Socialism, Not Racism - Obama Abandons Founding Fathers Dream - Global Warming
Lies Exposed With Greater Frequency - Insane Sunstein Offers Radical New Interpretation Of Constitution - Atomic Bombshell
What People Are Commenting
Socialism, Not Racism?
The crescendo of opposition against Mr. Obama has nothing to do with race. It has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that he was weaned on Marxist Socialism. He learned his lessons well, as evinced by his policies resulting in a litany of the most heinous legislation ever to come before a Congress. Such legislation is expressly designed to destroy
That is why Comrade Obama is being opposed.
We are talking about a man who shamelessly promotes the entirety of a culture-of-death and is opposed to the common good. A diabolic evil that has the country by the jugular, so extreme that he sees nothing wrong with killing babies inside their mothers' wombs or even outside of them!
We are talking about a man who is surrounded by the thick smoke of the accusation that he was never qualified to run for President in the first place. Given the army of lawyers that he has employed, Americans will never know the truth.
We are fighting WWIII. The frontlines are in our hometowns! We are all combatants in this most critical period of all of American history. Will God bless us or we deserve the damnation of the devil and his angels? The choice is ours! We must speak up now, or we will never have a chance to speak up again as the America of our founding fathers will no longer exist, due to the unchecked evil of Mr. Obama overcoming the country and, eventually, the world!
We vehemently, with every fiber of our being, oppose Mr. Obama because he is a Communist who is turning the American dream into an American nightmare by rendering the country unfit for our children, grandchildren, and future generations of Americans to live in. A country where authentic freedom to do what you ought is replaced by mandated orders to do what Mr. Obama wants under force of law!
We are not obliged to follow Obama to hell! Understand that all those who preposterously accuse us of racism for believing that God's Law takes priority over man's are wrong. We are not going to violate the First Commandment. We care about our eternity and realize we have the obligation to promote the common good, which leads ultimately to a supernatural good in a Kingdom not of this world as opposed to an earthly utopia which has been a lie since The Fall in
And with the help of God, we will prevail!
Gary L. Morella
COLUMN DU JOUR
The Democratic Party's
dream of dictatorship
John F. Gaski asserts health-care issue is just subterfuge on way to real objective
--Investor's Business Daily
By JOHN F. GASKI
Posted 09/22/2009 05:55 PM ET
By now the realization should be taking hold that the Democrats' health care plan has been exposed as a hoax. And it was the Democrats themselves who discredited and exposed it, but in a very ironic way. Of course, you won't hear this bombshell news reported by Democrat partisans Katie Couric, Charles Gibson and Brian Williams.
As for the substance, remember the Democrats' original rationale for their national health care takeover scheme? They wanted all uninsured Americans to be covered, right? Remember?
But now they concede that their mega-upheaval of a plan would still leave about 15 million without medical insurance. Yet they still advocate the plan! Why?
First, a digression: Don't believe that "47 million uninsured" number. That canard is beyond a hoax. It is a fraud and a lie.
For example, it includes at least 10 million illegal aliens (yes, that is the right term for those who enter our country by violating American law) and an additional five million or so legal foreign residents. Those categories are not "uninsured Americans" because they are not Americans.
The notorious 47 million also includes millions of wealthy people who do not purchase medical insurance — rendering themselves self-insured, not uninsured.
The biggest deceptions of all may be counting a large cohort of the young and vigorous who make the rational cost/benefit decision not to buy medical insurance yet, and several million others who qualify for free insurance and just don't bother to sign up!
Bottom line, subtract out the un-uninsured and other inapplicable categories and the true number of Americans without health insurance is somewhere around 7 million, maybe 10 million conservatively (compared with 15 million after Democrat "reform"?). Google the issue for about 10 minutes to verify.
Another way the Democrats inadvertently reveal their own national health insurance dishonesty is through infidelity to a second objective — cost control.
Remember that one? They are hoping you don't, especially since the Congressional Budget Office has reported that the Obama-Democrat scheme would add $1 trillion to the national health tab over the next decade. Yet the Dems still want their plan. Why?
Why, indeed? It must be something else, therefore. If their own action undermines their stated aims, and still they desperately favor the action, then the Democrats' real purpose must be something different, something they will not reveal. But what? Simple:
Have you noticed how the Washington Democrats like to take control of things, particularly big things in the economy such as the major banks and the auto industry, as well as health care?
(Obama has realized he doesn't have to literally own the banks to control them. He can, instead, achieve control through bank dependence on TARP money and through his own coercion and intimidation. Step out of line, that is, and a bank will be publicly vilified by Barney Frank and other operatives, and maybe even have its executives prosecuted.)
When American business, American jobs and the American people become totally dependent on Obama and the Democrats for money and credit, including student loans for good measure, how much power will that give the Obama Democrats over our country?
The portrait coming into focus is one of either totalitarian socialism or an unholy socialist hybrid with fascism. And when you are dependent on the decision of a Democrat bureaucrat for crucial medical treatment, how much power does that give the Democrats over you?
(Do you suppose party registration or political contributions might enter the bureaucrats' calculus? Recall how, in the GM reorganization, the Dems axed profitable dealers who were known to be Republican.)
