Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Credit Where It's Due

Whoever wrote the Obama Oval Office address tonight deserves a lot of credit for a job well done. It was a moving speech that reflected the values of many Americans and one that offered heartfelt appreciation for our military members. As August ends and September begins, I sincerely hope that the person responsible finds gainful employment quickly in such a volatile economic climate, for I fear that as of this writing, moments after the speech delivered by Obama, that person has already been unceremoniously sacked.

The president himself deserves a modicum of credit for reading through the entire text nearly flawlessly and credibly, even seeming at times to embrace the message as he delivered it. But he did stumble a bit at the eighteen minute mark, a moment that may be cast as a human triumph over an emotional subject, but one I maintain was nothing more than a face-saving victory over his own gag reflex.

I will admit that, at times, I was distracted from the actual message by the stage lights reflecting off of the interior of the suicide doors hanging from the starboard side of the coconut of Barry's head, but I have long ago learned to push aside the glitter of trinkets in pursuit of knowledge. Still, every time he tilted his head in that inimitable way he has whenever he refers to himself...

He credited the surge for this day, which must have hurt like hell and may be attributed to the near-catastrophic gastric explosion that was narrowly averted near the end of the address. I still believe that it may also be attributed to the newest addition to the ranks of the unemployed; the poor speech writer.

Sphere: Related Content

God's Flyover

The government said no. God said yes.

On Saturday, Glenn Beck hosted the "Restoring Honor" rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. The event planners really wanted to have a military flyover at the start of the ceremonies at 10:00AM, but with the restricted airspace over the Capitol, the military said they were unable to oblige.

At 9:59, one minute before the beginning of of the event, God provided for the believers. Fortunately, someone had a videa camera handy, and caught the flock of perhaps twenty geese, flying in "V" formation straight over the Reflecting Pool, as if on cue.

Awesome and inspiring video, especially the appreciative reaction of the crowd.

Sphere: Related Content

Mr. Jefferson, Tear Down This Wall

Political cartoon from 1800
Library of Congress
I learned something very interesting one day while watching the Glenn Beck program on Fox News, two things that most likely just sent any Liberal reader heading for the exits. Knowing this, I couldn't write this piece using Glenn Beck as a source, so I decided to research on my own; something for which Beck should be applauded more often. He is singly responsible for a great many people who of late have taken a keen interest in their nation's founding, and history in general.

The cartoon above was run during the Presidential campaign of 1800, and the kneeling man is Thomas Jefferson, who was being attacked as an infidel by the Federalists. It is titled The Providential Detection, author unknown. From The Library Company of Philadelphia:
In this cartoon, the eye of God has instigated the American eagle to snatch from Jefferson's hand the "Constitution & Independence" of the United States before he can cast it on an "Altar to Gallic Despotism," whose flames are being fed by the writings of Thomas Paine, Helvetius, Rousseau, and other freethinkers. The paper, "To Mazzei," dropping from Jefferson's right hand, was a 1796 letter that was interpreted by Jefferson's enemies as an indictment of the character of George Washington.
We know how the election turned out, but the history of Jefferson's relation to God has been misconstrued ever since, and to this day people still mistakenly insist that Jefferson was anti-religion and cite him as the architect of the alleged "wall of separation".  

Liberals use this misnomer to rail against any religious symbol on public land, from Nativity scenes on Town Hall lawns to crosses erected in desolate deserts. So it was intriguing to learn that as recently as 1850, the Capitol Building was used as a church. Of particular distinction is the fact that Thomas Jefferson attended these masses every Sunday.

Strangely, Liberals who complain about these symbols, or about the audacity of school prayers at something as innocuous as a football game, shout that the "Constitution has a wall of separation", and those things are a violation of the Constitution. Clearly, they claim to stand in defense of that which they have not read.

The phrase "a wall of separation between church and state" is not contained anywhere in the Constitution, nor was it the Founders' intent to include it at any time. The phrase is part of a passing sentence in a letter from Jefferson to The Danbury Baptists in response to a congratulatory address by that association. The full text of the sentence:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature would "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.

Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert E. Bergh, ed. (Washington, D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association of the United States, 1904), Vol. XVI, pp. 281-282.
For anyone who claims that Jefferson, or any of the other Founders, for that matter, were somehow anti-religion, or desirous of the segregation of faith and governance, keep in mind that all the presidents attended services in the Capitol building, and Thomas Jefferson was no exception, riding his horse the 1.6 miles, even in the pouring rain, to attend.

The video below explains even further how religious these Founders were, and why the hysteria about God and government being some sort of explosive mixture is nothing but foolishness from the Left.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, August 29, 2010

My Suggested Anthem of the Tea Party

Sure, we'd all love the Star Spangled Banner, but that just seems to infuriate the Left, so why not use an old Hollywood movie score. Besides being a great song, it seems more than fitting for the times in which we find ourselves, particularly the verses. The chorus isn't too bad, either.

Theres a hungry road I can only hopes
Gonna eat me up inside.
Theres a drifting spirit coming clean
In the eye of a lifelong fire.
Tell monday Ill be around next week;
Im running ahead of my days.
In the shotgun chance that scattered us,
Ive seen the error of my ways.
Oh oh oh, oh oh oh.

