Archive for March 20th, 2009

Remember the Celebration Of Life For Amina and Sarah Said This Saturday

Friday, March 20th, 2009

Don’t forget about the Celebration Of Life For Amina and Sarah Said this Saturday. Here is a rundown of the email from Gail Gartrell, the girl’s Great-Aunt:

“On March 21st., we will be holding a celebration for the short lives of Sarah and Amina. It also covers their birthdays and their graduations! We have pictures of these beautiful girls from infancy to when they died! Please come and help us celebrate their lives and help keep them alive in hearts and in memories.

I do expect some of their friends and teachers to be there. I pray so! If so, Amina’s friends will be given a chance to speak as they were never allowed to speak last year at all! I am not excluding Sarah’s friends but, I would love to hear from Amina’s friends, very much! I am sure they need to say what’s on their hearts and minds too.

Any of you may speak if you so choose too! Let’s just keep it to how they lived and not focus upon the horrible way they had to die. This is a celebration, not a Memorial!

Here is the location: Memorial Park, 1950 S. Valley Parkway, Lewisville, Texas. This is at the corner of Valley Parkway and Corporate Drive. This celebration begins at two o’clock pm. Expect to see a lot of media as there is a film crew coming who is doing a documentary on honor killings. This documentary will help me to fulfill my promise to Amina and Sarah…’I will tell your truth!’

There is a possibility that America’s Most Wanted will be there as well. Atlas Shrugs, from New York will be there too as well as local media. I thought I should let all you family members know this and ask you to come out anyway. If you do not want your faces in the camera lens, stay away from the lens! Certainly, if you have anything to say…SAY IT! This is your chance to voice your opinions and truths too!”

Amina and Sarah Said

See below for previous post:

  • Honor Killing in Dallas
  • “The Story is Bigger Than an Honor Murder in Dallas or What Happens in Dallas Stays in Dallas; Who Knew?” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler
  • “Human Sacrifice in Dallas: No One Saved These Girls” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler
  • “Raging Muslim Taxi Drivers in North American Cities” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler
  • “Murderous Mothers. The Hidden Female Face of Honor Killing” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler
  • “Still Dead in Dallas. An Update on the Double Honor Murders” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler
  • FBI Calls Dallas Murder Case an ‘Honor Killing,’ Upsetting Muslim Group
  • Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, Speaks About The “Honor Killing” Part 1.
  • Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, Speaks About The “Honor Killing” Part 2.
  • Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, Speaks About The “Honor Killing” Part 3.
  • Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, Speaks About The “Honor Killing” Part 4.
  • America’s Most Wanted to Air Segment on Said Sisters “Honor Killing”.
  • America’s Most Wanted Airs Said Sisters “Honor Killing”, Caves to Political Correctness.
  • Gail Gartrell, Great-Aunt to Sarah and Amina Said, Interviewed on Anniversary of “Honor Killing”.
  • America’s Most Wanted to Air Segment on Yaser Said for Said Sisters “Honor Killing”.
  • Celebration Of Life For Amina and Sarah Said – Honor Killed by Their Father”.
  • “The United States Abandoning Israel?” by Michael G. Mickey

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    It looks as though everyone who feared that Barack Obama would prove to be anything but a friend of Israel was correct in their suspicions, myself among them.

    Israel National News is reporting the following, in part:

    An unnamed former highly-placed U.S.intelligence official has broken silence and says that America may soon be abandoning Israel in favor of the Arabs. “This is just the beginning”, he said, “Israel could be about to lose the support of the United States.”

    Just when we thought things couldn’t get much worse, if this unnamed source is correct, the United States of America is about to land on the curse side of God’s promise of blessing and curse where the nation of Israel is concerned, at a time when we can least afford to no less!

    Genesis 12:3: 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.

    While this is but a rumor, albeit an apparently well-grounded one, and the jury is still out concerning where U.S. foreign policy is ultimately headed under the Obama administration, President Obama turning out to be an enemy of Israel is seeming more likely by the minute, both in rumor and in practice.

    This morning, even before I stumbled across the story linked above, I read an example of how insanely sensitive to radical Islam the Obama administration is and it made me ill. Absolutely ill.

    Conservative Sean Hannity posted the following yesterday:

    The language police in the Obama administration have struck again! First they got rid of the term “War on Terror,” then they threw “enemy combatants” overboard. Now it’s the word “terrorism” itself!