When the Democrats achieve literal death-grip power over the lives of all our people, that is when they also achieve their long-cherished dream of absolute power and a Democrat dictatorship.
Dictatorship in a virtual one-party state is the correct forecast because our present rulers can never be voted out of national power after they grant amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens, who would promptly be registered as mostly Democrat voters by Acorn!
Now do you see what the real scheme is? Now does it all make sense? This is not your father's Democrat party. This is also not about health care, ultimately. It's about raw political power and the long-promised socialist takeover of the
No public option, they now suggest? Don't believe it. They'll create a public option, soon to become the only option, by stealth — a kind of Fannie-Freddie co-op, because government control, in this case medical dictatorship, is an article of theology for the lib Dems.
We do not have a health care crisis in this country — because everyone already gets health care. It is just that some rely on the emergency room as their private medical services provider, so the system is inefficient and definitely too expensive overall.
We do have a health insurance problem , and a health care cost crisis, but not a national health care crisis. And both real problems are readily manageable if the Dems would only allow it.
We need to permit and foster interstate insurance competition, medical savings accounts and tort reform to help reduce costs, and tax credits for health insurance purchase to expand coverage — from about 98% of the population, in reality, to closer to 100%. Those numbers also help punctuate, and puncture, the true nature of the liberal Democrats' health hoax.
Incidentally, or not, despite the Democrats' fumbling of this whole issue, the Republicans are succumbing to their opponents' red herring, straw man, jiu-jitsu diversionary misdirection on the "death panels" matter. It is not those prospective end-of-life counseling "services" that are the real death panels, although that is a fair term for them.
The real Democrat death panels would be the thousands of politically appointed bureaucrats wielding life-and-death power over our citizenry through their decisions concerning whether to bestow or withhold lifesaving treatment.
This is it,
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Obama's competing Waterloos
David Limbaugh sees prez's foreign-policy moves as damaging to him as health care
Obama's competing Waterloos
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
Sen. Jim DeMint predicted that Obamacare
would be President Barack Obama's
The Heritage Foundation reports that Obama's would produce $13 trillion in deficits over the next decade, even more than the outrageous $9 trillion previously projected. This is nation-shattering stuff, folks, and Obama and his minions remain unflappable, intent on staying the bankrupting course, sporting Alfred E. Neuman, "What, me worry?" expressions. The fact that we know they can't be that oblivious is what makes us wonder whether something more sinister lurks in their motives.
But Obama's foreign policy is shaping up to be every bit as dangerous. Because he has lived in a relatively cloistered political world – surrounded and shielded by mostly fellow leftist radicals – he apparently doesn't realize just how repugnant his appeasement policies and mantra-like derision of this nation are to most Americans.
When I first heard that he was Mirandizing al-Qaida on the , I thought it was political satire. But it wasn't, any more than his scrapping of long-range missile defense or his apparent plan to unilaterally disarm us of our weapons.
Once elected, though, Obama had to fish or cut bait on
But we now know that one line of criticism Obama and his fellow "one-worlders" constantly leveled against President Bush truly was heartfelt – as unjustified as it was: Bush alienated the world with his "unilateralist, go-it-alone" approach. Obama clearly wasn't just spewing that bilge as a political weapon. He believes it, as evidenced by his reprehensible ongoing world apology and, most recently, his already infamous speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
If you had any doubt before, you cannot reasonably have it now: Obama believes
Within the first minute of his talk, he noted approvingly that when he took , much of the world viewed
He proceeded to tell those present, a good chunk of whom hail from thugocracies, that we share common interests. Well, speak for yourself, Mr. President.
Then he bragged that he had prohibited our use of torture and ordered Gitmo closed – thereby conceding to the world the disputed and, I believe, absurd proposition that we had indeed systematically tortured and abused enemy prisoners. Next, he boasted that he had begun to withdraw troops from
Equally troubling is his intention to disarm the
One thing is clear to me: Obama either has no clue how out of touch he is with mainstream
Founding Fathers' dream
Exclusive: Alan Keyes says U.N. speech proves president doesn't understand true liberty
Obama abandons Founding Fathers' dream
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
And he said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.'"
– (Mark 7:6)
But know this, that in the last days grievous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of self … holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof.
– (Timothy 3:1, 5)
Day by day the American people are from their experience of him that we cannot Obama by his words. Much of what he says is semi-fictional, like the book that purports to be his autobiography ("Dreams From My Father"). As I read the text of the speech he gave to the U.N. General Assembly this week, it occurred to me that it deserved a similar title, and a similar description of its content. The speech included the rhetorical equivalent of his deep bow to the Saudi monarch. Only this bow signaled subservience to the majority of U.N. member – a gaggle of socialist democracies, totalitarian tyrannies, dictatorships and absolute monarchies.
In a litany more appropriate to a prime minister of this illiberal majority than to any (even alleged) president of the United States, he dutifully reported on the long list of capitulations and betrayals of U.S. friends and interests that no have no doubt produced Libyan dictator Gadhafi's satisfied verdict: "We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as a president of the United States of America." Gadhafi knows that, if Obama's self-conscious destruction of
In the key respect, the speech accurately mirrored the hollowing out of
I was, of course, especially interested in the parts of the speech that purported to reflect
… [W]e must champion those principles which ensure that governments reflect the will of the people. These principles cannot be afterthoughts – democracy and human rights are essential to achieving each of the goals that I've discussed today, because governments of the people and by the people are more likely to act in the broader interests of their own people, rather than narrow interests of those in power. The test of our will not be measured by the ability to muzzle dissent, or to intimidate and harass political opponents at . The people of the world want change. They will no longer tolerate those who are on the wrong side of .
