Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Vacation for a Week

I'll be gone for a week in Colorado for a dog show - get this, we are taking 4 dogs and my bike in a mini van - Yikes!

Talk to you later - The Slickster!

Democrats/ Unions Fight for Control of New York

Great article on the unions and how they are fighting for control of New York - and we thought it was just the Republicans that were at war with each other.


Michael Barone: Dems at war: Public unions vs. gentry liberals
By: Michael Barone Senior Political AnalystSeptember 17, 2010

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. (AP File)

My subject today is the civil war raging in one of our great political parties, as highlighted in recent primary elections.

No, I'm not talking about the split between the Tea Partiers and the Republican establishment (is there a Republican establishment anymore?). I'm talking about the split between two of the core groups of the Democratic Party, as witnessed in the Sept. 14 primaries in heavily Democratic New York (63 percent for Barack Obama in 2008), Maryland (62 percent Obama) and the District of Columbia (92 percent Obama).

In each there was a split between the public employee unions that do so much to finance Democratic campaigns and the gentry liberals who provide Democratic votes in places like Manhattan, the Montgomery County suburbs of Maryland, and Northwest Washington, D.C. And in each case the public employee unions won.

Fred Siegel, professor at Cooper Union and unexcelled analyst of contemporary New York politics, identifies two big winners there. One is Eric Schneiderman, a public employee union stalwart who won the Democratic nomination for attorney general, the office whose previous holder, Eliot Spitzer, was elected governor in 2006 and whose current incumbent, Andrew Cuomo, seems certain to be elected governor this year. The other is the Working Families Party, controlled by public employee unions, which provides many Democrats, including Cuomo, an extra line on the ballot.

The big question is whether Cuomo, if elected, will keep his promises to hold down spending or whether he will cave in to the unions. Siegel predicts his governorship "might well be pulled apart by these cross-tensions."

Head down Interstate 95 to Maryland and you see a similar picture. Longtime local analyst Blair Lee IV, whose father was acting governor in the 1970s and whose great-grandfather was elected U.S. senator in 1913, notes that candidates supported by public employee unions whipped their opponents in Democratic primaries. In Montgomery County the only county council member defeated was targeted by the public employee unions.

Here at The Washington Examiner we have read with interest editorials written by our friends at the Washington Post denouncing the greed of the Montgomery County teachers' unions. Unfortunately, their editorials (and ours) don't seem to have cut much ice with the county's gentry liberals, who either stayed home (turnout was a record low) or did the bidding of the unions.

But the most stark demonstration of the public employee unions' power came in the District of Columbia, where Mayor Adrian Fenty was defeated in the Democratic primary by Council Chairman Vincent Gray. There's no Republican candidate, and Gray is as good as elected.
Four years ago, Fenty carried every precinct in the city. In office he has drawn national attention for his appointment of Michelle Rhee as school chancellor. Rhee's reforms have produced higher test scores, stable rather than declining enrollment, a teacher evaluations system that has resulted in dismissals of dozens of incompetents, and a union contract giving administrators greater flexibility in assignments.

Rhee won national acclaim but antagonized politicians like Gray with deep roots in Washington's black community. Blacks here as in most large cities have been more likely than average to work in public-sector jobs -- a legacy of the days half a century ago when governments, at least north of the Potomac, didn't discriminate against blacks as many private firms did.
As a result, Gray struck a chord with black voters when he denounced Rhee's teacher layoffs -- the same layoffs that gentry liberals hailed as eliminating bad teachers who hold back children from poor families.

This divide is apparent when you look at the election returns. Gray won citywide by a 54 to 44 percent margin. Fenty won 72 percent in Ward 2 (Georgetown and West End) and 79 percent in Ward 3 (west of Rock Creek Park), both dominated by gentry liberals. Gray won 82 percent in Wards 7 and 8 (east of the Anacostia River), both heavily black.

Gentry liberals and public employee unions were allies in the Obama campaign in 2008. But now they're in a civil war in city and state politics. This raises the question of whether the Democratic Party favors public employee unions that want more money and less accountability, or gentry liberals and others who care about the quality of public services. Right now the unions are winning.
Michael Barone,The Examiner's senior political analyst, can be contacted at mbarone@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Wednesday and Sunday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Obama Seen As A Joke? World Critic of the "One"?

We all have been told that Obama is seen overseas as savior of the world but according to this cartoon, maybe not. I believe the media is just shielding the 'great one' from any criticism that might diminish his status as a god.

What ever the truth might be, there are a lot o foreigners that see " the one" as a joke -



New Antiseptic
This cartoon originated months ago in Scotland ...
It looks like most of the world is laughing at our nation's leader.......

[How Sad the world is laughing at the U.S while we sit by and watch and wonder what will happen next!]

Monday, September 20, 2010

Obama Can't Manufacture Interrity : It's Earned!

This is something that Obama needs to address if he is ever going to connect with the population.

"You cannot vulcanize integrity onto the tread of your soul."

Further :

"A good man is guided by his honesty; the evil man is destroyed by his dishonesty."

Proverbs 11: 3

ObamaCare's Uninsured Unchanged by 2019?

Everything about ObamaCare is a fraud - but is this news? Congress knew the 2700 page bill was hog wash from the beginning, but it was the power that it would give to the federal government that tipped the scales for most of the legislators, liberal Democrat legislators that is. They all believed they would be in power for ever given insanity that brought Obama to power. But wow, how things have changed.

Most taxpayers are coming to see ObamaCare as the monster that it is, most legislators never even read it, and how it will change our lives and those of our off spring for decades if not generations.

Yet, millions still believe this is right and proper. Are we all doomed to destruction from ignorance, or is it just an astounding lack of common sense. Look around, watch and listen to what the politicians are saying, then vote for freedom of choice.


Crisis of the Uninsured: 2010 and Beyond
Source: Devon Herrick, "Crisis of the Uninsured: 2010 and Beyond," National Center for Policy Analysis, September 17, 2010.

One of the primary goals of the new federal health reform law -- the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) -- is to ensure that all Americans have health insurance. Yet it is generally overlooked that the proportion of Americans without health coverage has been relatively stable over time, says Devon Herrick, a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

According to the Census Bureau, in 2009 the number of individuals lacking health coverage rose from 46.3 million to 50.7 million. The proportion of uninsured Americans rose from 15.4 percent to 16.7 percent mostly due to job losses. In fact, the proportion of people without health insurance in 2009 is up just over one percentage point from a decade earlier.

The increase in the number of uninsured over the past decade is largely due to the recession, population growth, immigration and individual choice, says Herrick.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that about 32 million individuals will gain health coverage due to the PPACA -- about half of whom will be covered by Medicaid.
However, about 23 million people will remain uninsured in 2019 -- nearly half the 50.7 million today.

This figure may be wishful thinking -- the penalties for forgoing health coverage are less than the cost of coverage ($695 per individual or 2.5 percent of income).
More patients will be insured under the PPACA but that does not solve the problem of where they will be able to go to get care, says Herrick.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Obama's Theology Marks Him AND His Agenda

This seems on the mark to identify just who Obama is as he forges ahead to destroy our country.

"Your theology is what you are when the talking stops and the action starts."