Well weve wrapped ourselves in golden crowns
Like sun gods spitting rain.
Found a way home written on this map
Like red dye in my veins.
In the hardest times that come around,
The fear of losing grows.
Ive lost and seen the world shut down;
Its a darkness no one knows.
Oh oh oh, oh oh oh.

Forgive the grammatical errors, the lyrics were copied and pasted, and I thought it appropriate that, if we were to use the Hollywood crowd's tactics against them, it would be best to let them stand. Still, it's a great song.

Sphere: Related Content

Memo to the State-Run Media

This guy will not give anyone a job. I fail to grasp why that is so difficult to understand, yet the New York Times on Saturday published an editorial piece that - on its face - seemed critical of Barack Hussein Obama. Well, it was, but for an entirely different reason than I initially thought when I saw the byline; the Times complains that Obama is not enough of a Socialist.

Grudgingly admitting in the second paragraph that the economy is worse than the Obama administration will acknowledge, the Times piece launches immediately into defense mode in the third paragraph. It fallaciously states that, "The fiscal stimulus of 2009, coupled with low interest rates and other Federal Reserve interventions, kept the recession from being much worse." Clearly there is no way to substantiate such a claim because it is inherently speculative. Furthermore, it has been widely reported that much of the stimulus money hasn't been spent, and that a large percentage went towards creating a larger government.

It is a universally known fact that federal employees now earn more than private workers, and the ranks of government workers have increased at an alarming pace. What this means, of course, is that more people, earning higher wages, are being compensated from an employer that produces virtually nothing. The payroll is funded from the labors of an ever-dwindling work force of producers.

The piece then goes further, complaining of Congressional gridlock and blaming the minority party - Republicans - for the Democrats'  inability to "accomplish" anything. Perhaps the Times editorial staff has already forgotten the massive Health Care legislation, force fed on a decidedly unwilling populace, and the maneuvering of the majority party in that alleged victory.

But perhaps the most egregious example of political bias - and a gross misunderstanding of economic principle - comes in paragraph seven. Speaking of Obama, the piece states:
"First, he needs to keep driving home that he is committed to addressing the deficit, and that he will call for widespread sacrifice to do so — starting with letting the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans expire at year end. Mr. Obama must tell Americans that claims from Republican leaders that the country can both cut taxes and tackle the deficit are absurd and cynical."
What is absurd is the notion that increasing taxes on the wealthy - the actual employers of the country - will somehow fill the coffers of the federal government. Keeping in mind the growing number of people drawing a paycheck from the government, it stands to reason that the problem would only suffer the domino effect. The employers, forced to fund more of the insatiable government, will move more of their businesses offshore and shield even more of their incomes from the intrusive clutches of Uncle Sam.

The very next paragraph reveals the chilling idiocy of the Liberal mindset:
"Next, he needs to explain why too much sacrifice, too soon, especially from the middle class, would do more harm than good while the economy is weak. More government support is needed until conditions improve."
Anyone who actually belongs to the middle class understands all too well that that statement is ridiculous, for while the Liberal elites claim to target the "wealthy", it is the middle class - doing well, but not well enough to either run or hide - who will be leaned on to support the "more government" that the Times endorses.

The Times editorial concludes with this obsequious gem:
"The economic damage they inherited was too deep, and the economic stimulus they pushed through Congress, for all of the fight, was too small."
Toeing the party line, the Times dutifully perpetuates the lunacy that what Obama "inherited" was anything but incestuous, a gift from his own party, who managed to derail the Bush years in only two, after regaining control of the Congressional purse strings in 2007.

The most frightening aspect of such an editorial is the fact that readers of that publication already consider themselves intellectually head and shoulders above the rest of us. Granted, they are generally better educated and more handsomely compensated for their labors, but they are dupes nonetheless. Armed with the almighty New York Times, they may prove to be too formidable an adversary for the everyday, naturally smarter person who would otherwise disagree forcefully with such a position. That line of thought must change.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, August 28, 2010

Harder to ignore

Here are a couple of good videos on the Tea Party Movement.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, August 26, 2010

The Sand Dune Tsunami: An American Story

Most of us are familiar with the phenomenon of the tsunami and its devastating effects, so there is no reason to delve into the particulars of them. But try to imagine the impossibility of the dunes on the shore rising up in similar fashion to counter - and ultimately repel - the tidal wave. It's happening right now, albeit analogously, but happening nonetheless. Let's examine just how.

The tide of Liberalism has spent the past several decades gently and patiently lapping at the shoreline of reason in America, slowly eroding the values of our youth and creating sandbars a few dozen feet from the water's edge by which to generate more powerful waves. While this littoral drift has been occurring undetected, the sea of Liberalism has gobbled greedily at it, yet advancing at a nearly imperceptible pace.

As the sandbar grew through maturity, it begot more sand, making the waves' assault more powerful with time. Eventually the waves grew so furious that they began pounding the beach with a ferocity that threatened to engulf the land. Then the land rose up.


Yes, this may sound like the ravings of a man awakened from a weird dream, still clutching the false memories of fitful slumber, but stay with me on this. 

Almost all of us here in America are either immigrants, or descendants of immigrants. On that point, there is no dispute. But at some point, the people who came to America ceased doing so for the purpose of actually becoming Americans. This is a curious development, since one can only assume the reason to come here would be to escape an undesirable existence for a chosen one. Yet, there was a threshold where the new arrivals came, settled, and immediately set about the task of attempting to recreate the conditions they recently fled. 