Who could miss the echo of
Exploiting as he often does the false perception that he comes from and is especially familiar with the perspective of the black American struggle against injustice, Obama notes his "belief that no matter how dark the day may seem, transformative change can be forged by those who choose to side with justice." He purports to "pledge that America will always stand with those who stand up for their dignity and their rights – for the student who seeks to learn; the voter who demands to be heard; the innocent who longs to be free; the oppressed who yearns to be equal." But those who truly understand the transcendent source of the human claim to dignity and rights cannot but note that his words hollow. They ask themselves "What of those who cannot stand, or seek – the ones thrust out by lies, or ignorance or self-serving power, who suffer beyond longing or yearning or any human confirmation of their dignity? What of the voiceless ones, whom God intends for speech; the helpless one who by the nature He nonetheless destined for helping and hope and joy?"
Obama's lips say, "There are basic principles that are universal." But his actions and policies thrust from the universe helpless children in the womb and helpless victims like Terri Schiavo. His lips say, "There are certain self-evident truths," but instead of life and liberty, he finally offers unwavering support only for the "right of people everywhere to determine their own destiny," which means in fact to accept whatever destiny they can perceive as their own, within the limits fabricated by the manipulators of historical perception, with no regard for the better destiny to which "nature and nature's God" entitle them.
In a world where scientific advances every day confirm the emerging possibility of techniques that will allow the abusive manipulation even of human perception and consciousness, the denial of a standard for justice beyond what people can, at any given moment, determine for themselves leaves open the door to abuses of the human person more thorough and unscrupulous than history has ever known before. Slyly, with a careful eye upon the outward trappings of self-evident truth, Obama and those who ultimately help to craft his rhetoric (as Bill Ayers apparently helped to craft his semi-fictional autobiography) wean humanity from its hard won acknowledgment of the substantive authority for truth that arms conscience against the depredations of those who make the claims of knowledge (scientific and otherwise) the basis for a claim to unlimited power. Their excuse for the power grab is the good of mankind, but why should we believe their motive is any different than it has ever been for those with such ambitions – the arrogant self-worship that prides itself upon making the promise of good a successful mask for evil.
Introducing: Global governance
Introducing: Global governance
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
If there were ever a question about Barack Obama's dedication to the concept of global governance, it has now been answered fully. His track record to date points toward his commitment to global governance; his speech to the United Nations removes all doubt.
In order to fully appreciate the effectiveness of Obama's pursuit, it is necessary to have an accurate picture of what global governance really is. The picture of global governance has been deliberately camouflaged by images of black helicopters and imagined blue-helmeted U.N. forces invading nations to enforce its mandates. This is the picture of global governance that its proponents want people to see so they will not see the real events that are constructing the actual global governance.
The United Nations consists of a General Assembly, the Security Council and more than 1,300 different agencies, councils and commissions. Each of these governmental bodies is staffed by individuals who perform administrative duties dictated by the administrative hierarchy. In theory, the policies that guide the administrative hierarchy are established by the delegates from the U.N.'s 192 member nations. Keep in mind that these delegates are appointed officials of their governments.
These delegates meet in luxurious facilities and mouth platitudes and indictments, and, more often than not, eventually approve whatever agenda the administrative staff has laid before them. This is most accurately described as the "Administrator" form of government. To be absolutely clear: Global governance is a system of rules and regulations, created by an administrative hierarchy, that dictate how individuals and organizations must behave. Each nation becomes an administrative unit responsible for implementation of U.N. rules and regulations.
This is the form of global governance first envisioned by Woodrow Wilson's alter-ego, Col. Mandell , who shared his vision with the world in his book titled "Philip Dru: Administrator."
Franklin Roosevelt, who served in
It is significant that Obama quoted Roosevelt in his speech to the U.N.: "We have learned to be citizens of the world," said
Obama's actions in office are similar to
Now he has told the world that America has not only "re-engaged" the United Nations, but that America is adopting policies that accept and embrace the global governance pursued by Mandell House, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. While still a senator, Obama introduced legislation to comply with the U.N. request to increase
In his speech to the U.N., Obama promised the world that
To achieve "peace and " in the world, Obama threw Israel under the proverbial bus, demanding that Israel stop of their settlements, return to pre-1967 boundaries and provide "contiguous" territory for a Palestinian state. He forgets that
Obama promised the world that
The final "pillar" of American sovereignty Obama promised to relinquish to the U.N. is the acceptance of a "… global economy that advances opportunity for all people." The global economy envisioned by Obama is not a free-market economy. It is a managed economy, managed by government administrators, when possible, and "approved" by either appointed delegates, or a willing Democratic majority when necessary.
Pelosi's willful amnesia
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
Leftist politicians glide through their careers as though there were no Internet, no YouTube, no newspaper archives, no history books, no one worth knowing who does not agree with them.
