Monday, November 30, 2009

The Lowdown on The Weathermen

A look into the communist revolutionary Weatherman organization, and two of its leaders, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Barrack Hussein Obama and Radical Michelle Obama became close friends and worked with the Despicable Ayers & Loathsome Dohrn.
Would any of these Marxist or the Czars be allowed near the White House when Reagan or Bush was President. Have we sunk this low, so fast?
You must punish these Marxist at the Polls in 2010!

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 29, 2009

Tempers Flare At Anti-War Rally At Travis AFB

Below is a story on the Code-Pink Thugs. I experienced some of these Commies who play the role of "Community Organizer/Victim". They are Radical Marxist just like their leader, Barry Soetero. This Cindy Sheehan is a disgrace to America. Her poor son died for his Country and his memory is down played because his Mom wants to be a Celebrity. By the way where are all the Global Warming Nazis celebrities this week?

A Saturday rally led by anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan at Travis Air Force Base nearly ended in a brawl when a military veteran physically confronted the protesters.

Anti-war group Code Pink demonstrated at the military base Saturday morning in the first of six planned protests against unmanned military drones currently in use in overseas war zones.

Sheehan, a well-known anti-war activist whose son was killed while serving in Iraq in 2004, was leading the demonstration with a megaphone when a man dressed in a formal military uniform stepped up to her and berated her.

Videotape of the incident shows that Sheehan yelled "Get out of my face" through the megaphone at the man, who slapped the device away. Other protesters immediately joined Sheehan and traded insults with the man, and a shoving match broke out.

Military police quickly pulled the two sides apart.

The military veteran told reporters that he was upset with the anti-war protesters’ effect on troop morale. "They ruin the troops. They get to the troops. They did the same thing in Vietnam," he said.

The man declined to give his name to reporters. "I don’t want to be a personality over this, that’s not my intention," he said.

Sheehan told reporters that she was disappointed her protest against what she called "morally reprehensible" military drones was interrupted by the man.

"We are here non-violently, and he came up and shoved the megaphone into my face," she said. "I’m never going to stop, no matter how we’re oppressed."

Sheehan said she would be speaking to an attorney about legal action against the man.

Code Pink protester Xan Joy, who physically confronted the man during the incident, called the man a "bully" and said his behavior was meant to intimidate the protesters.

"He should be so happy and grateful that there are people in this country that are trying to protect him and his children and everybody’s children from war," Joy said.

The events of the day did not end when the protesters packed up and left. When part of Code Pink’s caravan paused in the middle of the road, Sheehan was given a ticket for impeding traffic.

"I got assaulted by this old man and I’m the one given a ticket. So, yeah, it’s bulls***," Sheehan said.

Several members of Code Pink said they wanted charges filed against the man in uniform, but no arrests were made.

Let’s review.

Ms. Sheehan claims the gentleman shoved the megaphone into her face, when the photographs show just the opposite.

And Code Pink protester Xan Joy, “who physically confronted the man during the incident called the man a ‘bully.’”

Usually its the physical confronter who is the bully.

But the professional harridans at Code Pink always seem to get things backwards. Their hatred for this country has twisted their minds.

"I’m never going to stop, no matter how we’re oppressed."

Cindy will never stop as long as those Chavez/Soros checks keep coming in.

After all, ‘protesting’ beats getting a real job.

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Five of the Obama Fails

A great story below on 5 of the Fails of the Messiah, B. Hussein Obama.
Sadly, "White-Guilt Ridden Drones" still follow him blindly. Though they will be put into Work Camps before they know it.
Another Fail by Obama not on the list below is his handling of Afghanistan. For him to disrespect our Troops and then take a photo op of our Fine Soldiers in caskets, is despicable!

Article below written by Adam Sparks

The Obama Administration burst onto the presidency with a historic wealth of good will, hope and change. It is now marked by one failure after another. Unfortunately, these failures are not without costs. The heavy burden is born by consumers, taxpayers and to generations yet to come. Nearly one year later we have an economy heading in the wrong direction, unemployment rising, a deficit that will double, banks failing, a war command which is virtually ignored, 911 terrorists given all the rights at a civil trial and an Administration hell bent on destroying rather than "reforming" the world's best health system. Not a bad day for an experienced community organizer.

1)Bank Bailout. The banks were bailed out to the tune of trillions of dollars with no oversight. The result: Banks continue to fail all over the country and lenders are not making any commercial loans, causing more business failures. Obama's score? Fail.

2)Auto Bailout. GM was given billions of dollars and the government hand picked its board of directors. Result, GM is still losing billions each year. A simple bankruptcy would have allowed GM to emerge with leveled books, without the need to have invested a single dime of taxpayer money.

