Archive for March, 2009

Clinton Off-Base, U.S. Not to Blame for Mexican Drug Violence

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

Secretary of State Clinton said Wednesday in Mexico City that America’s “insatiable” demand for illegal drugs and inability to stop weapons smuggling into Mexico are partly to blame for violence along the U.S.-Mexican border. “I feel very strongly we have a co-responsibility,” Clinton told reporters, adding: “Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade. Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers, and civilians.”

“The problem is that you’ve got vicious gangs in Mexico. We didn’t create those gangs. They’re not made up of Americans — they’re made up of people who were born in Mexico; and it’s the Mexican government that needs to get those gangs under control,” he contends. “I don’t think it’s helpful for the Secretary of State to once again be pointing fingers at our own country when she should be putting as much pressure as possible on the Mexican government.”

Instead of pouring tax money into the coffers of the Mexican government, [Gary Bauer, the president of American Values] argues that President Obama needs secure the border by providing enough National Guard troops or Border Patrol agents to ensure the Mexican drug violence does not spill over into the U.S. and further endanger the lives of American citizens.

Original Link.

A Little Humor: “Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog”

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

A Little Less In Your Stocking

Yesterday, Big O appointed perhaps the greatest tax-policy review panel in the history of tax-policy review panels.

Publicly, we’re saying this is OMB chief Pete Orszag’s idea, but everyone here knows that it was the Big Guy’s brainstorm, because Big Guy’s hobby is tax policy.

The plan is for this panel to come up with a plan to “rebalance” the U.S. tax system, and to end “corporate welfare” as we know it. By “rebalance” we mean “raise taxes,” and by “end corporate welfare” we mean “create new taxes.”

The plan is due on Big Guy’s desk by December 4, a nice early Christmas present for America.

—–

Hurtful Words and Point of Clarification

I was having breakfast in the Commissary this morning, and I overheard some of the Advance team talking about last night’s performance. They were impressed that Big Guy was able to say so many sentences without a “real” teleprompter. I had to run out of the room so that no one could see the tears running down my screens. Sorry … it’s been a tough week.

You see, the Obamatron is me. It’s kind of like Cinderella and Gibbsy is my Fairy Godmother who waves his magic wand and I go from two small screens to one, slick screen. Well not really, they just plugged my cables into a 52-inch flat screen, instead of the mini-LCDs that sit on the floor. Same words, just a different package. And a bigger package. But I digress.

I’m a computer after all, and when people can’t see past the gloss and the smooth lines, and thin brackets and sleek screens, not bothering to see the real me, the real guts, it hurts. I have a brain people.

This is the best way to look at it: my LCD component is to Big Boy, what the sleeveless dress is to Michelle.

“Absolute Power to Corrupt Absolutely” By Rick Saunders & Jeff Schreiber

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

Well, the Obama/Geithner kamikaze pirouette continues, and with each passing day the dance is looking more and more like something from the cutting room floor at the Bolshoi in Moscow. As in the Moscow in Russia, not Idaho.

Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner floated the spectacularly breathtaking notion to the House Financial Services Committee that the Treasury Department (a.k.a. “Toxic Tim’s Sandbox”) should be given sweeping and unprecedented–not to mention probably unconstitutional–new powers to regulate (Obamaspeak for “subjugate”) and even take over (Obamaspeak for “seize”) private financial and other businesses whose “too big to fail” size would make their collapse a perceived threat to the entire economy. With the now-expected help of TOTUS, President Obama chimed in, adding that he hopes “it doesn’t take too long to convince Congress” of the need for such expansive powers.

Really?

So what we now have, on the heels of (1) an Obama ten-year budget black hole plan which would suck the life out of the faltering economy and drive the deficit to at least $9.3 trillion with annual deficits that even Obama’s Budget Director, Peter Orszag, concedes are “not sustainable,” (2) a populist AIG bonus scandal facilitated, if not engineered, by administration officials through one of their many senatorial flacks on the Hill, Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd, and (3) an Obama-inspired “stimulus” bill that seems to be having exactly the opposite effect is a proposal for pre-nationalizing the economy. That is a characteristic of socialistic and communistic regimes and is likely NOT what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created this Republic.

Hence what Minnesota Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann said in the video clip above about the “lurch” toward socialism. It was Bachmann, by the way, whose questions yesterday about constitutionality were ducked and dodged by Geithner as though he were George W. Bush facing a size 10 Iraqi loafer.

Last night, The Chosen One followed up on Geithner’s trial balloon by noting to reporters at the White House: “We are already hard at work in putting forward a detailed proposal. We will work in consultation with members of Congress. That will be just one phase of a broader regulatory framework that we’re going to have to put in place to prevent these kinds of crises from happening again.”

Quick point: whenever Obama says he will be working “in consultation with members of Congress,” he means “I will twist the arms of any Democrat who doesn’t see it my way–and don’t think I won’t use Rahm and his Taser if I have to–but I will ignore the concerns of the Republicans because [flash the megawatt smile] I won . . . and their guy didn’t.”

How quintessentially presidential. How on Earth did the Republic survive so long without this guy?