Protected as they are by the media, they feel free to ignore the past as it happened and reconstruct it as it suits the purpose of the moment.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave remarkable witness to this willful amnesia with her hysterical – in both senses of the word – re-imagining of
"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw, I saw this myself in the late '70s in
"This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening, and it created a climate in which we (sic), violence took place."
Pelosi was implying that the 1978 murder of Harvey Milk, the gay
In reality, Milk's murder had nothing to do with anything right-wing. Indeed, left-wing violence of all sorts, the worst of it abetted by the Democratic establishment, terrorized the Bay Area from one end of the decade to the other.
For starters, Milk's killer was a Democrat, former Supervisor Dan White. In November 1978, the emotionally troubled White abruptly resigned from the Board of Supervisors.
On Milk's advice, Mayor George Moscone refused to reinstate White when he petitioned to get back on. White snapped. He shot and killed them both and promptly turned himself in. This was no historic moment. This was routine workplace violence prompted by Milk's double dealing.
After an absurdly lenient verdict – only in psycho
How far south? How about thousands of angry gay men marching down Market Street chanting "Kill Dan White" south – pretty rough rhetoric in anyone's book.
When the marchers reached City Hall, they broke windows, burned police cars and injured 61 cops. Our gay friends called their May 1979 escapade the "White Night Riot" – a cold-blooded pun on the recent Jonestown carnage.
Speaking of Jonestown, the atheist "religious leader" Jim Jones was the toast of liberal
"In my later years," Jones reflected near the end, "there wasn't a person that attended any of my meetings that did not hear me say, at one time, that I was a communist."
In the People's Republic of
After moving his flock to
Those who tell Kool-Aid jokes take note: 3-year-olds don't commit suicide. Authorities dumped the bodies of more than 250 of these children, all victims of left-wing violence, into a mass grave in
"Free at last, free at last," Jones would proselytize, "thank socialism almighty we're free at last." Socialism is exactly what these children had to thank for their final liberation.
The S.L.A. had condemned him for his "fascist" plan to introduce identification cards into
The S.L.A. fled to
Speaking of crime sprees, none in recent American history can match the grotesque and wanton murders perpetrated by the so-called "Zebra" killers in mid-'70s San Francisco and hushed up by a complicit media.
The self-described "Death Angels," a rogue auxiliary of Farrakhan's Nation of Islam, killed as many as 71 white Californians. Leadership gave extra points, literally, for the murder – often preceded by rape, torture and dismemberment – of white women and children. Look it up.
Speaking of the
The culprits? As WND recently reported, the evidence is "mounting" that Mrs. William Ayers, Weatherwoman Bernadine Dohrn, was responsible.
Pelosi was advancing her career in
If she were anything like her fellow Dems, Pelosi would have befriended Jones, ignored his communism, buried his crimes, suppressed all talk of the Zebra killings, sucked up to Farrakhan, criticized the police for "profiling" the Zebras, hung out with the radical cop-killers, marched with the White Night rioters and wept when the S.L.A. got smoked in L.A.
Then, at the end of the day, she would blame all this madness on a non-existent right wing, a claim unchallenged by an unwittingly comical major media.
For anyone who knows San Francisco history, Pelosi's verklempt reminisce suggests too much time on the bong, the early stages of Alzheimer's, or the chronic dissembling we have come to expect from our Democratic friends.
Pelosi gives proof to the adage that those who remember the '70s in
connection of global warming, storm intensity
'We have to play by the rules of probability and the laws of random chance'
--South Carolina Radio Network
Over the past 70 years, hurricane frequency
in the Atlantic basin is up, but the strength of the storms have
remained relatively constant. Those are the conclusions of a new study
”We took a look at the record from 1851 to 2008 and we did find a lot of changes besides recent changes. For instance, we found that around 1935 the count radically increased and that was probably do to aircraft reconnaissance, being able to fly out into the ocean and see these storms.”
Also participating in the study were Michael Robbins and Colin Gallagher of Clemson along with Mississippi State University Mathematics professor Dr. QIQi ( pronounced, chi-chi) Lu.
The dog ate global warming?
The Dog Ate Global Warming
Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data have been fiddled?
By Patrick J. Michaels
Imagine if there were no reliable
records of global surface temperature. Raucous policy debates such as
cap-and-trade would have no scientific basis, Al Gore would at this point be
little more than a historical footnote, and President Obama would not be
spending this U.N. session talking up a (likely unattainable) international
climate deal in Copenhagen in December.
Steel yourself for the new reality, because the data needed to verify the gloom-and-doom warming forecasts have disappeared.
Or so it seems. Apparently, they were either lost or purged from some discarded computer. Only a very few people know what really happened, and they aren’t talking much. And what little they are saying makes no sense.
In the early 1980s, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists at the
Putting together such a record isn’t at all easy. Weather stations weren’t really designed to monitor global climate. Long-standing ones were usually established at points of commerce, which tend to grow into cities that induce spurious warming trends in their records. Trees grow up around thermometers and lower the afternoon temperature. Further, as documented by the
So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.” The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong.