"Just as the body is dead when there is no spirit in it, so faith is dead if it is not the kind that results in good deeds"

James 2:26

Friday, September 17, 2010

Ollie North Testifying In 1987 : Kill Osama bin Laden

I can't confirm this took place in the halls of our astute government, but you take it for what it's worth. It has entertainment value in that we can believe out government Representatives back then as now were and are out of touch.

If our senators or Representatives are or were not privy to information concerning dangers to our country, then they don't exist. End of story. Who, after all, are the smartest people in the room?

Do you remember 1987.....

Thought you might be interested in this forgotten bit of information......... It was 1987! At a lecture the other day they were playing an old news video of Lt.Col. Oliver North testifying at the Iran-Contrahearings during the Reagan Administration.

There was Ollie in front of God and country getting the third degree, but what he said was stunning! He was being drilled by a senator, 'Did you not recently spend close to$60,000 for a home security system?' Ollie replied, 'Yes, I did, Sir..' The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience, 'Isn't that just a little excessive?' 'No, sir,' continued Ollie 'No? And why not?' the senator asked. 'Because the lives of my family andI were threatened, sir.'

'Threatened? By whom?' the senator questioned. 'By a terrorist, sir' Ollie answered. 'Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?' 'His name is Osama bin Laden, sir' Ollie replied. At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt.

Then the senator continued. Why are you so afraid of this man?' the senator asked. 'Because, sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of', Ollie answered.. 'And what do you recommend we do about him?' asked thesenator. 'Well, sir, if it was up to me, I would recommend that anassassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth.'

The senator disagreed with this approach, and that was all that was shown of the clip. By the way, that senator was Al Gore!

Also: Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called 'political prisoners.' However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands.

The AmericanPresident at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, 'insisted' that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked us by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center . This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports.

In memoryof all those who perished this morning; the passengers and the pilots on the United Air and AA flights, the workers in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and all the innocent bystanders. Our prayers go out to the friends and families of the deceased.

Liberals Showing Gov.mt Corruption : Eleanor Norton/ Nancy Pelosi

This not a pair to draw to as it would a losing hand. This incident is just one more in a long list of under-handed and completely corrupt dealings that has infested our government by liberal Democrats.

This is a great article from Big Government and Capital Confidential about the corruption in government, especially this liberal government.


I could not add the sound but you can go to the site below and hear the entire conversation that is listed below in print. I have not shown the entire article as it is large but a must read at the link below. ( The Slickster)


http://biggovernment.com/author/capitolconfidential


A couple weeks ago, House Member Eleanor Holmes Norton made a fundraising call to a lobbyist. The lobbyist wasn’t available, so Holmes Norton left a voicemail.

We have been given a copy of that message. The audio is below.

By way of background, with their prospects for November quickly deteriorating, Congressional Democrats are scrambling to assemble the financial resources they hope can stave off their electoral armageddon. Speaker Pelosi and her leadership team are putting a lot of pressure on Democrat members to pony up campaign contributions to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

In the article linked above, Politico noted:

In August, Pelosi and other top leaders wrote members, saying, “We need to know your commitment is to maintaining a strong Democratic majority now” and pleading with them to call “to let us know what you are able to do and when.”

The pressure is especially strong on members from “safe” districts, who need little campaign money of their own to win reelection. The catch, though, is that many of these members haven’t amassed vast campaign war-chests, for the simple reason that they haven’t needed them. So, they are scrambling to meet their Pelosi-imposed obligations. Holmes Norton is from one such “safe” district–the District of Columbia.

In the following voicemail recording, Holmes Norton seeks a campaign contribution from the lobbyist and even mentions that she hadn’t previously asked for a donation. Such is the pressure Speaker Pelosi has placed on the members. But, it is the content of Holmes Norton’s message that is interesting. (Note: the first few seconds of the recording, where the name of the lobbyist is said by Holmes Norton, have been redacted by the source.)
Her message raises many concerns.

Note: Beginning this morning, we made several attempts throughout the day to contact Holmes Norton’s office. At least two email requests for comments were sent to the Congresswoman’s Communications Director. Three phones calls and messages were also left. None of these were returned. We made clear we were on deadline, but we held the story for almost an entire day to give Holmes Norton’s office a chance to respond. If we receive a response from her office, we will update the post.

Below is the full transcript of the call:

This is, uh, Eleanor Norton, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton. Uh, I noticed that you have given to uh, other colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. I am a, um, Senior Member, a twenty year veteran and am Chair of the Sub-committee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management. I’m handling the largest economic development project in the United States now, the Homeland Security Compound of three buildings being built on the uh, old St. Elizabeth’s hospital site in the District of Columbia along with uh, fifteen other, uh, sites here for, that are part of the stimulus .

I was, frankly, uh, uh, surprised to see that we don’t have a record, so far as I can tell, of your having given to me despite my uh, long and deep uh, work. In fact, it’s been my major work, uh, on the committee and sub-committee it’s been essentially in your sector.

I am, I’m simply candidly calling to ask for a contribution. As the senior member of the um, committee and a sub-committee chair, we have (chuckles) obligations to raise, uh funds. And, I think it must have been me who hasn’t, frankly, uh, done my homework to ask for a contribution earlier. So I’m trying to make up for it by asking for one now, when we particularly, uh, need, uh contributions, particularly those of us who have the seniority and chairmanships and are in a position to raise the funds.

I’m asking you to give to Citizens for Eleanor Holmes Norton, PO Box 70626, DC, 20024. I’ll send you a follow-up note with appreciation for having heard me out. Thanks again.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

ObamaCare Facts WILL Cause Health Care Collapse

That ObamaCare will work for all of us, under any circumstances, was always known to be untrue. Right from the beginning, when questioned on the provisions of the bill, most legislators did not know what was in the bill. They never read it!! It was all about the agenda and doing the bidding of others that was more important then doing what was right for the country.

Now, all those the voted for this monstrosity, that is ObamaCare, are trying to run away from it on the reelection trail. They tell stories about how they voted against it hoping the media will tell their story, and for the most part, the mainstream media is more then willing to do what it takes to get the Democrats back in office. But as the old saying goes, 'you can run but you can't hide'.

Last Tuesday's vote was just the beginning for those that decided voting for ObamaCare will be there bread and butter in the future, or so Bill Clinton told them. Clinton was wrong as usual.

May all those that believe we need more government and more central control over our lives go down in defeat in November.

Seven Empty Promises about ObamaCare
Source: Peter Suderman, "Seven Empty Promises About ObamaCare," Reason Magazine, September 9, 2010.

The president and his administration are struggling to sell ObamaCare to the public. The problem is that so many of President Obama's claims are not likely to pay off. Here are some of the seven empty promises made about ObamaCare, says Peter Suderman, an associate editor of Reason Magazine.

If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.

A "grandfathering" provision that allows employers and insurers to continue offering plans that already exist without subjecting them to new rules and regulations was included in the new law.
But in a draft document laying out grandfathering rules, the administration admitted that after some period of time, most plans will relinquish their grandfathered status.

It will bring down the price of insurance.

Health care affordability was so crucial to the president's argument that the word made it into the title of the bill: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. So will health care costs come down? Not likely. The CBO predicted that the law will cause average health insurance premium prices to rise by 10 percent to 13 percent in the individual market.