Obama’s idea of negotiation, of course, is that you come to his position and all will be well, but if you think his position will change and move closer to yours–as in “compromise” or “give”–you are probably indulging in a controlled substance. Think of the process this way — it’s akin to Nancy Pelosi’s assurance when she ascended to the position of Speaker of the House that the relationship with President Bush and her fellow congressmen would be one of “partnership, not partisanship.” Yeah, that one’s workin’ out really well, don’tcha think?

Democrat Congressman Barney “Freddie’s Fannie is Basically Sound” Frank, the committee chairman, supplemented Obama’s remarks by adding that “when nonbank [sic] major financial institutions need to be put out of their misery, we need to give somebody the authority to do what the FDIC can do with banks.” Now, a cynic might be tempted to observe that there are some things in this country that are more in need of being euthanized than “nonbank major financial institutions.” Frank even elicited from Fed Chairman Bernanke that these powers, to be effective, would likely need to extend to private institutions regardless of whether they were the recipients of federal bailout monies.

Point: when Barney Frank suggests that some sweeping new powers need to be engrafted onto Toxic Tim’s biceps “when nonbank major financial institutions need to be put out of their misery,” he is really saying that “anything we, the omniscient Democrats in Congress can do, because we run the table, to facilitate the destruction of capitalism in order to speed the redistribution of the wealth and the creation of a combo Zimbabwe/worker’s paradise here–as long as it is not homophobic–we will do.” Not that it matters to Obots like Frank, be they straight or be they gay, but the mechanism for which he seems to be groping, albeit clumsily, is not nationalization and has been around for years. It is called bankruptcy.

Ah, but bankruptcy is too slow, too uncertain and too dependent upon analysis and logic dispensed by people in that “other” inferior appendage of the government, judges schooled in bankruptcy law. Besides, to quote Obama from the opening days of his administration: “We won.”

Read the rest of the article here.

“A Universal Doctrine of Women’s Rights” By Phyllis Chesler and Marcia Pappas

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

It is time for feminists, both women and men, of all faiths, and of no faith, to stand together for a woman’s right not to be murdered in the name of family honor. Indeed, we welcome men and women of all faiths, including Islam, to stand with us against female genital mutilation/castration, forced veiling, child marriage, arranged marriage, polygamy, and “honorcide,” and in favor of a woman’s right to live as a westerner in the West without being threatened and beaten for refusing to wear hijab, wanting to have non-Muslim friends, wear makeup, attend college, drive her own car, or end an abusive marriage. Muslim and Sikh women have been honor murdered in North America for all these alleged crimes against their religion and their culture.

Here are some specific examples of how American feminist leaders have addressed the problems of Third World women, including Muslim women, both here and abroad. While there are exceptions, most feminists seem to feel more comfortable criticizing their own government. They hesitate to criticize foreign, Third World governments, lest they be demonized as “crusaders” or “politically incorrect racists.”

In the 1980s, feminists respected Alice Walker’s brave stand against female genital cutting/mutilation. Walker, a feminist-”womanist,” focused on perpetrators who were usually women of color, in the Middle East and Africa, who were savagely mutilating their own daughters and granddaughters to render them “marriageable” for men. As an African-American legend, perhaps Walker was viewed as morally “entitled” to criticize foreign, including African, sexism. (Walker finally published her book about this, Warrior Marks, in 1993). In the 1990s, NOW national and state Presidents also spoke out against female genital cutting/mutilation.

Today, sadly something has changed. The unspoken politics of racism among the feminist intelligentsia, and among feminist philanthropists is as follows: If the victims are women of color, especially if they are Arabs, definitely if they are Palestinians, or Muslims, their suffering and their deaths matter—but only if their abusers and murderers are white, European, American, or Israeli. If dark-skinned Africans or Muslims of color gang-rape, kidnap, sexually enslave, bury alive, immolate or stone women of color, including Arabs, Palestinians, and Muslims, (in the West Bank and Gaza, in Afghanistan, Iran, Algeria, Sudan, Somalia), or if one Muslim denomination (Sunni) blows up the other, (Shiaa) in Pakistan and Iraq, it is simply not politically correct to say so. Muslim-on-Muslim crimes do not count in the same way that white European or American-on-Muslim crimes seem to matter.

This is the party line in our universities, in our mainstream media, at the United Nations and in international human rights organizations.

Why are Second and Third Wave feminists buying into this? Why are feminists sacrificing so many women to the dangerous ideology of “cultural relativism,” a belief system in which concerns about sexism are always trumped by concerns about racism? The authors are not saying that racism does not exist, that it does not matter, that it must not be addressed. We are saying that women are affected by both. And when a man or a woman seeks to objectify, abuse or murder women, they should be called out on it, no matter what their skin-color or gender may be.

Conflicting views about whether womens’ rights are universal or not seem to be surfacing in contemporary feminist circles.

Read the rest of the article here.

Pakistan Aiding Taliban Attacks in Afghanistan

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

Well so much for our ally in the war on terrorist…

The Taliban offensive in Afghanistan is aided partly by support from operatives in Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

Pakistan’s support for the Taliban, coordinated by operatives inside Pakistan’s Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, reportedly includes military supplies, money and guidance for the militant group’s leaders.