Then the story changed. In June 2009, Georgia Tech’s Peter Webster told Canadian researcher Stephen McIntyre that he had requested raw data, and Jones freely gave it to him. So McIntyre promptly filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the same data. Despite having been invited by the National Academy of Sciences to present his analyses of millennial temperatures, McIntyre was told that he couldn’t have the data because he wasn’t an “academic.” So his colleague Ross McKitrick, an economist at the
Faced with a growing number of such requests, Jones refused them all, saying that there were “confidentiality” agreements regarding the data between CRU and nations that supplied the data. McIntyre’s blog readers then requested those agreements, country by country, but only a handful turned out to exist, mainly from
It’s worth noting that McKitrick and I had published papers demonstrating that the quality of land-based records is so poor that the warming trend estimated since 1979 (the first year for which we could compare those records to independent data from satellites) may have been overestimated by 50 percent. Webster, who received the CRU data, published studies linking changes in hurricane patterns to warming (while others have found otherwise).
Enter the dog that ate global warming.
Roger Pielke Jr., an esteemed professor of environmental studies at the
Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e., quality controlled and homogenized) data.
about “data storage” is balderdash. They got the records from somewhere. The
files went onto a computer. All of the original data could easily fit on the
9-inch tape drives common in the mid-1980s. I had all of the world’s surface
barometric pressure data on one such tape in 1979.
If we are to believe Jones’s note to the younger Pielke, CRU adjusted the original data and then lost or destroyed them over twenty years ago. The letter to Warwick Hughes may have been an outright lie. After all, Peter Webster received some of the data this year. So the question remains: What was destroyed or lost, when was it destroyed or lost, and why?
All of this is much more than an academic spat. It now appears likely that the U.S. Senate will drop cap-and-trade climate legislation from its docket this fall — whereupon the Obama Environmental Protection Agency is going to step in and issue regulations on carbon-dioxide emissions. Unlike a law, which can’t be challenged on a scientific basis, a regulation can. If there are no data, there’s no science.
Inhofe going to climate summit as
1-man truth squad
- 09/23/09 11:54 AM ET
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said
Wednesday he would travel to this fall's climate change summit in
A noted skeptic of global warming, Inhofe pledged to present "another view" on climate change during the December summit to hash out an international climate change agreement.
"I'm going to go ahead an announce now that I'm going to go to
Inhofe noted that he attended a similar climate change summit in
"I was the only voice there that was saying that there was another view on this," he said. "So I decided to do the same thing now. It's been six years; it's time to go back."
The Oklahoma Republican has long called global warming science a "hoax," and has repeatedly warned that regulatory schemes to abate carbon and other polluting emissions would be excessively harmful to the economy. He said Wednesday on C-SPAN that passing the current cap-and-trade bills before Congress would result in a tax and be a "ludicrous" idea.
Watch the video of Inhofe's comments below:
Democrats 'thumbing their nose' at Americans
GOP's Vitter slams refusal to give public 72 hours to examine Senate bill
Sunstein: Fetuses 'use' women,
abortion limits 'troublesome'
Obama regulatory chief offers radical
new interpretation of Constitution
Sunstein: Fetuses 'use' women, abortion limits 'troublesome'
Obama regulatory chief offers radical new interpretation of Constitution
Posted: September 25,
12:45 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
"A restriction on access to abortion turns women's reproductive capacities into something to be used by fetuses. ... Legal and social control of women's sexual and reproductive capacities has been a principal historical source of sexual inequality," Sunstein wrote in his 1993 book "The Partial Constitution."
In the book, obtained and reviewed by WND, Sunstein sets forth a radical new interpretation of the Constitution. In one chapter, titled "Pornography, abortion, surrogacy," Sunstein argued against restrictions on abortion and pornography.
"Restrictions on abortion, surrogacy and free availability of pornography are troublesome," he wrote.
"I do not mean to oppose equality to liberty. ...
Sunstein's views on fetuses are not limited to his 1993 book.
WND reported earlier this month that in a 2003 book review, Sunstein argued there is no moral concern regarding cloning human beings since human embryos, which develop into a baby, are "only a handful of cells."
In addition to Sunstein's moral disregard for human embryos, WND reported the Obama czar several times has quoted approvingly from an author who likened animals to slaves and argued an adult dog or a horse is more rational than a human infant and should, therefore, be granted similar rights.
A brief video on YouTube captures Sunstein at a 2002 event using the writings of Jeremy Bentham, a 19th century social reformer and animal-rights pioneer.
"You've heard a reference to Bentham, so let's listen to him, shall we," he begins in the video.
He then quotes from Bentham's 1789 primer, "Introduction to Principals of Morals and Legislation," written just after slaves had been freed by the French but were still held captive in the British dominions:
"The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor," Sunstein states, quoting Bentham.
Sunstein continues quoting the author: "A full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month, old. But suppose the case were otherwise."
The rest of Bentham's sentence, not captured in the video, continued, "what would it avail? The question is not, can they (animals) reason or can they talk? But, can they suffer?"
While the YouTube video offers only a brief sound bite with no context, a WND review of Sunstein's academic writings find he used the same verses from Bentham to push for animal rights.
In the footnotes to a 2002 academic paper for
"I suggest that Bentham and Mill were not wrong to offer an analogy between current uses of animals and human slavery," he wrote.
Several other works by Sunstein, including his books, quote approvingly of Bentham's statements comparing adult dogs and horses to human infants.
