How the hell did we get here?

How the hell did we get here ?
(Giving credit where credit is due)

Sub-prime loans:

The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977( Jimmy Carter Era) that claimed to prevent “redlining” (denying mortgages to black borrowers), by pressuring banks to make loans in poor to moderate income neighborhoods. Every time my cousin had to endure government audits and defend his position on the granting of what he considered to be “bad loans” his mood was somber to say the least. As he told me, “I was hired to make good decisions and make money for my investors, and yet the government is making the decisions on a certain number of loans, in trade for a silly rating system instituted by the government. During the Clinton era this act was made even more stringent through his “Welfare Reform Act”. Loyola College economist Thomas DiLorenzo said that, to insure that banks got a high government rating, they had to issue increasingly riskier loans to people who wouldn’t normally have even qualified for a mortgage. This combined with an over-inflated housing market (land and property), has now attributed to the tumbling of the house of cards of “sub-prime” loans. The rules are ridiculous by anyone with a shred of common sense…..lax underwriting standards, no down payment, and no verification of income, interest only payment plans, and weak or non-existent credit history.

Gas Prices:

Although the Democratic stance for the war in Iraq was for oil, they have lots of explaining to do about how they recently declared the Polar Bear as an “endangered species” to keep oil companies from drilling in Alaska even though the polar bears are no longer “endangered.” The Democratic Party keeps exclaiming how we need to find alternative energy sources, but yet won’t allow drilling in our own country, even though we can produce enough oil to be self-sufficient. They won’t allow new refineries to be built, even though we can’t refine the oil we produce presently. They haven’t allowed any nuclear power plants to be built in close to 30 years, even though the current technology allows the cleanest power to be produced by nuclear. Energy is available, and clean energy at that, but the democrats won’t allow it. How can we be self-sufficient when the democrats tie our hands as a country? Now Senator Obama seems to have adopted Senator Clinton’s idea of removing what they call “tax benefits” to large oil companies, thereby limiting their profits. Before removal of such “benefits” Exxon/ Mobil in the first quarter of 2008 made 12 million dollars in sales. The government taxed them 9.7 million in this same period. If we tax them more it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to see they will merely pass along the price increase to us, but obviously the dems see that as “dumbing down the population” to appear as though they are for us……the little guy!

Osama Bin Laden:

When 9/11 happened some 100 days into George Bush’s presidency, the overwhelming conscientious (from the Bill Clinton administration) was that he was responsible for the horrible atrocity, even though President Bill Clinton was offered Bin Laden’s head on a platter numerous times. His concern revolved around the fact that his connections with the Saudi Royal family would have been compromised. Later the democrats claimed that George Bush had the connections with him. Because radical Muslim attacks started long before George Bush, in fact way back to the most embarrassing Presidency of Jimmy Carter, these actions were basically curtailed in President Regan’s term. Iran was afraid of Regan, as demonstrated by the release of the hostages within minutes of his Inauguration.

Iraq:

Most all the Democratic Party urged President Bush to invade Iraq, because of the threat of a threat of a nuclear program in the brewing, with the exception of Senator Obama, whom we know now wasn’t even a US Senator at that time. The information President Bush used to invade Iraq was collected and accumulated by the Clinton administration, and obviously President Bush should have been more diligent in collecting his own information. The fact that the Taliban was always in Iraq meant nothing to the Democrats, along with the fact that the military DID recover nuclear material after the invasion.


Health care:

The democrats have had a majority for the last 6 years to pass things into law but have been far busier trying to circumvent any and everything the President has tried to do. 41 challenges from Senator Reid alone to try to cut off funds to the armed forces. They have accused the Bush administration of not fixing the health care problems, yet they are the only ones who can sign bills into law. They have done NOTHING for the last 4 years to sign important bills into law. The only thing they seem to be able to do is attach Pork Barrel projects to important bills, and then place blame when the President vetoes it. Most of these bills have more money in pork then the original bill. They then blame the republicans and the president for not supporting a particular cause. The dems will never come to grips with the health care problem, because most of the PACS and special interests donate to the Democratic campaigns are lawyers who benefit immensely from litigations in medical malpractice cases.


Race relations:

It seems that Senator Obama has raised more questions about race then to help silence them. His relations with MANY Chicago ministers who have not only spewed racial hate speeches, but sexists ones as well, have served to sow a racial divide, and show that the people that surround Obama are showing the exact opposite that Obama wants to show as his “racial healing” stance. Rev Wright, Rev Moss, and Father Flagler, take your pick they all espouse hate.

Global Warming:

Al Gore is the lead in this alarmism that has invested his (hard earned?) money into convincing the public that the International Panel on Climate Change is correct in convincing us as a people that even though the scientific community as a whole is convinced that water vapor is responsible for 95% of the carbon dioxide emissions in the world. His speaking engagements to the tune of 5 Million a year and a company that he owns, that sells “carbon credits.” should be all that anyone needs to know about the farce that is being forced on our country to give the democrats yet another avenue for new taxes.

World Wide Income Redistribution:

Barack Obama has introduced a bill in Senate to substantially increase the United Nations’ Millennium Development Initiative, a far-reaching global welfare program. A history of 50 years of giving money to under-developed nations has shown to be a failure, but Senator Obama’s experience seems to be driving him to ignore the facts and push for the USA to designate .07 of the GDP to be divided by the United Nations to the poor nations of the world. You know the same organization known for corruption, and the very same crowd that supports the global warming alarmists. In just 6 short years, if passed, this bill will give 845 BILLION earned by American taxpayers to the UN, never to be seen again. We already give 15 billion a year to the UN for such grants, but the Democratic (eventual) nominee wants to increase that figure some 700 percent? We are already the country that gives the most of un-repaid aid in the world, and yet it seems that the democrats have run out of projects in our own country, and seek a better judge (UN) of economic aid. This Initiative also allows, once again, another “back door entry” to the Kyoto Protocol, the Law of the Sea Treaty, and most all of the previous UN previously initiated treaties, while disguised as a new plan. It really makes me wonder, when Obama only saw fit to vote 55 times out of two hundred times in the senate, and yet he has authored or co-authored some 573 bills since becoming a senator. It kind of makes you wonder if he thinks his agenda is somehow more important then any other senator’s. It appears to me to be nothing more then the conceit of a power hungry senator who wants to be our next president. Just to show what an idiot my senator from MD Barbara Mukulski is like, I wrote to her to express my opinion on this bill and this is what she replied to me. Obviously she is a co-conspirator on this bill with Obama.

I believe we do need to better manage what we are already spending. We also need to eliminate waste and inefficiencies in the aid, which we provide to foreign countries. That's why I am a cosponsor of the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433). This bill would require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community. This bill does not authorize any specific funding levels for aid programs and it does not give up any U.S. sovereignty to the UN - it would create a plan for U.S. programs run by the U.S. government.
I believe one of the priorities of our foreign aid efforts should be cost-effective programs that help the poor help themselves. We're already helping millions of people in many parts of the world, but we can achieve more results with a more comprehensive and coordinated plan.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts. While we may disagree on this issue, knowing of your views is important to me. Please feel free to contact me if I can be of assistance in the future.
There is nothing in our constitution that says we should be “sugar daddy” of the world, not a word about giving other countries our hard earned taxes. We don’t have anything that says we need to give charity (social programs) right here in our back yard and yet democrats continually give money away as if it grows on trees. Right now England takes almost 50% of their populations income, is this where we are headed?

In Conclusion:

A President’s position is largely over-rated, the real positions of power in our country, has to do with senators and congressmen. They hold the “elite status,” they make our laws they vote for self-entitlements, they work by different laws then we do as the masses. They have claimed they don’t have to adhere to term limits as other civil servants do. They have their own retirement plans, and don’t adhere to social security, they have their own health plans and thereby don’t really care if they fix these problems or not. Why do we allow this to continue? Why don’t we make them answerable to the will of the people? How have they amassed this power? They amassed this power because of the unbridled constraint of their positions. They are answerable to no one. They are above the law; they are always given the benefit of the doubt, in court, or in public opinion. We MUST take back our country from these people who think they are above the law. We need to replace the thought they all have, of “they will never throw us out,” because they have a history of being right. Close to 80% of incumbents get re-elected regardless of what they have done to their constituents. Our MD senators for years have assumed they are undefeatable. As far as I’m concerned senators and congress should be split down the middle in each state, half republican half democrat. A lopsided congress doesn’t do anyone any good. Politicians think we are stupid, are you willing to prove them right?