U.S. government officials said informants and surveillance provided key evidence to prove the ties between the Taliban and Pakistani spies.

Pakistani officials told the Times they had firsthand knowledge of the ties, which they denied were strengthening the insurgency.

Evidence shows ISI operatives meet regularly with Taliban commanders to discuss whether to intensify or reduce violence before the Afghan elections.

Pakistani leaders deny government ties to militant groups and the Times quoted U.S. officials as saying it was unlikely top government officials were coordinating the efforts. The middle-ranking intelligence operatives sometimes cultivate relationships without the approval of senior officials, the paper said.

President Obama has ordered an additional 17,000 troops to join the 38,000 U.S. troops already there. He is expected to announce Friday the results of his administration’s review of Afghanistan policy.

Original Link.

Obama Administration Slams Door on Israel

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

It’s no surprise to me that Obama would hang Israel out to dry on this one.

Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi cut short his visit to Washington after getting an extraordinarily cool reception from the new U.S. administration.

Last year, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi had no problem setting up meetings with top officials in the U.S. government.

On his current trip to Washington, Ashkenazi sought to meet the administration of President Barack Obama, but most officials were unavailable.

A statement to WorldTribune.com by the Israel Defense Forces spokesman attempted to downplay the snubs. But diplomatic sources said Ashkenazi failed to obtain access to any Cabinet member, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Israeli military chief, who sought to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat, was also unable meet his counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

[On March 19, the Israel Defense Forces spokesman e-mailed the following statement to WorldTribune.com: “The schedule for the United States visit of the IDF Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, was preplanned according to requests made by American officials. Any meetings that were cancelled were substituted with telephone conference calls.”]

“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”
—Genesis 12:3

The IDF Internet site reported on March 17, that Ashkenazi cut short his trip to the United States in order to participate in a security cabinet meeting regarding the abducted soldier Gilad Shalit.

“The Chief of the General Staff wishes to send his sincere apologies to the 1500 senior donors of the Friends of the IDF in the United States, who will gather for their annual donation gala dinner in New York City on Tuesday night (Mar. 17), in which Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi was supposed to participate as a guest of honor,” the IDF report stated.

On March 12, Ashkenazi left for a five-day visit to the United States meant to lobby the Obama administration to abandon the planned U.S. dialogue with Iran, Middle East Newsline reported. Ashkenazi, scheduled to meet with the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, was expected to have brought new Israeli intelligence on Iran’s nuclear weapons and missile programs.

But the diplomatic sources said the administration made it clear that nobody in a policy-making position was available to sit with Ashkenazi. This included the president, Vice President Joseph Biden, Gates, National Intelligence director Dennis Blair or Mullen.

[“With regards to a meeting with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one was not scheduled between Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi and Adm. Mullen,” the IDF stated. “Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi has met with Adm. Mullen five times in the past year.”]

“The administration is sending a very clear message to Israel, and this is we want to talk about Palestine and not Iran,” a diplomat who has been following U.S.-Israel relations said.

Ashkenazi obtained an appointment with National Security Advisor James Jones. But the sources said the meeting was to focus on U.S. demands for Israel to ease military restrictions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

“The Obama administration believes that Israel is as much or more of a problem as it is an ally, at least until Israel’s disagreements with its neighbors are resolved,” former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said.

Bolton envisioned that the White House would pressure Israel to legitimize Hamas and Hizbullah. At the same time, he said, Obama would continue to woo Iran.

Already, economic and diplomatic advisers to Obama have urged the president to launch a U.S. dialogue with Hamas. The US/Middle East Project, which includes such Obama supporters as former Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Sen. Chuck Hagel, was said to have elicited a promise from Obama to listen to any proposals made by Hamas.

“The main gist is that you need to push hard on the Palestinian peace process,” former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft said. “Don’t move it to the end of your agenda and say you have too much to do. And the U.S. needs to have a position, not just hold their coats while they sit down.”

The Israeli chief of staff had also scheduled a session with Dennis Ross, the special adviser on Iran to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But the sources said Ross was not regarded as being in a policy-making role.

The diplomatic sources said the White House and the senior echelon of the Obama administration have refused a dialogue with Israel on the Iranian threat. They said Ms. Clinton, during her visit to Israel, was largely silent during briefings by Israeli intelligence on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.

During her visit, Ms. Clinton received written recommendations on U.S. policy toward Iran from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The U.S. secretary said the recommendations would be relayed to the White House.

“The Israeli government and military have been alarmed by the rapid and dramatic reversal in the U.S. policy toward Iran,” the source said. “This reversal took place without any consultation with Israel, Gulf Arab countries or even Congress.”

The sources said Israel has sought a U.S. commitment to limit its dialogue with Iran. Israel has also urged Obama to make it clear that the military option against Iran’s nuclear program exists.

But Obama and his top aides appear uninterested in hearing Israel’s position. The sources said a key aim of Ashkenazi was to urge the administration to release weapons and systems long sought by Israel in the area of aerial refueling, air-to-ground weapons, sensors as well as the F-22 fighter-jet.

