Showing posts with label current events. Show all posts
Showing posts with label current events. Show all posts

Sunday, July 25, 2010

The Despicable Case Of Shirley Sherrod

THE DESPICABLE CASE OF SHIRLEY SHERROD

In the spirit of trivializing the momentous and complicating the obvious, the Obama administration has produced its latest unforced debacle and, in the process of chewing on its own foot, introduced us to the monster known as Shirley Sherrod. Everybody who has had a hand in this outrageousness has managed to bungle their particular portion of it with one exception: Andrew Breitbart. I tell you this man is a devious genius delivering to the progressive left a full dose of their own, Saul Alinsky inspired, medicine...and this week he scored a direct hit!

Just who is this previously unknown woman and why has she become a spectacle of clumsiness for Obama and just about every media organization in America? Up until Monday, July 19, 2010 she was an insignificant political appointee in the United States Department of Agriculture. The black woman was forced to resign from the Agriculture Department and claimed the White House forced her out after recorded remarks from a March NAACP meeting unleashed a spectacular racial controversy. I say "spectacular" because it lays to rest any remaining doubt anyone could have that this president is a racial divider of the first order. The post-racial presidency is, and always has been, a myth!

These recordings of a speech given by Mrs. Sherrod came to light when Andrew Breitbart released them own his website. He threatened to expose the NAACP for its own racism after that organization had the audacity to accuse the TEA Party, a rather de-centralized but highly effective grass roots political movement, of hoarding racists within its ranks. The NAACP nonetheless issued its condemnation of the Tea Party and Breitbart, a man of his word, responded by releasing a tape that clearly shows the NAACP is more than a little comfortable with racially motivated governmental disenfranchisement against white people.

And what were these remarks?

SHIRLEY SHERROD: "The first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer with saving his farm – he took a looooong time talking – but he was trying to show me he was superior to me. I know what he was doing."

AUDIENCE: That’s right!

"But he had come to me for help."

AUDIENCE: Laughter.

"What he didn’t know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me, was, I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him."

AUDIENCE: More laughter

"I was struggling with the fact that so many black people had lost their land, and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land. I didn’t give him the full force of what I could of."
AUDIENCE: Laughter

"I did enough so that when he – I assume the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me – either that or the Georgia Dept of Agriculture – and, uh, he needed to go and report that I didn’t help him. So, I took him to a white lawyer that had attended some of the training that we had provided because Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farm. So, I figured if I took him to one of them that his own kind would take care of him."

"That’s when it was revealed to me that it’s about poor vs those who have. It’s not so much about white – it IS about white and black – but it’s not, you know, it opened my eyes because I took him to one of his own."


It seems rather simple. A black woman admitting that she used her government position to deprive a white man of some of the benefits that he was entitled to simply because he was white. However, Shirley Sherrod was never actually the point of the video's release...at least according to Breitbart. His reason for releasing the tape that was sent to him was to expose the open tolerance for racism by the audience listening to the speech. However, this story took a lot of interesting turns very fast.

Before the day was over Shirley Sherrod was asked to resign. According to her, this request was directed from the White House. Ben Jealous, president of the NAACP, who was actually in attendance when the speech was made, also weighed in:

Racism is about the abuse of power. Sherrod had it in her position at USDA. We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers. Her actions were shameful. While she went on to explain in the story she ultimately realized her mistake, as well as the common predicament of working people of all races, she gave no indication she attempted to right the wrong she did to this man.

The reaction from many in the audience is disturbing. We will be looking into the behavior of NAACP representatives at this local event and take any appropriate action.


It would seem an open and shut case of a rogue racist having been rightly culled from the government in a swift and effective manner. However the Obama administration, which excels at racial divisiveness, found a way to make this worse. Mrs. Sherrod took up residence at CNN and said she was forced to resign because “the stuff that Fox and the Tea Party does is scaring the administration.“ The Obama administration and a compliant media quickly went to work to change the nature of the story.

You see, the act of racism that Mrs. Sherrod was speaking of occurred 24 years ago. Suddenly the Obama administration and the media raced to tell us all how this is really a story of redemption. Everyone was accused of taking the story "out of context." Mrs. Sherrod was actually teaching us how to overcome racism by using herself as an example. Though the tape released by Breitbart does not reveal that this particular racist act took place 24 years ago, it most definitely DOES include Mrs. Sherrod's attempt to use herself as an example of overcoming her racism. Sorry, but the context was ALWAYS there. Apparently Mrs. Sherrod simply observed that poor white people could be useful in the Marxist struggle to liberate productive people of their assets and rightly redistribute them to a parasitic coalition of minorities and aggrieved intellectuals.

Everyone in the media and government went about apologizing to this racist woman just as quickly as they rushed to judgement of her the previous day. She was offered another job in the USDA and President Obama even called her to offer his personal apology for the way she was treated. The media attempted to blame the whole thing on FOX news in spite of the fact that she had already tendered her resignation before one word of her was uttered on the network. Face it...the Obama administration finally did something right and in a timely manner and it just didn't sit well with them. They had to re-assess the situation and screw it up.

The media blitz was impressive in its scale. Even such conservative stalwarts as Ann Coulter and Charles Krauthammer came out suggesting that the woman should be offered her job back. By the end of the second day of this story you would think Mrs. Sherrod was a wrongly persecuted saint. Did I miss something? No, but maybe they did. Though the overt act of racism may have happened 24 years ago, the speech Mrs. Sherrod gave was in March 2010. Breitbart claims he has had the excerpt since April. This tape most definitely reveals an overwhelming tolerance, bordering on jubilation, for the revenge racism that Mrs. Sherrod admitted to perpetrating 24 years ago. In fact the crowd was more sympathetic to Mrs. Sherrod when telling the first part of her story than it was to her when she was telling of her conversion to a more race-neutral form of Marxism. This was the entire point of releasing the tape...and it was current! Shirley Sherrod's loss of a job was merely collateral damage.

The NAACP has the master of this entire speech. If they are now convinced that she is someone who should be celebrated rather than condemned why did they jump to condemn her in the beginning? Perhaps because they know the one element of the story that wasn't being told. Yet they dutifully followed the White House's lead an issued a retraction:

"With regard to the initial media coverage of the resignation of USDA Official Shirley Sherrod, we have come to the conclusion we were snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart into believing she had harmed white farmers because of racial bias. Having reviewed the full tape, spoken to Ms. Sherrod, and most importantly heard the testimony of the white farmers mentioned in this story, we now believe the organization that edited the documents did so with the intention of deceiving millions of Americans." - NAACP

Of course the NAACP was following instructions issued from the White House. Ben Jealous was in attendance at Mrs. Sherrod's speech. He got it right the first time. Likewise, so too did USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack. When a potential embarrassment for the President arose in his department, he swiftly removed it. This is exactly what he should have done to a political appointee who serves at the pleasure of the President. Yet, he too was forced to call Mrs Sherrod and issue a personal apology as well as offer her another job even as the President accused him and his department of rushing to judgement in demanding her resignation. It is clear that the president is enamoured with this woman and does not want to lose her.

For their part, both Shirley Sherrod and her new-found adorers in the media would like to blame the whole thing on Andrew Breitbart and have openly expressed their desire to have his website shut down as well as have a general crackdown on internet bloggers. There is nothing unusual about the progressive left's contempt for your freedom of speech. Nobody wants to silence Shirley Sherrod, they just want to silence the people who failed to recognize her sainthood.

Sherrod even implies she would like to sue Breitbart but considering everything is in her own unedited words, she won't get far. Lets be clear: Shirley Sherrod is no victim. The only reason this is being talked about is because SHE talked about it. No one made her bring this up in the March meeting. She arrogantly volunteered it.

In spite of the attempt to deify this woman, the fact remains that she did use her position in a government administration office to commit an act of overt racism. Does anyone believe that the event she is describing is the one and only time she ever used her office to employ her ideas of racial retribution? In reviewing the language she used in her speech of March 2010 it is clear that by referring to a white lawyer as "one of his own kind" that her current attitude towards white people isn't as altruistic as she and her adoring media would have us believe.

The entire speech still has not yet been revealed and the whole story has not been told. Further releases by the NAACP have proven that Breitbart did NOT edit any of the segments that were sent to him to make her look worse. However, there is one key element that has been remarkably overlooked even to this moment, almost a full week from the breaking of the story. We know Shirley Sherrod is a racist. We know she has not repented of her racism and, in all fairness, we can fully understand why she is, and must be, a racist. You and I would most likely be one too if you had her history...and what is her history you ask?