3)Cap and Tax. This boondoggle is more commonly known by the misleading name "Cap and Trade". This scheme caps all CO2 emissions at a level 83% below the current level of emissions and further punitively taxes any additional CO2 emissions. Even the left leaning Brookings Institute study predicted dramatic job losses, particularly in certain energy industries, of between 35-40% as soon as 2025. I'm guessing this legislation was the brainchild of China, as there is no better way to encourage the few American manufacturers we still have in this country to pack up and manufacture overseas.

This discourages manufacturers from expanding their companies. Not a great idea in the midst of a global recession. This will not only be a jobs killer, it will be a huge tax to the consumers who will have this tax burden passed on to them in higher consumer costs. Trucking, flights, gas, electric and everything else that is moved or manufactured will go up in price. Obama fail.

4) Health Care reform. According to a Kaiser Foundation study, 89% of Americans are very satisfied with their current insurance plans. Creating a government subsidized plan that will now compete with private insurers is not competition at all. It will destroy private insurers until only the taxpayer subsidized government option is left standing. We all know how successful other government run programs are: Social Security: failing, Medicare: failing, post office: failing, Fannie Mae: failing, GM: failing, bank bailout plan: failing, creating more jobs after trillion in "stimulus"; failing, even the Obama touted, but poorly planned, Cash for Clunkers ran out of money unexpectedly in the first week.

Obama said he would veto any health care reform bill which added to the deficit and yet he still explains the bill that's working it way through congress will insure an extra 40 million people without a loss in quality or increasing costs. Was I the only one he saw the Wizard of Oz and the fraudulent wizard behind the curtain? "Nothing to see here." How exactly do costs for insuring an extra 40 million people not increase costs to the taxpayers? Of course they will, they'll just juggle their books and pass on added costs to both the states, by getting them to cover the cuts in Medicare, and directly to taxpayers, particularly to the younger Obama supporters, through new mandates.

Moreover, forcing insurance companies to take anyone with any pre-condition sounds populist, but what if you only bought your car insurance after you had an accident? How long will insurance companies stay in business? They won't and that's where we have another "government rescue" and another fail. Connect the dots on all of Obama's other big successes.

5) Global Warming Fail. Anthropogenic CO2 makes up about 3.2% of greenhouse gases. The New Zealand atmospheric scientist, Augie Auer, wrote that three-quarters of the earth is ocean, and 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is governed by water vapor.

"Of that remaining 5 percent, only about 3.6 percent is governed by CO2 and when you break it down even further, studies have shown that the anthropogenic (man-made) contribution to CO2 versus the natural is about 3.2 percent.

"So if you multiply the total contribution 3.6% by the man-made portion of it, 3.2%, you find out that the anthropogenic contribution of CO2 to the global greenhouse effect is 0.115 percent ... that's like .12 cents in $100. It's minuscule ... it's nothing."

Finally, the Obama administration would like to sacrifice business growth, at an astronomical cost to both the taxpayer and the consumer, while slowing down our economy further, in order to reduce our carbon emissions by 20%. But, it's not a total waste; he will be satisfying his own left wing base. Assuming the entire world cooperates with Obama's plan, which it won't, this initiative will have a negligent effect on Global Warming. Another Obama fail.
Written by Adam Sparks
Bookmark and Share

Friday, November 27, 2009

Obituary printed in the London Times

Interesting and sadly rather true.

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.

He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

- Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
- Why the early bird gets the worm;
- Life isn't always fair;
- and maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement. Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, I Want It Now, Someone Else Is To Blame, and I'm A Victim

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing
Thanks to Mr. I
Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Pastor Manning being taken down for telling the truth about Obama

This Post is in honor of Pastor Dr. James David Manning of Harlem, NY for his tireless efforts within the Patriot and Truth Movement to get out the truth about Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama, to the American people. He also has countless Youtube videos exposing the truth about our Private Federal Reserve and the banking institutions that comprise it and control the monetary and foreign policy agendas from behind the curtain. Many of his Videos are being shut down.

He is a true Patriot in this cold war of informing the American people of the truth. The fight to save our Republic and the freedoms and liberties we are all losing in America. If he is arrested for telling the truth, we owe him, to get the news out across the world.

The Truth will set you free? Martin Luther King would be ashamed of Hussein Obama. Obama wants reparations not "Equal Rights".

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Global Warming Fraud: Somebody Needs to Go to Jail

The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth has been suddenly and quite brutally exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the Internet.

Wasn't it convenient of Nobama to have his big, Hollywood dinner for a bunch of Nazi Elitists last night. Obama, Gore and Hollywood Leftist should be wearing Orange Jumpsuits today. How will Hussein Obama spin this to blame Bush?