The administration claims the bill won't cut Medicare benefits, but according to the head of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) it will. Thanks to $130 billion in planned cuts to companies that offer Medicare Advantage plans, the health care law will "reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through Medicare Advantage plans," says the CBO.
Officials say it will give consumers more access and greater choice, but early signs indicate that, as a result of the law, patients and consumers will have fewer options for doctors and health insurance.

Other empty promises, says Suderman, include:

It will cost about $900 billion (it will actually cost well over $1 trillion).

Reform will be paid "mostly" by shifting around money the country is already spending.

The new law will put Medicare on better fiscal footing.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Obama's Second "Stimulus" More 'Sky' then 'Pie'

Proof that the second "stimulus" won't work is the first one didn't work - the figures show we are not any better off, actually worse off, then we were when Obama took the first 1.4 trillion out of the taxpayers pockets. How is it Obama would believe taking money from one pocket and sticking it into the other makes sense?

Who in their right mind would believe a second trillion will do anything that the first trillion could not? - trillions we don't have to start with!!

"Stimulus" Snake Oil
Source: Alan Reynolds, "'Stimulus' snake oil," New York Post, September 7, 2010.

Democrats argue that the U.S. unemployment rate, still stuck at 9.6 percent, is reason to try "a second fiscal stimulus" to raise "aggregate demand." That's wrong, says Alan Reynolds, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute.

Unlike the rapid recoveries from other recessions in 1975-76 and 1981-82, this anemic recovery is the first time the United States has ever experimented with "fiscal stimulus" on a large scale.
FDR did not use fiscal stimulus (despite what many people think) and the budget deficit peaked at 5.9 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 1934, falling to 4 percent in 1935.

Today, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) adjusts such deficits for the impact of recession, meaning the U.S. economy actually grew by 10.9 percent in 1934 and 8.9 percent in 1935 without any "fiscal stimulus."

After the stagflationary recession of 1974-75, federal spending was cut from 21.4 percent of GDP in 1976 to 20.7 percent in 1977 -- and economic growth averaged 5 percent in those years.

In 2009, by contrast, spending jumped to 24.7 percent of GDP from 20.7 percent in 2008 -- up four points in a single year. Even the CBO's cyclically adjusted budget deficit was 7.5 percent of potential GDP -- nearly 3 percentage points above the previous all-time high.

Yet Democrats want even more "fiscal stimulus" in order to boost domestic demand -- that is, total spending by U.S. consumers, business and governments. They point to the second quarter's weak 1.6 percent growth in real GDP, but GDP doesn't measure domestic demand.

As the second quarter GDP report clearly stated, "Real gross domestic purchases -- purchases by U.S. residents of goods and services wherever produced -- increased 4.9 percent in the second quarter, compared with an increase of 3.9 percent in the first." Whatever the problems of the U.S. economy, slowing growth of demand is not one of them, says Reynolds.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Arab TV On the Muslim Agenda : A Video

Is this video legitimate? I don't know but it seems so. In any case, it does bring up some interesting questions about the differences between East and Western culture. Many questions do remain though.

Is it individual freedom that enrages the Muslims so much? Do the Muslims need to control all lives in the world to make their world complete?

And if they can't control everyone in the world, then they find it necessary to kill everyone that will not conform to their way of life. Is this the way to build bridges? hmmmm

Take a few minutes and watch this and then you decide what is right in this world.

http://www.tangle.com/view_video.php?viewkey=0861ff3eabea1ceb73e4

Saturday, September 11, 2010

ObamaCare Health Agenda : Employer Benefits Gone

We all knew this was the basis for ObamaCare health agenda from the very outset, that is, all of us that was paying attention. When the rest of the population wakes up to find that their employer based benefits are gone, and their health care that they took for granted now is decided by a committee, the howling will be heard only the hollow parts of their empty heads.

What do you think is happening in Massachusetts with their health exchanges? This an example right before our eyes but we pay no attention to. Reality is no substitute for "hope and change".

Why won't the protest be heard by our most benevolent rulers? Easy. They won't hear them as they are laughing so hard at the shear stupidity of the general public for believing that the government will take care of them. What a hoot!

Hey, the government is taking care of them - our leaders have decided that an early grave is better then spending unnecessary moneys that should go to those that showed support for ruling classes in Washington. Nah - can't be. Right? Just wait and see what happens if this makes it to 2014.


State Health Exchange Will Slash, Not Boost, Choice
Source: John R. Graham, "State health exchanges will slash, not boost, choice," San Francisco Examiner, September 9, 2010.

Unless repealed, the new health reform law will require every American not dependent on government health plans like Medicaid or Medicare, or enjoying employer-based benefits, to purchase health insurance in a state-based "exchange" as of January 2014, says John R. Graham, director of health care studies at the Pacific Research Institute.

Massachusetts provides an example of what to expect from these exchanges: An April 2006 law created an exchange called the Commonwealth Connector, which deploys a politically appointed board to limit people's choice of coverage.

Not surprisingly, limited choice means higher costs.

Economists John Cogan and Daniel Kessler of Stanford University, and R. Glenn Hubbard of Columbia University, found that premiums in Massachusetts increased by 6 percent more than in the rest of the country, and 14 percent more for small businesses, between 2006 and 2008.

California's Legislature has proposed an exchange similar to Massachusetts': Its most important power would be to "selectively contract" with insurers to offer policies in the exchange. This is fundamentally different from traditional insurance regulation, which concerns solvency, fraud and good-faith claims processing by insurers.

The exchange's bureaucrats would choose the policies available to Californians that Obamacare will force into the exchange.

Worse, the California exchange would persist even if Obamacare is repealed.

Most of us throughout the country will be facing exchanges like Massachusetts' and the one proposed in California, says Graham.

Indeed, John Goodman, president, CEO and Kellye Wright Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis concluded that any household earning less than $80,000 annually will lose its employer-based benefits and be driven into an exchange.

Friday, September 10, 2010

Obama Fires Cattle Guards? Joe Biden Wants Retraining?

Can this be? Is this true? No matter what, even if this was just hinted at, then it could be true. Even if it isn't, it's still has some basis as these people are this far out of touch. My Goodness!
No matter what - it's good for a laugh.

Obama Fire Cattle Guards
Joe Biden Wants to Retrain Cattle Guards

A few months ago, President Obama received and was reading a report that there were over 100,000 cattle guards in Colorado . The Colorado ranchers had protested his proposed changes in grazing policies, so he ordered the Secretary of the Interior to fire half of the “cattle” guards immediately!

Before the Secretary of the Interior could respond and presumably try to straighten President Obama out on the matter, Vice-President Joe Biden, intervened with a request that...before any “cattle” guards were fired, they be given six months of retraining for Arizona border guards. 'Times are hard', said Joe Biden, 'it's only fair to the cattle guards and their families!'

Russian Candid Camera Is Nyit!

videoWant to chill out? Watch this and get a great laugh.

Pelosi Said A Saint

What do you think - can this be? - heh


Pelosi Goes To Church

On a Saturday afternoon, in Washington, D. C., an aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the Bishop of the Catholic cathedral in D.C. He told the Cardinal that Nancy Pelosi would be attending the next day's Mass, and he asked if the Cardinal would kindly point out Pelosi to the congregation and say a few words that would include calling Pelosi a saint.