America Under Attack

AMERICA UNDER ATTACK

 Kevin Bryant

 There is not a day that America is not under attack. She is attacked on our southern border by the drug cartels and by illegals trying to gain access to this country. Islamic extremists attack her. She is attacked in the world press including some of our own news outlets. The environmentalist and the atheist attack her. She is even victim of attacks by viruses and bacteria brought into this country as well as the ones that are home grown. Not during the Revolutionary War or even WWII has America been attacked so ferociously attacked and with such hatred for our way of life as it is being attacked right now from our very own congress. They have successfully placed polar bears on the endangered species list even when they aren’t, virtually assuring that we never drill for oil in ANWR. 

They successfully passed ethanol mandates, driving up the price of food we eat. They passed tax rebates for many Americans knowing that they would have to borrow the money from China to pay for it further increasing our national debt. There has been not one single action taken place in congress over the past 4 years that has actually benefited the average American family. The last one that comes to mind was the 2003 Bush Tax Cut. Instead, congress has set their agendas in support of special interest groups and force unnecessary, illogical, unproven and costly global warming initiatives down our throats. Today’s politicians on both sides of the aisles have not learned the meaning of the term “public servant” and instead choose to embrace party politics. It is time for them to learn that they were not chosen to go to Washington solely for the purpose of supporting self-interest but rather to serve the general public as a whole and act in the public’s best interest.

 Here in Kansas City, 2 of our elected congressional officials (Cleaver in the house and McCaskill in the senate) have continually shown that they support their party over their constituents time and again. I will not be voting for either of these candidates when it comes time for them to run for re-election. If you have the same problem with those that are supposed to be representing you, then I would suggest that it is time to send them back to the private sector and bring in someone who does understand that the people should always be placed ahead of their respective parties.

 Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton

Patriot Perspective

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE
The right of the People... shall not be infringed
By Mark Alexander
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” —Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
There is no more important constitutional issue than that of defending the plain language and original intent of the Second Amendment.
Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by our Constitution’s principal author, James Madison, wrote in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833), “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
It is no small irony that the latest assault on the Second Amendment is taking place in our nation’s capital. The Supreme Court will announce its decision in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller in June, and that decision will likely have far-reaching implications for the “interpretation” of our Constitution’s most important provision.
And make no mistake, the newly-emboldened Left, with Barack Hussein Obama leading the charge, is gunning for those rights. Obama supports the D.C. regulations because he, “...wanted to make sure that local communities were recognized as having a right to regulate firearms... The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can’t initiate gun laws isn’t born out by our Constitution.”
Does he suggest, by extension then, that our national Constitution can be amended by judicial dictates and local ordinances?
Of course, in addition to serving on the Woods Fund board with Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Obama also served on the board of the Joyce Foundation, which since 2000, has given more than $15 Million to radical gun control organizations and is closely linked to the Soros Open Society Institute, which advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership.
Indeed, the Second Amendment is “the palladium of the liberties of the republic,” and those who fail to support it as such, and reject detractors like Obama, do so at great peril to themselves and the liberty of future generations of Americans.
The subject of this dispute is the Washington, DC, “Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975,” which banned handguns and mandated that all other firearms, including shotguns and rifles, be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock,” ostensibly to deter so-called “gun violence.” D.C.’s FCRA actually prohibits a person who owns a legal handgun (pre-1976 grandfathered one) from transporting the handgun from one room to another in his or her own home.
Of course, suggesting that violence is a “gun problem” ignores the real problem—that of socio-pathology and the Leftists who nurture it. (See the Congressional Testimony of Darrell Scott, father of Rachel Scott, one of the children murdered at Columbine High School in 1999.)
Will that decision comport with the Constructionist view (original intent) of our Constitution, or will it be another adulterated interpretation of the so-called “Living Constitution”, the ACLU’s perverted distortion of our Constitution by its cadre of judicial activists?
It is our hope that the Court will affirm the ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the District’s ordinance banning possession of handguns is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
Though every constitutional constructionist knows that the Second Amendment assures an individual right to keep and bear arms, militias being the people, the ACLU’s “Living Constitution” mob argues that “the people” means “the state militia,” as outlined on the ACLU’s website under “Gun Control”: “We believe that the constitutional right to bear arms is primarily a collective one, intended mainly to protect the right of the states to maintain militias. ... The ACLU therefore believes that the Second Amendment does not confer an unlimited right upon individuals to own guns.”
Well, they may believe that, but in the inimitable words of Founder John Adams, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
It seems the lawyers at the ACLU are always viewing the First Amendment through a wide-angle lens, while they view the Second through a pinhole. Alas, they have it backwards.
In the 1788 Massachusetts Convention debates to ratify the U.S. Constitution, Founder Samuel Adams stated: “And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”
That same year, James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers (No. 46), “The ultimate authority... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.”
Similarly, Federalist Noah Webster wrote: “Tyranny is the exercise of some power over a man, which is not warranted by law, or necessary for the public safety. A people can never be deprived of their liberties, while they retain in their own hands, a power sufficient to any other power in the state.”
To understand how the right to bear arms was understood in proper context as an individual right, consider some of the earliest state constitutional provisions both before and after the ratification of the Bill of Rights: Pennsylvania—That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state (1776); Vermont—[T]he people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State (1777); Kentucky—[T]he right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned (1792). Tennessee—[T]he freemen of this State have a right to keep and bear arms for their common defence (1796) and, Connecticut—Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state (1818).
These are not references to state guard units as the ACLU insists.
Though the Supreme Court rarely referenced the Second Amendment in the first hundred years of our nation’s existence, because its meaning was understood, in one early reference, Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856), the Court noted, “It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union...the full liberty...to keep and carry arms wherever they went.” The implication is that the right to carry arms was considered to be universal right for U.S. citizens.
Of course, Washington, D.C. is not the only major city violating the Second Amendment. New York City has restrictive gun regulations, but consider this comment from Timothy Dwight, President of Yale College, from an 1821 commentary on American life: “In both New-England, and New-York, every man is permitted, and in some, if not all the States, is required to possess fire arms.”
Times have indeed changed, and not in the interest of liberty.
If you know some of those Chardonnay-sipping elitists who insist that guns should be banned, get them a few of these “Gun Free Household” stickers for their front and back doors.
Speaking of Chardonnay, here’s an interesting fact: Alcohol-related traffic deaths outnumber homicides with guns by a wide margin. In the latest year of record, there were 12,253 homicides with firearms (many of which involved alcohol) but 16,885 alcohol related highway fatalities. (Perhaps the ACLU should be fighting for a five-day waiting period to purchase alcohol?)
Here’s another inconvenient truth for the Leftist gun-grabbers: The U.S. ranks 41st in the world in homicides but first in the world in private gun ownership (39 percent of households). The firearm homicide rate in the United States was 4.17 per 100,000 in 2005. But Israel, which is awash in so-called “assault weapons,” has a total homicide rate of 2.62 per 100,000.
The National Institute of Justice estimates that Americans use firearms in self-defense approximately 2.73 million times per year. While firearms are used in 67 percent of illegal homicides in the United States, they are used in 99 percent of justifiable homicides. In other words, bad guys use guns sometimes, but good guys use guns almost all the time.
Put another way, smart guys protect their families with “Second Amendment Security”.
On this point, I would argue that gun ownership is not only a right, but a duty and obligation of all Patriots. After all, we are the Militia.
(For good reference pages on the Second Amendment, see Sources on the Second Amendment and Brief Amicus Curiae in DC v Heller, both by my colleague Eugene Volokh, Professor, UCLA Law School. Read Charlton Heston’s comments on the Second Amendment, 1997.)

Reprinted for Patriot Post (http://patriotpost.us)

Affirmative Action in the campaign?