    The force behind this change is Secretary of Homeland Security , who told the German newspaper Der Spiegel that she’s not going to use the word “terrorism” because it perpetuates the politics of fear. Instead, she’ll call terrorist murders “man-caused disasters.”

    According to the secretary, “I did not use the word ‘terrorism,’ I referred to ‘man-caused’ disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.”

    Madam Secretary, if you can’t even call it by its name, how exactly do you plan to protect us against it? Shying away from the word “terrorism” in an effort to be politically correct is cowardly, not courageous.

    Many laughed and mocked those who, leading up to the November elections, openly expressed fears that Barack Obama may secretly be a Muslim. I caught my fair share of heat for writing a commentary on our president’s connection and potential affinity to Islam entitled “Music to Barack Hussein Obama’s Ears” almost a year ago, but look at us now!

    America may be on the verge of turning its back on Israel and we have stooped so low in under 100 days of Barack Obama leadership that this once proud and brave nation can no longer call terrorism by its name, choosing instead to refer to it as a ‘man-caused disaster.’

    While September 11th, 2001 was one peach of a ‘man-caused disaster’, I think time may reveal that a far greater ‘man-caused disaster’ took place on November 4th, 2008 when we elected a proven socialist and potential Muslim sympathizer (at the very least) to be our president.

    While I love my nation and pray for the salvation of its leadership, including President Obama, America has slowly been turning its back on God for a long time, but what we’re on the verge of now, potentially? I feel physically ill and, quite frankly, scared. So much for “hope and change!” Change we are definitely getting, but HOPE? There is no hope for America’s future if we’re about to abandon Israel! No hope whatsoever.

    I say it often but this morning, after what I’ve taken in during an hour or so of reading? I have never meant it more when I say, “Come quickly, Lord Jesus!”

    Original Link.

    House Adopts Plan for ‘Volunteer’ Corps – Also Evaluates Possibility of ‘Mandatory’ Service for Everyone

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    Emperor Obama now has the Democrat controlled congress on board for his version of the Brown Shirts. Passing it off as a “volunteer” program for now, the legislation calls for investigating the possibility of making it mandatory instead of volunteer.

    People, this is exactly how Hitler’s Sturmabteilung, otherwise known as the “Brown Shirts” was formed. We need to be very worried about this!!

    The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new “volunteer corps” and consider whether “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people” should be developed.

    The legislation also refers to “uniforms” that would be worn by the “volunteers” and the “need” for a “public service academy, a 4-year institution” to “focus on training” future “public sector leaders.” The training, apparently, would occur at “campuses.”

    The vote yesterday came on H.R. 1388, which reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.

    It not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes “new programs and studies” and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

    Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 “volunteers,” is the beginning of what President Obama called his “National Civilian Security Force” in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate.

    WND reported when a copy of the speech provided online apparently was edited to exclude Obama’s specific references to the new force.

    The new bill specifically references the possibilities “if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.”

    Such new requirements perhaps, the legislation notes, “would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

    No one, apparently with the exception of infants, would be excluded:

    “The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives.”

    According to a report by Canada Free Press, “‘volunteerism’ that kept America running since the days of its founding” would be “wiped out with the stroke of a pen.”

    “It becomes forced labor and like the practice of another era, presses American citizens of all ages and creeds, unknowingly into military service,” the commentary said.

    “On paper, H.R. 1388 is the ‘Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act’; the more innocuous sounding ‘The Give Act,’ for short.

    “The Give Act puts the finishing touches to Public Allies New Leadership for New Times, modeled after Saul Alinsky’s ‘Peoples Organizations’ and operating under Michelle Obama,” the commentary said.

    “Michelle was also a pioneer in the social entrepreneur movement – leaders who create new approaches and organize to provide new solutions to social problems. Like most things Saul Alinsky, H.R. 1388 sounds noble in stating why wide-sweeping change is necessary,” the commentary said.

    “H.R. 1388 goes straight to the heart of volunteerism in America, impacting everything from the lemonade stands of neighborhood children, to the residents of senior citizens homes. … The Give Act puts tow-headed school children and silver-haired seniors in the official uniform of the new State, and encompasses every walk of life in main-street America,” the commentary said. “Whether you are young or old, or firmly believe that volunteering means you are offering your time to the good of community work, you will be pressed into Obama’s National Civilian Community Corps.”

    Groups of such “volunteers,” would, under the legislation, be “grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp.”