In 2008, under the Bush administration, Gates and then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice blocked U.S. requests for these military systems. The sources said Gates and Ms. Rice concluded that Israel could use this equipment for an air strike on Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities.

“Ashkenazi sees this U.S. refusal as what has been undermining Israeli deterrence toward Iran and boosting the confidence of the Teheran regime,” the source said. “The mullahs in regime have concluded that America has dropped the military option and won’t allow such an option to Israel.”

Original Link.

This post is brought to you by:




Christian Gifts from Israel – The Jerusalem Gift Shop

‘Take America Back’

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

“We must take America back,” Vaus sang. “Put an end to the gangs and the drugs in the street and the fact that the bad guys most always go free. That is wrong. We need leaders who lead us, not stick us and bleed us and take all our money and send it abroad. We must take America back. We need prayer in schools and more things made in USA. It’s the least we can do for the red, white and blue. We must take America back.”
-Lyrics to “We Must Take America Back” by Steve Vaus

Please read the article here.

Justice, Supremes Confirm Receiving Obama Eligibility Challenge

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

We recently blogged about an attorney’s contention the reason the Supreme Court refused to review the latest case challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president was because they had never received the case.
Now, the lawyer has confirmation that the case has been received and entered the Supreme Court system properly.

The U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Justice Department today confirmed that documentation challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president has arrived and soon will be evaluated.

Confirmation came from DefendOurFreedoms.us, the foundation through which California attorney Orly Taitz has been working on a number of cases that raise questions over Obama’s birth location, and therefore his qualifications to be president under the Constitution’s demand that the office be occupied only by a “natural born” citizen.

According to the blog, Taitz was informed by Karen Thornton of the Department of Justice that all of the case documents and filings have arrived and have been forwarded to the Office of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, including three dossiers and the Quo Warranto case.

“Coincidently, after Dr. Taitz called me with that update, she received another call from Officer Giaccino at the Supreme Court,” the posting said. “Officer Giaccino stated both pleadings have been received and being analyzed now.”

The report from the Supreme Court also said the documents that Taitz hand-delivered to Chief Justice John Roberts at his appearance at the University of Idaho a little over a week ago also were at the Supreme Court.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 340,000 others and sign up now!

Some of the legal challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

WND reported earlier on a proposal by U.S. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., and the criticism he’s taking simply for suggesting that the issue be avoided in the future by having presidential candidates supply their birth certificate.

“What you should do is stop embarrassing yourself and take the Reynolds Wrap off your head,” MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann suggested to Posey, and U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, has gone so far as to suggest that Posey’s judgment is skewed.

“The citizenship of someone who has reached the point of running for president of the United States is not really an issue,” Abercrombie said.

Posey said he made the suggestion because he’s seeking the truth, and “the more and more I get called names by leftwing activists, partisan hacks and political operatives for doing it, the more and more I think I did the right thing.”

Hawaiian officials have confirmed they have a birth certificate on file for Obama, but it cannot be released without his permission, and they have not revealed the information it contains.

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, told WND a demand for verification of Obama’s eligibility appears to be legitimate.

Eidsmoe said it’s clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents that “he does not want the public to know.”

Original Link.

Lady Gabrieli Silk Tallit – Prayer Shawl from the Jerusalem Gift Shop

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

Weekly I highlight items being offered by the Jerusalem Gift Shop. Today it’s the Lady Gabrieli Silk Tallit – Prayer Shawl.

Lady Gabrieli Silk Tallit - Prayer Shawl

Take a moment to see all of the other interesting items they stock.




Christian Gifts from Israel – The Jerusalem Gift Shop

James Having Surgery Today – Continue to Pray for Him

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

Our friend, James, who is suffering from cancer, is due to have surgery today to repair leaks in his lung caused by the cancer. He is very weak from the cancer treatments and greatly needs your thoughts and prayers.
Thanks!!
-Steve

Top EU Politician Slams Obama’s Plans to Spend U.S. Out of Recession

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

When the European Union, which was right behind the Main Stream Media as the most vocal Obama shill prior to the election, begins to criticize his spending plans, we can rest assured that the plan is a really bad thing for everyone. Will Oboe change and listen? Never…The One, Emperor Obama I knows all. Remember your place, subjects!! You are here to serve the Emperor, not criticize him. How dare you!! All must love the Emperor, or else!!

STRASBOURG, France — A top European Union politician on Wednesday slammed U.S. plans to spend its way out of recession as “a way to hell.”

Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, whose country currently holds the EU presidency, told the European Parliament that President Barack Obama’s massive stimulus package and banking bailout “will undermine the stability of the global financial market.”

A day after his government collapsed because of a parliamentary vote of no-confidence, Topolanek took the EU presidency on a collision course with Washington over how to deal with the global economic recession.

Most European leaders favor tighter financial regulation, while the U.S. has been pushing for larger economic stimulus plans.

Topolanek’s comments are the strongest criticism so far from a European leader as the 27-nation bloc bristles from recent U.S. criticism that it is not spending enough to stimulate demand.

They also pave the way for a stormy summit next week in London between leaders of the Group of 20 industrialized countries.