Shirley Sherrod’s 17th year probably did more to mold her personality and set her on a path that traveled through the dangerous, volatile world of race. That year, 1965, her father was shot and killed by a white man in a dispute over cows, the family says. - Atlanta Journal Constitution

The white farmer was never prosecuted for the murder. However, we should not be too quick to judge...it may very well have been a justifiable act of self-defense. The way this story has unfolded, there is always another layer of deceit. And therein lies the problem. To the progressive left, racism is the ultimate sin of mankind when, in reality, it is and always has been the bearing of false witness against one's neighbor. In other words...lying! Half of all the racism alleged these days is false, particularly the allegation that Tea Party protesters uttered racial epithets at John Lewis and other prominent democrats who arrogantly strode through them on their way to a vote that stole the health care system of the United States. Had the NAACP not made that false accusation it is unlikely we would have ever heard of Shirley Sherrod.

"You know, I haven’t seen such a mean-spirited people as I’ve seen lately over this issue of health care. Some of the racism we thought was buried. Didn’t it surface? Now, we endured eight years of the Bush’s and we didn’t do the stuff these Republicans are doing because you have a black President." - Shirley Sherrod

Does that sound like a woman who has left her racism in the past? No, it sounds like a woman using her appointed position in the Obama administration to lash out at her perpetual enemy...white people. She played the race card and then had it played on her.

Shirley Sherrod is a narcissistic woman in love with the sound of her own false wisdom. No one made her tell this story. She gave this speech to glorify herself and present the illusion that she had outgrown racism on her climb toward a greater understanding of Marxism. Marxism is all about revenge...and make no mistake about it, Shirley Sherrod has extracted revenge for her father's murder...one white farmer at a time. Its too bad she didn't consult Christianity. She might have found the ability to forgive and be forgiven.

If you are looking for a story about the real redemption of a racist you might consider the actions of this one:

What followed was a period of reflection. "And so, one by one, he picks up the telephone and he begins calling his old enemies, the people who he had used as kind of punching bags in the 1960s and asked for their forgiveness," says Dan Carter. One of the people (He) called was civil rights leader John Lewis, who had been beaten by state troopers on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in 1965. "He literally poured out his soul and heart to me. It was almost a confession," says Lewis.

Whether it was his conscience or political expediency that sparked him to ask for forgiveness will never be known. But when he reentered politics for the 1982 governor's race, he sought and won the vote of black constituents, and he worked with black leaders once elected
. - Racism to Redemption By Maggie Riechers

And who was the writer speaking about in that passage? Former Alabama governor George C. Wallace. Unfortunately, Wallace is a white man and therefore can never be redeemed.

Those who seek revenge have their reward. As it stands, Shirley Sherrod is owed nothing. She got her revenge...many times over. That she may have finally got her fill of it should disgust us, not impress us. This woman should be kept as far away from a government position as possible. She should be shunned, not celebrated. She should be ostracized, not sanctified. She is no civil rights hero.

President Obama, on the other hand, loves this woman. It is no surprise that he would rise to her defense and force every government and media apparatchik to issue her apologies. A narcissistic Marxist seeking vengeance. Now that's..."one of his own kind."

YOU"RE DESPICABLE!

Monday, July 5, 2010

She Wanted It

SHE WANTED IT

It was the first Manowar record I ever bought: Into Glory Ride. It began with the sounds of a couple entwined in sexual copulation only to be discovered by the sixteen year old girl's none-too-happy parents. The boy tapping into the forbidden fruit gave the long established yet uncomfortable excuse that, unfortunately for many parents, happens to be true...she wanted it. Alas, this same excuse, though useless when dealing with an aggrieved father and his 12 gauge shotgun, works wonders as a defense in rape prosecutions throughout that part of the world that operates under Muslim law. In fact, once it is ascertained that the victim of a rape "consented" to the sexual act she can then be prosecuted herself, for that too is against sharia law. If you are a male unable to restrain your sexual appetite, then perhaps you should consider making Islam your religion of choice.

ABU DHABI A teenager who alleged she had been gang-raped by five men but later recanted her claim has been sentenced to a year in prison for consensual sex. The five she had initially accused were acquitted of rape by the Abu Dhabi Criminal Court today, but were found guilty of less serious charges.

The Emirati teenager LH, 18, was found to have consented to intercourse with YM, a 19-year-old military police officer who was also sentenced to a year in jail after the rape charge against him was changed to one of consensual sex by the judge. Two further defendants, both referred to as HA, were sentenced to three months in prison for being alone in the company of a woman. The fifth and sixth defendants were fined Dh5,000 (US$1,400) for violations of public decency.
- The National

Islamic Sharia law requires four male Muslim witnesses who actually saw the rape to establish rape or adultery. Without those witnesses, a woman who makes such an accusation is ultimately incriminating herself. A clever rapist knows how to remedy this situation. You simply invite the girl to be alone with you. Once that happens everything she has is yours. What a religion, huh?

Genetic material recovered from the scene led the judge to convict YM of consensual sex, while acquitting HA. The forensics report found that LH was not a virgin and that there was no genital bruising. It found 12 bruises ranging from 1cm to 7cm long on her upper lip, hands, thighs, knee and behind her left ear.

"Some of the bruises are new, two to three days old, and some of them are old, seven to 15 days old," the report said. The report attributed the bruises to body pressure or being hit with a solid material. During the trial, prosecutors claimed that LH had gone for a drive on May 2 with her male Emirati friend, HA, in Baniyas, where they had intercourse. Prosecutors said the fact she agreed to go with him alone in the car partly showed her consent to sex.


Apparently beating your victim is not proof of coercion. Just so long as you do not damage the parts you were looking to play with in the first place. But hey, what's wrong with busting her in the mouth for protesting? We are Muslim men, we don't take no lip from no woman...ever!

It's too bad Mike Tyson or Kobe Bryant didn't have their little "entanglements" in a Muslim country. However, if they would convert to Islam, there are plenty of liberal judges who would consent to applying Islamic law to their cases. It's only fair that you be judged a legal code of your own choosing...isn't it?

Where are all the women's advocacy groups calling out the injustice of convicting a woman of allowing herself to be raped solely on the basis of agreeing to be in the company of a man. I suppose they are too busy fighting all the oppressive laws here in America that require a teenage girl's parents to be notified before an abortion. It's good to see that those advocates for women's rights have a good set of priorities. We must stifle those restrictive meddling parental consent laws.

My favorite part of this story, naturally, revolves around the cleverness of the initial rapist. Since Muslim law requires four male Muslims to testify as witnesses in order to prove a rape I have always contended that any witnesses would likely be participants in the crime itself. This was borne out as this story continued:

They said that, HA, 19, then called five of his friends - four Emiratis and one Iraqi - and invited them to join him in raping her in the backseat of his Nissan Altima. Charges against one defendant were later dropped.

Man do those Muslims know how to throw a party or what? If your Muslim buddy finds a woman foolish enough to be alone with him, the law encourages him to share his bounty with you so that everyone can keep their story straight. Who knew the droogs in "A Clockwork Orange" were Muslims? What's not to love about the Religion of Peace? Or is that the Religion of Piece? Where do I sign up? Allahu Akbar!




Monday, June 14, 2010

Nurturing A Crisis

NURTURING A CRISIS

"We were stepping on the neck of BP to do everything we can do. Our job is keep our boot on the neck of British Petroleum and make sure they live up to their responsibilities." -Ken Salazar, Interior Secretary

President Barack Obama and his bureaucratic henchmen proudly boast that they intend to keep their boot on the neck of a major corporation even as they are entirely dependent on their intended victim to stifle the escalating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It would almost seem an idiotic statement were it not coming from a president who promised that "change is coming to America." Rest assured, the apparent incompetence of the Obama administration is far more nefarious than the "Keystone Cops" illusion that they are gleefully promoting to the American public.

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste" -Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief Of Staff

No, a crisis must be nurtured and cultivated to fruition. The Obama administration's animosity toward capitalism and big corporations has found the perfect vehicle with which to attack the United States economy. Just as surely as the allied bombers of World War 2 destroyed Germany's ability to survive by killing its fuel supply, so too do today's social engineers intend to cripple our economy by professionally mis-managing both the spill and its subsequent cleanup.