    The plan generated this concern from “This is the equivalent of brown shirts.”

    Another portion of the bill talks about a “service learning” plan that will be “a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.”

    A forum participant noted, “I wonder what’s going to happen to those who refused to ‘volunteer.’ Maybe they will be put into a different ‘campus.’ I guess we will soon find out.”

    Formal announcements about the plan suggested something far different, picking a provision far down in the 200 pages of legislation to highlight.

    According to a Business Wire statement released by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill “would formally authorize federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as a National Day of Service and Remembrance.”

    That provision is tucked into the far reaches of the legislation, but Schumer discussed it as if it were the primary point.

    “I could not be more proud to work to pass this important provision,” said Schumer. “September 11 should not only be a day for mourning – it should be a day to think about our neighbors, our community, and our country. We can take a tragic day in our nation’s history and turn it into a force for good.”

    On the Albany Insanity blog, this concern was raised: “What gives the government the right to require individuals to give three years service under the guise of ‘volunteer’ service? It is not explicit exactly who is required but I think they get the bill passed and then iron out the details. It talks about uniforms and ‘camps.’ They revise the word ‘camps’ and call it ‘campus.’ There is language about Seniors and Community organizations.”

    Original Link.

    Tax Day Tea Parties Expected to Number More Than 1,000

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    Message to the Federal Government – Don’t Tread on Me (Click Here to Learn More)

    While WND has been tracking 170 individual tea parties across the nation, one group has announced it is planning rallies in 1,000 cities and towns on April 15.

    The American Family Association, or AFA, is coordinating 1,000 Taxed Enough Already, or TEA, parties to be held at 12 p.m. in front of city halls across the nation.

    The organization launched a Tea Party Day website just days ago so volunteer organizers may register their protests with AFA. The website also provides a list of other protests across the nation that are not organized by AFA.

    Michael DePrimo, special counsel to AFA President Tim Wildmon, told WND that AFA has been inundated with e-mails from citizens who want to attend or organize tea parties in their own cities.

    “We’re trying to get people to attend these and we’re also encouraging others if there is no tea party in their community to start their own,” he said. “All we’re trying to do is really generate activity to try to try to get people to attend these rallies to really send a message to Washington.”

    The tea party website asks, Are you fed up with a Congress and a president who:

    • vote for a $500 billion tax bill without even reading it
    • are spending trillions of borrowed dollars, leaving a debt our great-grandchildren will be paying?
    • consistently give special interest groups billions of dollars in earmarks to help get themselves re-elected?
    • want to take your wealth and redistribute it to others?
    • punish those who practice responsible financial behavior and reward those who do not?
    • admit to using the financial hurt of millions as an opportunity to push their political agenda?
    • run up trillions of dollars of debt and then sell that debt to countries such as China?
    • want government-controlled health care?
    • want to take away the right to vote with a secret ballot in union elections?
    • refuse to stop the flow of millions of illegal immigrants into our country?
    • appoint a defender of child pornography to the No. 2 position in the Justice Department?
    • want to force doctors and other medical workers to perform abortions against their will?
    • want to impose a carbon tax on your electricity, gas and home-heating fuels?
    • want to reduce your tax deductibility for charitable gifts?
    • take money from your family budget to pay their federal budget?

    The group encourages tea party attendees to bring a cell phone and call the president, 202-456-1414, and Congress, 202-224-3121, while attending the rallies.

    While many mainstream media outlets have provided little to no coverage of the nation’s numerous tea parties so far, DePrimo said the growing movement is proof that Americans no longer need them to launch a widespread revolution.

    “I think the media does whatever the media choose to do,” he said. “We’re all aware that the media have a liberal bias. I suppose if it’s big enough, they will report on it. If they think it really may spur some change in Washington that the media elites don’t want, they may ignore the story altogether.”

    De Primo continued, “The good news is that with the Internet, Facebook, texting and with all the ways we can communicate today, we don’t necessarily need the mainstream media anymore. The message can get out without them.”

    Original Link.

    Silent No More - Tax Day Tea Party

    For up to date information, see the Tax Day Tea Party website here.

    Also see the American Tea Party here.

    “Role of ACORN in 2010 Census Could Have Lasting Consequences” by Jeff Schreiber

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    Counting is simple, right? After all, my two-year-old can tell me if she has four, six or ten green peas left on her plate, a skill largely gleaned from a stuffed vampire on public television. How difficult could it be?