The Cardinal replied, "No. I don't really like the woman, and there are issues of conflict with the Catholic Church over certain of Pelosi's views."Pelosi's aide then said, "Look. I'll write a check here and now for a donation of $100,000 to your church if you'll just tell the congregation you see Pelosi as a saint." The Cardinal thought about it and said, "Well, the church can use the money, so I'll work your request into tomorrow's sermon."

As Pelosi's aide promised, House Speaker Pelosi appeared for the Sunday worship and seated herself prominently at the forward left side of the center aisle. As promised, at the start of his sermon, the Cardinal pointed out that Speaker Pelosi was present.

The Cardinal went on to explain to the congregation, "While Speaker Pelosi's presence is probably an honor to some,the woman is not numbered among my personal favorite personages.Some of her most egregious views are contrary to tenets of the Church, and she tends to flip-flop on many other issues. Nancy Pelosi is a petty, self-absorbed hypocrite, a thumb sucker, and a nit-wit. Nancy Pelosi is also a serial liar, a cheat, and a thief. I must say, Nancy Pelosi is the worst example of a Catholic I have ever personally witnessed. She married for money and is using her wealth to lie to the American people. She also has a reputation for shirking her Representative obligations both in Washington , and in California. The woman is simply not to be trusted."

The Cardinal concluded, "But, when compared with Obama and Senators Harry Reid and John Kerry, House Speaker Pelosi is a saint.

Thursday, September 09, 2010

World Looks to Amercia for Leadership : Foreign Investors Buy US Debt

This article questions the courage of the American people - can they make a difference in the political system as it is now positioned? Many in this country don't believe they can, but foreign investors still believe in the American dream as they continue to buy our debt.

Sure, they are Leary as the debt grows, but they see the people rise up with a vengeance to take control of our liberal left government to stop a slide into chaos. And it's not just some people but people of all political strips. It's across the board revolution that will not go away. The people want, demand, sane government and they are willing to put their beliefs on the line, the Tea Party Movement. Again, these people won't go away and this is what the foreign investors sees as the future.

They believe we are best bet to fix our problem in a world of financial disasters. Europe has long ago descended into the socialist nightmare and believe there is no way out any time soon. So what's left for hope, the people of America, as usual.

And as usual, the world in looking to America for leadership and they are getting it.


For Certain Is Debt for the Born
Source: Peter Suderman, "For Certain Is Debt for the Born," Reason Magazine, August 30, 2010

Is the United States on a certain path toward a debt crisis? And if so, at what point will it strike? Economists disagree on the details, but the best answers we have to these questions right now are: "It sure looks that way" and "sooner or later...probably." In a recent paper, the Mercatus Center's Arnold Kling attempts to describe just how uncertain the workings of debt markets -- sovereign and otherwise --actually are, says Reason Magazine.

The trigger point for a debt crisis is not quantifiable. This is often true even in the case of private debt, such as a credit card balance. What should be the trigger point at which your bank disallows use of your credit card? The fact that different people may respond differently under similar circumstances poses an analytical challenge for the bank, says Reason.

Kling admits up front that there's no way to preemptively pinpoint the exact trigger point for a debt crisis.

But after laying out a number of the important factors, he concludes that if one accepts the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) alternative fiscal scenario as the most likely fiscal path going forward, the United States will likely experience a debt crisis within the next two decades.
No surprises there; the CBO has described the country's fiscal path as unsustainable, Moody's recently cautioned that the U.S. has inched closer to losing its platinum credit rating, and earlier this year the International Monetary Fund told the United States that it needed to generate a "credible, medium-term" plan for bringing down its debt level.

Yet despite the warnings, Kling notes that "international capital markets continue to treat U.S. Treasury debt as a fairly safe asset." Why? In his paper, Kling suggests that it may be that "investors expect the United States to take steps to get its fiscal house in order," an assumption, he says, that is "based more on hope than on recent experience." Given the political disincentives to making the sort of policy moves necessary to stabilize our debt, it's not the safest assumption, says Reason.
.

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Liberal Woman Shot in Head : Maybe Not -

I have to revisit this little story as it does resonate so much of what a liberal is. This is cute - and of course expected from a liberal. The funnest thing is why she thought she had anything inside her head in the first place.

One of the basic requirements for being a liberal is having an empty head - any conscience person that actually has a brain would never become a liberal. Facts are facts. Hey, this all about science.

Woman shot in the head

Linda Burnett, 23, a resident of San Diego, was visiting her in-laws and while there went to a nearby supermarket to pick up some groceries. Later, her husband noticed her sitting in her car in the driveway with the windows rolled up and with her eyes closed, with both hands behind the back of her head.

He became concerned and walked over to the car. He noticed that Linda's eyes were now open and she looked very strange. He asked her if she was okay, and Linda replied that she had been shot in the back of the head and had been holding her brains in for over an hour.

The husband called the paramedics, who broke into the car because the doors were locked and Linda refused to remove her hands from her head. When they finally got in, they found that Linda had a wad of bread dough on the back of her head.

A Pillsbury biscuit canister had exploded from the heat, making a loud noise that sounded like a gunshot, and the wad of dough hit her in the back of her head. When she reached back to find out what it was, she felt the dough and thought it was her brains. She initially passed out, but quickly recovered.

Linda is blonde, a Democrat and an Obama supporter, but that could all be a coincidence.

Obama's Early Years in Kenya : What Did He Learn?

One has to wonder just what Barack Obama was taught in his early years, and if those teachings are directing him today.

Just wondering.


"Teach a child to choose the right path and when he is older, he will remain upon it."

Proverbs 22:5

Liberals Find Comfort in Self Deception

This little story is just for fun, but it still bears some insight as to where a lot of liberals like to hide, imagined reality and self deception.

All this and more can be found in most liberal Democrats. Their grasp of reality seems to have taken leave in the face of disappointing results from their personal champion. It is no stretch o the imagination that most liberals will go to any lengths to sustain the fallacy that brought Obama to power and is now destroying the country.

This is extremely important in that without lying to one's self about the total belief that Obama would save us all from our selves, he has instead done a one eighty and brought destruction down on the true believers. Now it's a matter of saving one's ego from implosion and to do that, all of these believers lie about the "One's" accomplishments. They lie to their friends and more importantly, they lie to themselves. This, of course, unfortunately, brings on more defensive mechanisms, hate for those that are successful.

Truly, they are a lost people.


Woman shot in the head

Linda Burnett, 23, a resident of San Diego, was visiting her in-laws and while there went to a nearby supermarket to pick up some groceries.

Later, her husband noticed her sitting in her car in the driveway with the windows rolled up and with her eyes closed, with both hands behind the back of her head. He became concerned and walked over to the car. He noticed that Linda's eyes were now open and she looked very strange. He asked her if she was okay, and Linda replied that she had been shot in the back of the head and had been holding her brains in for over an hour.