No one could fairly argue that President Obama could have in any way prevented the accident that has led to this disaster. Likewise, no one can suggest that anything within the president's or the federal government's power can realistically alter the situation at the point of the oil leak. This is simply something outside of their area of expertise. Therefore when it comes to containing the leak 5000 feet underwater they are entirely at the mercy of British Petroleum. Lest we be too hard on the unfortunate company, we should all realize that there is no reason that BP should want to prolong the uncontrolled release of the valuable crude into the Gulf. Every day the oil flows represents hundreds of millions of dollars in loss. Bottom line: If they could stop it they would...and they will stop it as fast as they can.

Yet, in an attempt to appear as though it is in command of the situation, the Obama administration announced that it intends to open criminal investigations into the disaster before it has either plugged the leak or made significant efforts to begin cleaning the massive spill.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in New Orleans that he planned to “prosecute to the fullest extent of the law” any person or entity that the Justice Department determines has broken the law in connection with the oil spill. On Wall Street, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 120 points shortly after Mr. Holder’s announcement as energy stocks tumbled on expectations of the federal investigations. BP lost 15 percent of its market value during the day’s trading. - New York Times

Only an ideologically puritanical leftist could see the logic in rushing in a bunch of lawyers while the well is still spewing. You can always count on this administration to cultivate as much harm to the business climate as possible. Various elements of the American left have even gone so far as to suggest that the administration should seize British Petroleum's American assets. Considering the fact that they have already nationalized General Motors, Chrysler, AIG and the entire student loan business this is certainly not an unreasonable possibility. However even this administration, in spite of all its bumbling, is not foolish enough to seize the company until after the leak is stopped. If they did that then Obama truly would own a hole in the ground. But once the leak is plugged...BP should take the threat of seizure seriously.

The damage to the Gulf Coast economy was apparently not disastrous enough to suit the Obama administration, therefore they cleverly decided to make matters worse as fast as possible. With the seafood and tourist industry reeling from the effects of the spill the administration moved in for the kill by issuing a moratorium on new offshore drilling in the Gulf. This moratorium immediately affects 33 rigs and places a still greater burden on the flailing economy of the Gulf Coast states.

First, there are the immediate consequences as tens of thousands of oil industry workers are instantly put out of work by the moratorium. But then, there are the far more sinister long term consequences:

Brazil could benefit from the BP Gulf of Mexico spill as a U.S. moratorium on offshore drilling boosts available rigs for the country’s deep water oil exploration program. Even as an ecological catastrophe makes the future of U.S. offshore drilling less certain, Brazil is plowing ahead with a $220 billion five-year plan to tap oil fields even deeper than BP’s ill-fated Gulf well, which is still leaking crude.

With an estimated 35 rigs idled in the Gulf of Mexico, Brazil is already receiving inquiries from companies looking to move their rigs here, where vast discoveries in recent years may soon turn the country into a major crude exporter. “What is bad for some may be good for others,” said Fernando Martins, Latin America Vice President for GE Oil and Gas, which provides services to drillers in Brazil.

“Since operators are shutting down at least temporarily in the U.S. Gulf, some companies are planning to move their rigs to Brazil now,” he said, without offering details.
- Reuters

These consequences are sinister in that the Obama administration is well aware that once these oil operations are moved away from U.S. waters...they won't be coming back. In his attempt to give the appearance of doing SOMETHING (anything?), this administration is further enabling our country's dependence on foreign sources of oil. Is it likewise another coincidence that the democratically controlled U.S. Senate is currently pushing to pass the presidents cap and trade energy bill?

Many others in the conservative media seem puzzled and perplexed at the environmentalists who have apparently given the president a pass on this "mother of all environmental disasters." After all, how can they be silent? If this were a republican president they would be spraying oil all over innocent bystanders at the capitol. What gives? Perhaps they are rejoicing over the fact that those operations currently shut down will be leaving for good...and with them goes the last of the "drill baby drill" crowd's political momentum...or so they believe.

Though this may be the hope of the environmentalists, this will not ultimately lead to the defeat of the "drill baby drill" movement. If you will recall, this movement came about in 2008 when gas prices at the pump were pushing $5.00 a gallon nationwide. The country may very well be lenient on Obama for his inability to stop the leaking oil but if gas prices surge again it will be as a direct result of HIS actions. He is very aware of that fact. He has other motives. It should be noted that all five Gulf Coast states have republican governors and four of the five voted for McCain in the presidential election. Coincidence?

If the president is powerless to stop the leaking oil then he should be focusing on that which his power can have an influence: containing and cleaning the oil that has escaped. This is where president Obama "appears" to be at his most incompetent. Governors from Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have been clamoring for more floating oil containment booms from the very beginning of this catastrophe. These devices, in sufficient numbers, would have been able to protect the beaches and the marshes from the oil that is now ruining them. Inexplicably these booms have not been forthcoming. For some reason, the Obama administration would like for us to believe there is a shortage of these devices as this exchange with Admiral Thad Allen, the man in charge of the administration's cleanup operations, demonstrates:

Jake Tapper, ABC: I talked to a guy who runs a company in Maine that offers boom, and he has — he says — the ability to make 90,000 feet of boom a day. High quality. BP came there 2 weeks ago, looked at it, they are doing another audit today. He is very frustrated, he says he has a lot of high quality boom to go and it is taking a long time for BP to get its act together. Don’t you need this boom right now?

Admiral Thad Allen: Oh we need all the boom wherever we can get it. If you give me the information off camera I’ll be glad to follow up.


Hmm... I hate to come down on a serviceman, but his answer is particularly disingenuous. There was no need for the admiral to ask for the information from Jake Tapper. It’s contained in a letter that has been sitting on the admiral’s desk since May 21st. Copies of letter were also sent to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and to NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco. The letter proudly touts the Auburn, Maine company Packgen and its capability of supplying the necessary boom and was written and signed by both Maine senators, Olympia Snow and Susan Collins. Unfortunately for the Obama administration this letter is widely available to the public.

Apparently Packgen has miles of floating oil containment boom in warehouse right now and they say they can make lots more on short notice. Packgen owner John Lapoint said his company is ramping up production to make 90,000 feet of oil boom per day. Packgen first alerted the government 4 WEEKS AGO that they can produce more boom than anyone in the US and abroad. And yet the governors of the Gulf states have been denied these resources even as the oil was encroaching ever closer to their shores. Did I mention that all five Gulf states have republican governors and four out of five of them voted for McCain?

Florida's state Senator, Bill Nelson, worries about yet another problem that is not being adequately addressed by the Obama administration. State emergency officials say there are not enough skimmers out in the Gulf catching oil.

“Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help. It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect sensitive marshlands.
The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are coordinating the cleanup: “The embassy got a nice letter from the administration that said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’” said Geert Visser, consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.”
- Houston Chronicle

Now, after over 50 days of oil flowing freely into the gulf, the question must be asked: Why do effective and proven foreign clean-up ships remain unused and their offers to help unaccepted? Could it have something to do with the Obama administration’s close relationship with labor unions?

Suspicion revolves around the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, sometimes referred to as the Jones Act. The Act requires that ships that do business within the US be staffed with at least 75% American Citizens. In addition, ships that operate within U.S. waters have heavy restrictions placed on foreign manufacture. In its day, the law was made in order to protect American seamen. Today it has become a nuisance to the effort to clean up the oil spill. There are skimmer boats that wish to help clean up the oil, but the problem is they aren’t owned and operated in the United States. Therefore, under the Jones Act, they cannot work.

This is a big deal to the unions. They see it as protecting jobs. Or, more to the point, protecting UNION jobs. They don't like it when the Jones Act gets waived, and they take revenge on the politicians that do it. So is the Obama administration placating the unions and not doing everything he can to advance the cleanup of the spill? The administration continues to say that no one has requested a waiver of the Jones act. Perhaps it is simply because all foreigners and most Americans are simply unaware of the need to request a waiver. It should be noted that in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina President Bush granted a general waiver of the act so that all help that was available could be utilized...regardless of the source. But G.W. was not beholden to the unions. It should also be noted that the Obama administration has never acted against the wishes of the labor unions. The trend continues.

And then there is this...