Wealthy Liberals take pride in using their fame and fortune to denigrate the nation that allowed for both, claiming that the system that made them is a terrible one. People who successfully gain entry here - often at great personal risk - quickly learn to complain of alleged unfair treatment, demanding better, while they felt no compunction to change their places of origin. Why, for example, don't the multitudes of illegal aliens coming here from Mexico stay home and demand of current President Filipe Calderon that he improve their lives? Simple answer; they are afraid. 

This week, Sean Hannity had David Horowitz and Jehan S. Harney on as guests to debate the Ground Zero Mosque being considered for construction near where the September 11, 2001 attacks took down the Twin Towers. Hannity grilled Harney about conditions in Saudi Arabia, where Christians are forbidden from stepping foot within Mecca, and no churches exist. Harney countered - dismissively- that Saudi Arabia has the right to run their country as they saw fit, but that America is "our" country, and we shouldn't be exclusive. It was a very interesting exchange. 

Since the driving force behind the project 600 feet from Ground Zero, Imam Feisel Abdul Rauf, has expressed a desire to advance Shar'ia Law here in America, the same question must be asked: Why come here only to recreate the prohibitive and exclusionary atmosphere of places like Saudi Arabia? In spite of Harney's rejection of the argument, it remains valid. Either come here to worship as you see fit while obeying our laws, or stay home and fight for your rights there. 

This all goes straight to the heart of the Liberal - or Progressive, or subversive, or whatever label one may prefer - agenda of wiping out the garden that our Founders had planted. The reef was finally built and the Liberals released their tsunami in the form of Barack Hussein Obama and the 111th session of Congress. In the the first year, their waves swept over the land, wiping out everything in their path. Then the Tea Party happened in the form of a solid wall of Earth. 

No one ever expected to see a resistance on this level. It was assumed by the Liberals that the placid shore was just that; harmless and ripe for conquest. No one ever foresaw the dunes rising in opposition. But they did. They rose so quickly that even their supposed allies - the Republicans -  are alarmed. I suspect that the Republicans will recover much more quickly, while the Democrats are flailing like a dolphin caught in a tuna net. 

Here is a great video, the by-product of the "Tea Party Movie". Please watch it and let me know if you got goosebumps, too. 

Final thought: Just as water will always try to encroach on land by seeking rivulets wherever possible, the Liberals seek to undermine the Tea Party through deception, claiming that the movement is racist, bigoted, or against the advancement of America. With the right trajectory, the Tea Party can demonstrate and prove that progress can be achieved while remaining anchored to principles.

We can succeed without sacrificing virtue.

God Bless America.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Unintended Transparency and the Toxic Champion

Incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi promised to "drain the swamp" in 2006. President-elect Barack Hussein Obama promised ultimate transparency, promised to utilize modern technology to make the common people keenly aware of what his administration and Congress were doing, and promised to move slowly enough to post proposed legislation on the Internet for five days so we could all learn what was planned. None of that happened - none of it.

Quite the opposite. Pelosi and Reid had a head start on Obama, two years of putting the final nail in the coffin of George W. Bush's legacy. After gaining back control of Congress, the new
Speaker and the new Majority Leader not only failed to drain the swamp, they restocked it. The coercion and bribery became rampant, and only became worse once Obama was sworn in as President.

Congress brought out the hatchets and began frantically dismantling the economy of the Bush years, setting the plate for Obama to ride in and pretend to be the savior. Claiming the utmost urgency in fixing "what Bush had wrought", careful planning and openness became casualties of reckless velocity and sleight of hand maneuvering. Assuming that the people would recognize the necessity of broken promises on the most base level, the destruction we have witnessed since thus proceeded at dizzying speed.

Then something amazing happened; people began to awaken. They began to observe. They began to learn. Ultimately, they became very angry.

Perhaps elected politicians took for granted that the vast majority of the American people have for decades been preoccupied by managing their personal lives and have not been acutely engaged in politics or politicians. That complacency most likely lulled the politicians into a sense of omnipotence, and they believed that it was finally time to pull the trigger and fundamentally alter the composition of America. They quickly discovered that they were dead wrong.

The unintended consequence of their collective hubris became the eventual fruition of their empty promises. While they assumed we'd accept wax paper over the windows because you can almost see through it, we ripped it down and walked inside. To their horror, we were no longer in the role of casual observer; we were demanding answers.

The rash of You Tube recordings of town hall meetings - and the subsequent reactions of the members of Congress on the receiving end of America's ire - were a tease, starter fuel in the coming barbecue. The Internet - still a free-speech venue as of this writing - has been instrumental in this collective epiphany, so it is small wonder that the perpetrators have begun to plant the seeds of doubt in the minds of the gullible that nothing on the web is true. We're told that only the state-run media can be trusted.

The state-run media has sold its soul and surrendered all claims to credibility. More and more people every day are abandoning that sinking ship out of a realization that those outlets are merely perpetuating the lie. The incumbents, despite all of their false bravado, know that their days are numbered. There is nothing that can save them at this stage beyond a successful marketing of more lies, a prospect that seems dismal, at best.