The host of the summit, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, praised Obama on Tuesday for his willingness to work with Europe on reforming the global economy in the run-up to the G-20 summit.

The United States plans to spend heavily to try and lift its economy out of recession with a $787 billion economic stimulus plan of tax rebates, health and welfare benefits, as well as extra energy and infrastructure spending.

To encourage banks to lend again, the government will also pump $1 trillion into the financial system by buying up treasury bonds and mortgage securities in an effort to clear some of the “toxic assets” — devalued and untradeable assets — from banks’ balance sheets.

Topolanek bluntly said that “the United States did not take the right path.”.

He slammed the U.S.’ widening budget deficit and protectionist trade measures — such as the “Buy America” — and said that “all of these steps, these combinations and permanency is the way to hell.”

“We need to read the history books and the lessons of history and the biggest success of the (EU) is the refusal to go this way,” he said.

“Americans will need liquidity to finance all their measures and they will balance this with the sale of their bonds but this will undermine the stability of the global financial market,” said Topolanek.

Original Link.

Conservative Congressman Concerned Liberal Special-Interest Groups Will “Gerrymander” 2010 Census

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

“Gerrymandering is a form of redistribution in which electoral district or constituency boundaries are deliberately modified for electoral advantage. Gerrymandering may be used to help or hinder particular constituents, such as members of a political, racial, linguistic, religious or class group.”
-Wikipedia.

A conservative congressman is concerned that liberal special-interest groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, will be allowed to “gerrymander” the 2010 census. ACORN recently signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau to assist with recruiting temporary census workers.

“You have to realize that President Obama used to represent ACORN,” [Congressman Lynn Westmoreland (R-Georgia)] notes. “In fact, he represented them in an Illinois case that said certain banks in Illinois were not doing enough lending to people who could not afford a mortgage, and therefore [he] is one of the main reasons that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lowered their guidelines for people to get loans under this Community Redevelopment Act.”

Westmoreland says he plans to ensure that the more than one-million census workers who will be hired over the next year are fingerprinted, submit to an FBI background check, and “held accountable for giving an accurate count of the people.”

Original Link.

Obama Scraps ‘Global War on Terror’ for ‘Overseas Contingency Operation’

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

Leave it to the liberal Democrats and their wanna-be Emperor, Obama I, to change the verbiage used to define terrorist. We are going from a “Global War on Terror” to an “Overseas Contingency Operation”. Rates right up there with “Pro-Choice” which is infanticide.

The Obama administration has ordered an end to use of the phrase “Global War on Terror,” a label adopted by the Bush administration shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

In a memo sent this week from the Defense Department’s office of security to Pentagon staffers, members were told, “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.'”

A spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget, from whom the direction reportedly came, told the Post there was no guidance given from the agency and that it was merely the “opinion of a career civil servant.”

The Obama administration’s rhetoric has paralleled this idea, having used the “Global Contingency Operation” phrase for a month prior to the e-mail being sent.

Craig W. Duehring, assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower, also used the term last week.

“Key battlefield monetary incentives has allowed the Air Force to meet the demands of overseas contingency operations even as requirements continue to grow,” he said in congressional testimony.

Critics have pleaded with the Obama administration to abandon the use of “Global War on Terror” because they say it mischaracterizes the nature of the enemy and its abilities.

Original Link.
See America’s Right “Names Have Been Changed to Protect the Ignorant”.

Christian Valedictorian Case Headed for Supreme Court

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof“.
-First Amendment to the United States Constitution

It doesn’t say “…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, except

There are no exceptions. Period.

Attorneys for a high school valedictorian whose microphone was turned off when she began sharing her Christian faith say they’ll appeal her case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In June 2006, McComb strayed from her school-approved script to tell how faith in Jesus had filled a void in her life. Her microphone was shut off in mid-sentence as she said, “God’s love is so great that he gave up — gave up his only Son…” The audience responded with boos and shouts to turn it back on, and responded similarly when school officials attempted to introduce the next valedictorian speaker, saying “she deserves this chance to speak.”

“This is a very important free-speech case that will affect the rights of all persons across America,” states John Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, in a press release. “If government officials can extinguish speech by turning off microphones at public assemblies, then none of us will have any rights.”

Original Link.
See our article “What Does the U.S. Constitution Actually Say About Religion?”.

Geithner Seeks Power to Seize Imperiled Firms

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

In other words, the government wants to nationalize businesses that have taken bailout funds and if, in their opinion, are not doing well enough (what they called “imperiled”). If these powers were given to Geithner, I can see how the definition of “imperiled” could become just about anything he (and Obama) wanted it to be.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asked Congress Tuesday to give the White House unprecedented powers to seize large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, leaping beyond its present authority to seize only banks.

Geithner argued for such authority during the House Financial Services Committee’s hearing on the handling of bonuses paid to executives at American International Group.

“As we have seen with AIG, distress at large, interconnected, non-depository financial institutions can pose systematic risks just as distress at banks can. The administration proposes legislation to give the U.S. government the same basic set of tools for addressing financial distress at non-banks as it has in the bank context,” Geithner told the committee.