Pursuant to 14 CFR section 91.137(a)(1) temporary flight restrictions are in effect for deepwater horizon/mississippi canyon (mc252) incident cleanup and reconstitution operations an area bounded by: 290500n/0904000w or the leeville /lev/ vortac 258 degree radial at 30.1 NM to 300000n/0890000w or the gulfport /gpt/ vortac 169 degree radial at 24.7 NM to 300000n/0870000w or the crestview /cew/ vortac 196 degree radial at 52.2 NM to 280000n/0870000w or the panama city /pfn/ vortac 208 degree radial at 149.6 NM to 280000n/0904000w or the leeville /lev/ vortac 201 degree radial at 76.3 NM to the point of beginning at and below 3000 feet AGL excluding the airspace outside of 12 nautical miles from the us coastline.

All aircraft operations are prohibited except those flights authorized by ATC, routine flights supporting offshore oil operations; federal, state, local and military flight operations supporting oil spill recovery and reconstitution efforts; and air medical and law enforcement operations.


That's right, The Federal Aviation Administration has banned all flights over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. After all, some of those flights could lead to nasty photos and more bad press for the thinned skinned Obama. The president has nurtured this catastrophe to make sure it grew to calamitous proportions...but he doesn't need for us to see a photograph of it lest we become fully aware of what he has done.

"In the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11, I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come." - President Barack Obama

By comparing this disaster to the 9/11 attacks he is telling you that he fully intends to use this opportunity to push his already discredited climate/energy plan. The infamous cap and trade bill has been sitting lifeless in the senate for a year. His plans for placing huge cost increases on energy have not went away just because they are unpopular with the American people. This crisis is not going to go to waste!

America is now coming to understand that this president’s sense of identification lies not in American exceptionalism but in a belief that America is a force of evil in the world that needs to be destroyed. He never sounds convincingly like the leader of a great nation, because he is, in his heart, the product of his ideological upbringing. If you were at war with America, you could hardly do better than he has done.
He has increased the federal debt by more than all of his predecessors...COMBINED! He has coddled America's enemies even as he is undermining the alliance with our two best allies, Great Britain and Israel. He has attacked American capitalism by nationalizing companies and passing a stimulus bill that took 800 billion dollars away from the private economy and used it to bail out government unions...and he has had the audacity to ask the congress for another 50 billion to bail them out again!

By exploiting the Gulf oil disaster to promote his own, and his benefactors, political agenda he has placed the United States further into the clutches of dependence on foreign oil. If you were out to destroy America you could hardly do better than he has in just 18 months. Obama promised to change America. He never implied he had the slightest interest in running it. Destruction is change. And did I mention that the five states directly affected by his intentional mis-management of this crisis all have republican governors?


Sunday, May 30, 2010

Equality...The Way To Death?

EQUALITY...THE WAY TO DEATH?

PROVERBS 14:12: There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Somewhere the greatness that was Greece is spinning in its grave. The birthplace of democracy and the proprietor of the largest single empire in history has become a den of childish parasites desperate to throw tantrums in order to get what they feel is their entitlement. And what might that entitlement be you ask? Why your money of course. Only a greedy capitalist pig of the highest order would think they were entitled to keep what was theirs. Socialism throughout Europe is dying an embarrassing death but as these parasites burn and loot their own cities let us rejoice in their having received their just rewards.

The recently announced Greek rescue package is dramatic, unprecedented in international politics and absolutely doomed to fail. This new program calls for a total of 11% of GDP in terms of "fiscal adjustments." Which is an elitist way of saying that the Greeks are going to have to cut their government spending. The politics of their situation have left them with almost no options. Most Greek debt is held abroad, therefore roughly 80% of the budget savings the Greek government makes will go straight to Germany, France and other foreign debt holders.

There was some talk of simply letting Greece default on its debts and face the consequences that they have earned for spending more money than they have. But in the dramatic showdown within the European union it was not Greece who blinked. The European leadership panicked with the realization that the European Union and its currency, the Euro, was itself at risk of a meltdown. If the European Union is unwilling to come to the aid of a member state like Greece, then bond investors will also run from Portugal and Spain. Both of which are themselves in desperate risk of going into default. Higher yields on government debt would have caused concerns about potential bank runs in these countries, and then spread to more nations in Europe...and beyond.

The Europeans therefore decided to throw everything they and the IMF have into a bailout for Greece. The program has little to no chance of actually preventing the inevitable Greek bankruptcy, but it may avert some of the collateral damage to the rest of Europe. The European Union itself could not likely survive if this spreads beyond Greece.

The backing for a bail-out comes despite worries that it will lead to the collapse of all fiscal discipline across region. It also raises the expected questions of fairness. Ireland, for example, has tackled its own crisis by slashing wages and going far beyond any measure so far offered by Greece, yet Dublin has not received help.

The Greeks for their part have responded with a considerable lack of gratitude.

Groups of masked youths hurled petrol bombs, stones and sticks at riot police as nearly 50,000 striking workers and public servants marched to parliament, where a bill dictating pay cuts and tax hikes was due for debate.

Eyewitnesses said marchers chanted "Thieves!" and hurled water bottles at riot police, who had formed a cordon around the parliament building in central Athens, reflecting increasing anger among ordinary people at politicians.
-Reuters

Well what do you expect? Public sector workers have succeeded in rewarding themselves with extremely generous compensation and benefits packages at the expense of the taxpayers...you didn't think they were going to give it up without blaming those same taxpayers for being greedy for wanting to keep their money, did you? Government workers in Greece have even learned a trick that Einstein would be envious of: They can manipulate time. Every year, they receive 14 monthly paychecks! Isn't that an interesting application of the theory of relativity?

Even better, they are getting these 14 months of pay for only working about seven months! You see, for many of them, the workday ends at 2:30 pm. Suddenly it is not hard to see why socialism is so popular in these European countries. The average retirement age in Greece is 61 years of age...among the lowest in the world. When these workers retire they, of course, get 14 monthly pension payments a year.

Those of us who do not live in Utopia find it difficult to understand how the Greek government came to identify at least 580 job categories as hazardous enough to merit early retirement. In Greece early retirement is at age 50 for women and 55 for men. These categories include some obviously dangerous jobs like coal mining and bomb disposal. However it also covers such life threatening occupations as radio and television announcers who are thought to be at risk from the bacteria on their microphones and musicians playing wind instruments who must contend with gastric reflux as they puff and blow...I'm not kidding. In Greece everyone is "special" except, of course, the greedy taxpaying capitalists who have to pay for these hazardous entitlements.

As a consequence of decades of bargains struck between strong unions and weak socialist governments, Greece has promised early retirement to about 700,000 employees, or 40 percent of its work force. It is this system of early retirement that has greatly exacerbated the out-of-control state spending that has led to Europe’s current debt crisis.

The problem with Greek pensions far outweighs the troubles previously caused by "cooking" its accounts in the early 1990s to get its official deficit figures to appear low enough to qualify to join the European Union. A recent report by the European Commission found that Greek spending on pensions and health care for its aging population, if left unchecked, would soar from just over 20% of GDP today to about 37% of GDP by 2060, the highest level in Europe. It's no small wonder then that they are being asked to privatize their health care even as the United States is in a hurry to catch up with Greece by socializing ours.

Economic reality is not a concern in the socialist realm where truths are relative and not absolute. However, like the buffalo before them, the unicorns that once roamed the mighty socialist plains are dwindling. Sooner or later you do run out of other people's money.

For his part, Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou is blaming everyone except the corrupt socialist policies that created this situation. And he has found a new herd of unicorns that he believes can rescue Greece: the mythical "green economy."

“The focus on green economy is no longer just a case of sensitivity towards the environment, but an issue of creating a sustainable economy also. Due to the experience of the ongoing economic crisis, we realized that a closer international cooperation is needed to develop forward-thinking energy policies, as well as face the speculators who now attack Southern European countries.” - George Papandreou

That's right, its not our fault for squandering huge amounts of borrowed money we can't possibly ever pay back, its those other guys, the speculators. THEY are out to get us...and isn't the pursuit of that elusive "green economy" exactly what has placed Spain next in line for a default? Papandreou is merely the latest in a long line of politicians who is simply telling his people what they want to hear. A recent opinion poll shows that 55% of Greeks are unwilling to accept any more austerity measures in the future. Since the majority of the country is in denial and unable to face the reality that socialism doesn't work the fate of Greece seems assured. Who would loan Greece any money when there is no chance of getting repaid?