The president is toxic, and they all know it. He may travel to quietly raise donations for them, but none wishes to be associated with him, and he is powerless to go out and actively stump for them. How ironic that after such a short time in paradise, the hope is gone. The change is coming, though. Coming fast. Somehow, however, I doubt this will be what the Democrats had in mind.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 20, 2010

The Problems With Junior

As the sleek veneer begins to fade and tarnish, and as a reticent media feels the unrelenting tug of duty - or perhaps shame - the questions about Obama's past are finally gaining credibility and momentum. Furthermore, the notions of his incompetency and ineligibility are suddenly seeming more plausible to a larger portion of Americans, no longer cavalierly dismissed with a shrug and a wave of the hand.

I was among a sizeable crowd of bloggers and pundits who were sounding the alarm about Obama's past associations, from William Ayers to Reverend Wright. But the core of Obama's character was formed long before he would meet either of those men. It is derived from the dreams of his father and the call to prayer in Jakarta.

While the buzz lately is about the percentage of people who believe Obama to be a Muslim, the media elites are demanding to know how so many people could be so gullible, an irony I find immensely amusing. Equally as ironic is their intense desire to convince those "gullible" people that the President is a Christian, a group they are normally engaged in mocking.

But to believe that Obama is a Muslim is less of a stretch than vice versa. While he may not be a practicing or active Muslim, there is no question that he is a cultural Muslim. He was born to a Muslim father and an atheist mother. In the world of Islam, he is a Muslim. For him to claim otherwise makes him an Apostate, one more hated by Muslims than even infidels, but we'll get to that particular problem later.

His birth to Barack Sr. makes him a Muslim, that much is clear. What Junior chose to become later in life may have meaning to him or not, but to Muslims, he will always be a Muslim. That was clear throughout the campaign, when people like Mohamar Gadhafi were enthralled at the prospect of a Muslim becoming president of the United States. Louis Farrakhan, leader of The Nation of Islam, felt the same way. Remember these pertinent facts, they will come in handy.

Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, divorced Barack Sr. when the president was three years old, ostensibly because she discovered that the father of her child already had a wife and family back in Kenya. She subsequently married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian man working towards his masters degree at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was five years old, Soetoro was recalled to Indonesia by his government. A year later, Ann Dunham and her six-year-old followed. Soetoro eventually adopted Obama, who then became young Barry Soetoro.

So the young Soetoro was now an Indonesian citizen, and attended madrassa, taking reading lessons on the Qur'an. Obama has confided that he once got in trouble for making faces during Qur'an studies. He himself has stated recently that the sweetest sound he ever heard was the Muslim call to prayer at sunset. During an interview with George Stephanopoulos in the campaign season of 2008, Obama slipped, referring to "my Muslim" faith. (Stephanopoulos dutifully corrected the gaffe).

Since he's been president, Obama has spent more time reaching out to Muslims and slamming Israel, defending the Ground Zero mosque while decrying home building in Jerusalem. He's coddled Iran - the country he said he would never permit to have a nuclear weapon - and as a result, Achmedinejad has jammed his thumb in our eye. In a matter of hours, Iran and Russia will begin loading fuel rods into the newly finished nuclear reactors.

Obama spoke in Cairo, Egypt, where he offered apologies on our behalf for having been "arrogant", something I personally did not need representation on in such fashion. But the interesting part is the fact that he made it out of there alive. Here's why.

According to the Qur'an, an Apostate is a Muslim who has committed a worse crime than murder; conversion from Islam. Don't take my word for it, however, read from a "newspaper" that has, since the election, become the official propaganda machine of the Obama administration, The New York Times:

His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)

It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Iran’s Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities.

For example, in Iran in 1994 the intervention of Pope John Paul II and others won a Christian convert a last-minute reprieve, but the man was abducted and killed shortly after his release. Likewise, in 2006 in Afghanistan, a Christian convert had to be declared insane to prevent his execution, and he was still forced to flee to Italy.

Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.

At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards.
Curious, the reception he received in a Muslim country, then. So when people like Joel Achenbach write OpEd's in the Washington Post titled, "Are Americans total numbskulls?", the question must be reversed upon them immediately. Is Obama a Muslim, or an Apostate? For someone who should be most reviled in a Muslim country, he certainly seemed cozy. Perhaps he didn't convert? Or he returned?

Claiming that he and his family would find a new church in the DC area by Easter, that hasn't happened. The excuse is that he doesn't want to be a disruption. Apparently that is only true of a Christian church as he and his family don't seem to mind fouling traffic on the streets and airports on New York, feel comfortable closing sections of prime beach areas in Spain, and cause security havoc at professional sporting events. Nope, we can't attend church because we'll "interfere".

Maybe Obama is a Christian Apostate. He's safe, there is no penalty for that in the true religion of peace beyond disappointment. "How can people believe that Obama is a Muslim?" How can they deny it?

Sphere: Related Content

Barack Obama Has Awakened a Sleeping Nation

By Gary Hubbell

Barack Obama is the best thing that has happened to America in the last 100 years. Truly, he is the savior of America's future. He is the best thing ever.