    Unfortunately, the issue here is not necessarily as simple as it should be. As always, “simple” is being made complicated by a bitter group of people bent on preserving perpetual power by any means possible. This time, though, it’s the census. It happens every ten years and, this year, it’s going to cause a street-fight.

    The issue here is the difference between actual enumeration and statistical sampling. As we look forward to the 2010 Census, with control of the count having been wrestled from the apolitical Commerce Department by the Democrat-led White House, and with both the reapportionment of U.S. House seats and the redistricting of the several states depending upon accurate census numbers, the distinction between actual enumeration and statistical sampling has never been so crucial.

    While the latter, statistical sampling, uses mathematical equations to estimate the amount of people in a given area, actual enumeration is the practice of actually counting those who live here—legally or illegally—in the United States of America, and using those actual numbers to reapportion House seats and re-draw the boundaries of congressional districts in each state. Actual enumeration is actually required by Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution:

    Representation and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers … . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

    Most recently in the lead-up and aftermath of the 2000 Census, however, Democrats pushed for the use of statistical sampling to determine–largely by mathematical estimation–population data and reapportion and redistrict accordingly, claiming that minorities were not fairly represented because they are less inclined to return census forms. Republicans and conservatives alike have decried the practice as inaccurate, easily manipulated and, above all else, unconstitutional.

    Do not expect the fight over the use of statistical sampling to be over, though. If the Democrats controlling Capitol Hill have learned anything over the past 18 months or so, it is the power of appealing to minority voters with superficial promises of “hope” and “change.” Expect the same sort of appeals, except this time in the name of “fairness” and accompanied by the same, tired old diatribe that actual enumeration shortchanges minority voters.

    The decision to bring control of the 2010 Census under the umbrella of the White House and Rahm Emanuel could have been the foundational move to do just that. Much in the same way that President Barack Obama took to the airwaves and to late-night talk shows to sell his counterproductive economic recovery measures, expect him to deal directly with the American people with regard to the merits of statistical sampling.

    So long as his teleprompter is working, that is.

    Of course, just as the Census Bureau predicted in its March 2001 report, new technology has indeed made the practice of statistical sampling more accurate, but any technology employed in the sampling process would be handled by human hands – and with regard to redistricting and the effect it has upon the value of each vote, a little fraud can go a long way.

    How convenient.

    With 2010 around the corner, we’ve learned that voter fraud specialists ACORN will be participating in this particular count. In other words, the very same group which accepted $832,000 in donations from then-candidate Barack Obama’s campaign and subsequently was under investigation for registration fraud in more than a dozen states during last year’s contest will have a heavy hand in determining the population count so crucial in determining everything from the balance of power on Capitol Hill to the allocation of federal funds nationwide. An excerpt from a Fox News article published Wednesday:

    But ACORN’s partnership with the 2010 Census is worrisome to lawmakers who say past allegations of fraud should raise concerns about the organization.

    “It’s a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it’s not just the lawmakers’ concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country,” Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told “We want an enumeration. We don’t want to have any false numbers.”

    ACORN, which claims to be a non-partisan grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, came under fire in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 phony voter registration forms. The group’s activities were frequently questioned in the 2008 presidential election.

    ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told that “ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime.” He added that fears that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.

    Sure, just like Mickey Mouse registered to vote in Orlando, and the entire Dallas Cowboys front line registered in Las Vegas. Oh, ACORN is non-partisan. I don’t worry a bit.

    During the recent election, I recall one Ohio voter who admitted to having been registered to vote 73 times by ACORN workers. With that kind of track record concerning just one voter, imagine the effect that ACORN’s involvement could have on the number of minority voters in urban centers like Philadelphia, for example. Should ACORN workers be able to “find” many more voters in the very liberal City of Brotherly Love than before, much in the same way ACORN workers “found” those 1,700 additional registered voters in Washington State or “found” Freddie Johnson 73 times, redistricting according to new-found numbers could mean a dramatic shift in congressional power away from the more conservative center districts of Pennsylvania to the liberal southeastern corner. Such a result could be repeated in population centers across the country.

    Unfortunately, the various approaches to census-taking and the consequences of each count are not the sexiest of news stories. Though it gets mired in details and numerical mumbo-jumbo, the approach taken to the 2010 Census could be the most critical issue with regard to the Obama administration so far. For conservatives, sticking our heads in the sand and hoping this goes away is simply not an option.