You can cry out that it is all the greedy capitalist's fault but the fact is that all of the capitalists left Greece a long time ago. Capitalists don't stay where they are not treated well and, as Greece is learning, they take their money with them. Class warfare is a Marxist notion that people in different social classes must necessarily be in conflict with each other, the rich seeking to keep the poor down and the poor seeking to take away what belongs to the rich. Until Greece gets over the "social justice" nonsense they are going to have to fend for themselves. The Europeans are simply looking to buy time to preserve their own interests.

I would like to tell you that what happened in Greece could never happen here in America. Unfortunately that would not be true for it already has...

"Thousands of teachers and other union workers descended on the state Capitol on Wednesday and chanted "raise my taxes" to try to pressure politicians to avoid major budget cuts. "If you try to leave town without doing your job, we're going to chase you," warned union leader Henry Bayer at a rally that drew an estimated 15,000 people — the biggest at the Capitol since the era of the Equal Rights Amendment more than a quarter-century ago." -April 21, 2010 Chicago Tribune

"More than 30,000 angry New Jersey residents marched to the state capitol Saturday, delivering a blistering message to the governor in an effort to protect their turf and their paychecks. At times resembling both a rock concert and a pep rally, more than 30,000 union employees and community activists gathered for a massive protest at the capitol to blast the governor." -May 23, 2010 WCBS TV

Like government workers in Greece, they do not care where the money comes from as long as they get their full paycheck, full pension, and full benefits. The combination of unions and the politicians who need their campaign donations is a deadly arrow aimed straight at the heart of every democracy that travels down the "social justice" highway to death.

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -Aristotle

The proponents of "social justice" consistently want to deprive corporations and the successful of their freedom in the name of the "collective good" even as their policies directly harm the very people they propose to represent. They strangle their economies with regulations and regulators who then arbitrarily, or through bribery, determine who and what will be regulated. Laws and regulations, in and of themselves, accomplish nothing without enforcement. In the world of "social justice" every election changes the economic climate as each newly elected government has its own benefactors to pacify through either the strict enforcing of regulations on their competitors or failing to enforce them on their benefactors.

The apparently outdated concept of "equal justice" under the law does not recognize the need for those who know better to right the injustices and redistribute wealth so that failures, fools and fiends are rewarded the same as the frugal, the the successful and the honorable. To create the mythical "equality" that "social justice" advocates, people must be seen as unequal under the law, thereby providing those with the favor of the government with special classifications and extra rights under the law. "Social justice"= corruption 100% of the time.

"When there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income." -Plato

Socialist democracies constantly need more money to finance their redistributionist schemes and they inevitably accomplish this through higher and higher rates of taxation. In Greece this has led to tax evasion on a massive scale as people simply do all their transactions in cash and do not report any of them to the government. This is a reasonable and expected response to excessive taxation and it forces the government to view its subjects as criminals. The unfortunate truth of "social justice" is that it makes criminals out of everyone. Where is the justice in that?

The socialist democracies that came into existence preaching the dogma of "social justice" are now being consumed by the parasites they created in order to attain their power. This may not qualify as "social justice" but it certainly does look to possess a fine quality of "divine justice." In other words, shed no tears for Greece and the other nations who will follow her into default. All is as it should be. However let us not rejoice too much...President Obama would have the United States follow the same path and achieve the same fate. In fact, he is doing everything he can to get us there in a hurry almost as though he feels envious of Greece and the other declining and defaulting socialist states. Perhaps he is finally aware there is only one path to true equality...all are equal in death.

PROVERBS 14:12: There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

The "social justice" crowd is exactly that which it outwardly claims to oppose as they are not, and never have been, the "Robin Hood" who steals from the rich and gives to the poor. No, they are the ones oppressing their people through ridiculously higher taxes while justifying their right to do so in the name of "social justice." Alas, Prince John and his sycophantic sheriff have found their way to Greece.

BEWARE...THE "GREEN" ECONOMY

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

When Tolerance Kills

WHEN TOLERANCE KILLS

Political correctness is in the air, and fear of the truth is everywhere. In the aftermath of the recent attack on soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, President Obama went out of his way not to use the word "terrorism" to describe the massacre. And for good reason, the fantasy that there is no "war on terror" is one of the quintessential cogs in the left's governing apparatus. Without which, all the other gears in their machine will not turn. It shall be interesting to watch the president and his administration scramble to blame the military and the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq for this incident. They will blame everyone...except those responsible.

In fact, the Fort Hood shooting is the first successful terrorist attack on American soil since 9-11. But Obama, his hands soiled with the responsibility of dis-assembling Bush era protections against such attacks, is attempting make it look like a run-of-the-mill maniac with a gun shooting. The politicization of the massacre was swift and sure as the FBI, within hours of the shootings, decried that this was not terrorist related even before FBI agents arrived at the scene.

Ever the loyal sycophants, the media too has been downplaying any relationship to the attacker, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, to organized terror groups. But alas, not only do such connections exist, they are damning:

Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt. His mother's funeral was held there in May that year.

The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations.
-The London Telegraph

It is a shame that one has to consult foreign journalists to get an honest assessment of such critical elements of this story. This man was a follower of the same Imam as several of the 9/11 attackers. Some would say this alone qualifies as a reason to look for a possible terrorist link. Yet, as always, there is more:

Hasan's eyes "lit up" when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki's teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday's horrific shooting spree. As investigators look at Hasan's motives and mindset, his attendance at the mosque could be an important piece of the jigsaw. Al-Awlaki moved to Dar al-Hijrah as imam in January, 2001, from the west coast, and three months later the September 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and Hani Hanjour began attending his services. A third hijacker attended his services in California.

Hasan was praying at Dar al-Hijrah at about the same time, and the FBI will now want to investigate whether he met the two terrorists. Charles Allen, a former under-secretary for intelligence at the Department of Homeland Security, has described al-Awlaki, who now lives in Yemen, as an "al-Qaeda supporter, and former spiritual leader to three of the September 11 hijackers... who targets US Muslims with radical online lectures encouraging terrorist attacks from his new home in Yemen".

Last night Hasan remained in a coma under guard at a military hospital in San Antonio, Texas, and was said to be in a "stable" condition. Born in America to a Palestinian family, Hasan, 39, was an army psychiatrist who had chosen to sign up for the US military against his parents' wishes. But he turned into an angry critic of the wars America was waging in Iraq and Afghanistan and had tried in vain to negotiate his discharge.

He counselled soldiers returning from the front line and told relatives that he was horrified at the prospect of a deployment to Afghanistan later this year – his first time in a combat zone. Whether due to his personal convictions, his stress over his deployment or other reasons, Hasan is alleged to have snapped and gone on a murderous rampage with a powerful semi-automatic handgun after shouting "Allahu Akhbar" ("God is great"), according to survivors. He had earlier given away copies of the Koran to neighbours.
-The London Telegraph

Major Nidal Malik Hasan screamed "Allahu Akhbar" and began a shooting massacre that killed 13 soldiers and wounded 30 more. The fact that he acted alone would not make him any less of a terrorist. Lone suicide bombers are the norm in most Islamic terrorist attacks. That Hasan was a trained soldier would certainly make the use of firearms a somewhat more reasonable method of operation. The difference between a stressed out or delusional psychopath and a terrorist is political motivation and the political motivation is certain. Also certain is the unfortunate fact that Major Hasan had been communicating recently with his former Imam, Anwar al-Awlahi who currently resides in Yemen and acts as a recruiter for...Al-Qaeda!

His "Allahu Akhbar" declarations would certainly indicate that he was motivated by the Islamic fanatacism that Obama and his media bootlickers are bending over backwards to deny. This, of course, recalls President Clinton's deliberate and misleading response to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Like all democrats, he viewed the bombing as a merely a crime, promising to find those guilty and punish them, rather than to attack the international groups that funded and enabled them. We have come full circle to the delusional world of leftist fools who act as though 9/11 never happened. Which, of course, only guarantees something equally disastrous will happen again.

Many people, including myself, have lamented and warned that the the weakening of Bush administration anti-terrorist policies would leave us vulnerable to be attacked again. Now it has happened and our president, fully believing that the only enemy to the United States is the American people, is doing everything he can to delegitimize the terrorist threat in order keep his domestic political agenda front and center. Depriving Americans of their liberties through the confiscation of the health care system and redistributing U.S. sovereignty and wealth through a fraudulent carbon-tax scheme supercedes defending the nation and its antiquated constitution in his eyes.