In the Harvard paper, Sunstein even suggests animals could be granted the right to sue humans in court.
"We could even grant animals a right to bring suit without insisting that animals are in some general sense 'persons,' or that they are not property," he wrote.
The Senate two weeks ago confirmed Sunstein as Obama's administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, overcoming months of delay due to Republican concerns that he would push a radical animal-rights agenda.
- September 24, 2009
Those at the
By now you've heard the consistent crooning from a bit of video making its way across the talk radio airwaves, television screens and, of course, the Web and FOXNews.com's "Strategy Room."
The presentation being replayed again and again is of a classroom of students in
Several personal phone calls to the school's administrative office this morning have produced the following results.
1. The school refuses to acknowledge that the
events on the tape even occurred.
2. They refuse to admit whether or not information concerning the activity, and the right of a family or child to opt out of it, was made available.
3. They refuse to admit whether or not the children were offered other options, as opposed to being forced to memorize the words, "Hello, Mr. President, we honor you today! For all your great accomplishments we all do say "hooray!" Hooray, Mr. President, you're number one!
4. But the spokesperson I talked with at B. Bernice Elementary school did say the school was aware of, and considering taking actions against, the persons "who illegally taped and distributed a video recording of a private class activity."
Message to the genius public educators at
You might also be mindful of the fact that as a public school, your accountability is to the people of your district.
Obviously no conspiracy is at work here. The source of the video recording is easy to narrow down -- this isn't an ACORN style sting operation. This was likely made by a parent, someone either proud or concerned, who taped the children singing. They were most likely in plain sight of the teacher and the children in attendance. This is their right as a tax-paying parent.
But to the geniuses at B. Bernice elementary school, I want to further add that you might also be mindful that parents do have a say in what you do or do not expose their children to in your attempt to "educate" them. In fact it might be more helpful for everyone if you would stick to teaching 4-6 year olds that "2+2=4," that "A-n-d is "and'," and that "yellow and blue make green."
There is a reason we do not allow kindergarteners in this nation to cast votes in elections. Political philosopohy, worldview, and worship of dieties are something they have not yet quite gotten a handle on.
Raising hands of praise to President Obama's "accomplishments" is not just inappropriate it's entirely premature.
Those at the
But what do I know? After all, I'm just a tax-paying parent.
Friday 25th September 2009
As the 10th anniversary of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising’s tragic murder and rape by two homosexuals approaches, the young boy remains victim of a second burial – by the American media.
10 years later: Media bury Jesse Dirkhising
Press focuses on Shepard death, ignores homosexuals’ brutal murder of boy
Web News WorldNetDaily
As the 10th anniversary of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising’s tragic murder and rape by two homosexuals approaches, the young boy remains victim of a second burial – by the American media.
The press is still buzzing about the murder of Matthew Shepard – an adult homosexual brutally murdered in Wyoming by heterosexuals – and his mother’s newly released memoir, "The Meaning of Matthew: My Son’s Murder in Laramie, and a World Transformed" describing the gory details of her son’s murder in a descriptive narrative. Shepherd’s parents have been lobbying for a hate-crimes bill since the murder.
USA Today reported "The Laramie Project – 10 Years Later" will debut in more than 100 theaters in all 50 states and seven countries Oct. 12, the 11th anniversary of Shepard’s death, in an effort to raise awareness about "hate crimes." NBC aired a drama, "The Matthew Shepard Story," in June 2006.
But, even on the anniversary of his death, another boy’s horrific murder continues to be largely ignored – with no plays, books or TV dramas to honor his memory. No local memorials have been held since Dirkhising’s brutal death at the hands of two homosexual predators who confessed to using the boy as a sex toy while torturing him to death.
And even though the case received a flurry of publicity after first being brought to the attention of the nation in WorldNetDaily, the number of articles written pale in comparison to those written about the murder of Matthew Shepherd.
Dirkhising was found by police unconscious on the floor of a Prairie Grove, Ark. residence around 5 a.m. Sept. 26, 1999. The boy had suffocated to death during the early morning hours, after being bound, drugged, gagged and brutally sodomized by Davis Don Carpenter, then 38, and Joshua Macabe Brown, then 22, at the men’s apartment in
Police determined Dirkhising had been repeatedly raped over a period of hours, including with foreign objects, by Brown and Carpenter.
Police also said Dirkhising had been blindfolded and tied to a mattress in the residence, and also had possibly been drugged during the ordeal. And authorities said after the last rape he was left bound and gagged while his attackers ate a sandwich. He died of suffocation, a coroner’s report found.
Carpenter, whom police say orchestrated the attack, pleaded guilty and received a sentence of life in prison. Prosecutors had sought the death penalty in the case. As WND reported in Sept. 2003, the Arkansas Supreme Court upheld a 25-year sentence for Brown.
News of the Dirkhising case was surprisingly muted throughout the country, perhaps because it involved a homosexual crime, said WND readers, who voted it one of the most spiked stories of 1999.
A Google News search for the month of September 2009 alone shows more than 100 stories for Shepard and only one brief mention of the anniversary Jesse’s death.
JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S
Obama to Congress: Forget it!
President 'disregards' missile defense mandate
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Editor's Note: The following report is excerpted from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium online published by the founder of WND. Subscriptions are $99 a year or, for monthly trials, just $9.95 per month for credit card users, and provide instant access for the complete reports.