    When it comes to a national election, ACORN is a bad dream. When it comes to the census, however, ACORN is an absolute nightmare. This is a group which was under investigation for voter fraud, for inventing fraudulent registrations, and now could play a role in the long-term balance of power in our representative republic. A few thousand fraudulent votes can elect a congressman; a fraudulent sampling, however, can pass legislation for years to come.

    Read the complete article here.

    Obama Secretly Ends Program that Let Pilots Carry Guns

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    The Emperor (Obama I) is secretly ending the program that allowed pilots to carry guns. Nothing like compromising our safety in order to advance his anti-gun agenda. What could possibly happen? Oh wait, there was the September 11, 2001 thing. Y’all remember that, don’t ya? Didn’t a bunch of innocent people die when terrorist, armed with box cutter, flew jet liners into some really big and important buildings? I seem to remember something about that. Why, come to think of it, pilots armed with guns would have been more than a match for a bunch of cowardly terrorist armed with box cutters.
    Well, the secret is out. Maybe Oboe will have to rethink this one. Or maybe he’ll do what he always does and just do what he wants to do anyway. Remember, he is “The One”, Emperor Obama I. He can do whatever he wants, or so he says.

    After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

    Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

    The Obama administration this past week diverted some $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots.

    This looks like completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots. The 12,000 Federal Flight Deck Officers, the pilots who have been approved to carry guns, are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency. There are no cases where any of them has improperly brandished or used a gun. There are just a few cases where officers have improperly used their IDs.

    Fewer than one percent of the officers have any administrative actions brought against them and, we are told, virtually all of those cases “are trumped up.”

    Since Mr. Obama’s election, pilots have told us that the approval process for letting pilots carry guns on planes slowed significantly. Last week the problem went from bad to worse. Federal Flight Deck Officers – the pilots who have been approved to carry guns – indicate that the approval process has stalled out.

    Pilots cannot openly speak about the changing policies for fear of retaliation from the Transportation Security Administration. Pilots who act in any way that causes a “loss of confidence” in the armed pilot program risk criminal prosecution as well as their removal from the program. Despite these threats, pilots in the Federal Flight Deck Officers program have raised real concerns in multiple interviews.

    Arming pilots after Sept. 11 was nothing new. Until the early 1960s, American commercial passenger pilots on any flight carrying U.S. mail were required to carry handguns. Indeed, U.S. pilots were still allowed to carry guns until as recently as 1987. There are no records that any of these pilots (either military or commercial) ever causing any significant problems.

    Screening of airplane passengers is hardly perfect. While armed marshals are helpful, the program covers less than 3 percent of the flights out of Washington D.C.’s three airports and even fewer across the country. Sky marshals are costly and quit more often than other law-enforcement officers.

    Armed pilots are a cost-effective backup layer of security. Terrorists can only enter the cockpit through one narrow entrance, and armed pilots have some time to prepare themselves as hijackers penetrate the strengthened cockpit doors. With pilots, we have people who are willing to take on the burden of protecting the planes for free. About 70 percent of the pilots at major American carriers have military backgrounds.

    Original Link.

    “Preying on Prayer” by Alan Sears

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    It’s high time someone asked: where in the U.S. Constitution are so many angry people finding the legal right not to be offended?

    The assumption that this imaginary protection exists is everywhere – and is usually invoked to suppress the much-more-demonstrable religious rights clearly secured by the First Amendment. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and American Atheists all make their headlines and their reputation by demanding the right never to be faced with any sight, symbol, or idea with which they disagree.

    They want Bibles out of schools and crosses off of veterans’ memorials. They want religious symbols removed from public markers and political issues removed from pastors’ sermons. They want a guarantee, in writing, from our federal government that they’ll be able to walk through life without ever being confronted by the barest wisp of suggestion that God exists or that people believe in Him.

    That’s not so unreasonable is it? After all, in the immortal words of Frank Burns, “Unless we all conform, unless we follow our leaders blindly, there is no possible way we can remain free.” How long can America really be the land of liberty if people insist on walking around living their convictions and praying whenever they feel like it?