The husband called the paramedics, who broke into the car because the doors were locked and Linda refused to remove her hands from her head. When they finally got in, they found that Linda had a wad of bread dough on the back of her head. A Pillsbury biscuit canister had exploded from the heat, making a loud noise that sounded like a gunshot, and the wad of dough hit her in the back of her head.

When she reached back to find out what it was, she felt the dough and thought it was her brains. She initially passed out, but quickly recovered.

Linda is blonde, a Democrat and an Obama supporter, but that could all be a coincidence.

Tax Increase for Small Business Crushing: 48% of Businesses

Small businesses are in trouble and the liberal Democrats are right there ready to administer the final blow that will do them in. Oh, wait - that would mean the very basis of employment in this country would be gone - well isn't that too bad. More people on unemployment - more people to vote for more unemployment - more people to vote Democrat. That works.

Why would anyone believe anything that Nancy Pelosi would say, or for that matter any liberal Democrat, especially when it comes to the economy. They are illiterate on economics and agenda driven on all other fronts. Their main focus is for power. Nothing else matters

It's so obvious - Pelosi has a track record that proves she is helpless when it comes to telling the truth about anything.



The Small Business Tax Hike and the 97 Percent Fallacy
Source: Kevin A. Hassett and Alan D. Viard, "The Small Business Tax Hike and the 97% Fallacy," Wall Street Journal, September 3, 2010.

President Barack Obama has called for the permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts for singles with incomes below $200,000 and married couples with incomes below $250,000, but has proposed that most of the tax cuts for households with higher incomes be allowed to expire.

The president and his supporters have repeatedly asserted that the expiration of these cuts will have little impact because they affect only a tiny fraction of the wealthiest Americans, say Kevin A. Hassett, director of economic policy studies and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Alan D. Viard, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the planned tax increases would exempt "98 percent of American families and about 97 percent of small businesses." However, the impact is far more severe than Pelosi leads on. In fact, the sound bite about 3 percent of small businesses is one of the more misleading statements in the long history of economic propaganda, say Hassett and Viard.

The 3 percent figure, which is computed from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data, is based on simply counting the number of returns with any pass-through business income.
So, if somebody makes a little money selling products on eBay and reports that income on Schedule C of their tax return, they are counted as a small business.

The fact that there are millions of people in the lower tax brackets with small amounts of business income is irrelevant for the assessment of the economic impact of the tax hikes.
The relevant number is clear, say Hassett and Viard.

According to IRS data, fully 48 percent of the net income of sole proprietorships, partnerships and S corporations reported on tax returns went to households with incomes above $200,000 in 2007.

That's the number to look at, not the 3 percent.

For those who are determined to tax the rich at all costs, the tax hikes may well make sense. But the evidence is clear that lifting the top rates will hamper the business investment upon which our nation's prosperity depends. That affects all Americans, not just 3 percent, say Hassett and Viard.

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Growing Old IS A Journey : The Journey IS Everything

This following poem is so true - life is a journey and just because you enter the final stages should not mean you are still not struggling to reach your final destination.

If you are now on this great road of life and forget where you've been, then you took the wrong road. Turn around and start again on life's high road -

Live with intention -
Walk to the edge -
Play with abandon -
Choose with no regret.

Life is good - make the most of every day.

Never, ever forget who you actually are, this makes living a full and exciting life so easy.



When an old man died in the geriatric ward of a nursing home in North Platte , Nebraska, it was believed that he had nothing left of any value.Later, when the nurses were going through his meager possessions, they found this poem. Its quality and content so impressed the staff that copies were made and distributed to every nurse in the hospital.

One nurse took her copy to Missouri. The old man's sole bequest to posterity has since appeared in the Christmas edition of the News Magazine of the St. Louis Association for Mental Health. A slide presentation has also been made based on his simple, but eloquent, poem.And this little old man, with nothing left to give to the world, is now the author of this 'anonymous' poem winging across the Internet.

Crabby Old Man

What do you see nurses? . . .. .. . What do you see?
What are you thinking . . . . . when you're looking at me?

A crabby old man . . . . . not very wise,
Uncertain of habit . . . . . with faraway eyes?

Who dribbles his food . . . . . and makes no reply.
When you say in a loud voice . . . . . 'I do wish you'd try!'

Who seems not to notice . . . . . the things that you do.
And forever is losing . . . . . A sock or shoe?

Who, resisting or not . . . . . lets you do as you will,
With bathing and feeding . . . . . The long day to fill?

Is that what you're thinking? . . . . . Is that what you see?
Then open your eyes, nurse . . . . . you're not looking at me.

I'll tell you who I am. . . . . . As I sit here so still,
As I do at your bidding, . . . . . as I eat at your will.

I'm a small child of Ten . . . . . with a father and mother,
Brothers and sisters . . . . . who love one another.

A young boy of Sixteen . . . . with wings on his feet.
Dreaming that soon now . . . . . a lover he'll meet.

A groom soon at Twenty . . . . . my heart gives a leap.
Remembering, the vows . . . . . that I promised to keep.

At Twenty-Five, now . . . . . I have young of my own.
Who need me to guide . . . . . And a secure happy home.

A man of Thirty . . . . . My young now grown fast,
Bound to each other . . . . . With ties that should last.

At Forty, my young sons . . .. . . have grown and are gone,
But my woman's beside me . . . . . to see I don't mourn.

At Fifty, once more, babies play 'round my knee,
Again, we know children . . . . . My loved one and me.

Dark days are upon me . . . . . my wife is now dead.
I look at the future . . . . . shudder with dread.

For my young are all rearing . . . . . young of their own.
And I think of the years . . . . . and the love that I've known.

I'm now an old man . . . . . and nature is cruel.
Tis jest to make old age . . . . . look like a fool.

The body, it crumbles . . . . . grace and vigor, depart.
There is now a stone . . . . where I once had a heart.

But inside this old carcass . . . . . a young guy still dwells,
And now and again . . . . . my battered heart swells.

I remember the joys . . . . . I remember the pain.
And I'm loving and living . . . . . life over again.

I think of the years, all too few . . . . . gone too fast.
And accept the stark fact . . . . that nothing can last.

So open your eyes, people . . . . . open and see.
Not a crabby old man . . . . Look closer . . . see ME!!

Remember this poem when you next meet an older person who you might brush aside without looking at the young soul within. We will all, one day, be there, too!PLEASE SHARE THIS POEM The best and most beautiful things of this world can't be seen or touched. They must be felt by the heart.

Monday, September 06, 2010

Obama's Character Revealed by Crisis Management

Here is something for our president to think about, that is if he really cares at all what happens to this country, when the next crisis comes along.

"Crisis doesn't develop character: crisis reveals character"

President Bush at Dallas Airport Greeting Troops

Here is some shots of President Bush and Laura at the airport greeting the troops - what class they have - it's about honor and commitment to this country. Take a few minutes and open these - it will make you feel good for a change when you think about the president we have now.



image001.jpg, image002.jpg, image003.jpg, image004.jpg, image005.jpg, image006.jpg, image007.jpg, image008.jpg, image009.jpg, image010.jpg, image011.jpg, image012.jpg, image013.jpg, image014.jpg, image015.jpg, image016.jpg, image017.jpg, image018.jpg, image019.jpg, image020.jpg, image021.jpg
Message Source

ObamaCare Forces Ins. Premiums Higher for Workers

Intended consequences of ObamaCare - this was not an accident, this was planned to force everyone onto ObamaCare and crush the insurance industry. It's sure looks like it's working to a tee.