President Obama's decision to cancel a plan to deploy defensive missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic may have put him at odds with a 10-year-old requirement from Congress "to deploy as soon as technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense,"according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
The Bush administration sought to deploy ground-based interceptors in
The goal of the Bush administration missile defense system was to "defend (
In doing its analysis of various missile defense options, the CBO looked at three approaches in addition to the Bush administration's proposal.
The alternatives included the sea-based system which the Obama administration now has selected, missile defenses located in
The CBO concluded the Bush administration proposal was preferable to the three alternative solutions. In fact, the Kinetic Interceptors weren't even an option during the latest round of consideration since it was cut from the Pentagon's missile defense budget earlier this year.
"(The Missile Defense Agency's) proposed system would complement the coverage already available from U.S.-based interceptors by providing redundant defense from a third interceptor site for all of the continental
"Deploying Kinetic Energy Interceptors would add defense from a third redundant interceptor site for about 75 percent of the
In effect, the proposed Obama administration sea-based approach offered the least protection as compared to the Bush administration proposal, and it was more expensive, since there would be added costs for specially equipped ships. In addition, it will take more time to deploy.
"This is some evidence that has been floated. It hasn't been validated yet, it's very preliminary," cautioned Dr. Don Low, microbiologist-in-chief at
"This is obviously important data to help guide policy decisions. How can we best protect people against influenza?"
It's important to validate the information, which has not been peer reviewed, to make sure it's not just a fluke, and that the observation is confirmed elsewhere such as in the Southern Hemisphere, which just completed its seasonal flu season, or in the U.S. and UK.
Four Canadian studies involved about 2,000 people, health officials told CBC News. Researchers found people who had received the seasonal flu vaccine in the past were more likely to get sick with the H1N1 virus.
Researchers know that, theoretically, when people are exposed to bacteria or a virus, it can stimulate the immune system to create antibodies that facilitate the entry of another strain of the virus or disease. Dengue fever is one example, Low said.
The latest finding raises questions about the order in which to get flu shots.
The main reason is that H1N1 may be the dominant strain of influenza circulating when the fall flu season hits, meaning it could be a waste of time and resources to mount a seasonal flu vaccine campaign.
Health authorities in
The Public Health Agency of Canada says it's up to provinces and territories to decide on when to roll out flu shots.
"We don't know with this year's flu shot how it interacts with the pandemic flu shot, so it's a worry," said Dr. Michael Gardam, director of infectious diseases prevention and control at the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion.
"It makes the decision-making a lot more complex," Dr. Perry Kendall, B.C.'s provincial health officer, said in
In Thornhill, Ont., Melissa Cass, who usually gets an annual flu shot to protect herself, had been planning to get one this year for her one-year-old daughter, Aliya, as well.
"You have a baby, you sort of want to protect them from everything possible. So if you can protect them from some things, why not?" Cass said.
But this year, she may not get any shots.
"If I knew that it was a risk to get H1N1, I wouldn't get any of them," she told CBC News. "I would just be as I am and just, you know, take all the precautions I possibly can for flus, and that's it."
Rare earths are vital,
Without access to unique elements, much
of modern economy will plain shut down
In fact, neodymium is the only element that can create strong permanent magnets, although engineers have tried to find a substitute, King said.
And it's a little-known fact, he added, that strong magnets "are critical to the guidance systems of every missile in the
TARP inspector: Transparency 'attitude' on bailout frustrating
'Taxpayers ... will not be told the full details of how their money is being invested'
Tylenol recalls kids' liquid medicines
20-plus products yanked due to concerns over 1 inactive ingredient
--Palm Beach Post
A VOICE OF SANITY
Wile E. Obama vs.
Road Runner Beck
Exclusive: Robert Ringer sees Fox host
capable of bringing down BHO in 2012
RETURN TO REASON
Life in the Oink Sector
Exclusive: Ilana Mercer offers jaw-dropping stats on earnings of gov't workers
Life in the Oink Sector
Posted: September 25, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
Be it the "public option" (that'll eliminate all other
options), the co-opting "co-op," or the make-believe market that is
the " exchange" – if implemented, these
euphemisms for centrally planned will mean many more bureaucracies manned
by plenty of government workers.
workers may not always be genial to the public that pays them, but they are generous to a fault with their own. In the course of providing the stellar service for which the United States Postal Service has become famous, they pay themselves sizeable salaries and bountiful benefits, and retire years before the stiffs who support them can afford to.
For the benefit of the philistine forces that religiously pray for the creation of more such bloated behemoths – Rachel Maddow does so nightly on MSNBC – here are some sobering statistics about the price of the parasitical class. They come courtesy of The Free Enterprise Nation and Business Wire:
· On average, the federal civilian wage in 2008 was $79,197, almost 50 percent greater than that of the average private-sector employee's wages of $49,935.
· Pay growth in the public sector has been much higher than growth in the private sector over the years, too. Between 2000 and 2008, wages for federal civilian workers climbed by 53.7 percent, while wages in the private sector went up 28.5 percent over the same time period.
· The average state and local government employee earns 29 percent more than the average private sector employee.