I’d like to think, “affirmative action” hasn’t found it’s way into the presidential campaign, but I fear it has. Howard Dean (democratic screaming meme), and his merry band of the DNC, has deemed that the Florida and the Michigan count for the democrats will only be counted at half the amount the people have voted. Is this a joke or what? Barack Obama wasn’t even ON the Michigan ballot, and yet Hillary’s overwhelming victory in that state will only be counted as half, because of some date that the Democratic hierarchy has chosen to be the “formal date” to vote? I see the Florida Supreme Court has already voted not to hear the challenge from Hillary. You already know my stance on the campaign, but damned if I think ANYONE’S vote should be thrown in the trash, and it is my prediction that if the US Supreme Court has to make a decision on it, they will rule in favor of everyone’s vote being counted regardless on any other states ruling.

In my opinion this whole thing about not counting Michigan or Florida is crap, pure and simple! No party Dem or Republican should be allowed to make a decision NOT to count a single vote. Let the chips fall where they may, but don’t handicap one candidate over another. Those of you who know me already know that I’d be complaining if it were the Democrats or the Republicans. Howard Dean needs to count all the votes, not just the ones who favor his favorite candidate!

Trail of Tall Tales

Sen. Barack Obama has gained a fervent following by preaching messages of hope and change, but has a long campaign tethered him to the sphere of age-old politics? A series of statements on the stump suggest Obama is perfectly capable of joining the ranks of silver-tongued politicians.
1. Spiritual Adviser, April 29, 2008Non-truth: Obama told reporters at a news conference that his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was never his spiritual counselor.
“He was never my spiritual mentor. He was my pastor. And to some extent how the press characterized in the past that relationship, I think, was inaccurate,” Obama said.
Truth: During a June 5, 2007, speech at Hampton University, Obama introduced Wright by describing him as “the guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me.”
Sources: CQ, Newsmaker Transcripts, Special Events April 29, 2008; “Obama Says White House Ignores ‘Quiet Riot’ Among Blacks,” CBS2Chicago.com, June 5 2007.
2. Jeremiah Wright, April 16, 2008Non-truth: During a March 14 interview with FOX News, Obama said he was never in church when his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, made the now infamous sermons during which he proclaimed “God damn America” and asserted that the U.S. brought on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks with its own “terrorism.”
“None of these statements were ones I had heard myself personally in the pews,” Obama said, calling the sermons “unacceptable and inexcusable.”
Truth: During a March 18 speech Obama said, “Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.” He added, “The remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial … they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country.”
Nearly one month later, on April 16, Obama told a group of Jewish leaders in Philadelphia that he “did not become aware of [Wright’s statements] until I started running for president,” implying that he did not hear the remarks while he “sat in church.”
Sources: “Obama Rejects Sermons from Pastor Who Was Like an Uncle,” FOXNews.com, March 14, 2008; “Remarks of Senator Barack Obama, ‘A More Perfect Union’” barackobama.com, March 18, 2008; “Obama Tells Philadelphia Jewish leaders He Would Not Sit Down With Hamas,” Obama speech, pool report, April 16, 2008.
3. Selma Voting-Rights March, March 5, 2007Obama told an audience at a Selma Voting Rights March commemoration that during this historic civil rights event in 1965 “there was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma.”
Non-truth: He said his parents “got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama.”
Truth: Obama was born in 1961 — four years before the 1965 Selma march occurred. He later clarified his remarks, saying, “I meant the whole civil rights movement.”Sources: “Sen. Obama Delivers Remarks at Selma Voting Rights March Commemoration, Selma, Ala.,” Newsmaker Transcripts, March 4, 2007; “Clinton and Obama Unite, Briefly, in Pleas to Blacks,” The New York Times, March 5, 2007.
4. Lobbyist Money, April 12, 2008Non-truth: During campaign speeches, Obama frequently makes the contention that “I’m the only candidate who doesn’t take money from corporate PACs and lobbyists.”
Truth: Obama has raised nearly $14 million from lawyers and lobbyists. In October, Obama raised about $125,000 at a fundraising event in the Washington offices of Greenberg Traurig, the law firm that once employed convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Obama has sought to draw a distinction between “lawyer advocates” and “lawyer lobbyists,” but some non-partisan experts see that as “a distinction without a difference,” as they both operate as special interests.
Sources: “Full Text of Obama’s Speech to the Alliance for American Manufacturing,” Time.com, April 14, 2008; “Obama Draws Fine Line Between Lobbyists, Lawyer Donors,” Newsday, April 12, 2008.5. Nuclear Legislation, Dec. 30, 2007During a campaign event in Newton, Iowa, Obama touted his sponsorship of a bill in the Senate that required nuclear power plant owners to notify authorities immediately of all radioactive leaks, no matter how small.
Non-truth: That was “the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed” he told the crowd.
Truth: Obama had rewritten the bill to ease its passage and removed the language requiring the reporting of leaks. The bill died when it reached the full Senate, and did not pass as he claimed.
Source: “Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate,” New York Times, Feb. 3, 2008.6. Law Professor, March 30, 2008Non-truth: During a campaign fundraiser in Tallahassee, Fla., in March 2007, Obama spoke of his time as a “constitutional law professor” at the University of Chicago, “which means unlike the current president, I actually respect the Constitution.”
Truth: Obama never held a professor position at the University of Chicago. The university said he was a lecturer and taught courses to students at the law school, but “did not hold the title of professor of law.”
Sources: “Obama: Bush Fails to Respect the Constitution,” Associated Press, March 30, 2007; “No ‘Professor’ Obama at U. of C,” Chicago Sun-Times, March 30, 2008.
7. Life Magazine Claims in Obama’s Autobiography, March 25, 2007In his 1995 autobiography, “Dreams From My Father,” Obama cited a copy of Life magazine as having stirred a racial awakening in him.
Non-truth: He wrote that when he was 9 years old, living in Indonesia, he flipped through Life magazine and read an article about a black man who had scarred and ruined his skin applying chemicals that promised to make his skin white. “I imagine other black children, then and now, undergoing similar moments of revelation,” he wrote.
Truth: No article or pictures exist of any such story, according to Life historians. When questioned about the mix-up, Obama couldn’t name the specific magazine in which he read the article.
Source: “The Not-So-Simple Story of Barack Obama’s Youth,” Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007.
8. Obama’s Fluency, March 25, 2007Non-truth: Obama has claimed on numerous occasions that, as a boy growing up in Indonesia, he was fluent in the country’s language. “It had taken me less than six months to learn Indonesia’s language, its customs, and its legends,” he wrote in “Dreams From My Father.”
Truth: His first-grade teacher in Jakarta said he struggled with the language, needing help with pronunciation and vowel sounds, and teachers and friends remembered him as a being a quiet boy as a result of his difficulties.
Source: “The Not-So-Simple Story of Barack Obama’s Youth,” Chicago Tribune, March 25, 2007

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/23/trail-of-tall-tales-barack-obama/

Obama Satire

Obama Speaks!
By Larry Elder
Thank you very much. It's great to be here.

You know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. We are going to do things differently and expect a different result. And if we don't do things differently, well, the results we get, well, they'll be the results we deserve. Thank you.

We deserve better results, and that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I'm running for the presidency of the United States of America. If you want the same results done in a different way, then you're going to get the same results, only achieved differently.

If, however, you want different results with a different way, but not done the same way, without the same results, but with new results in a new way, while ensuring the new results are much more new than the old results we've had the old way, then I'm sure you'll agree with me that we, ladies and gentlemen, must work toward a different way, to achieve results in a different way than the way we used to achieve the results differently. Thank you.

Change is never easy. Change is hard. Some change is harder than others. And easy change is never as easy as hard change, if only because hard change is hard. Changing the easy to the hard is harder than changing the hard to the easy.

But if, ladies and gentlemen, you are looking for easy change done the hard way, then that hard change will not be easy, if only because change is hard, and harder change is much harder when it is hard than when it is easy. This is especially the case if you use the same way of changing results that ultimately result in change done the hard way. And that is why I am proposing hard change with a different approach that could ensure a different change than we've had in the past with the same approach only with different results with easy change than the hard change that we've had when change was, in fact, easy. Thank you very much.

We must have hope. Hope is what we must have. If you have no hope, then you are without it more than you would be if, indeed, you had hope. Without hope, there is only hopelessness. If you have hopelessness, then those without hope will never have hope because those who have it, do, and those who don't, don't.

And that is why I intend to hope that we may have more hope, so that those without hope can get it from those who do have hope. So the hopeful must share the hope with the hopeless to reduce the hopeless while uplifting the hopeful. And I certainly hope that we can all agree that hope alone without hoping for those without hope is, in fact, a recipe for further hopelessness. Thank you.