Employers Shifting Health Care Costs to Workers, Survey Shows
Source: David S. Hilzenrath, "Employers shifting health care costs to workers," Washington Post, September 2, 2010.

Amid high unemployment and a weak economy, employers have been shifting health care costs to workers, according to a study released Thursday. The premiums that employees pay for employer-sponsored family coverage rose an average of 13.7 percent this year, while the amount that employers contribute fell by 0.9 percent. Workers are paying an average of $3,997 for family coverage, up $482 from last year, while employers are paying an average of $9,773, down $87, according to the survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust.

Overall, premiums for employer-sponsored coverage -- the amounts paid by employer and employee combined -- rose an average of 3 percent for family coverage and 5 percent for single coverage, says the Washington Post.

Workers with health benefits are paying an average of 30 percent of the premium for family coverage and 19 percent of the premium for single coverage this year, the highest in 12 years of surveys by the two organizations.

Last year, workers were paying an average of 27 percent of the premium for family coverage and 17 percent for single coverage.

Since 2005, employees' premium payments have gone up 47 percent while overall premiums have risen 27 percent. Over the same period, wages have increased 18 percent and the consumer price index has risen 12 percent, reports the Post.

Thirty percent of employers offering health benefits reported that this year they reduced the scope of benefits or increased cost-sharing because of the economic downturn. Increasingly, employers are offering insurance plans with high deductibles. Twenty-seven percent of employees with health benefits now have annual deductibles of at least $1,000, up from 22 percent last year, the organizations said.

Saturday, September 04, 2010

Boomer Generation's Children Stumble in Future

The very foundation of the American dream is the family unit. It has always been this way and has shown to be successful, until now. This article, and others like it, have spotlighted the gaps in our educational process and, as it seems, our grab for the brass ring, lotteries and games, as a way to get to success without working. Let the good times roll while letting someone else pick up the tab seems to be the prevailing legacy of our youth.

Why is this? Education in this country has failed. The very frame work that laid out an agenda of work ethics and belief in God that produced engines of success in our past are missing today. Now education is founded in what 'feels good' rather than what will prepare our kids for the twenty first century world economy and conflicts.

Most people know this is happening and are just now beginning to address the problem. People are waking up to the fact that socialism, whether in politics or eduction, is a failure. The problem that faces us now is nearly a whole generation has been subjected to this propaganda.


The Generation That Can't Move On Up
By ANDREW J. CHERLIN and W. BRADFORD WILCOX

Most people assume that working-class members of the baby-boomer generation have been hurt the most by the outsourcing and automation in which millions of factory jobs moved overseas or disappeared into computer chips, a shift recently compounded by recession. But actually it may be their children's generation.

Not only are many members of the younger working class unprepared for the contemporary job market. New research we have done shows their striking inability to fit the middle-class ideal in family and religious life. It's a worrisome development for their lifestyle and our culture.
These are the people we used to call "blue collar," although you can no longer tell a person's social class by the color of his shirt. If we can speak of a working class at all, education is now the best way to define them.

Think of people with high school degrees but not four-year college degrees. They make up slightly more than half of all Americans between the ages of 25 and 44; old enough to have completed their schooling but young enough to be still having children, and 79% of them are white. Because they don't have the educational credentials to get most middle-class professional and managerial jobs, their earnings have sunk toward the wages of the working poor.

The grim employment picture is familiar, but what's less widely known is that they are losing not only jobs but also their connections to basic social institutions such as marriage and religion. They're becoming socially disengaged, floating away from the college-educated middle class.
Consider the settings in which they have children. According to surveys by the National Center for Health Statistics, much of the recent rise in childbearing outside of marriage reflects a rise in births to cohabiting couples rather than to women living alone. The percentage of working-class women of all races who were cohabiting when they gave birth rose from 10% in the early 1990s to 27% in the mid-2000s—the largest increase of any educational group.

These working-class couples still value marriage highly. But they don't think they have what it takes to make a marriage work. Across all social classes, in fact, Americans now believe that a couple isn't ready to marry until they can count on a steady income. That's an increasingly high bar for the younger working class. As a result, cohabitation is emerging as the relationship of choice for young adults who have some earnings but not enough steady work to reach the marriage bar.

The problem is that cohabiting relationships don't go the distance. In fact, children who are born to cohabiting parents are more than twice as likely as children born to married parents to see their parents break up by age five. These break-ups are especially troubling because they are often followed by a relationship-go-round, where children are exposed to a bewildering array of parents' partners and stepparents entering and exiting their home in succession.

Church-going habits are changing, too. Traditionally, working-class couples who are married and have steady incomes have attended church, in part, to get reinforcement for the "respectable" lives they lead. But now, when a transformed economy makes marriage and steady work more difficult to attain, those who in better times might have married and attended church appear to be reluctant to show up. Thus, working-class men and women aren't going to religious services as often as they used to.

The drop-off in attendance has been greatest among whites, according to the General Social Survey, conducted biennially by the National Opinion Research Center. In the 1970s, 35% of working-class whites aged 25-45 attended religious services nearly every week, the same percentage as college-educated whites in that age group. Today, the college-educated are the only group who attend services almost as frequently as they did in the 1970s.
Some observers might say that there's nothing alarming about the working class's retreat from marriage and organized religion. It's true that not everyone wishes to marry or to worship, and that family and religious diversity can be valuable.

But the working class is not a cultural vanguard confidently leading the way toward a postmodern lifestyle. Rather, it is a group making constrained choices. For the most part, these are people who would like to marry before having kids but who don't think they are economically ready.
In contrast, college-educated Americans—the winners in our globalized economy—are now living more traditional family and religious lives than their working-class peers. More than 90% of college-educated women are married when they give birth.

What happens, then, when the job-market conditions that once allowed most high-school-educated Americans to connect to the rest of society through hard work, marriage and religious participation no longer exist? Will working-class young adults begin to devalue marriage and religion, or will they fiercely hold onto these ideals because their values are all that they have left? Will their social disengagement leave them vulnerable to political appeals based on anger and fear? Will their multiple cohabiting unions and marriages prevent their children from developing a sense of attachment to others?

These are the kinds of questions that our nation will confront unless we can narrow the economic and social gap between a middle class that is managing to hold its own in our postindustrial economy and a working class that is falling further and further behind.

Mr. Cherlin is a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns Hopkins University. Mr. Wilcox is director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia.

Friday, September 03, 2010

Obama's Agenda Divides America : Soft Tyranny?

How far have we come toward a decision to stop Barack Obama? Just what is to be done to get our country back? Will the November election turn the tide in favor of the American dream or will it be more of same?

We the people have to decide what is best for our country. Either we stand up for our rights as citizens of this great country under our Constitution, or we take a seat in back of the church of socialism and totalitarianism.

In November, it will be a turning point for our country. Gather and understand the facts and then determine what is important to you. Vote for what is best for you and our country. Elections have consequences as the last one has so painfully proven. We, as citizens of this great county, will decide what is right.