If Obama signs the Copenhagen climate change treaty, he will sign our freedom, democracy & our prosperity away forever!

Written by Alan Caruba
The revelations that scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) doctored the data supporting the global warming claims of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) means that EVERYTHING attributed to or based upon “global warming” is invalid.

It means the Kyoto Climate Protocols that nations agreed to on December 11, 1997 and which entered into force on February 16 2005, and all subsequent agreements based on “global warming” have no validity, scientifically or as the basis for public action by any nation, state, province, city or town.

It means that Al Gore’s pusillanimous “documentary” is a fraud along with just about every other statement uttered by any scientist, academician, or politician claiming that something, anything, should be done to avoid “global warming.”

There is no “global warming”, if by that discredited term, you mean a dramatic increase in the Earth’s temperature, the vast rising of ocean levels, the melting of the polar ice caps, and the thousands of other things attributed to a massive fraud orchestrated by the IPCC and a vast network of scientists and environmental groups that benefited from the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars they received in grants and other payments for their “research.”

Global warming, allegedly the result of rising levels of “greenhouse gas emissions”, primarily carbon dioxide (C02), underwrites the sale of “carbon credits” that industries, utilities, and other entities purchased for the “right” to use energy and as further revelations about the doctoring and virtual invention of false scientific data become known, it means those sales were a complete fraud.

It was never really a secret. You could have read about in “Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don’t Want You to Know” and a dozen other books I can put my hand on this very moment. The only thing missing was the proverbial “smoking gun” and the revelations about the CRU now confirms what the “deniers” and “skeptics” kept saying.

It’s worth keeping in mind that in several Northeastern States, utilities were required by law to purchase these worthless carbon credits and spend millions, not on improvements to the electric grid, not on building more capacity to serve their customers, but on what is worthless paper.

Someone needs to go to jail
The release of thousands of emails and other data, now believed to be the work of a conscious-stricken CRU insider, will as they are examined in detail reveal what has long been known to those actively opposing the “global warming” fraud. As Christopher Horner, the author of “Red Hot Lies”, recently noted, the CRU and its lead scientists refused for years to release the data which they alleged proved that “global warming” was happening.

This data and the periodic reports of the IPCC are the basis for the existence of the IPCC, the Kyoto Protocol, and the “cap-and-trade” legislation awaiting a vote in the U.S. Congress. Horner observed “After running out of excuses, in September CRU’s Phil Jones simply claimed that he had lost the data so, sorry, no one can check it.” Horner called it “implausible beyond comprehension.”

And yet the United States and the representatives of many other nations will gather in Copenhagen in December for yet another UN conference on climate change, the now preferred synonym for “global warming.” Basing any international treaty on climate change or global warming is an utterly deceitful act.

The IPCC conference is based on the original Kyoto Protocol and, since there is no global warming, and since the science supporting it has been revealed to be false and misleading, no action should be taken other to disband the IPCC entirely.

All U.S. laws and regulations based on the so-called “global warming” should be reexamined and exorcised from the Congressional Register and from all state bodies of law. Most certainly, “cap-and-trade” should be withdrawn from further consideration.

Beyond that, school books about the environment must now be reviewed to determine how much of their content is invalid as well.

The undoing of this fraud must begin and begin NOW!
Written by Alan Caruba

Bookmark and Share

Climategate reminds us of the liberal-left's visceral loathing of open debate

Mr. Delingpole really nails the Liberal Left in England. Yet our American Liberal Nazis want to take away our Constitution and make us England Jr. With Thanksgiving upon us, isn't that enough of a reminder to the Left Wing Loons about why America was started?
Obama and his Thugs seek to destroy our Constitution, all the while leaving our Troops to hang in the wind.

Written by James Delingpole
If the argument isn’t going your way, close it down. This was ever the way of liberal-left. Criticize the European Socialist Superstate and you’re a “Little Englander”; object to wind farms spoiling your view and you’re a “NIMBY”; demand curbs on immigration and you’re “a racist”; desire better education for your kids and you’re “elitist”; question the current majority scientific view on AGW and you’re a “Denier” who deserves only to be scorned, vilified and preferably silenced.

We have seen plenty examples of that last kind of bullying in the Climategate scandal (Warmergate, as Mark Steyn has wittily christened it: damn! Wish I’d thought of that): scientists ganging up to shut scientists who disagree with them out of the peer-review process; scientists actually gloating over their opponents’ deaths.