Lets face it, when the U.S. military is targeted within our own borders, our enemies do NOT fear us. As certainly as the October 12, 2000 attack on the USS Cole was a warning that our Islamic enemies were not impressed with America's ability to thwart their actions, so too is Major Hasan's attack on Fort Hood a precursor to an even greater and imminent attack. They our watching our for our response. What will it be?

The soldiers killed in this vicious attack were murdered by the president and his follower's allegiance to the myths of tolerance, diversity and political correctness. As I have documented in previous writings, many of our soldiers are killed by people masquerading as their friends and allies. It is perhaps an unavoidable reality when an Iraqi soldier who goes into battle with Americans suddenly reveals his true allegiance by turning and firing on our soldiers. You cannot tell who is a jihadist just by looking at them. Al Qaeda has long encouraged infiltration into the foolishly politically correct West. However, this killer was no surprise:

In the months leading to Thursday's shooting spree that left 13 people dead and 29 others wounded, Hasan raised eyebrows with comments that the war on terror was "a war on Islam" and wrestled with what to tell fellow Muslim solders who had their doubts about fighting in Islamic countries. "The system is not doing what it's supposed to do," said Dr. Val Finnell, who complained to administrators at a military university about what he considered Hasan's "anti-American" rants. "He at least should have been confronted about these beliefs, told to cease and desist, and to shape up or ship out."

Finnell studied with Hasan from 2007-2008 in the master's program in public health at the military's Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md., where Hasan persistently complained about perceived anti-Muslim sentiment in the military and injected his politics into courses where they had no place. "In retrospect, I'm not surprised he did it," Finnell said of the shootings. "I had real questions about what his priorities were, what his beliefs were."
-Associated Press

It's called "discrimination," and it is exactly what was called for here. Too many people hold onto foolish ideas of tolerance and political correctness and those are the very things that led to this massacre. The saddest part of this story is the revelation that many soldiers who heard the rantings of this Islamic supremacist dared not report what they knew in fear of being labeled a bigot and accused of discrimination. Even worse the Secretary of the Army had this to say after the tragedy:

"I'm concerned that this increased speculation could cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers. And I've asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that. There are about 3,000 Muslims on active duty military service or in the National Guard or reserve forces, They remain a small minority within the U.S. military." -General George Casey

WHAT!!!!! A fully indoctrinated Islamic supremacist infiltrates the United States Army and kills American soldiers and the army's top general goes on every major Sunday news show to say he fears a "backlash" against the one thousand Muslim soldiers who currently serve? If there is one group of people who have shown they can keep a level head in these situations it is those serving in our military. We need to stick to the issue at hand instead of fabricating a "backlash" that has not and will not happen. In fact, we need to act in a way that will protect our soldiers from the "backlashes" of future turncoats.

In WW II our ancestors had the wisdom to disallow American's of Japanese descent from serving in the Japanese theater, and even went so far as to imprison many until their backgrounds could be investigated during the early stages of the war. Obama and his ilk look down on these decisions as discriminatory and bigoted, yet it was entirely reasonable given the suddenness of the Japanese attack and the problems inherent with diverse and multicultural societies.

I tell you we are NOT better than our ancestors. We are weakened by political correctness because we haven't had the courage to question Muslims in our society...and we are paying for it. It may be true that not every Muslim is a terrorist in waiting, and many are perfectly loyal Americans. But Major Hasan wasn't, and it doesn't take a psychological degree to see that he was a threat. What more could he have done to draw attention to himself? Declare war on America? Obama has done that!

Major Hasan was definitely wrong about one thing. Presidents Bush and Obama have gone out of their way to make it clear that the "War on Terror" was NOT a war on Islam. That is why it is doomed to fail. Too many ignorant people inflate their opinion of themselves and their intellect by accepting a foolish moral equivalency of Islam with other religions, particularly Christianity. It is a fool's lie. Islam is at war with us and has been for 1200 years. It only understands dominance and submission. Tolerance to Islam is dangerous. Thanks to Nadal Hasan, we have learned that lesson yet again. Therefore, what we need is an open declaration of "War on Islam." Political correctness be damned! Islam is not compatible with Western Civilization. Muslims know this, why do we insist on accepting tolerance, diversity, equality and political correctness mythology? They are all false gods.

"Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what [Hasan] has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal." -Anwar al-Awlaki's response to the massacre

Discrimination. It's what people do...when they KNOW better. How long does it take for some people to learn?



Photobucket

Sunday, November 1, 2009

A Time To Kill?

A TIME TO KILL?

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace. - Ecclesiastes 3:1-7

Finally, ten months into his administration, President Obama has a significant foreign policy achievement he can hang his hat on. Perhaps it is something we can assume is a direct result of the "prestige" bestowed upon him with the awarding of the now infamous Nobel Peace Prize. No, I am not talking about an agreement for sanctions against the recalcitrant regime in Iran that is Hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons. The Russians, in spite of Obama's feel-good appeasement/betrayal of the Czech and Polish governments, have already announced they will not participate in any such maneuver. Instead, our president has apparently succeeded in getting the legally removed socialist dictator in training restored to his presidency in Honduras.

Honduras is on the verge of ending a four-month political crisis after rival camps cut a deal that could return ousted President Manuel Zelaya to power and earn international support for a November 29 election. Buckling under pressure from U.S. diplomats, negotiators for Zelaya, toppled in a June 28 coup, and the de facto leader Roberto Micheletti who replaced him, agreed to put an end to Central America's worst political turmoil in two decades.

The deal, a diplomatic victory for U.S. President Barack Obama, leaves it up to the Honduran Congress to decide whether Zelaya can be restored to serve the last few months of his term -- the question that caused earlier talks to stumble. A Congress vote is expected in the next few days, after the Supreme Court gives a non-binding opinion on the matter.
(Reuters)

This, of course, is the same Honduran Congress and Supreme Court that initially supported the ouster of the president in the first place thereby assuring its' status as a legal removal from office. Due to the misguided and relentless pressure applied by the Obama administration, which included the refusal to recognize the legally chosen replacement for President Zelaya as well as the refusal to recognize subsequently elected governments in the future, the Honduran government has a greed to a compromise that will allow the exiled president to return to office.

This may not, at first glance, appear to be a big deal. Surely the Obama administration will call this a triumph for democracy and the rule of law. After all, Honduras has elections scheduled to occur shortly and and Zelaya will almost certainly be voted out...or will he?

Zelaya was sent into exile on June 28 after attempting to hold a vote on whether a constituent assembly should be set up to look at rewriting the constitution. The proposed rewrite would lift the current ban on presidential re-election and allow him to remain in office beyond a constitutionally limited second term. The vote was deemed in violation of the constitution by the Supreme Court. This process is not unlike the one used by Zelaya's good friend and political ally, Hugo Chavez, that has allowed that socialist dictator to assume permanent control over Venezuela...all in the name of democracy and the rule of law. Peculiar how these people use such seemingly liberal ideals to enslave their populations under fascist domination isn't it?

Clearly, with the action to restore Zelaya to office, The Constitution of Honduras has been negated. No agreement to restore him can be considered legal if, in fact, his removal was legal. Zelaya's replacement, Robert Micheletti, cowered in the face of pressure from international socialists. The Honduran Congress still has to vote on this agreement and the Supreme Court has to certify it as well. However all of this is occurring AFTER external pressure from other nations has been applied. This is definitely a test of a nation's right to exert its' own sovereignty.

If, in fact, Zelaya is restored to power, this will constitute an intolerable act perpetrated against the people of Honduras. They had a procedure for protecting themselves from a president that was abusing his power. The ability to impeach, recall and remove leaders is a necessary part of a healthy democracy. The people must have protections against those who would use the apparatus of the law to establish a dictatorship. This is what Zelaya was accused of, and for which he was legally removed. If Zelaya returns to power, the military, or a group of civic minded leaders, should assassinate him. When the people have exhausted every other recourse, and in this case they have, then violence is in order...it is the time to kill. A price must be extracted for this intolerable act or there will definitely be more intolerable acts to come. The price must be very high. If this leads to further violence and unrest, so be it.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

That Obama would choose to interfere with the internal machinations of another democratic country is very revealing. Especially when you consider how, up till now, it has been handled relatively peacefully. Obama, like all socialists, is willing to contest the unfairness and social injustice of law and order until, of course, he becomes the law and the order. Then, like all socialists, he acquires a peculiar dislike for such things as dissent that might point out certain injustices of their own. That is why democrats in this country always speak of disenfranchised voters when they lose, yet fail to prosecute cases of voter intimidation when they win. This is evidenced by Obama's Justice department's unwillingness to prosecute the Philadelphia Black Panthers. It is not freedom, fairness or equality that they seek...it is absolute power. That is why the events in Honduras are so important. They are establishing an international right to validate a sovereign country's government without the consent of the governed. Did you ever think you would see an American president make such a stand?