I ask you not to take a chance on me, but to take a chance on your own aspirations. And aspirations are nothing without inspiration. And with inspiration comes perspiration. So I ask you to aspire to perspire so that you may inspire. And with your inspiration, coupled with the aspirations of those who perspire, that perspiration will create further inspiration to which all of us can aspire. And those who inspire the most will perspire the most, only because their aspirations create the greatest inspirations. And it is a false choice to think you can have inspiration without perspiration.

So, if you can't stand the heat in the kitchen, better get yourself out, unless you're popping popcorn! Until you see the whites of their eyes, then, by god, don't you fire! I have but one life to give to my country, but I sure do regret it! We have nothing to fear, but fear itself, especially when fear fears us back! Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you! Si, se puede! Pass the guacamole. Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce, special orders do not upset us. Boo-ya!

So to sum up, in conclusion, per se, so to speak, if you will, on the one hand, if not on the other, let me say this: Don't do drugs!

Thank you, and may God bless you, and may God bless America!

CREATORS SYNDICATE © 2008 LAURENCE A. ELDER

FOR THE RECORD

FOR THE RECORD
“In his victory speech after the North Carolina primary, Sen. Barack Obama...[defended] his stated intent to meet with America’s enemies without preconditions...: ‘I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.’ That he made this statement, and that it passed without comment by the journalists covering his speech indicates either breathtaking ignorance of history on the part of both, or deceit. I assume the Roosevelt to whom Sen. Obama referred is Franklin D. Roosevelt. Our enemies in World War II were Nazi Germany, headed by Adolf Hitler; fascist Italy, headed by Benito Mussolini, and militarist Japan, headed by Hideki Tojo. FDR talked directly with none of them before the outbreak of hostilities, and his policy once war began was unconditional surrender. FDR died before victory was achieved, and was succeeded by Harry Truman. Truman did not modify the policy of unconditional surrender. He ended that war not with negotiation, but with the atomic bomb. Harry Truman also was president when North Korea invaded South Korea in June, 1950. President Truman’s response was not to call up North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung for a chat. It was to send troops... Sen. Obama is on both sounder and softer ground with regard to John F. Kennedy. The new president held a summit meeting with Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev in Vienna in June, 1961. Elie Abel, who wrote a history of the Cuban missile crisis (The Missiles of October), said the crisis had its genesis in that summit... Mr. Abel wrote, ‘There is no evidence to support the belief that Khrushchev ever questioned America’s power. He questioned only the president’s readiness to use it.’... It’s worth noting that Kennedy then was vastly more experienced than Sen. Obama is now. A combat veteran of World War II, Jack Kennedy served 14 years in Congress before becoming president. Sen. Obama has no military and little work experience, and has been in Congress for less than four years... History is an elective few liberals choose to take these days... The lack of historical knowledge among journalists is merely appalling. But in a presidential candidate it’s dangerous. As Sir Winston Churchill said: ‘Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it’.” —Jack Kelly
reprinted from the Patriot Post (PatriotPost.us)

It’s a cookout in Washington!

I was watching the public lynching of the oil executives today by congress, and I couldn’t help but to laugh. Senator Ben Cardin, one of the two idiot senators from the state previously known as the “free state” of Maryland, was talking to Neil Cavuto on Fox News. Neil asked him why the congress has tied the hands of oil companies to drill on our lands, and off our shores. Cardin skillfully dodged every one of Neil’s questions, telling Neil that we need to find alternative, renewable, fuel sources, that we are far too reliant on oil from the Middle East. Neil agreed with him but questioned him farther about why, drilling isn’t allowed in Alaska in this new untapped oil field, or just 60 miles offshore of Miami, where China is currently drilling, but the “green heads” (democrats), won’t allow it. Again Cardin dodged the bullet, citing the need for alternative renewable energy. Cavuto sited the oil companies profit margin this year of 4 cents a gallon, which has been a reduction of last years profit of 10 cents a gallon, and then asked how much the federal government and state governments are making from the sale of each gallon of gasoline, without so much as lifting a finger. He went on to tell Cardin that the federal government hasn’t allowed a refinery to be built in this country since 1973, and no nuclear power plants to be built is nearly the same time period, which is a renewable source.

I have to wonder what the deal is with Democrats; we certainly can’t run cars on wind power, solar, or any other sources of energy they claim we can use. They have brought us to a failed policy on ethanol, and driven the food prices up accordingly to produce a wasteful program that was destined to fail from the start. Every car racer knows that it takes twice as much alcohol to accomplish the same thing that gasoline produces BTU wise.

Earlier in the day Shepard Smith showed a video from the tar and feathering showing a liberal congresswoman Maxine Waters from CA grilling a Shell Oil Executive on the effect the high prices of gas is having on America. Waters has had an ongoing lynching going on with Shell Oil Company, as she has written a book about them. She threatened the executive with “socializing” his company…….dumbfounded and with his mouth hanging open, he collected his wits later and told Fox News…..”I think Hugo Chavez has already tried that.” At least one Democrat came clean about the agenda they have!

The CONGRESS has made the laws that have allowed us to arrive at the predicament we are in now. THEY passed the ethanol program complete with subsidies, not President Bush. They need a scapegoat right now to offer as a sacrifice to the American people. You have to listen to these videos and sound bytes to see who profits the most from the sale of gasoline in America, and the big news here is…………it’s not the oil companies!

Maxine Waters’s admission
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUaY3LhJ-IQ
Maxine Water’s book on Shell Oil
http://www.amazon.com/Where-Vultures-Feast-Shell-Rights/dp/1578050464Neil

Cavuto’s take on the day
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=628860&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

Just the facts:

Fact:
Barack Obama was raised in a dysfunctional family, fathered by a black Muslim from Kenya, whom abandoned him at the early age of two. He was then raised by his white mother until she thought it was more important to go back to school, so she dumped Barack on her parents. Although the only thing his father donated to the situation was his “blackness,” Barack seems to celebrate his father more then any other family member, including the grandparents who, clothed, educated, and fed him!

Fact:
Barack Obama claims to have taught Constitutional Law (although I can find no proof of that claim), and yet has claimed, that if he becomes President, he will pick Chief Justices that will see the Constitution through “social eyes” and interpret it on that basis, rather then on the law.

Fact:
Barack Obama expouses “change we can believe in” and yet hasn’t given any specifics.

Fact:
Barack Obama wants to give 845 BILLION of the US Taxpayers Money to the UN to distribute to other nations through the “Millenium Development Initiative.”

Fact:
Senator Barack Obama in his first two years as senator had a chance to vote on 200 bills, but chose to vote on just 55 of them, thereby shirking his responsibility of the job he has been paid to do. In a move of arrogance, he has chosen to introduce or co-introduce 573 bills of his own, showing that he believes his legislation to be more important then any one else’s.

Fact:
The National Journal has voted Senator Obama as the “most liberal senator,” not an easy task in that group!

Fact:
Barack Obama has chosen to surround himself with not only shady characters such as Tony Resko (whom helped him obtain a $2 million dollar mansion in Chicago’s south side at sub market value), but has surrounded himself with polarizing characters such as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his own wife Michelle that tend to divide America rather then the “uniting,” that Barack claims to want to do.

Fact:
Although old news at this point, Barack always claimed, “I never voted for the war in Iraq.” In it’s content that claim is true, but the fact he never alluded to was that he wasn’t in a position to even vote on that, as he was STATE senator when that vote came up in the US Senate.

Fact:
Barack Obama is a junior senator with very minimal experience at best, (3 years).

Fact:
Barack Obama has surrounded himself with staff and friends that have shown hatred and distain for Israel and the Jewish faction.

Fact:
Although Senator Obama has stated that the Iraq War was wrong, his Middle East Policy, shows he thinks we attacked the wrong country. He thinks we should have attacked Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran. Surely harbingers of things to come.




Obama’s family history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

Obama’s middle east policy:
http://middleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/a/me071202a.htm

Obama on picking Chief Justices:
http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/punditry/comments/obama_judicial_selection_and_the_rule_of_law/

Obama’s Millenium Development Initiative:
http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272618845.shtml

Obama’s voting record:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/votes/

Letter from a friend

A democratic friend sent me an email the other day, and I replied to her as best I could.