Despite the fact that he has some of the lowest approval ratings among recent presidents, history will see Barack Obama as the source of America's resurrection. Barack Obama has plunged the country into levels of debt that we could not have previously imagined; his efforts to nationalize health care have been met with fierce resistance nationwide; TARP bailouts and stimulus spending have shown little positive effect on the national economy; unemployment is unacceptably high and looks to remain that way for most of a decade; legacy entitlement programs have ballooned to unsustainable levels, and there is a seething anger in the populace.

That's why Barack Obama is such a good thing for America.

Obama is the symbol of a creeping liberalism that has infected our society like a cancer for the last 100 years. Just as Hitler is the face of fascism, Obama will go down in history as the face of unchecked liberalism. The cancer metastasized to the point where it could no longer be ignored.

Average Americans who have quietly gone about their lives, earning a paycheck, contributing to their favorite charities, going to high school football games on Friday night, spending their weekends at the beach or on hunting trips — they've gotten off the fence. They've woken up. There is a level of political activism in this country that we haven't seen since the American Revolution, and Barack Obama has been the catalyst that has sparked a restructuring of the American political and social consciousness.

Think of the crap we've slowly learned to tolerate over the past 50 years as liberalism sought to re-structure the America that was the symbol of freedom and liberty to all the people of the world. Immigration laws were ignored on the basis of compassion. Welfare policies encouraged irresponsibility, the fracturing of families, and a cycle of generations of dependency. Debt was regarded as a tonic to lubricate the economy. Our children left school having been taught that they are exceptional and special, while great numbers of them cannot perform basic functions of mathematics and literacy. Legislators decided that people could not be trusted to defend their own homes, and stripped citizens of their rights to own firearms. Productive members of society have been penalized with a heavy burden of taxes in order to support legions of do-nothings who loll around, reveling in their addictions, obesity, indolence, ignorance and “disabilities.” Criminals have been arrested and re-arrested, coddled and set free to pillage the citizenry yet again. Lawyers routinely extort fortunes from doctors, contractors and business people with dubious torts.

We slowly learned to tolerate these outrages, shaking our heads in disbelief, and we went on with our lives.

But Barack Obama has ripped the lid off a seething cauldron of dissatisfaction and unrest.

In the time of Barack Obama, Black Panther members stand outside polling places in black commando uniforms, slapping truncheons into their palms. ACORN — a taxpayer-supported organization — is given a role in taking the census, even after its members were caught on tape offering advice to set up child prostitution rings. A former Communist is given a paid government position in the White House as an advisor to the president. Auto companies are taken over by the government, and the auto workers' union — whose contracts are completely insupportable in any economic sense — is rewarded with a stake in the company. Government bails out Wall Street investment bankers and insurance companies, who pay their executives outrageous bonuses as thanks for the public support. Terrorists are read their Miranda rights and given free lawyers. And, despite overwhelming public disapproval, Barack Obama has pushed forward with a health care plan that would re-structure one-sixth of the American economy.

More in the Aspen Times Weekly

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Inmates Running The Asylum

With the Cordoba Initiative attempting to build a thirteen story Muslim learning and prayer center a mere two blocks from the scene of the heinous attacks - by Muslims - in 2001, concerned citizens have been trying to get Congress to investigate the source of Imam Rauf's funding. They have refused. Mayor Mike Bloomberg said such an investigation would "be un-American". And Nancy Pelosi claimed that it was a "zoning issue" that should be decided by New Yorkers.

How ironic ,then, that on Tuesday the House Speaker called for an investigation into the funding sources of...the people opposed to the mosque. Speaking to San Francisco's KCBS radio, here's what the Speaker had to say:

"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded. How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we've been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City."

So Madam Pelosi thinks a Congress that will haul professional baseball players - for example - up to Capitol Hill for questioning regarding steroid use thinks that it has no business finding out who is paying for a Muslim conquest edifice at Ground Zero. Then declares that it should find out where the people opposed to the mosque get their money.

Any questions as to why we have to vote them all out of our House?

Sphere: Related Content

A Matter of Priorities

Don't try telling President Obama that "it's the economy, stupid." It is, after all, his top priority. Just ask him. Then mention the Mexican border problems, and you'll be relieved to know that he's on it. It is yet another of his top priorities. Oh, so you're concerned about the BP oil spill and its effects on the environment? Fear not, that is also - c'mon, say it with me - one of Obama's top priorities.

Perhaps the man is not quite as brilliant as he's been portrayed by an adoring media, particularly in light of the fact that he appears ignorant of what "top priority" means. One may have a list of priorities, usually listed in descending order based on urgency, but even a fifth grader knows that only one can be at the top of the list. I wonder if Jeff Foxworthy has rung up the White House yet?