There is one thing you can count on from our socialist friends. The acquisition of power will lead to a love of country and a belief in the patriotic duty to sacrifice for the country that they control. Dissent, once celebrated as a high form of patriotism, will suddenly be reviled as treason against the state and their illusions of the will of the people. One need only watch the transformation of the on air personalities at MSNBC to see such shifting principles and the resulting new-found love for a country that just last year they condemned. Which brings us to a new problem...or should I say. the highly expected return of an old standard of the left: The unfair election...

This year, New Jersey’s registered voters can request a mail-in ballot for any reason. (Before 2005, voters needed to provide a reason for why they needed an absentee ballot.) The state received about 150,000 absentee-ballot applications this year. On about 2,300 of those applications so far, the signature on the request form does not match the signature on the voter’s registration forms with the state.

In a development that is depressingly predictable, the New Jersey Democratic party is asking the state to provide provisional ballots for all these voters. Those ballots could, presumably, be used to overcome any narrow lead by Republican Chris Christie over Democrat Jon Corzine on Election Day.


A mass distribution of provisional ballots, at the request of a political party, would represent a significant change from established law. Currently, when a county clerk rejects an absentee-ballot request, the clerk tries to contact the voter — through mail, by phone, and in some cases, by attempting to contact the voter in person. And a person who has spoken to some of New Jersey’s county clerks says they’re granting wide latitude on signature styles; for them to reject a ballot request because of the signature, it has to be dramatically different from the one on file..

Democrats have never made this request before, not even in 2008, where many more New Jersey residents were voting through absentee ballots. Of course, that year Democrats Barack Obama and Frank Lautenberg were expected to win the statewide races handily.
The fears of absentee-ballot fraud in New Jersey is not theoretical or far-fetched. Earlier this year, Atlantic City councilman Marty Small and 13 people who worked on his unsuccessful mayoral campaign “were indicted on charges they conspired to commit election fraud during the June Democratic primary through a variety of schemes involving messenger absentee ballots, state Attorney General Anne Milgram announced in Trenton.” One of those workers has already pled guilty. Five workers were indicted on similar charges in Essex County in August.
- National Review Online

Now, according to New Jersey Policy, third parties can pick up and return absentee ballots. However, a couple of weeks ago, a Democratic operative in Atlantic City plead guilty to a charge of tampering with ballots. One of the practices mentioned in the indictment was the person picking up ballots from people and throwing them out if they weren’t for his candidate. And then there was this:

They allegedly solicited applications for messenger absentee ballots from individuals not qualified to receive them and had the voters not fill in the name of the messenger, so they could fraudulently designate themselves as the authorized messengers or bearers. - New Jersey Office Of The Attorney General

Hmm. It looks like another play at the Al Franken strategy, and why not? They got away with it that time. In a close election you make sure you have plenty of absentee ballots at your disposal to "discover" during the recount process as you contest all of your opponent's votes and replace them with your own. If you will recall, Franken trailed his opponent, Norm Coleman, by just a few hundred votes. However, after a recount fraught with judicial challenges brought before favorable judges that also included the discovery of 300 ballots, all for Franken, found in the trunk of a car, Franken unsurprisingly came out the winner. A perfectly stolen election.

Suspicious minds reasonably see these requests for questionable absentee ballots as an attempt to create a pool of emergency votes to be used if Republican Chris Christie holds a small lead on Election Night. Reasonable people should also see that this is another example of Democrats preparing their tactics for the 2010 elections and beyond. Republicans and conservatives are rightly salivating at the prospects of substantial gains in the coming elections due to the over-reach of progressive democrats. However you must remember who you are dealing with. This is the evolutionist, by any means necessary party. They are not bound by moral convictions or an ideological attachment to free and fair elections. They will do whatever they have to do to steal the election and then afterward demand the rest of us abide by the laws they so flagrantly violated.

In Honduras, the time for peaceful dissent is winding down. The re-installment of a legally removed president is their sign that they can no longer remain passive and non-violent. Their liberty is in need of "refreshing." As anyone who has ever planted a tree can attest, they need lots of "refreshing" when they are young and vulnerable. There is nothing unexpected in this. However, we haven't got there yet, but Obama and his progressive sycophants are pushing us in that direction. Soon, we too could reach a point of no return. Even a 233 year old democracy can find itself in need of "refreshing."

As we look forward to the 2010 and 2012 elections just remember, so are the progressives...and we are seeing their plans.




Sunday, October 18, 2009

What Could Possibly Go Wrong With This?

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG WITH THIS?

While we celebrate breast cancer awareness week here in America, it's good to know our Islamic friends, likewise, are concerned about the safety of their women's breasts...sort of:

Muslim Militants in Somalia Crack Down on Deceptive Bras!

A Somalian Muslim group reportedly has started whipping women in public for wearing bras that violate Islam, the Daily Mail reports. Residents claim insurgent group Al Shabaab sent gunmen into the streets to round up women who appeared to have a firm bust. The women are inspected to see if their suspected firmness is natural or from a bra.

Officials reportedly make the women shake their breasts after removing their bras. "Al Shabaab forced us to wear their type of full veil and now they order us to shake our breasts," a resident, Halima, told Reuters, adding that her daughters had been whipped on Thursday.

The new bra rule adds to the long list of religious restrictions in Somalia, including a ban on movies, musical cell phone ring tones, dancing at weddings and playing soccer.
- FOXNews

And the National Organization For Women would have us believe that women are being persecuted in the United States when a 14 year old girl's parents have to be notified before she can have an abortion...

Burka breast crop

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Another Dead Cat On The Line

ANOTHER DEAD CAT ON THE LINE

Dead cat on the line - Something suspicious or 'fishy' is going on...

Where's PETA? The Obama administration is massacring "proverbial" cats at a rate that can only be described as an abomination (Obamanation?). This administration will one day be looked upon with the same disdain currently reserved for the likes of William "Boss" Tweed and the corruption of Tammany Hall. In fact, Obama and his Chicago thugs are starting to make Tammany Hall look like the work of amateurs! The latest outrage from the "Corruptocrat in Chief" stems from the blatantly illegal firing of the AmeriCorps Inspector General. Yet another scandal is brewing that has the putrid odor of...a dead cat on the line.

AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin was dismissed last week from his position by President Obama who claimed he no longer had confidence in this Inspector General. Just what is it that caused the President to lose his confidence? Competence perchance? Gerald Walpin was guilty of doing his job well, perhaps too well, for his own good. He dared to question the eligibility of the largest and most expensive AmeriCorps program, and also questioned the "propriety" of a settlement made with a mayor, and friend of President Obama, over the misuse of AmeriCorps funds. Essentially, Walpin audited two taxpayer subsidized programs and found a considerable number of violations that included lapses in criminal background checks, misuse of funds and "pervasive problems of eligibility, timekeeping and documentation."

While investigating the Teaching Fellows Program, run by the research foundation of the City University Of New York (CUNY), Walpin's office discovered duplicative educational awards of over $16 million and and undocumented costs of $775,000. CUNY refused to return the excess funds and also refused to revise the procedures that led to their drawing of the excessive funds. CUNY also refused to provide documentation that would verify that its AmeriCorps participants even existed! As a result, Walpin reasonably advised AmeriCorps parent organization, The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), to cut off any further funding and to re-examine all past government funding provided to CUNY. Since they have received $75 million in government grants, there is a potential cornucopia of fraud and abuse yet to be discovered.