KUHNER: President's socialist takeover must be stopped
By Jeffrey T. Kuhner
The Washington Times 5:58 p.m., Thursday, July 22, 2010

President Obama has engaged in numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr. Obama should be impeached.

He is slowly - piece by painful piece - erecting a socialist dictatorship. We are not there - yet. But he is putting America on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law; presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars of traditional capitalism.

Like Venezuela's leftist strongman, Hugo Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above - one that is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr. Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are Balkanizing the country. It's time for him to go. He has abused his office and violated his oath to uphold the Constitution. His health care overhaul was rammed through Congress. It was - and remains - opposed by a majority of the people. It could only be passed through bribery and political intimidation. The Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the $5 billion Medicaid set-aside for Florida Sen. Bill Nelson - taxpayer money was used as a virtual slush fund to buy swing votes. Moreover, the law is blatantly unconstitutional: The federal government does not have the right to coerce every citizen to purchase a good or service. This is not in the Constitution, and it represents an unprecedented expansion of power.

Yet Obamacare's most pernicious aspect is its federal funding of abortion. Pro-lifers are now compelled to have their tax dollars used to subsidize insurance plans that allow for the murder of unborn children. This is more than state-sanctioned infanticide. It violates the conscience rights of religious citizens.

Traditionalists - evangelicals, Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, Orthodox Jews - have been made complicit in an abomination that goes against their deepest religious values. As the law is implemented (as in Pennsylvania) the consequences of the abortion provisions will become increasingly apparent. The result will be a cultural civil war. Pro-lifers will become deeply alienated from society; among many, a secession of the heart is taking place.

Mr. Obama is waging a frontal assault on property rights. The BP oil spill is a case in point. BP clearly is responsible for the spill and its massive economic and environmental damage to the Gulf. There is a legal process for claims to be adjudicated, but Mr. Obama has behaved more like Mr. Chavez or Russia's Vladimir Putin: He has bullied BP into setting up a $20 billion compensation fund administered by an Obama appointee. In other words, the assets of a private company are to be raided to serve a political agenda. Billions will be dispensed arbitrarily in compensation to oil-spill victims - much of it to Democratic constituents. This is cronyism and creeping authoritarianism.

Mr. Obama's multicultural socialism seeks to eradicate traditional America. He has created a command-and-control health care system. He has essentially nationalized the big banks, the financial sector, the automakers and the student loan industry. He next wants to pass "cap-and-trade," which would bring industry and manufacturing under the heel of big government. The state is intervening in every aspect of American life - beyond its constitutionally delegated bounds.

Under Mr. Obama, the Constitution has become a meaningless scrap of paper. (hi-lite is mine, The Slickster)

To provide the shock troops for his socialist takeover, Mr. Obama calls for "comprehensive immigration reform" - granting amnesty to 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens. This would forge a permanent Democratic electoral majority. It would sound the death knell for our national sovereignty. Amnesty rewards lawlessness and criminal behavior; it signifies the surrender of our porous southern border to a massive illegal invasion. It means the death of American nationhood. We will no longer be a country, but the colony of a global socialist empire.

Rather than defending our homeland, Mr. Obama's Justice Department has sued Arizona for its immigration law. He is siding with criminals against his fellow Americans. His actions desecrate his constitutional oath to protect U.S. citizens from enemies foreign and domestic. He is thus encouraging more illegal immigration as Washington refuses to protect our borders. Mr. Obama's decision on this case is treasonous.

As president, he is supposed to respect the rule of law. Instead, his administration has dropped charges of voter intimidation against members of the New Black Panther Party. This was done even though their menacing behavior was caught on tape: men in military garb brandishing clubs and threatening whites at a polling site. A Justice Department lawyer intimately involved in the case, J. Christian Adams, resigned in protest. Mr. Adams says that under Mr. Obama, there is a new policy: Cases involving black defendants and white victims - no matter how much they cry for justice - are not to be prosecuted. This is more than institutionalized racism. It is an abrogation of civil rights laws. The Justice Department's behavior is illegal. It poses a direct threat to the integrity of our democracy and the sanctity of our electoral process.

Corruption in the administration is rampant. Washington no longer has a government; rather, it has a gangster regime. The Chicago way has become the Washington way. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is a political hit man. He is an amoral, ruthless operator. It was Mr. Emanuel who reached out to Rep. Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania Democrat, offering a high-ranking job in the hopes of persuading Mr. Sestak to pull out of the primary against Sen. Arlen Specter. It was Mr. Emanuel who offered another government position to Andrew Romanoff to do the same in the Colorado Democratic Senate primary. And it was Mr. Emanuel - as the trial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has revealed - who acted as the go-between to try to have Valerie Jarrett parachuted into Mr. Obama's former Senate seat. The only question was: What did Mr. Blagojevich want in exchange?

This is not simply sleazy Chicago machine politics. It is the systematic breaking of the law - bribery, attempt to interfere (and manipulate) elections using taxpayer-funded jobs, influence peddling and abuse of power.

The common misperception on the right is that Mr. Obama is another Jimmy Carter: an incompetent liberal whose presidency is being reduced to rubble under the onslaught of repeated failures. The very opposite, however, is true. He is the most consequential president in our lifetime, transforming America into something our Founding Fathers would find not only unrecognizable, but repugnant. Like all radical revolutionaries, he is consumed by the pursuit of power - attaining it, wielding it and maximizing it. Mr. Obama's fledgling thug state must be stopped.

If Republicans win back Congress in November, they should - and likely will - launch formal investigations into this criminal, scandal-ridden administration. Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican and ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has promised as much. Mr. Obama has betrayed the American people. Impeachment is the only answer. This usurper must fall.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute, a Washington think tank. He is the host of "The Kuhner Show" on WTNT 570-AM (http://www.talk570.com/) from 5 to 7 p.m.
© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Thursday, September 02, 2010

Cyber Attacks ARE Real : Congress Stonewalls/Sleeps

We know this is a problem but it seems our congress, as usual, doesn't care or they think it can't happen to us. Worse, they know it can happen and see it as another chance to take more control of our lives.

The truth? You decide after reading Peters' article.

The new Wiki warfare
By RALPH PETERS
Last Updated: 9:09 AM, August 27, 2010

The recent WikiLeaks debacle, which will result in American, allied and Afghan deaths, drives home how inadequate our antique laws on war are in the new millennium. We live in a lawless age, when it comes to our security. A hypernarcissist such as WikiLeaks' Julian Assange puts thousands of lives at risk by e-publishing classified documents, and we have no legal answer.

Every day, foreign powers and rogue players attack our nation's computer networks, attempting to steal secrets, plant sleeper programs or just create havoc. We have no practical legal framework for counterattacks. We haven't even decided when cyberattacks amount to acts of war.Even regarding physical acts of terrorism, our laws lag grotesquely -- hence the repeated delays in bringing the world's most vicious butchers to trial. It's as if, in the age of the automobile, we relied on traffic laws from horse-and-buggy days.

Absent appropriate legal codes, our government turns to lawyers without laws.The lawyers, in turn, fish through laws governing yesteryear's concerns -- and apply them restrictively to keep their departments out of the headlines.