    Well, the Freedom From Religion Foundation wants to find out. And their latest tactic is a lawsuit designed to eradicate the National Day of Prayer from the first Thursday of May on the federal calendar. (People who want to support the effort to defend the National Day of Prayer against this lawsuit and protect their First Amendment right to religious liberty can visit

    Basically, this suit is just FFRF’s way of stamping its restless legal foot at hundreds of years of American history and tradition. After all, Americans have been encouraged by their leaders to pray since the Pilgrims first waded ashore. In 1775, the Continental Congress made it official by calling on the colonists to beseech the Almighty’s guidance on the forming of a new nation. Members of the Constitutional Convention prayed fervently over their historic efforts.

    Lincoln proclaimed Thanksgiving a national holiday in 1863, and wartime presidents, up to and including George W. Bush, have urged citizens to intercede for their soldiers and their nation.

    Indeed, to separate our national commitment to prayer from the history of America, you have to cut away the crux of the American character. This nation was founded, settled, and populated by people seeking, first and foremost, the freedom to pray and worship; a government proclamation doesn’t compel anyone to continue that tradition…it merely recognizes a love for God and religious freedom that still pulses in the hearts of most Americans.

    But not, apparently, in the hearts of the FFRF, who claim this once-a-year proclamation and the events that attend it create a “hostile environment for nonbelievers, who are made to feel as if they are political outsiders.”

    Read the rest of the article here.

    Some Guantanamo Prisoners Could be Released in U.S.

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    That’s all we need; terrorist, with a grudge on their shoulders, walking around free in our country. That’s the way to protect America…NOT!!

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Some of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners could be released into the United States while others could be put on trial in the American court system, Attorney General Eric Holder said on Wednesday.

    Holder, who was chosen by President Barack Obama to lead the administration’s efforts to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba within a year, said the review of what to do with each of the prisoners had begun.

    About 240 terrorism suspects, including suspected planners of the September 11 attacks, are being held in the prison. Many have been detained for seven years without charges and some were subjected to interrogation techniques denounced by critics as torture.

    The administration faces intense political resistance to the idea of bringing the prisoners to the United States as part of closing the detention camp. The administration seeks to transfer some detainees to Europe or other countries while freeing others.

    Holder told reporters at the Justice Department that the administration’s review, made on a case-by-case basis, would determine whether the prisoners need to be put on trial or whether they can be released.

    “For those who are in that second category, who can be released, there are a variety of options that we have. Among them is the possibility that we could release them into this country,” he said.

    Original Link.

    Dems Engage in Finger-Pointing on AIG Bonuses

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    Democrat modus operandi; when in trouble for something you’ve done, blame someone else.

    WASHINGTON — The case of the missing AIG bonus limits has become a tale of political intrigue and Democratic infighting that could threaten the re-election chances of a top senator and the credibility — if not the career — of one of President Obama’s top advisers.

    As the House passed new legislation Thursday to crack down on the outrage-inspiring bonuses, Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, the Banking Committee chairman, and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner engaged in finger-pointing about who was responsible for Congress’ failure to prevent them in the first place.

    Dodd, a five-term senator, was already facing a tough re-election contest in 2010. He says the Obama administration insisted he modify his proposal to rein in bonuses at companies getting billions of dollars in financial bailouts so that it would only apply to payments agreed to in the future — thus clearing the way for the AIG payouts.

    It was that or have his executive pay limits dropped altogether from the $787 billion stimulus measure that passed last month, Dodd says.

    He agreed to the changes “in order to preserve the amendment,” Dodd told reporters Thursday. “They sought it; I didn’t. They asked for the changes … and so we agreed to those changes.”


    Geithner said Thursday that his staff merely pointed out that without the change, the government risked being sued by executives in line to get big bonuses from bailout recipients.

    “What we did is just express concern about the vulnerability of a specific part of this provision, the legal challenge, as you would expect us to do. That’s part of the legislative process,” he told CNN.

    The treasury chief also appeared to back away from the administration’s previous assertion that Geithner first learned of the bonuses last week. Interviewed on CNN, Geithner said only that he “learned of the full scale and scope of these specific” bonus payments at that point.

    Both men had positive things to say about each other despite the dispute over who watered down the bill.

    “He has the president’s support and backing and he has mine at this point,” Dodd said of Geithner.

    Geithner told CNN that Dodd “has played an enormously important leadership role in this, and he’s doing the right thing.”

    Late Thursday night, a Treasury spokesman said that the conversations between Treasury and Dodd’s staff were part of the normal legislative process.

    “Treasury staff raised a general concern about broad legal challenges to the retroactivity of the amendment, including constitutional claims, but did not insist on any changes or receive any resistance from the senator’s staff,” Treasury spokesman Isaac Baker said in a statement.