“The proposed resolution authority would allow the government to provide financial assistance to make loans to an institution, purchase its obligations or assets, assume or guarantee its liabilities and purchase an equity interest,” he said.

President Obama said later Tuesday that he hopes “it doesn’t take too long to convince Congress” that it should approve the new powers.

But Republican leaders were quick to express skepticism Tuesday at the prospect of expanding Geithner’s authority.

“I’m a little concerned,” House Minority Leader John Boehner told reporters during a press conference. “This is an unprecedented grab of power and before that occurs, there ought to be a real debate about whether we should give that authority to the Treasury secretary.”

House Democratic leaders also showed reservation over supporting the administration’s call for expanded authority.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters Tuesday: “I want to discuss it with a number of people. Obviously one of the issues that Congress is concerned about is the delegation of authority. We are talking about huge sums of money — huge consequences for one individual.”

“At this point in time, I want to look at it more carefully,” he added.

Geithner called on Congress to grant him new powers to regulate huge financial companies like insurance giant AIG, whose failure would pose a grave danger to the U.S. financial system and the broader economy.

Specifically, the Treasury secretary asked for powers similar to those of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which has authority to seize control of banks, take over their bad assets and sell good ones to competitors.

“AIG highlights broad failures of our financial system,” Geithner told the House Financial Services Committee. “We must ensure that our country never faces this situation again.”

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, appearing with Geithner, agreed. He said the government’s bailout of AIG underscores the urgent need to wind down financial giants on the verge of collapse and subject them to much stronger regulatory oversight.

Original Link.

‘Fusion Centers’ Expand Criteria to Identify Militia Members

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

Look at this…the government thinks I could be a domestic terrorist. Leave it to them to accuse innocent people while ignoring the ones who might actually be terrorist.

If you’re an anti-abortion activist, or if you display political paraphernalia supporting a third-party candidate or a certain Republican member of Congress, if you possess subversive literature, you very well might be a member of a domestic paramilitary group.

That’s according to “The Modern Militia Movement,” a report by the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), a government collective that identifies the warning signs of potential domestic terrorists for law enforcement communities.

“Due to the current economical and political situation, a lush environment for militia activity has been created,” the Feb. 20 report reads. “Unemployment rates are high, as well as costs of living expenses. Additionally, President Elect Barrack [sic] Obama is seen as tight on gun control and many extremists fear that he will enact firearms confiscations.”

MIAC is one of 58 so-called “fusion centers” nationwide that were created by the Department of Homeland Security, in part, to collect local intelligence that authorities can use to combat terrorism and related criminal activities. More than $254 million from fiscal years 2004-2007 went to state and local governments to support the fusion centers, according to the DHS Web site.

During a press conference last week in Kansas City, Mo., DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano called fusion centers the “centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing” in the future.

“Let us not forget the reason we are here, the reason we have the Department of Homeland Security and the reason we now have fusion centers, which is a relatively new concept, is because we did not have the capacity as a country to connect the dots on isolated bits of intelligence prior to 9/11,” Napolitano said, according to a DHS transcript.

“That’s why we started this…. Now we know that it’s not just the 9/11-type incidents but many, many other types of incidents that we can benefit from having fusion centers that share information and product and analysis upwards and horizontally.”

But some say the fusion centers are going too far in whom they identify as potential threats to American security.

People who supported former third-party presidential candidates like Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr are cited in the report, in addition to anti-abortion activists and conspiracy theorists who believe the United States, Mexico and Canada will someday form a North American Union.

“Militia members most commonly associate with 3rd party political groups,” the report reads. “It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty or Libertarian material.”

Other potential signals of militia involvement, according to the report, are possession of the Gagsden “Don’t Tread on Me” flag or the widely available anti-income tax film “America: Freedom to Fascism.”

Barr, the 2008 Libertarian Party presidential nominee, told FOXNews.com that he’s taking steps to get his name removed from the report, which he said could actually “dilute the effectiveness” of law enforcement agencies.

“It can subject people to unwarranted and inappropriate monitoring by the government,” he said. “If I were the governor of Missouri, I’d be concerned that law enforcement agencies are wasting their time and effort on such nonsense.”

Barr said his office has received “several dozen” complaints related to the report.

Original Link.

‘Politics of Fear’ Obama-Style

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

A leading terrorism analyst says because of pressure from oil-producing regimes, President Obama and members of his national security team are pursuing the very “politics of fear” they once accused President Bush of pursuing.

During her first testimony before Congress, Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano avoided using the word “terrorism,” but instead referred to the phrase “man-caused disasters.”

[Dr. Walid Phares, a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies] says Napolitano’s comments signal a major policy shift, and abandon Arab allies in the Middle East who are encouraged by elections in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as struggling for democracy in their own countries. Distancing the nation from using the “right terminology,” he says, takes the U.S. in the wrong direction.

Original Link.