And the cyberassaults go on, 24/7. Security leaks haunt the Internet (and our amoral media). Terrorists kill, then sue us. In the first case, we take our beatings and slap on bandages. In the second, we huff, puff and do nothing. In the third case, an apprehended terrorist gets better medical care than an out-of-work American. Even the civil laws and military codes we /do/ have on the books are not enforced. If found guilty, that Army private who allegedly passed over 90,000 classified documents to WikiLeaks should get the "full Rosenberg," a shortened life and a hot exit. Instead, he'll do a few years at most -- /at most/ -- then get a book contract. (Can't wait for the movie!)

As for Julian Assange, who released a deluge of sensitive operational data to America's enemies, he'll probably pay no price at all for any deaths his actions cause. Instead, he'll rake in speaking fees.

Our own cyberwarriors in the Pentagon and the intelligence community face no end of frustration as they try to defend us. We have superb, conscientious, capable officers working the problem. But the absence of laws to deter enemies or facilitate retaliation not only ties our hands behind our backs, but chains our ankles, too.That's a key reason why Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III just went public about a massive cyberinvasion of military computers in 2008, when a foreign agent used a flash drive to slip malware into a military laptop. The goal was to steal and corrupt military plans and secrets.The attacker suffered no meaningful consequences. We knew who did it, but couldn't do a thing. No laws.

And that attack was small change, compared to what an all-out cyberassault on our nation might do, from shutting down power supplies and transportation networks, to blacking out communications -- e-bombing us back to the 19th century, if not the Stone Age. As for our military itself, it simply could not function today without its computers: Aircraft wouldn't fly, gunnery systems wouldn't work and we'd lose global comms.

It no longer takes lead or high explosives to kill. If attacked, should we strike back with cyber means? Counterattack asymmetrically? Hit the aggressor physically? In the absence of updated laws of war for a new millennium, our military and our intelligence agencies are condemned to playing defense. It's a prescription for an eventual catastrophe.

And what about the likes of Assange? Nothing will happen to an activist who helps terrorists identify, track and slaughter those who stand up against Islamist fanatics.

Who's AWOL in these undeclared wars against us? Congress. That's who makes our laws, folks. But Congress has ignored these life-and-death issues, leaving our defenders out on the end of a creaking limb. Instead, legislators in /both/ parties play for short-term political advantage, while our enemies act with impunity. If a cyber-Pearl Harbor -- on a far-greater scale than that savage attack -- hits our country, don't blame our military or call it an intelligence failure. It'll be a congressional failure.

Our military and our spooks know who the bad guys are. They /could/ strike back. But, contrary to the myths of the left, they aren't rogues. They operate within our existing laws. Congress has to empower them.

When should a cyberattack trigger devastating retaliation? When can an Internet accomplice to terror be placed on a kill-or-capture list? What is the /proper/ judicial forum for putting terrorists on trial? It's the duty of /Congress/ to decide.

To update an old line describing Pearl Harbor, "At cyberdawn, we slept."Ralph Peters' latest book is "Endless War."

Wednesday, September 01, 2010

Sarah Palin's History : She's One of Us!

Little wonder why the insane liberal left hates Sarah - they hate America and therefore they hate anyone that loves this country. How can so many among us willing bite the hand that feeds them? Again, we, lovers of God and country, are truly 'enemies of the state'.

Think about this when you step in to the booth in November.


Copyright 2009 CanadaFreePress.Com

Yes, I know, The Canadian Free Press has to publish this because the USA media is too scared they might be considered racist. Sorry USA !

By Dewie Whetsell, Alaskan Fisherman.

As posted in comments on Greta's article referencing the MOVEON ad about Sarah Palin.The last 45 of my 66 years I've spent in a commercial fishing town in Alaska. I understand Alaska politics but never understood national politics well until this last year. Here's the breaking point: Neither side of the Palin controversy gets it. It's not about persona, style, rhetoric, it's about doing things. Even Palin supporters never mention the things that I'm about to mention here.

1. Democrats forget when Palin was the Darling of the Democrats, because as soon as Palin took the Governor's office away from a fellow Republican and tough SOB, Frank Murkowski, she tore into the Republican's "Corrupt Bastards Club" (CBC) and sent them packing. Many of them are now residing in State housing and wearing orange jump suits The Democrats reacted by skipping around the yard, throwing confetti and singing, "la la la la" (well, you know how they are). Name another governor in this country that has ever done anything similar.

2. Now with the CBC gone, there were fewer Alaskan politicians to protect the huge, giant oil companies here. So she constructed and enacted a new system of splitting the oil profits called "ACES." Exxon (the biggest corporation in the world) protested and Sarah told them, "don't let the door hit you in the stern on your way out." They stayed, and Alaska residents went from being merely wealthy to being filthy rich. Of course, the other huge international oil companies meekly fell in line. Again, give me the name of any other governor in the country that has done anything similar.

3. The other thing she did when she walked into the governor's office is she got the list of State requests for federal funding for projects, known as "pork." She went through the list, took 85% of the m and placed them in the "when-hell-freezes-over" stack. She let locals know that if we need something built, we'll pay for it ourselves. Maybe she figured she could use the money she got from selling the previous governor's jet because it was extravagant.Maybe she could use the money she saved by dismissing the governor's cook (remarking that she could cook for her own family), giving back the State vehicle issued to her, maintaining that she already had a car, and dismissing her State provided security force (never mentioning - I imagine - that she's packing heat herself). I'm still waiting to hear the names of those other governors.

4. Now, even with her much-ridiculed "gosh and golly" mannerism, she also managed to put together a totally new approach to getting a natural gas pipeline built which will be the biggest private construction project in the history of North America. No one else could do it although they tried. If that doesn't impress you, then you're trying too hard to be unimpressed while watching her do things like this while baking up a batch of brownies with her other hand.

5. For 30 years, Exxon held a lease to do exploratory drilling at a place called Point Thompson. They made excuses the entire time why they couldn't start drilling. In truth they were holding it like an investment. No governor for 30 years could make them get started. Then, she told them she was revoking their lease and kicking them out. They protested and threatened court action. She shrugged and reminded them that she knew the way to the court house. Alaska won again.

6. President Obama wants the nation to be on 25% renewable resources for electricity by 2025. Sarah went to the legislature and submitted her plan for Alaska to be at 50% renewable by 2025. We are already at 25%. I can give you more specifics about things done, as opposed to style and persona. Everybody wants to be cool, sound cool, look cool. But that's just a cover-up. I'm still waiting to hear from liberals the names of other governors who can match what mine has done in two and a half years. I won't be holding my breath.

By the way, she was content to return to AK after the national election and go to work, but the haters wouldn't let her. Now these adolescent screechers are obviously not scuba divers. And no one ever told them what happens when you continually jab and pester a barracuda. Without warning, it will spin around and tear your face off. Shoulda known better.You have just read the truth about Sarah Palin that sends the media, along with the democrat party, into a wild uncontrolled frenzy to discredit her.

I guess they are only interested in skirt chasers, dishonesty, immoral people, liars, womanizers, murderers, and bitter ex-presidents' wives. So "You go, Girl." I only wish the men in Washington had your guts, determination, honesty, and morals.

I rest my case. Only FOOLS listen to the biased media.