The second program Walpin's office challenged was the non-profit St. HOPE academy, run by Obama friend and supporter Kevin Johnson. The former NBA star is now the Democrat mayor of Sacramento, California. In a report released in May 2009, Walpin's office exposed a settlement that the U.S. Attorney's Office arranged with Johnson and his deputy, Dana Gonzalez. This settlement reeks of the kind of political cronyism we have come to expect in the short time Obama has been in office. Johnson and Gonzalez exploited $900,000 in AmeriCorps funds for personal and political gain. Based on Walpin's findings, the CNCS suspended their access to federal funds when it was revealed they had six major violations which included:

1. Using AmeriCorps members to “recruit students for St. HOPE Academy.”

2. Using AmeriCorps members for political activities in connection with the “Sacramento Board of Education election.”

3. Assigning grant-funded AmeriCorps members to perform services “personally benefiting Johnson,” such as “driving him to personal appointments, washing his car, and running personal errands.

4. Improperly using AmeriCorps members to perform non-AmeriCorps clerical and other services that were outside the scope of the grant and therefore were impermissible for the benefit of St. HOPE.

However, in the aftermath of both Johnson's victory in the mayoral election and President Obama's election in November, the U.S. Attorney's Office rushed to arrange a settlement with the new mayor so that he would be able to qualify for even greater funds being made available in the Obama stimulus bill. In April of this year, the new acting U.S. Attorney, Lawrence Brown, settled the case, requiring St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50, $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson. Walpin complained that he had not been consulted on the settlement.

Walpin charged that AmeriCorps made a “180-degree turnaround” on the circumstances in the case “based on the change of circumstances of Respondent Johnson, who had, after directing St. HOPE’s misuse of the grant funds provided to it and receiving the suspension notice, become Mayor of Sacramento. The suspension was lifted because, as one Corporation official put it, the Corporation could not ‘stand in the way of Sacramento’ -- thereby effectively stating that, while Respondent Johnson was not sufficiently responsible to receive further Federal funds in his management position as a grantee, he suddenly became sufficiently responsible when elected Mayor of a city receiving substantially more federal funds…”

Walpin said this was “akin to deciding that, while one should not put a fox in a small chicken coop, it is fine to do so in a large chicken coop!”

Walpin charged that the settlement “sends the signal that acceptance of a grantee or its principal as 'responsible' can be purchased in a monetary settlement, overriding all evidence of wrongdoing previously found to warrant a suspension, without the presentation of any contradicting evidence."
-ABC News

According to the law, the President must give Congress 30 days’ notice and he must provide the reason before removing any Inspector General. The 30 day requirement is important because last year Congress passed the Inspectors General Reform Act, which was designed to strengthen protections for Inspector Generals, who are tasked with the responsibility of investigating allegations of waste, fraud and abuse within federal agencies. This law was passed to prevent interference by political appointees or the White House. In this Act is a requirement that the President give Congress 30 days' notice BEFORE dismissing an Inspector General. The firing of Inspector Walpin, in violation of this requirement, is particularly distressing because one of the co-sponsors of the Act was Senator Barack Obama. It is one of the few pieces of legislation to bear his name, and yet one in which he chose to willfully violate!

According to Republican Senator Charles Grassley, a strong advocate of inspectors general, Walpin received a call from the White House Counsel's office on Wednesday. Walpin was told that he had one hour to resign or be fired. Senate sources say Walpin asked why he was being fired and, according to one source, "the answer that was given was that it's just time to move on. The President would like to have someone else in that position." Walpin, displaying the kind of spine we have seen far to little of in resisting this administration's thuggery, declined to resign.

"I was troubled to learn that Wednesday night your staff reportedly issued an ultimatum to the AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin that he had one hour to resign or be terminated. As you know, Inspectors General were created by Congress as a means to combat waste, fraud, and abuse and to be independent watchdogs ensuring that federal agencies were held accountable for their actions. Inspectors General were designed to have a dual role reporting to both the President and Congress so that they would be free from undue political pressure. His independence is the hallmark of all Inspectors General and is essential so they may operate independently, without political pressure or interference from agencies attempting to keep their failings from public scrutiny." -Senator Charles Grassley, in a letter to President Obama

According to Grassley's version of events, the White House first tried to intimidate Walpin out of his job without having to go through the 30-day process. It was only when Walpin refused to resign that the White House notified Congress of the President's intention to fire Walpin. Why is the president doing this and why is he attempting to do it so quickly? It appears Obama is firing Walpin over his investigation of Kevin Johnson, a prominent supporter of the President. As we have seen with the selection process for closing Chrysler dealerships, not being a supporter of Obama will be swiftly punished. However, "right thinking" Obama supporters, it appears, will be just as quickly defended and rewarded.

For its part, the White House went on to confirm that it decided to fire Inspector General Walpin because of the Kevin Johnson/St. HOPE affair. In a letter sent Thursday night to Senator Grassley, White House counsel Gregory Craig cited a complaint lodged by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento, Lawrence Brown, accusing Walpin of misconduct in the St. Hope investigation.

"The Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, a career prosecutor who was appointed to his post during the Bush Administration, has referred Mr. Walpin’s conduct for review by the Integrity Committee of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE). We are aware of the circumstances leading to that referral and of Mr. Walpin’s conduct throughout his tenure and can assure you that that the President’s decision was carefully considered." -Gregory Craig

In the referral which Craig mentioned, U.S. attorney Lawrence Brown accused Walpin of conducting a biased investigation and seeking "to act as the investigator, advocate, judge, jury and town crier." Brown was particularly angry that Walpin's office had talked with the press at various times in the St. HOPE investigation. Brown asked AmeriCorps to investigate Walpin's behavior.

In his response, Walpin wrote that several of Brown's points were flat-out wrong and he reveals the process by which St. HOPE will supposedly return about half of the $850,000 grant it received from AmeriCorps. Walpin accused the U.S. attorney's office of undermining his attempt at "suspension and debarment." That procedure would prevent the organization from receiving any further federal money.

According to Walpin, the U.S. attorney's office resisted efforts to get St. HOPE to repay the money. Even though AmeriCorps inspector general officials had found "six specific instances of diversion and misuse of AmeriCorps grant funds," and even though Kevin Johnson never "submitted a single fact to dispute those findings," the U.S. attorney, according to Walpin, insisted that the settlement agreement forbid suspension or debarment.

Further, according to Walpin, even with the settlement agreement as it now exists, there is little hope the government will ever get any of its money back. "As St. HOPE is insolvent, the absence of any obligation imposed on…[Kevin Johnson], and the absence of any guarantee or security to ensure payment, makes the settlement a farce," Walpin wrote. "Mr. Brown knows," Walpin concluded, "that the settlement agreement was carefully drafted so that no obligation is imposed on Mr. Johnson to pay to AmeriCorps a single penny of the amount supposedly to be paid to AmeriCorps by St. HOPE."
-Washington Examiner

That was just the first exchange of charges and counter-charges resulting from the White House's first public statement of its reason for firing Walpin. Unfortunately, President Obama's charisma was insufficient to satisfy many on Capitol Hill, including Democrats.

“The White House has failed to follow the proper procedure in notifying Congress as to the removal of the Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service. The legislation which was passed last year requires that the president give a reason for the removal.” - Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO)

In an attempt to further dig itself into a hole, the White House came up with still another reason for terminating the Inspector General:

"Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the board to question his capacity to serve." -White House letter

Yea, that clears things right up doesn't it? Somehow, despite the fact that this alleged behavior occurred at a board meeting, there doesn't appear to be a witness to corroborate this accusation. Further, the White House requested Inspector General Walpin to give a public presentation two days after the alleged episode of disorientation. Why would you ask a "confused" man to make a public speech? A speaking engagement he apparently made without any incident of "confusion" or "disorientation." The Obama administration apparently is willing to engage in the politics of personal destruction, complete with mudslinging and false allegations. It is, after all, the Chicago way. When pressed on the matter, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs didn't back down:

"These were views that were held by many people as part of that board, and certainly the administration stands behind what's in the letter." -Robert Gibbs

It's really quite simple. The AmeriCorps Inspector General accuses a prominent Obama friend and supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money. No one has denied or contested these findings. The prominent Obama friend and supporter even agrees to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money. Although, being insolvent, this almost certainly will not come to pass. The reward for offending Obama's supporters is a swift termination of the AmeriCorps Inspector General. And, lest we forget, all of the criminals involved here are still eligible to receive future federal dollars! Its good to be king isn't it Mr. President?

DON'T STAND IN THE WAY OF THIS ADMINISTRATION...
...OH YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT...
BUT DON'T DO IT!