Obama Budget to Bring $9.3 Trillion in Deficits

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

For those of you who have almost constantly accused President Bush of unbridled spending; worse than anything anyone else has ever done…please be quiet now. Your man in the White House, The One, Emperor Obama I, is exceeding President Bush’s deficit by over four times.
Many of you equated President Bush’s spending to that of a “drunken sailor”. If President Bush was the drunken sailor, I can’t publish on this blog what that makes Obama for his spending.
Get a grip people. What we have now is at least ten times worse than what we had.
When the Associated Press, one of Obama’s main shills in the election, is willing to offer criticism of his policies, then we know things are not going well at all.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush’s presidency, congressional auditors said Friday.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It’s a prospect even the president’s own budget director called unsustainable.

In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By CBO’s calculation, Obama’s budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama’s policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

White House budget chief Peter Orszag said that CBO’s long-range economic projections are more pessimistic than those of the White House, private economists and the Federal Reserve and that he remained confident that Obama’s budget, if enacted, would produce smaller deficits.

Even so, Orszag acknowledged that if the CBO projections prove accurate, Obama’s budget would produce deficits that could not be sustained.

“Deficits in the, let’s say, 5 percent of GDP range would lead to rising debt-to-GDP ratios that would ultimately not be sustainable,” Orszag told reporters.

Deficits so big put upward pressure on interest rates as the government offers more attractive interest rates to attract borrowers.

“I think deficits of 5 percent (of GDP) are unsupportable,” said economist Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “It will lead to higher interest rates to the point where it will force policymakers to make changes.”

Republicans immediately piled on.

“This report should serve as the wake-up call this administration needs,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. “We simply cannot continue to mortgage our children and grandchildren’s future to pay for bigger and more costly government.”

But Obama insisted on Friday that his agenda is still on track.

“What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term,” Obama said. “That’s why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform [socialized health care like they have in other countries…health care that introduces massive waits for treatment and less care from lack of incentive. -ed]. That’s why it enhances America’s competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil [how? you won’t let us drill domestically or build any new refineries. -ed] and building a clean energy economy.”

Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget for the 2010 fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 contains ambitious programs to overhaul the U.S. health care system and initiate new “cap-and-trade” rules [which will raise the cost of consumer goods. who do you folks think get to pay for higher taxes and penalties socked to companies? they certainly don’t. we, the consumers, get that honor. -ed] to combat global warming [which doesn’t exist. -ed].

Both initiatives involve raising federal revenues sharply higher, but those dollars wouldn’t be used to defray the burgeoning deficit and would instead help pay for Obama’s health plan and implement Obama’s $400 tax credit for most workers and $800 for couples.

Obama’s budget promises to cut the deficit to $533 billion in five years. The CBO says the red ink for that year will total $672 billion.

Most disturbing to Obama allies like Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., are the longer term projections, which climb above $1 trillion again by the end of the next decade and approach 6 percent of GDP by 2019.

Among about a dozen major changes to Obama’s budget, Conrad is looking to curb Obama’s 9 percent increase for non-defense appropriations to show short-term progress and insists that the long-term deficit and debt crisis will have to be addressed via a special bipartisan commission.

“The budget that I’ll submit will cut the deficit by more than two-thirds over these first five years,” Conrad. “These imbalances are just absolutely unsustainable.”

The worsening economy is responsible for the even deeper fiscal mess inherited by Obama. As an illustration, CBO says the deficit for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, will top $1.8 trillion, $93 billion more than foreseen by the White House. That would equal 13 percent of GDP, a level not seen since World War II.

The 2009 deficit, fueled by the $700 billion Wall Street bailout and diving tax revenues stemming from the worsening recession, is four times the previous $459 billion record set just last year.

The CBO’s estimate for 2010 is worse as well, with a deficit of almost $1.4 trillion expected under administration policies, about $200 billion more than predicted by Obama.

Long-term deficit predictions have proven notoriously fickle — George W. Bush inherited flawed projections of a 10-year, $5.6 trillion surplus and instead produced record deficits — and if the economy outperforms CBO’s expectations, the deficits could prove significantly smaller.

Republicans say Obama’s budget plan taxes, spends and borrows too much, and they’ve been sharply critical of his $787 billion economic stimulus measure and a just-passed $410 billion omnibus spending bill that awarded big increases to domestic agency budgets.

The administration says it inherited deficits totaling $9 trillion over the next decade and that its budget plan cuts $2 trillion from those deficits. But most of those spending reductions come from reducing costs for the war in Iraq.

Original Link.

“Dumbing Down Marriage” by Allen Hunt

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

Being able to buy a $500,000 house on fabricated and blown up income figures with no money down……. a perversion of the American dream of homeownership.

Getting paid $15MM for employment that helped cause failure at major financial institutions…..a perversion of the American work ethic.

Assaulting the institution of marriage so as to eviscerate it of any meaning whatsoever….. a perversion of the American social fabric.

And assaulting the very idea of marriage is exactly what is occurring at every turn. Consider just four examples from the past week:

1) New data shows more than 40% of American babies were born out of wedlock. This staggering figure continues a twenty-year growth trend in children starting life from the outset in incomplete families.

2) Most, if not all, dictionaries, now provide multiple definitions for “marriage.” Their stated goal is to reflect cultural usage rather than to create it.

3) The same-sex marriage battle continues in California in spite of the passage of Proposition 8 in November. Gay activists have already begun mobilizing for another referendum if the state’s Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to stand.