· When wages and benefits are combined, federal civilian workers averaged $119,982 in 2008, twice the average compensation of $59,909 for private sector workers. This places the value of benefits for federal civilian workers at an average of $40,000 a year, four times the value of benefits that the average private-sector employee receives.
· The majority of state workers have pension plans that allow them to retire 10 to 25 years earlier than members of the productive sector, and that provide benefits many times the retirement payout that Social Security would provide.
While gathering the data, The Free Enterprise Nation sampled (in the statistical sense) life in the Oink Sector:
A driver's education teacher in
· A citizen of Houston, Texas, pondering the curious, concomitant rise in crime and taxes, would find that the number of police officers serving the community has remained the same for six years running, despite a 40 percent budget increase to cover higher salaries, pension and health-care benefits.
In another state, Free Enterprise Nation researchers discover that teachers retired at over $100,000 a year after 30 years of employment, with a guaranteed 3-percent increase per annum. "Only 12 percent of retirees from the private sector have defined benefit pensions to supplement their Social ." The average annual pension of a private-enterprise employee is $13,083.
These serfs of the state are not eligible for full Social Security benefits until their late 60s.
Early this year, still in the midst of an economic depression, the awarded a 2.9 percent raise to every federal worker and a 5.9 percent raise to every retiree.
The average worker in the
The number of government workers is increasing and is projected to continue on this trajectory.
As invasive as the Kudzu vine, government added over half a million workers in the second quarter of 2009, as the private sector shed more than a million. Servant of the State Ms. Maddow will have to bear with Barack's steps. Yes, Bush set an ambitious pace for the growth of government, but before she knows it – and well before his term is over – Obama will have bumped up the current federal workforce considerably.
Over and above these mind-numbing numbers, it's crucial to comprehend the underlying principles that permit in one sphere (the public sector) what they prohibit in the other (the private sector).
In the private sector, a worker is to be paid for his productivity. If he were overpaid – in other words, remunerated more than he produces – the proprietor would go belly up. No business means no jobs.
Set aside the question of whether productivity – output per unit of labor – is the appropriate gauge in an enterprise – government – that confiscates and distributes wealth, but produces nothing.
Understand this: Backed by the power of the State, the sponger sector has unlimited access to income not its own – it has the power to tax, borrow and mint money out of thin air. With such usurped authority, why would public that runs to the trillions deter the ongoing orgy?
By the standards of honest, if unorthodox, , government workers, moreover, don't pay taxes, but are paid out of taxes. In other words, they pay taxes out of money confiscated from taxpayers, who, in turn, pay taxes twice: on their own income and on the income of members of the bureaucracy.
At the very least, this should disqualify state workers from voting.
In any event, if you are a private-sector sucker plumping for a panoply of new government programs, consider the following: The more of them there are, the fewer of you there will be. Think zero-sum, or parasite vs. host. The first is sucking the lifeblood of the second. The larger the parasite gets, the weaker the host will grow.
Our 'Jericho' Future
Chuck Baldwin on hyperinflation and nuclear war.
face it: most Americans live in a world of false security. This is somewhat
understandable, given the fact that the majority of the
Modern living within the world's only "superpower" has created a giant unsuspecting, soft, lackadaisical, and lethargic society. We expect the government to keep our streets safe, our roads paved, our stores stocked, our jobs secure, and our enemies at bay. However, in the desire to make government the panacea for all our problems, we have sold not only our independence, but also our virtue.
Where the federal government was contracted (via the U.S. Constitution) to accept limited power for the overall good of both states and people, it has become a monster of gargantuan proportions, claiming authority over virtually every liberty and right known to man. And in the process, it decided it didn't need God, either.
It is no hyperbole to say that the
Although the comfortable, sports-crazed, TV addicts probably aren't paying attention, this country is on the verge of an implosion like you cannot believe. For anyone who cares to notice, the signs are everywhere.
First of all,
It is estimated that
Third, the paranoia regarding the Swine Flu being demonstrated by both government and media spokesmen begs a giant push for some type of "government solution." If they keep hyping this "pandemic," mass hysteria and fear (created by the government and its lackeys in the media) will result. This would, no doubt, necessitate some form of forced vaccination, quarantine (maybe this is what all those internment camps will be used for), and martial law.
Exactly how and when all of the above will actually materialize is yet to be seen. There is no doubt in my mind, however, that within the next few months, the world that we know today is going to vanish. And most Americans are totally unprepared for what's coming.
If you are able to get out of debt, do it. If you need to scale down your lifestyle in order to be better prepared for difficult days, do it. If you don't have guns and ammo, buy them. If you have not prepared some sort of preserved food pantry, do it. If you don't have some kind of survival plan in place for you and your family, get one. If you are not physically fit, get in shape. If you are able to move to a more secure, out-of-harm's-way location, do it. (During any kind of financial or societal meltdown, urban areas will quickly turn into war zones. Can anyone say, "
Am I worried or discouraged? Absolutely not! (But I am preparing.) The potential good that may result from all of the above is that perhaps God will protect and raise up a remnant of people who would be willing to rebuild a place where Natural Law is respected, constitutional government is revered, and where a ubiquitous, loathsome, overbearing federal government is far, far away. You know, like
In the meantime, get ready. It's going to be a rocky road.