Dear Al,
In a book I'm reading by Brian D. McLaren called Everything Must Change. Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope, he asks some good questions like, "What kind of world will we who are comparatively rich and powerful bequeath to our children and grandchildren if we do not redirect our energies from accumulation, and self-protection toward compassion, service, and equity? And what kind of world will we bequeath to future generations if equity becomes our sacred passion and personal ambition?...But the struggle for a healthy equity system, like the struggle for a wise prosperity system and a sane security system, is perpetual; it is as much a part of the ongoing social task of being human as eating, drinking, and sleeping are part of the physical task. As long as you're alive, you're not finished.... Perhaps, in the interests of sustainability, we should speak less of an environmental crisis and more of an over-consumption crisis. That way, we'd focus our attention on the source of the problem, not its victim--the source being human beings, particularly in the global North, who are living an unsustainable life, oblivious to limits, destroying their natural wealth in pursuit of financial wealth.

"Peace and Love,.





You raise a few points that have merit in today’s society, and political climate.

We live in a Democratic state, defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary as;

: government by the people: rule of the majority: a government in which the supreme power is held by the people: a political unit that has a democratic government: the common people especially constituting the source of political authority: the absence of heredity or arbitrary class distinctions or principles

We are commonly referred to as a Capitalistic Society defined as:

An economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, and by prices, production, and distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

I’m not sure if you support the principles of the author of the book you are reading or not, but from what you have told me about what you are reading, his principles sounds a lot like the socialist manifesto defined as such:

A theory or system of social reform, which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor. In popular usage, the term is often employed to indicate any lawless, revolutionary social scheme.

I’m also not sure if the author is speaking of “income redistribution” on a world basis or as an internal US basis, but the US gave 21 Billion last year in foreign aid. The US spends 56% of it’s national budget of 2.7 trillion will be spent on social security, income security (welfare programs), Medicare, and health programs.

Social conscience is a big controversy in our country right now. Philanthropy in this country in the year 2006 amounted to $295 billion.

When philanthropy becomes mandatory through taxes and fees, it no longer exists as giving voluntarily but it then becomes socialism, as the government will oversee its collection and distribution.

The Democratic Party sees this type of distribution as necessary and plays it off as “social conscience,” and will call it anything but what it really is, because under the term of socialism, nothing will pass in this country, but under any other name it has a chance.

Nothing in our Constitution was designed or specifically addresses “social programs,”
or the appropriations for such spending. President Franklin Roosevelt started the large scale social programs in the Great Depression, as a way to pull our country from the economic devastation. The programs that have evolved from his intentions are not only deplorable, but burden our very existence. Our foreign aid spending has hampered our economic expansion and threatens our very existence.

This unchecked “throwing away of tax payer’s dollars” needs to cease. The idea of taking the money a successful businessman makes, and giving it to third world nations run by thugs and dictators, and taking that same money and given to people who haven’t made any investment into their personal education, defeats the very basic principles of the capitalistic society. What incentive is there to do better when the wealthy population is taxed at a higher percentage then any other group?

Obviously this basic ideology difference between the parties will be voted on in November.


Social programs
http://www.teachablemoment.org/high/militaryspending.html

Philanthropy in the US
http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropy/philanthropy_stats.asp

Quote this!

Quote This!
Kevin Bryant

Hello Everyone,

I thought I would do a little something different today. Instead of filling this page full of my rhetoric, I just thought I would make a remarks about some of the quotes that have been made in the past couple of weeks by members of the beloved liberal left. Personally I think Warner Bros Studios should start a whole new line of Looney Tune cartoons using these folks as inspiration.

*All quotes are reprinted from the Patriot Post(PatriotPost.us)

“I can’t stand one more friggin’ minute of this administration and the
permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I’m
almost at the point where I don’t care if the Democrats don’t have a backbone or
a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name
ain’t ‘Bush’ and the word ‘Republican’ is not beside theirs on the ballot, then
that’s good enough for me.” — Michael Moore endorsing Obama

Sounds like he’s been drinking way too much liberal kool-aid.

“Just when we were close to a national news media providing a general consensus
on what the truth is, along comes the Internets that allows its users a choice
on the kind of news it watches and the YouTube. My God, we’ve got to stop them.”
—actor Tim Robbins

Yes, Mr Robbins…..the truth is out there.

“We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like
to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor
or African-American or gay or disabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which
I’ll be selecting my judges.” —Barack Obama

So, I guess knowledge of the law would not apply to your appointees??????

“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran. In
the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an
attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.” —Hillary
Clinton

Don’t worry sweetheart, I’m quite certain that Israel can turn Iran into a glass parking lot with every bit of efficiency as America.

“I’m not going to put my lot in with economists, because I know if we get it
right, if we actually did it right, if we had a president who used all the tools
of the presidency, we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented
effectively.” —Hillary Clinton

This sounds way too much like Ted Kennedy’s statement a few months back when he said that the only reason no socialist government has ever endured was because they never had him there to run it.

“Only in Washington can you get away with calling someone out of touch when
you’re the one who thinks that 30 cents a day is enough to help people who are
struggling in this economy.” —Barack Obama on Hillary’s gas tax
proposal

Guess Obama isn’t much of an economist either or even on par with the average 5th grader. It’s 30 cents a GALLON you idiot, not per day. My truck drinks 4 gallons with me just driving to work and back. 30 cents a gallon x 4 gallons per day x 5 trips a week = $6.00 a week then x that by the 17 weeks it would apply is $102.00, and who wouldn’t want $102.00?????????? I know this and I don’t have an Ivy League education.

“We can’t just plan for the future, we have to help people in the here and now.
The choice to me is clear, we need to go after the oil companies.” —Hillary
Clinton

Then Wal-Mart, then Sears, then the cable companies, then McDonalds and before 8 years in office is up….we are officially a Socialist State……WHOO HOO……….

“My longer-term plan is to put an excess profits tax on the oil companies above
a certain level of profit that would go in to help us make the transition.”
—Hillary Clinton

Let’s think about this…would the oil companies pay this tax out of the meager 8 whole cents they make on the dollar or would they pass it on to me, the consumer. I’m betting on me, the consumer who already pays 52% of his income in taxes.

“What I think particularly angered me was his suggestion somehow that my
previous denunciation of his remarks were somehow political posturing.” —Barack
Obama

Perhaps because it was………..

“We don’t deal with the serious issues that are in front of us, we try to figure
out what’s going to poll well and what can we do to get through the next
election.” —Barack Obama

And we all thought Bill Clinton was bad about doing what was popular instead of what was right.

“I would never be here telling you something I didn’t believe.” —Bill
Clinton

And I never had sexual relations with that woman……..

“I don’t want to sound like an ad, a public service ad on TV, but the fact is if
you can read, you can walk into a job later on. If you don’t, then you’ve got,
the Army, Iraq, I don’t know, something like that. It’s, it’s not as bright.”
—horror author Stephen King

John Kerry reincarnated…..now there is a best selling horror story for you.

“If you were black in this country, especially if you are of Jeremiah Wright’s
age, of his era or even times before that or even kids today, when you look at
the situation in our inner city schools, I mean, you have to ask yourself...
what’s it like to be black in America? And what kind of rage would you feel? And
if you did feel that rage, what kind of things would you say that, at times,
would be outrageous, crazy even, because you’ve had to live through this for so
long?” —Michael Moore

Let’s see….Michael Moore, your white, fat, loud-mouthed, sweaty and swing to the farthest reaches of the liberal left. What qualifies you to speak about the injustices of being black in America…….NOTHING.

“I listen to Jeremiah Wright, and frankly, it made sense to me. I totally
understood what he was saying.” —Rosie O’Donnell

Only you would Rosie….Only you would.

“We got to move forward. You know, this conversation doesn’t help my kids, you
know.” —Michelle Obama

But attending this church for many years and exposing your children to this type of hate speak is a good, healthy and wholesome thing for your kids?

“If we want to save our planet earth, to save life, to save mankind, we have a
duty to put an end to the capitalist system.” —Bolivia’s President Evo
Morales

Ladies and gentlemen, your next democratic party presidential hopeful……

“Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans
is weakening again...Whites in both states who had not completed college were
supporting me... I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on.”
—Hillary Clinton

Sounds like she is giving an acceptance speech after being endorsed by the Klu Klux Klan doesn’t it?