Mark Knoller of CBS NEWS has put together a handy list of Obama's top priorities:

FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS: "...that's something that's going to be a top priority." (4/27/10)

ENERGY SECURITY: "And that's why my energy security plan has been one of the top priorities of my Administration since the day I took office." (4/28/10)

EDUCATION REFORM: "To train our workers for the jobs of tomorrow, we've made education reform a top priority in this Administration." (2/24/10)

STUDENT LOAN REFORM: "This is something that I've made a top priority." (2/1/10)

EXPORTS BY SMALL BUSINESSES: "This is going to be a top priority." (12/3/09)

HEALTH ASSISTANCE TO 9/11 FIRST RESPONDERS: "I'm not just talking the talk, we've been budgeting this as a top priority for this Administration." (2/3/10)

END HOMELESSNESS AMONG VETERANS: "I've also directed (Veterans Affairs) Secretary Shinseki to focus on a top priority: reducing homeless among veterans." (8/17/09)

HURRICANE PREPAREDNESS: "Our top priority is ensuring the public safety. That means appropriate sheltering in place or if necessary, getting as many people as possible out of harm's way prior to landfall." (5/29/09)

H1N1 FLU VACCINATIONS: "And throughout this process, my top priority has been the health and the safety of the American people." (5/1/09)

SUPPORT FOR MILITARY FAMILIES: "These military families are heroes too. And they are a top priority of Michelle and me. And they will always have our support." (5/30/09)

STRENGTHENING TIES WITH CANADA AND MEXICO: "We're going to make this a top priority..." (10/16/09)

CONSUMER PROTECTION: "During these challenging times, the needs of American consumers are a top priority of my Administration." (2/11/09)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: "So this is going to be a top priority generally improving our environmental quality." (11/5/09)

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Knowing the Path

In order to recognize the looming danger, one must be fully cognizant of the path that leads to a particular destination. Ronnie knew the path chosen by Liberals, and knew full well the dangerous conclusions they had planned. Here is a great montage that spells it out succinctly:

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Trading the Bus for a Fiat

During his campaign for president, Barack Hussein Obama analogized a bus, driven by the Republican party and the previous administration, as having lost its driver and that he was needed to grab the wheel and stop us from going off a cliff. Since his victory at the polls and ascension to the Oval Office, the new president has decided to abandon the public transportation motif and chosen to go it alone in a sports car. His modus operandi now is to rule by fiat.

With one party rule since his election, Obama and his party have become an oligarchy, inflicting their whims on a vast majority that vociferously declares that it does not want them. It is a dangerous trend, for while they are staying within the lines and following the law, they are quickly learning that there is really no reason to maintain that path.

The hubris and arrogance demonstrated by the ruling elites has been staggering, and the clear contempt exhibited by alleged representatives such as Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) toward their constituents, frightening. The actions of the Legislative and Executive branches has been appalling, passing new laws that were obviously unpopular, and the derisive comments at meetings with the people a testament to that contempt.

The Obamas' opulent lifestyle in the face of a shattered economy and incredible joblessness is an absolute insult to the American people. The hypocrisy of his admonitions in contrast to his own deeds is nothing short of majestic, telling us to tighten our belts as he lives the life of which Robin Leach reported.

Now, the only thing being reported is news about Lindsay Lohan's arrest and subsequent trial, while the "press" completely ignores the blatant corruption in Washington. It seems the only interest by the media in Charlie Rangel and his thirteen ethics violations, for example, is a desire to hear him complain how it is the Republicans' fault that he is in trouble. The lack of intellectual curiosity by the media is astounding.

There is also a troubling lack of true opposition from the Republican party, save for a few stray members of Congress who have spoken out. Thus far it seems that there is little standing in the way of the Democrats' runaway "progress", and barely a whisper of the disastrous and escalating debt, despite the plaintive wails from the Left when George W. Bush ran a measly $400 billion debt. The media, in the face of a $13 trillion debt seems to give Obama a "Heckuva job, Brownie", something for which Bush was excoriated during the Hurricane Katrina debacle.

Perhaps it could be argued that the Republicans are merely standing aside and allowing the Democrats to commit Hari Kari, letting them take as much rope as they need, only to sweep into Congress in November. That is a hope for change I can cling to, but only if the Republicans handle it better this time around.

Hopefully, they have learned the same valuable lesson that we have.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 13, 2010

The Irony of Obama's Fear

It appears that Barack Hussein Obama - that champion of Community Organizers - is frightened by the prospect of Conservatives doing the same. It has historically been very easy for the Left to march toward their goals because they faced no resistance from their opposition.

Conservatives never actually got together before to act on their displeasure with the Socialist advance that has been going on in this country for decades, mainly because they were too busy building their lives, families and ultimately, a nation. Now, however, with the Left poised to topple and ruin all that Conservatives have toiled to accomplish, the gloves are off.

Barack Hussein Obama was in Austin, Texas on August 9th to deliver - yes, another - speech to a friendly audience at a Democratic National Committee (DNC) finance event, and after a rambling diatribe that opened his remarks by blaming his predecessor and the Republican party for our current ills, finally got to his attacks on a group of ...Community Organizers. He called out the organization Americans for Prosperity (AFP) because they have had the audacity to oppose his agenda, and he did it by name.

Ironically, Obama worries that we who donate to AFP really don't know who they are and he claims that all the Democrats have asked for is disclosure. Funny how we never knew where all of Obama's campaign money came from, yet he still wants the other side to "fess up", a notion that prompted his heinous rebuke of the Supreme Court at his State of the Union Address. If he's worried about how we spend our money, I have a laundry list of advice for him, but that's for another time.