    The situation has Dodd on the defensive even as party strategists tag him as the most politically vulnerable sitting Democratic senator.

    “He was in trouble before this controversy, and this just makes his problems worse,” said Douglas Schwartz, director of the Hamden, Conn.-based Quinnipiac University Poll. Dodd was essentially tied in a hypothetical matchup with much lesser-known former GOP Rep. Rob Simmons, according to a survey Schwartz released last week.

    It also poses a steep challenge for Geithner at a time when he badly needs credibility and cooperation from Congress to navigate a deep recession, stabilize the troubled financial system and implement new rules aimed at preventing another meltdown.

    “The president has been blunt, forthright, strong on a lot of these key issues, particularly the question of making sure you rein in these outrageous bonuses, but I think that there hasn’t been adequate follow-up in terms of his economic team,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.

    Asked for an assessment of Geithner’s performance so far, Wyden would only say, “I want them to get their act together. I want the economic team to have a coordinated message that carries through with what the president has told the American people are his priorities.”

    Republicans went much further. Several of them called Thursday for the Treasury chief’s resignation, and in a somewhat odd twist, ended up essentially taking Dodd’s side in the intramural fight by blaming Geithner for weakening the Democratic senator’s executive pay proposal.

    As former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Geithner worked closely with AIG, leading some lawmakers to question how he could have failed to know that the company had a bonus program that would be affected by the language Congress approved last month.

    “You’re talking about the administration. Individuals either did know or should have known,” said Rep. Michael N. Castle, R-Del.

    Original Link.

    Bonus Outrage You Can Believe In

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    Speaking to a crowd of 1,500 supporters in Costa Mesa, California, about the bonuses given to employees of 80% taxpayer owned AIG, President Barack Obama said: “I know a lot of you are outraged about this. I’m outraged, too.” We’ll leave for others to decide the level of Obama’s outrage, especially considering reports this morning that the Obama Administration found out about the bonuses on February 28, not March 10, as they originally claimed. But what we would like to see some genuine outrage over are the millions of taxpayer dollars going to executives at the taxpayer owned companies Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

    Fannie and Freddie reported combined losses of about $108 billion last year. But the damage they caused the entire economy goes far beyond the losses on their balance sheets. Fannie and Freddie are at the core of the current economic meltdown. Although they were only recently fully taken over by the government; for much of their existence Fannie and Freddie were quasi-governmental agencies that made no actual home loans. Instead they buy loans from banks, and then bundle and repackage them as securities. For years Fannie and Freddie leveraged their government-sponsored advantages — including exemptions from state and federal taxes, lower capital requirements, and the ability to borrow at rates well below those paid by private companies — to create a co-monopoly in the housing finance sector.

    Contrary to what the left claims, Fannie and Freddie were integral to the creation and expansion of the subprime loan industry. With Fannie and Freddie as their largest customer, subprime king Countrywide Financial grew from a tiny institution to the largest mortgage lender in the country. Fannie and Freddie’s subprime business was not isolated to Countrywide. Fannie and Freddie both bought subprime securities since 1995, and by 2004 they were purchasing $175 billion worth of such securities a year, or 44% of the entire market. From 2003 through 2006 Fannie and Freddie bought more than a half trillion dollars in subprime securities. That is more than any other purchaser in the entire world.

    In 1991, following the Savings and Loan disaster, Heritage pushed for the full privatization of Fannie and Freddie, predicting that “maintaining secondary mortgage firms in a twilight zone between the public and private sectors … may be a recipe for an eventual taxpayer bailout.” We just didn’t realize how huge that bailout would be.

    Back in California, Obama told his audience: “We’re going to do everything we can to fix it. So for everybody in Washington who’s busy scrambling, trying to figure out how to blame somebody else, just go ahead and talk to me, because it’s my job to make sure that we fix these messes, even if I don’t make them.” President Obama did not create the Fannie and Freddie disaster, but he is not fixing it either. Instead of learning from the disastrous consequences of Fannie and Freddie’s market distorting housing interventions, the Obama Administration is doubling down by making Fannie and Freddie a center piece of their housing plan. Now that is something to be outraged over.

    Original Link.