“I do think that one of the ironies of the last two or three weeks was this idea
that somehow Michelle and I are elitist, pointy-headed intellectual types. I
filled up my own gas tanks.” —Barack Obama

This has got to be my favorite quote of the past several weeks. Every time I read this, I picture the movie “Big Daddy” starring Adam Sandler, and the part of the movie where the social worker is dragging the little kid from Adam Sandler’s apartment and the little kid is crying, “But I wipe my own [butt], I wipe my own [butt]. Be honest, you can picture it too can’t you.

Barack…..over 99.9% of driving Americans do the same thing at least once a week. I love how you are trying to spin this so that it disqualifies you to from being called an elitist.

Random Thoughts

I sit here reading about children whom actually brazenly beat teachers in their classrooms and principals whom turn a deaf ear. I read about a homeless woman that boards a bus with her boyfriend, and the only crime they did was sit down in a seat in front of a bunch of middle school children, the children not only taunted her and the boyfriend, but beat her almost to death, in a fight that spilled out onto the street. I read about a police officer that was in the midst of filing a lawsuit against the City of Baltimore, and only to find out later that they intended to blackmail him into dropping the case by threatening to charge him with a fraudulent rape. I read about a Governor of Maryland who has a grudge against the Maryland Superintendent of Schools because she made him look the fool on a subject that only served the best interests of the children, and after an announcement that she was one of the top 3 in the nation, he stopped all legal ranglings to have her publicly tarred, feathered, and fired. I read about meter maids who issue parking tickets to people whose cars are in two places at once, or people who don’t even live in the state any longer. I read about a local politician whose ticket for failure to obey a police officer because they told her she couldn’t turn there, mysteriously disappeared, while everybody else’s ticket stood. I read about a senator who has served in that position for 21 years, who thinks that “pork barrel” money is just some magical well that she may dip into at anytime to fund a project that she personally thinks worthy, not once considering that the money she is using comes from taxes. I read about police officers and firemen who go without raises while the Governor of MD. Forms a committee on “Global Warming,” when he can’t so much as stop the pollution emitted from the Jones Falls into the Chesapeake Bay. I read about how the Governor of MD. Decries about a “structural deficit” of 1.7 billion dollars and hopes that the citizens don’t figure out the true meaning of the term has to do with finding money for plans HE intends to institute. I read about how Constellation Energy exports almost 100% of the electric output from the nuclear power plant at Calvert Cliffs, out of state because the markets are more “lucrative there,” sticking us with the higher priced coal burning plants for our in state energy needs. I read about how the increase in state sales tax to 6% in MD has basically signed a death warrant to any retailer that borders Delaware whose tax is 0%. I read about how government high tech jobs are coming to the state and we have to build more infrastructure, and yet people are leaving our state in record numbers, which rival the new numbers that are coming. I read about taxes that only affect certain groups, the latest being a tax on the highest wage earners, tobacco smokers, and then there is always the Lottery, but I digress! Once we tax only certain groups we practice a division of sorts, our politicians signaling it’s OK to dislike these people because they aren’t “like us.”

I write these things down because as just one article in the paper, it doesn’t have much of an impact. Here and right now you have read all these things together, doesn’t this infuriate you? How in the hell did we get here? The erosion of the family unit?…yes. The egotistical elitist politician?…..yes. The abuse of power?….yes. The audacity to think that the politicians “know what is best for you?”……yes. The lack of accepting responsibility?………yes. ……….

I ask you now…..just what are you going to DO about it? November is quickly approaching

Conservatism, The 4-letter word

Conservatism, The 4-letter word
By Kevin Bryant

Why is the word “conservative” treated as a four letter word in most circles? Most self-labeled “Liberals” hold some conservative beliefs even if they want to deny that fact.

Gay rights organizations are liberal based. So are most other organizations that deal with such issues as women’s rights, African American, Latino, Asian & and other ethnic groups organizations. Well over three quarters of them are liberal based, but I bet if you ask the members of these organizations if they would like to have their taxes raised by 10 to 15% over the next three years, most would say “no”. Ask those same groups if they believe they pay too much in taxes and most would say “yes”. OH MY – that is conservative thinking. Ask those same organization members if they believe that they believe that more government is the only solution to America’s problems and I would bet that over ½ would say no. That is conservative thinking…….but how could this be?

I think former Democrat Senator from Georgia, Zell Miller and former Democrat California Governor Ronald Reagan summed it up best when they both stated well over 20 years apart that they did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left them. They are two men who held on to their core values and didn’t let politics sway them from those values or their conservative beliefs. One became a republican and eventually the President of the United States. The other retired from the senate still a member of the Democratic Party.

So, as shocking as this may sound, it is possible to be a conservative and be a democrat (Joe Lieberman, Sen - .CT) Just as it is possible to be a republican and be a liberal (Chuck Hagel, Sen - NE). You never hear main stream media blasting Hagel for his liberal views but how many times has commentators and opinion writers on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, L.A. Times, Washington Post and so many others blast Lieberman for supporting John McCain for President over members of his own party.

By today’s standards of both parties, The Republican Party is almost a mirror image of the Democratic Party of the 50’s and early 60’s. The Democratic Party is what the Republican Party was in the early 20th century. Parties change platforms, party’s change their base constituents yet the values of most Americans do not change. They still believe in freedom and liberty.

I’m not a republican nor am I a democrat but I proudly state that I am a conservative.




Are you a conservative at heart? Take this little test and find out. My score was 34.
http://www.madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

An Educational Proposal

I'd like to introduce you to a past principal of mine whom happens to be a reader of this blog and happens to share very similar views that I try to promote. Articles will follow this post, as schools in the state of Maryland have become very dangerous to teach AND to learn....

An Educational Proposal
By Quinton D. Thompson

Since education has been the saga of my professional life, I am deeply saddened and thoroughly disgusted as I continue to read about the numerous physical violent incidents, which are occurring in our Baltimore City public schools. However, it is not only prevalent in the City, but also throughout our whole country where it has been reported that well over a million such incidents happened last year in our public schools.

This type of behavior cannot and must not be allowed to continue in the interest of Humanity. The punishment of suspension is certainly not the answer as the guilty ones are probably happy to be out and hit the streets. Occasionally I have noted that Dr. Andres Alonso, Superintendent of the Baltimore City public schools is taking some type of superficial action such as appealing to the public to obtain 600 volunteers to serve as stabilizing elements in the classrooms, which I believe would amount to nothing more than serving as an act of appeasement to the City. There is certainly no such maneuver "as a quick fix" in the profession of education.

Therefore, I would like to submit a proposal. It is quite complicated and involved, and no doubt would take several years to reach maturation. If successfully implemented every child under the age of 17 would have to be enrolled in an educational program.

It is my opinion that the education of every youth in our nation is absolutely necessary for this country's survival as the most powerful nation in the world. At present we are definitely not measuring up to this label because we are not educating an adequate number of individuals to fill the professional and vocational positions necessary for our country to operate effectively. At present we are importing many foreign professionals to serve in the medical and educational areas and recently it was reported that there are not even enough factory workers available. This is an absolute disgrace to our society.

Needed in my proposal:

1. A legal framework must be prepared and approved by the authorities along with the criteria for addressing all school children who have been guilty of unacceptable behavior, such as physically attacking their teachers in the classrooms and attempted gang rape within the school, school drop-outs age 17 and under, and gang members of school age who are involved in attacking school children on their way to and from school, should all be considered for assignment to a special rehabilitation and educational center. However, the contemporary drop-outs should be given the opportunity to re-enroll in school and the ones who refuse should then be assigned to the rehab/ed center.

2. Select a facility such as The Charles H. Hickey complex or the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center on Gay Street, providing for separate dormitories for males and females, spaces for classrooms, academic material and equipment, activities, athletics, entertainment, qualified educational personnel, health facilities and quarters for employees.

3. Seek assistance in the establishment of an educational program to serve in these complexs from the Baltimore City and State Departments of Education, local colleges and universities and other community organizations such as The Living Classroom Foundation, all working in conjunction with the Juvenile Justice System with emphasis on respect and self-discipline.