4) Two Pepperdine University law professors published an article in Time this week, arguing that the government should get out of the marriage business altogether.

These four examples join what has become a siege on the very notions of family and marriage in America. Much like Vicksburg in 1863, where residents dug tunnels to survive the daily bombardment from Union cannons and hid food to try to outlast the severed supply lines, marriage and family today live in a fixed state of defense and survival, clinging to what little sustenance they can find in a culture almost exclusively hostile to them. From the defective idea of “same-sex marriage,” to the increasing disregard for marriage as the birthplace for children, and to a malformed desire to make marriage contractual and disposable at will, family and marriage stand battered and bruised by a ceaseless bombardment of attack.

Sadly, in the not too distant future, we will experience the painful chaos borne by those in our nation who claim to “broaden” our understanding of marriage. In fact, these folks dumb down the very concept of marriage so as to gut it of meaning altogether. The resulting chaos, if the trend continues, will wreak havoc on children who will consistently find themselves unable to give and receive love in appropriate ways, unable to form deep bonds of intimacy and long-term commitments, and unable to provide a stable setting for future generations. This chaos comes from the increasing pressure in our culture to define the ideas of marriage and family by purely individual desires rather than by socially meaningful and viable ones.

Read the rest of the article here.

Quiet Muslim-Only Town in N.Y. Founded by Alleged Terrorist

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009

Our very own potential breeding ground for home grown Muslim terrorist? Time will tell. Of course by then, it will be too late to stop it and innocent people will have died.

HANCOCK, N.Y. — If you didn’t know where to look, you’d probably never find Islamberg, a private Muslim community in the woods of the western Catskills, 150 miles northwest of New York City.

The town, sitting on a quiet dirt road past a gate marked with No Trespassing signs, is home to an estimated 100 residents. There are small houses and other buildings visible from the outside, but it is what can’t be seen from beyond the gate that has some watchers worried.

Islamberg was founded in 1980 by Sheikh Syed Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, a Pakistani cleric who purchased a 70-acre plot and invited followers, mostly Muslim converts living in New York City, to settle there.

The town has its own mosque, grocery store and schoolhouse. It also reportedly has a firing range where residents take regular target practice. Gilani established similar rural enclaves across the country — at least six, including the Red House community in southern Virginia — though some believe there are dozens of them, all operating under the umbrella of the “Muslims of the Americas” group founded by Gilani.

Federal authorities say Gilani was also one of the founders of Jamaat al-Fuqra, a terrorist organization believed responsible for dozens of bombings and murders across the U.S. and abroad. The group was linked to the planning of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and 10 years earlier a member was arrested and later convicted for bombing a hotel in Portland, Ore.

Shoe bomber Richard Reid has been linked to the group, along with convicted D.C. sniper John Allen Muhammad. But it is Sheikh Gilani who creates the most controversy and concern.

Gilani has told his followers that “Zionist plotters” plan to rule the world, and he encourates them to leave America’s cities and avoid the “decadence of a godless society.” Gilani is the man American reporter Daniel Pearl was trying to interview in Pakistan when he was kidnapped and beheaded. The Sheikh was taken into custody and later released by Pakistani authorities; he denies any involvement in Pearl’s murder.

Gilani also denies any connection to Jamaat al-Fuqra, as do residents of the MOA compounds, who say the “terrorist” group doesn’t exist and was created by enemies of Islam hoping to destroy their communities. Members also deny sending a portion of their earnings to the Sheikh, but a former resident told FOX News that 10 to 30 percent of their income is regularly delivered to Gilani in the form of cash donations.

FOX News attempted to visit Islamberg after earlier efforts to set up on-camera interviews were rebuffed. A spokesman said by phone that residents typically shy away from interviews since they worry their words will be manipulated and turned against them. He accused FOX News of misrepresenting the group and suggested covering an Islamic festival in Binghamton later in the month to celebrate the birthday of the prophet Muhammad. Then he hung up.

Local police told FOX News there has been plenty of rumor and innuendo over the years but very little trouble. The FBI’s Albany Division said the agency has an open discourse with the residents of Islamberg. They’ve visited the compound but won’t discuss whether there are any ongoing investigations.

That has not dispelled the worries of some watchdogs. Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch, says the group is making a concerted public relations effort to present a benign face and hide its violent past.

“I think we need to be very much on guard about every member of these compounds,” he said. Though Spencer admits there is nothing inherently wrong with living in isolation, he stressed that “they’re not at all open to visitors, they’re not at all open to scrutiny and there’s an abundance of evidence of sinister goings-on.”

Spencer offered no evidence to back his misgivings, but suggested political correctness may be hampering investigations. He says the group’s connection to Sheikh Gilani is reason enough to be concerned that they’re planning for “something on a larger scale and longer term,” to “further the causes of the global Islamic Jihad”, something MOA has repeatedly denied and scoffed at in the past.

Residents call it a peaceful place to raise a family away from the pressures of the city, and maintain that the group is woefully misunderstood.

Critics, lacking an eye into the cloistered community, still wonder whether it’s something more.

Original Link.