    “The Great Betrayal” by David Horowitz

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    On this sixth anniversary of America’s invasion of Iraq, there is finally a consensus among supporters and opponents that we’ve won the war. The surge that Bush launched and Democrats opposed has been successful and, as a result, Iraq has become a Middle Eastern democracy, an anti-terrorist regime, and an American ally. It would be hard to imagine a more remarkable turnabout or a more comprehensive repudiation of conventional political wisdom. Yet this has not led to a comparable reappraisal by critics of the war of their previous attacks, or to any mea culpas by Democrats who launched a scorched earth campaign against the president who led it, and continued it for five years while the war dragged on.

    The Democratic attacks on the war described America’s commander-in-chief as a liar who misled his country and sent American soldiers to die in a conflict that was unnecessary, illegal and unjust. This made prosecution of the war incalculably harder while strengthening the resolve of our enemies to defeat us. It is time to re-evaluate the words and actions of the war’s opponents in the stark light of a history that proved them wrong.

    In the fall of 2002, a majority of Democrats in the Senate joined Republicans in voting to authorize President Bush to use force to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein. In July 2003, only three months after Saddam had been removed, the Democratic National Committee launched a national campaign which accused President Bush of lying in order to trick Democrats into voting for the war. It was the beginning of a five-year campaign designed to paint the president as the liar-in-chief and America as a criminal aggressor, and the military occupier of a poor country that had not attacked us.

    What had changed in the intervening three months to turn Democrats so vehemently against the war they had authorized? The answer can only be found in domestic politics. In those three months, an unknown antiwar candidate named Howard Dean had taken the lead in the primary polls and was looking like a shoe-in for the Democratic presidential nomination. As a result rival candidates who had voted for the war, including eventual nominees Kerry and Edwards, changed their positions 180 degrees and joined the attacks on President Bush. Naturally, the Democrats couldn’t admit their attacks were motivated by crass political calculations. Instead, they claimed that they had been deceived by the White House which had manipulated the intelligence on Iraq, persuading them to support the war on false premises.

    This allegation was in fact the biggest lie of the war, since Democrats had full access to all U.S. intelligence on Iraq through their seats on the congressional intelligence committees. This intelligence was available to them, in advance of their vote to authorize the use of force. In the months and years that followed, the Democrats added other false charges — that troops “killed innocent civilians in cold blood,” were “terrorizing kids and…women,” and had committed atrocities comparable to “Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime.” They rejoiced when news reporters leaked information about national security programs designed to combat the terrorists – and thus destroyed them. They held up funding for American soldiers on the battlefield, attempted to cut off all funding, and when that failed, tried to tie funding to a timeline that would ensure America’s defeat. They openly accused uniformed officers like General David Petraeus of lying about conditions on the ground and hoped against hope that “this war is lost, and the surge is not accomplishing anything.”

    Dissent is legitimate in wartime, but the Democratic Party’s opposition to this war went far beyond dissent into unprecedented territory. Fortunately, the Bush administration was able to retrieve its own mistakes and its domestic opponents to win a war that Democrats said was unwinnable and (despite their own authorization) shouldn’t have been fought in the first place. But it was no thanks to the Party that now occupies the White House that this American war was won.

    Original Link.

    Obama Compares His Bowling Score to Special Olympics on ‘Tonight Show’

    Friday, March 20th, 2009

    What is the sitting president of the United States doing on the Tonight Show anyway? Did he ever stop to think why he was the first sitting president to on the show? Maybe because a president shouldn’t be doing the talk show circuit? Maybe because the president is supposed to have more important things to do with his time?
    All top of the fact that he shouldn’t have even been there, he drops yet another misspeak to his ever growing list, this time insulting the Special Olympics and special needs people. He should know better than to speak in public without his teleprompter.

    Obama at Work

    President Barack Obama might have rolled a gutter ball on NBC’s “The Tonight Show.”

    Toward the end of the interview on Thursday, Obama told host Jay Leno he’s been practicing at the White House’s bowling alley but wasn’t happy with his score of 129.

    Leno complimented Obama on the score, but the president quipped, “It was like the Special Olympics or something,” which prompted laughter from the audience.

    Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton said the president’s offhand remark was not meant to disparage the Special Olympics, only to poke some fun at the commander-in-chief’s bowling skills.

    “He thinks that the Special Olympics are a wonderful program that gives an opportunity to shine to people with disabilities from around the world,” Burton told reporters flying back to Washington with Obama aboard Air Force One.

    A call for comment to a Special Olympics spokesman was not returned late Thursday.

    Original Link.