4. However since, unfortunately, the track records of the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system and other appointed security agencies have not been successful in the operation of juvenile centers in the past, this proposed rehabilitation/education program should be under the supervision of a strong, firm, demanding and respected organization such as the Maryland State Police Department with assistance as needed from The Maryland National Guard.

5. Other components that would need addressing are; uniforms, communication privileges including - mail, phone calls, e-mails, and visitation privileges by relatives and friends and off campus visiting.

6. Goals: Students would hopefully develop a better sense of self-discipline and a more positive attitude which would enable them to become respectful & respected members of our society, earn a high school diploma, and if able apply for admission to an institution of higher learning hopefully with scholarship aid, enlist in the military, or become engaged in a meaningful vocation.

True it would all take considerable long range planning requiring many years for full maturation. It would indeed be a complicated endeavor and very expensive, including additional public school buildings and the training of many more educators and most important increasing their salaries comparable to other professions. In my opinion society has a definite responsibility to salvage the lives of these young confused and troubled youth and in addition the school age drop-outs, not only in their interest but also in the interest and welfare of all citizens. The guilty ones should not be left on the streets to struggle for survival and then become involved with illegal drugs and crimes, soon "graduating" into full-fledged hardened criminals which in the long run would probably amount to considerably more of an emotional and financial burden to the local, state and federal governments than would the establishment of this proposed rehabilitation/educational program.

What a coup this would be for Baltimore City and the State of Maryland if the authorities would join their ideas, efforts and political hands and convince our society, what most would consider the impossible, could indeed be achieved in the interest of Mankind; and then in turn would hopefully stimulate and initiate similar actions in the other states of our United States.

Quinton D Thompson:
(Retired former Head of the Independent McDonogh Middle School located near Owings Mills, MD., with thirty–two years of service in that position.
Retired Naval Reserve Naval Officer with eight years of active service, five during WWII over two of which were in the Pacific aboard the aircraft carrier, The USS Enterprise and then recalled for three more years during the Korean Conflict.)

No ObamaNation Part 3: Another Marx brother

No ObamaNation Part 3: Another Marx brother
By Mark Alexander
After her Pennsylvania primary victory, Hillary Rodham Clinton is still swinging, but unless she can win 60 percent of delegates in the remaining primaries (unlikely) and turn more than half of the remaining superdelegates her way prior to the convention, her bid is done.
The Democrats are thus stuck with Obama, the handpicked protègè of UberLeftist Demo-gogues Jean-Francois Kerry and Teddy Kennedy.
Obama fever is now breaking among moderate Democrats, reducing the odds that he can beat John McCain in the general election, but if the Democrat National Committee takes action to derail his campaign, the party would implode.
At this point, the Demo elite are prepared to sacrifice the presidency knowing that their majorities in the House and Senate will still carry water for their constituencies of “useful idiots.” But given Obama’s mesmerizing effect on the proletariat, he may be down but certainly not out.
Barack Obama is the most radical Leftist to ever make it this far in a presidential primary. In Part 2 of this series, “Disciple of Hate,” I summarized the influence of his religious mentor for the last two decades, black supremacist Jeremiah Wright.
This week’s essay will provide insight into Obama’s political mentors, all protagonists of Marxist-inspired anti-American movements. If a man can be judged by the company he keeps, Obama should be judged harshly. He may be a “closet smoker,” but as more of his mentors are smoked out of his closet, it becomes increasingly clear that Obama is just another traitorous Leftist posing as an all-American.
For starters, consider Obama’s friends and neighbors, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Ayers and Dohrn were leaders of the Weather Underground, a violent group of radical Leftovers from the Revolutionary Youth Movement, a wing of Students for a Democratic Society. Ayers and Dohrn split from the Maoist RYM, insisting that a revolution against the United States and capitalists everywhere should commence immediately.
In 1969, Ayers and Dohrn were founding signatories of the Weathermen’s declaration of unification with the “Black Liberation Movement” and other “anti-colonial” vanguards, to ensure “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world Communism.”
In 1970 the Weather Underground issued a “Declaration of a State of War” against the United States and commenced a campaign of terror including bombings, jailbreaks, and the instigation of riots. Between 1969 and 1975, they bombed the U.S. Capitol twice, the Pentagon, the Department of State and several federal courthouses. They also attacked state and local government buildings and “capitalist targets” such as banks. The terrorist organization began to disband after the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and the fall of Saigon, though one of their last acts of violence was a Brinks robbery in 1981, in which two police officers and a security guard were murdered during that robbery.
Ayers and Dohrn scurried underground in 1970, after a bomb being constructed in New York to kill Army officers at Fort Dix detonated prematurely, killing three fellow Weathermen. (In the jargon of bomb technicians and investigators, this is known as “self solving.”)
They surrendered to authorities a decade later but were never prosecuted because of “improper” FBI surveillance methods. Ayers is now a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Dohrn is an associate professor of law at Northwestern University. Isn’t that special.
Asked about his association with Ayers, Obama said, “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood... who I know... He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” So, he only exchanges ideas with him on an irregular basis?
Obama added the disclaimer that he was only eight years old when Ayers was bombing buildings. However, Obama was 40 when an unrepentant Ayers told The New York Times, “I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.” (No small irony that interview was published on 11 September 2001.)
For her part, Dohrn once offered the following assessment of the Manson family murders: “Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into [pregnant actress Sharon Tate’s] stomach! Wild!”
Nonetheless, Obama has maintained his association with Ayers and Dohrn, and the connection goes quite a bit deeper than just neighborhood proximity.
Ayers and Dohrn actually hosted the party to launch Obama’s successful 1996 Illinois State Senate campaign at their fashionable Hyde Park home, a campaign endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America. Incidentally, the DSA would later note in a newsletter that State Senator Obama gave the eulogy for socialist Saul Mendelson, a “champion” of the “democratic left.”
Obama and Ayers also served together on the Woods Fund board, which, incidentally, awarded $6,000 to Obama’s “pastor,” Jeremiah Wright, noting the grant was “in recognition of Barack Obama’s contributions to Woods Fund as a director.” This is the same board that supports such anti-Semitic organizations as the Arab-American Action Network.
A more in-depth look at Obama reveals he may indeed be a “hard-core academic Marxist” as accused by his 2004 Senate campaign opponent, and sacrificial lamb, Alan Keyes.
Obama admits to having attended “socialist conferences” as a “community organizer” in Chicago in the late 1980s, where he broke bread with Democratic Socialists of America lefties—also with full-circle connections to William Ayers.
But that is hardly the extent of Obama’s fascination with Marxist ideology.
According to my colleague, Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media editor and president of the UN watchdog group America’s Survival, Obama was mentored for most of his formative years by black radical Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA member. Obama had “a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis,” writes Kincaid.
In his book, Dreams from My Father, Obama refers to “Frank” repeatedly, and said that Davis “and his old Black Power dashiki self” was still mentoring him as late as 1979, when he was a student in California. Davis warned Obama that college would give him “an advanced degree in compromise” and not to “start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that s**t.”
Kincaid notes that a CPUSA devotee recently said of Obama’s political fortunes, “Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.”
Obama’s record speaks for itself. In 2006, Senator Obama campaigned for the re-election of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who openly lists his party affiliation as “Socialist.” Sanders applauded freshman Sen. Obama as “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” and understandably so. Last year, National Journal, which rates members of Congress strictly by their voting records, ranked Obama as the single most liberal member of the Senate—a remarkable “achievement,” given the Socialist bona fides of the aforementioned Sanders.
When questioned why he refuses to wear an American flag on his lapel, Obama said, “I won’t wear it on my chest. It’s a substitute for... true patriotism. You show your patriotism by being true to our values and ideals.”
No doubt, the true colors of Obama’s “values and ideals” are bright red.

reprinted from the Patriot Post (PatriotPost.us)

Jesus save me from my friends

On the heels of yet ANOTHER statement from Barack Obama about Reverend Jeremiah Wright, when he threw his ex-pastor under the bus, saying that Rev Wright wasn’t the same man he knew 20 years ago. Obama has now lauded the Pastor to receive the heir apparent “senior pastor” title to the Trinity United Church of Christ, Rev. Otis Moss III, son of an “advisor” to Martin Luther King. Barack has admitted to the news media that his association To Rev Wright as being a real “Presidential issue,” and up for debate, and yet his endorsement for Otis Moss III has been…. “While slamming Wright this week, Obama told the New York Times he will continue his membership in Trinity. He referred to Moss as "wonderful." "Well, you know, the new pastor – the young pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, is a wonderful young pastor. And as I said, I still very much value the Trinity community."
When interviewed, Moss refused to discount the past senior pastor Wright’s views on AIDS and HIV, and actually reinforced them. The 37 yr old pastor has had sermons entitled “ Don’t let the enemy tell you how to act,” and “Being Black- a skin disease.”