For anyone with the stomach to read through it all, the full text of Obama's Austin speech is here. For an excerpt of his attack on AFP, I have mercifully provided it below:

Right now all around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads against Democratic candidates all across the country. And they don't have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are. You don't know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation. You don't know if it’s a big oil company, or a big bank. You don't know if it’s a [sic] insurance company that wants to see some of the provisions in health reform repealed because it’s good for their bottom line, even if it’s not good for the American people.
Now, this may shock some readers but it must be pointed out that - ahem - Barack Hussein Obama is lying. A simple perusal of the Americans for Prosperity website clearly states "Who We Are" and "What We Do". For an ideology that screamed for freedom of speech and civil liberties throughout the Bush administration, this crowd sure seems eager to shut us up, from the Tea Parties to talk radio to grass roots organizations like AFP. Why?

The answer couldn't be clearer. Barack Hussein Obama and the other points of The Triad - Pelosi and Reid - know that the clock is ticking. They know that the other team has the ball and is about to score, and score big. They know that the guys with the white hats are coming for them and they are terrified. And the most amazing aspect of this is that we have mobilized as we have in such a short time. That speaks volumes about just how devastating the policies of these Leftists have been.

It also speaks loudly to the threshold of the American peoples' tolerance for socialism.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

For Anyone Who Remembers America

As a general rule, this is aimed at the reader who has chronologically passed the half-century mark, but is also for the offspring of the target audience whom were raised properly, as Americans. Certainly the erosion of national pride has affected even the youth who were fed it, as my kids were, but they still get it even while not clinging as fiercely as we have.

There was a time when we were taught the magnificence of our nation, and when we were grateful for having been born here. It wasn't a hard lesson to learn, and was not drummed into our heads. Back then we were observant enough to hear the words, peruse our surroundings, and come to the conclusions at which we ultimately arrived. We were damned lucky and loved our country for what it represented, not because we were afraid of those we elected. Essentially, it was true love and not duty.

People my age - and of my political persuasion - traversed the sixties much as a fictional space pilot would avoid an alien asteroid belt in the television shows and subsequent movies we enjoyed, or as they would speed away from the shock wave of some super nova. We made it through danger in the nick of time and with seemingly inconceivable fortune, and we have huddled ever since, teaching our children the ways of our forebears.

For decades it seemed easy, with no real pressure from the opposition. Ours was still the dominant doctrine, though the subversives gained steam, and we never envisioned that our roles would ever reverse. We were vigilant and observant, but never actually worried that we'd be fighting for our lives while looking up at the enemy.

They relied on violence to achieve their goals and subterfuge for their prominence and we assumed they would be rejected by our peers for their tactics. We were mistaken. Now, as we try to fight our way back, I fear that we may suffer heavy casualties, as ours is the way of Gandhi; peaceful protest. While many on our side possess the skills and the willingness to respond in kind, the opposition has succeeded in painting us into a corner. Physically, we could crush them, but we dare not for fear of appearances.

(In case the irony is lost on the reader, the very same tactic has effectively neutered our superior military prowess world wide. Coincidence?)

When the Boy Scouts can be seriously vilified in the press, America has a problem. When American kids in an American school can be suspended for wearing the American flag on their clothing, America has a problem. When school kids singing our National Anthem can be silenced by police at the Lincoln Memorial, America has a problem. (Yes, I am aware of the codes for the American flag being used on clothing and merchandise, but let's look at the context.)

What have we done, people? We have left the front door wide open and have welcomed the home invasion cretins to help themselves to our property. Far worse, we have allowed our patriotism to become criminal or, at the least, offensive in our own home. We have encouraged bad behavior to the point that it has become the norm, and decent people immoral.

Perhaps our worst sin has been to allow the enemies of America to infiltrate our politics and ultimately seize control of this great land. We have become serfs to the Lords we escaped centuries ago, meekly succumbing to the whims of the people who we allegedly hired to "represent" us. The hired hands now run the farm.

The opportunity to restore our freedom is a small porthole that is rapidly closing, and November is the vehicle we must drive through it in order prevent our complete subjugation. Thus far, our Founders' vision is solvent, but not if we passively allow it to expire, along with American liberty.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, August 9, 2010

I Think Newt Will Run

For years Sean Hannity has been pestering Newt Gingrich about a possible run for the presidency, and for years Newt has been coy about his answers, while not actually running. I believe that Gingrich played it smart by waiting, opting to let the left take another shot at it, counting on the disaster that is now happening before our eyes.

Now, it sounds like he's ready to make his move. If that is the case, be prepared for the left to bring on the heavy artillery, along with every negative ad ever run about Gingrich being resurrected.

To my fellow bloggers, keep this piece in mind: Withering on the Vine. It may come in handy during the 2012 election season.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, August 6, 2010

Classic Diversions

So far, everything about the Obama administration has involved the President figuratively interrupting himself in mid-sentence to say, "...Hey, look up there!" His defense of the anemic economic situation has been that it "could be worse". Well, it is getting worse.

Now that the 2010 Census is over and those temporary workers find themselves jobless again, the numbers are reflected in the latest jobs report from the government. But they're trying to spin the news yet again, saying that only 131,000 people lost their jobs. Meanwhile, the Obamas are enjoying opulent vacations - separately - in Chicago and Spain. Swell.

As the First Family spends lavishly on leisure, the President continues to spend lavishly on measures that are clearly having a detrimental effect on the country. The national debt continues to climb out of sight, and despite the massive spending of money that does not exist, entities run by the government are losing even more money.

