism is not merely a talking point but a first principle.
The Pew Research Center released a poll in May 2009 that was conducted in March and April when President Obama was still hugely popular. The poll showed that the overwhelming trend is toward conservatism, and not merely among Republicans. The number of Independents calling themselves conservative was increasing to 33%, up from 26% in 2005. The number of Democrats calling themselves conservative was up to 8%. In this poll 37% described themselves as politically conservative; almost double the number identifying as liberal (19%). The values of these respondents demonstrated an increasing trend away from big government as the solution and towards local and community based approaches.
These results were in line with a Gallup poll in June that showed Conservatives were the single largest ideological group (40%) and more recently on October 26, when Gallup showed that Conservatives maintain a two to one advantage over liberals (40%-20%). Conservatism wasn’t grounded in any one party or candidate. It was election neutral. In fact it was the only tri-partisan issue or philosophy overwhelming numbers of Americans seemed to agree on. The state of conservative popularity is strong.
This overwhelming conservative philosophy in America is the reason why failed liberal policies of the past are failing once again in 2009. President Obama promised jobs, but quickly learned that he can’t create 7 million jobs in government alone, although he tried. As of now, President Obama is 7.6 million jobs short of his promise to the American people, and that number is unfortunately growing. Obama’s response has been to support and liberal Cap and Trade bill that would kill millions of jobs. Obama signed a stimulus that not only hasn’t created jobs, but actually slowed down economic activity. Obama supports a health care plan that imposes mandates on employers to help fund it. Employer mandates would put 5.2 million low wage workers at risk of unemployment, and put another 10.2 million at risk of lower wages or reduced benefits.
Conservatives have been offering alternatives throughout. Conservatives support a health care plan that eliminates imaginary barriers from true competition by allowing insurance to compete across state lines, by allowing consumers to take their insurance from job to job, by giving them the same tax breaks the federal government gives big corporations. Conservatives understand that states are the best incubators for this reform. Conservatives have argued for reforming Medicare and other entitlements rather than growing their membership while cutting their benefits. Conservatives have proposed real energy solutions for America that include zero-emissions nuclear energy. Conservatives have proposed job creation through small business incentives and tax cuts. Conservatives have argued for a strong missile defense, rather than a raw deal for our eastern European allies, and a strong national security strategy that supports our troops and America’s leadership around the world. The state of conservative policies is strong.
And Conservatives have been seen and heard in 2009. They went to tea parties in April, town hall meetings in August, and to the U.S. Capitol in September. Pictures of multi-generational families spending the day together protesting big government expansion, increasing debt and deficits, and an apologetic footing by our President on the world stage. Conservatives have been re-energized to participate in the public policy process demanding transparency, dividing up 2,000 page bills among their friends and reading them, and pointing out where government has gone too far. The White House spent September 12 denying hundreds of thousands of conservatives were in their backyard. And last night, the White House promised again that they were paying no attention to the voices of the people. But conservatives are not universally being ignored, especially on Capitol Hill where conservative Republicans, Democrats and Independents are demanding bills be modified to represent the will of the people. The state of conservative people is strong.
Conservatives have a destiny. Conservatives can strengthen our economic and national security. Conservatives can offer real solutions to the nation’s challenges, without robbing Peter to pay Paul. Conservatives can continue to learn about the issues that affect their families, their communities, their businesses, and with this knowledge, they can affect real change. The Heritage Foundation has never been stronger, with over a half million members and growing. We thank you, and we invite those still waiting, to sign up to become a member now. Your conservative destiny starts here.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/04/morning-bell-the-state-of-conservatism-is-strong/
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