Barack Obama can’t say he hasn’t heard this pastor’s sermons, and yet the new pastor re-enforces the past sentiments of Rev. Wright, as being the oppressed race. Senator Obama has based his Presidential race as being that of bringing the races together, and yet almost all the people that surround him support the idea of not only segregation, but militant black victimization of apartheid.

I take exception to this idea, although the more militant black churches blame white America for their troubles because of the slavery issue, white America understands the history, but yet America has put into place “affirmative action” way before Africa ever made a political stand one way or the other against apartheid. The beginnings of our stand against slavery, and the support of equality started in 1865, although the institutions of law weren’t really realized until the 1960’s it was decades before African nations started their stand on apartheid. America in general can only apologize so many times for slavery, when will “Black America” accept the responsibility for the past 50 years of failure for their own children? Koreans, Vietnamese, and most all legal immigrants have succeeded in spite of their adversities, in far less time……….why not Black America?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=63153

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfRKRv0Iog&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUOwVgSuTLs&feature=related

Propoganda

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” – Adolf Hitler

Raise your hand if you believe that Global Warming is 100% man made.

Raise your hand if you believe that Barrack Obama is through with Rev. Wright.

Raise your hand if you believe Illegal Immigration is good for America.

Raise your hand if you believe that adding an $18 billion dollar tax on oil companies will not be passed on to the consumer.

Raise you hand if you believe that Al Qaeda was not in Iraq until we sent troops there.

Raise you hand if you believe that government run health care is the way to go.

Raise your hand if you believe that government bailing out those who have bad credit and bought houses that they could not afford with adjustable rate mortgages is a good thing.

Raise you hand if you believe that cutting the interest rate is good for the economy.

If you raised your hand even once for any of those, then you are a victim of a multi-million dollar propaganda ad campaign designed to get you to believe something that just isn’t so. Career politicians over the years have learned many tricks and spent countless dollars to get you to buy into beliefs that serve only 3 purposes.

1 To get the politician elected or re-elected

2 To better the position of the politician to appear as though he or she is serving for the common good of those of the working class who do not bother to inform themselves.

3 To advance the conversion of the United States from a free enterprise republic to a central government controlled socialist state.

Don’t feel bad if you answered honestly and raised your hand. 40 million or more Americans would do so as well if they too answered honestly to those or a whole host of other propaganda statements being repeated out there. Those statements range anywhere from public education to global warming and all point in between.

The right to vote should be classified not as a right, but a privilege. It should be the duty of all Americans to research the candidates, their stances on issues and their voting records. Voting is one of the most sacred of our duties as Americans. Don’t let mainstream media or opinions of others sway you one way or the other. Be informed & base your vote on sound reasoning. Propaganda leads the masses to follow the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Castro. Don’t let that happen here in America.

Kevin Bryant

No ObamaNation Part 2: Disciple of Hate

No ObamaNation Part 2: Disciple of Hate
By Mark Alexander
(Part 2 of 3 on Barack Hussein Obama)
Part One of this series, “Barack who?”, provided insights into how Obama’s tragic childhood formed the pathological foundation for his narcissistic ambition.
This essay examines how Afrocentric Liberation Theology and its message of hate have wedded Obama’s anger and ambition and defined his worldview. This radical belief system is, after all, a hybrid of black supremacist doctrine and “social gospel” Marxism.
In advance of the Pennsylvania primary, Obama displayed his disdain for middle America’s faith and values at a closed-door San Francisco fundraiser: “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest... it’s not surprising they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
In other words, according to Obama, their faith is a byproduct of bitterness. While this sentiment might have been a hit with the chardonnay-sipping elite of Marin County, it hasn’t played well in Peoria. Or in Pennsylvania, which holds its crucial presidential primary on 22 April.
In the parlance of psychology, this assessment would be classified as projection. Indeed, Obama’s “faith” does have bitter origins, and he assumes, errantly, that such bitterness is the root of all faith.
He also alluded to bitterness in mid-March: “We’ve got a tragic history when it comes to race in this country. We’ve got a lot of pent-up anger and bitterness... The anger is real. It is powerful, and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.”
To date, Obama has passed on charm alone, all fragrance, no substance. So little is known about Obama that when it was discovered that his mentor, the man he identifies as most influential in his life, has discipled him in Afrocentric Liberation Theology for more than 20 years, that presented an excellent opportunity to gain real insight into Barack Hussein Obama.
That mentor is Jeremiah Wright, just retired as head holy man of Trinity United Church (TUC) of radical black political theology. Wright officiated at Obama’s wedding, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, The Audacity of Hope.
So who is this mentor, this chief spiritual advisor to Obama?
Here is a portrait of Wright in his own words from the pulpit: “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government gives [black people] drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strikes law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, g*d d*** America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. G*d d*** America for treating our citizens as less than human. G*d d*** America for as long as she acts like she is god and she is supreme.”
Wright calls America “the US-KKK-A” and says the nation is “controlled by and run by rich white people. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in god. And. And-and! God! Has got! To be sick! Of this sh*t!”
“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”
Lest anyone mistake who he felt was to blame for 9/11, and who he felt deserved punishment, Wright elaborated in 2005: “White America got a wake-up call after 9/11. White America and the Western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just disappeared as the great white West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”
How did Obama respond when asked about his pastor’s false and vicious tirade? “It sounds like he was trying to be provocative,” he said.
It worked.
On Israel, Wright claims: “The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”
Perhaps that explains Hamas’ endorsement of Obama?
In December 2007, Wright presented the TUC’s “Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award” to a man who “truly epitomized greatness,” Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam and a consummate anti-Semite. “When Minister Farrakhan speaks, Black America listens,” says Wright. “His depth on analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye opening. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest.”
Recently, Wright compared Obama to Jesus, saying, “Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger.”
TUC’s mission statement, since removed from its website, noted the congregation’s “Commitment to the black values system,” or as Wright notes, “Similar to the Gospel movement in Nicaragua during the whole liberation theology movement.” The statement continues, “Commitment to the black community... black family... adherence to the black work ethic... supporting black institutions... pledging allegiance to all black leadership who have embraced the black values system.”
That is a very dark mission statement.
A current mission statement notes, “Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.”
Wright was, himself, a disciple of James Cone, one of the original champions of Black Liberation Theology, who wrote the following in his seminal work, Black Theology and Black Power: “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”
Wright quotes Cone on TUC’s website: “The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people... All white men are responsible for white oppression... Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil’.”
When asked if he would leave TUC (as if that would make everything copacetic), Obama said, “This is somebody who I have known for 20 years [who] led me to Christ. He is a biblical scholar. He is a well regarded preacher and somebody who is known for talking about the social gospel.”
In other words, “No.”
But when pressed, Obama invoked his own version of Bill Clinton’s “I didn’t inhale” defense. Indeed, after 20 years of being fed the Wright stuff, Obama said, “I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally, either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.” Yeah, right.
Clinton’s disclaimer registers much higher on the truth meter.
A prominent member of Wright’s congregation says, “He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive.”
Wright himself told The New York Times a year ago, “If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me. I said it to Barack personally, and he said ‘yeah, that might have to happen’.”
Translation: Any distance between Obama and Wright is contrived purely for political expedience. All the bitterness and hatred is seething right under the surface.
Now that Obama’s wafer-thin layer of shellac is peeling away, some moderate Demos, and more than a few superdelegates—who hitched their wagon to this most Leftwing of Lefties—are concerned that Obama is leading their party into a black hole. As they learn more, however late, about Obama’s black-nationalist and Marxist roots, they correctly see his election prospects growing dimmer.
At this point, Hillary Clinton is looking better to moderates, but her only chance to become the Demos’ nominee is to turn almost all of the superdelegates at convention, and her campaign can do that only with a bombshell.

Reprinted from the Patriot Post (Patriotpost.us)