The United States Postal Service just reported a third quarter net loss of 3.5 billion dollars. Social Security will pay out more this year than it takes in for the first time since 1983, when it was overhauled. Fannie Mae is seeking 1.5 billion dollars from the treasury following a 12th straight quarterly loss. Uh, that's three years in a row for those keeping score.

So what does Obama want to do? He wants to pile more debt onto the backs of taxpayers by "forgiving" underwater mortgages or, more accurately, having Fannie Mae do it. Oh sure, the feds are denying it, saying that Obama has no plans at this time for any such program, but how many other things has he lied about in one and a half short years?

No new taxes? That one didn't last long as evidenced by the most punitive new tax of all on the poorest amongst us; smokers. When accused of a new tax in the form of mandated health coverage, the administration vehemently denied that it was a tax, referring to it instead as a "fee". However, when pressed by the states as to the constitutionality of mandated health care, the administration quickly changed its tune to invoke the Commerce Clause.

How about this one? “Under our Plan, No Federal dollars will be used to fund abortions and federal conscious laws will remain in place," Obama said. Uh-huh. Last month Maryland became the second state - joining Pennsylvania - to offer federally funded abortions, using the 85 million dollars it will receive from the federal government.

There are a plethora of smaller lies, demonstrating that the man is incapable of telling the truth regardless of the magnitude of the situation. Lies such as his claim that the Selma march was responsible for his existence, despite the fact that he was 3 and a half years old when the march took place. Or his claim that he was never a Muslim, which was later adjusted to never a practicing Muslim. Yet he fondly spoke of his years in Indonesia, recalling that the Muslim call to prayer was the "sweetest sound" he'd ever heard.

So to believe that he is planning to throw a lot more money down the drain is easy, no matter how the man doth protest.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Cordoba Sounds Nice

No, this is not a fluffy blog post about my preferred vacation destination, it is indicative of just how stupid radical Islamists believe Westerners to be. By designating the coalition to build a vast Islamic Center the "Cordoba Initiative", those who wish to dance on the graves of their victims have been seemingly quite successful in the subterfuge that will make it all possible. And an important tool of Allah's disciples is just that; subterfuge.

They have also learned other methods from the Progressives in America - currently at work dismantling everything that preceded us and made this nation great - that have abetted their efforts, a fact evident in the willingness of those in control of the World Trade Center area to favor the wishes of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf over the pained protests of a multitude of 9/11 surviving family members. That lesson has been if you can't fool your enemy, shame them.

The beauty of the shame campaign is that the perpetrators never have to engage in it. All they have to do is appear nice and reasonable and their primary targets once in control - and their current accomplices - will grab the "tolerance" baton and run with it. So eager are they to demonstrate their tolerance, they will offer their own throats to the wolf, and chastise those who refuse.

What the so-called mainstream media will never report upon is exactly what mainstream Americans need and deserve to know. The Cordoba Initiative, I maintain, was cleverly named with both subterfuge and a degree of defiance in mind. Most Americans would find it harmless because it sounded Spanish and exotic, not threatening at all. New Yorkers, a strange breed already, would welcome what they would automatically consider "diversity".

Diversity and tolerance have been the hallmark points employed by the founder of the Cordoba Initiative, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and he has been rather proficient at sounding sincere in his desire to "build bridges" of multiculturalism and tolerance. But a simple examination of Islamic history and the significance of Cordoba, Spain proves chilling.

While outlets like the BBC take pains to point out the Muslim, Christian and Jewish "harmony" enjoyed in Cordoba after the Muslim conquest of Cordoba in the early 8th century, even they acknowledge that Muslims were in complete control while Christians and Jews were "tolerated". Harmony at a price is what it was, however, and the latter two religious groups were tolerated as long as they paid and behaved. Tolerance is not always a nice word. Sometimes it means that one group agrees not to kill another for a price.

Feisal Abdul Rauf has written a book, titled What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right with America. Just the title is enough to give the average American liberal the warm fuzzies, and on its face seems quite harmless even to someone like me. Fortunately, I have long ago learned to accept nothing at face value, so I read.

Andy McCarthy investigated the good Imam's writings, and here is what he found, written for National Review Online:

But the book hasn’t always been called that. It was called quite something else for non-English-speaking audiences. In Malaysia, it was published as A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11.

Now it emerges that a “special, non-commercial edition” of this book was later produced, with Feisal’s cooperation, by two American tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood: the Islamic Society of North America and the International Institute of Islamic Thought.
The question then arises, why would Imam Rauf feel the need to re-title his book for consumption here? Hell, even our current president has said that the Muslim call to prayer was "the sweetest sound I have ever heard". Why lie, Mr. Rauf?

The guilt trip is beginning to slip amongst the American people in spite of the weak-spined capitulations of elected officials all too eager to appear tolerant. While Newt Gingrich recently noted that the City of New York already has over 100 mosques, the point becomes clearer that the opposition to this particular edifice is not based on bias but, rather, a desire to prevent a Muslim declaration of conquest, such as the Great Cordoba Mosque (pictured at top) being built on the graves of Americans.

Somehow I doubt that still-grieving family members of the deceased from that horrible day would find the minarets of Cordoba House appealing or the Muslim call to prayer as beautiful as Obama did. That still does not make them hateful, nor intolerant.

Sphere: Related Content