There’s another particularly splendid example of this approach from the Times’s resident ex-(?)Commie and apparently fervent Warmist David Aaronovitch. Often these days, the genial Aaronovitch is pretty good at portraying himself as the voice of commonsense and sweet reasonableness. But just occasionally, the former student radical’s half-buried inner Stalin will out – and never more so than in this diatribe against Lord Lawson of Blaby’s new climate change think tank, The Global Warming Policy Foundation.

What Aaronovitch gets particularly worked up about is Lord Lawson’s suggestion that there is not a consensus on global warming:

Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of “the (present) majority scientific view”, hinting rather slyly at the near possibility of a future, entirely different scientific view. That is why he qualifies “the majority scientific view” with the bracketed “and it is far from a consensus”.

Aaronovitch finds this very wrong. We know he does a) because of the way he weights every sentence with a molasses-thick layer of baseball-bat-on-the-head sarcasm but also because b) he concludes that Lord Lawson is effectively just another evil mouthpiece for the great capitalist, AGW-Deniers’ conspiracy to go on driving 4 x 4s and destroy the world:

They somehow believe that the whole global warming schtick is an amazing confidence trick performed upon the peoples of the world by a group of scientists and socialists, and pursued by politicans keen to get their hands on green taxes (though for what nefarious purpose we do not know), and which has taken in almost all the governments of the world, from the US to China.

They suggest that they are open-minded, but their foundations and articles are designed to reassure the witless that their attachment to their Porsche Cayenne Turbos and their hatred of recycling are somehow acts of non-conformist courage. The Lawson argument is a masterpiece in disingenuousness. A Magic Flute of guile. A Mona Lisa of chutzpah. Don’t buy it.

Before we get too carried away, let’s remind ourselves what the Global Warming Policy Foundation says it stands for:

We are an all-party and non-party think-tank and a registered educational charity which, while open-minded on the contested science of global warming, is deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated.

Through our website and in other ways, we shall be subjecting both the claims of the damage that might be caused by any future warming, and the costs and consequences of alternative policies that might be put in place, to dispassionate analysis based on hard evidence and economic rigour. We are in no sense ‘anti-environmental’. There is a wide range of important environmental issues, which call for an equally wide range of policy responses. Our concern is solely with the possible effects of any future global warming and the policy responses that may evoke. But we are also aware of the curse of world poverty, and of the crucial importance of growth and economic development in the poorer countries of the world as the only serious means of alleviating it.

Doesn’t sound that nakedly evil to me. All that Lord Lawson and this new body are trying to do is sift the evidence on Climate Change and its effects in order to help inform rational decisions as to the best course of action. What possible objection could any open-minded person have to that?

Unfortunately on this issue, like so many on the liberal-left, Aaronovitch isn’t remotely open-minded at all. This thing why he speaks with such reverence of “the majority scientific view”, and with such unutterable disgust that this might be replaced by “an entirely different scientific view.”

Er, David, I know you’re generally quite a bright boy. But were you not aware that this is how science works? Science is never settled. If it were, it would never advance. So when you criticise Lord Lawson for his apparent belief that the majority scientific view may change on Climate Change, what you are in fact having a go at is science itself. (Shades of Lysenkoism, anyone? Well you’d know about that, wouldn’t you, Comrade Aaronovitch?)

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Obama the Racist?

Written by Kevin Jackson

The question was recently posed to me, "Do you think Obama is a racist?" I answered, "Obama is the best kind of racist to whites, but the worst kind of racist to blacks." My questioner was perplexed.

I began by explaining that Obama's racism against whites is upfront, in-your-face racism, which he discussed in his book Dreams from My Father:

I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.

I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.

Obama learned this racist ideology during his formative years from his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, a self-admitted communist and sexual deviant, and most certainly a racist -- the kind that blacks say cannot exist.

As Robin of Berkeley suggested in an article in American Thinker, "Davis blamed racism and capitalism for all of the problems in society and instructed young Barry, 'Don't fully trust white people,' and ‘Black people have a reason to hate.'"

In Obama's defense, his book was written prior to his emergence onto the scene in 2004. Perhaps he had formulated new ideas on whites, and had stopped "nursing that pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against [my] mother's race"? Or not.

After the tutelage of Davis, Obama's next-biggest "non-influence," as it were, came in his twenty-plus-year association with Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Obama sold his racism to whites during his presidential campaign, saying that he didn't really listen to the hate-speech wrongfully labeled "sermons" at his so-called church. This was a "church" that practiced Cone's Black Liberation Theology,-a "theology" in which if the word "black" were replaced with "white," the "church" would have undoubtedly been considered a haven for the Aryan Brotherhood. The Acton Institute reports:

The echoes of Cone's theology bleed through the now infamous, anti-Hilary excerpt by Rev. Wright. Clinton is among the oppressing class ("rich white people") and is incapable of understanding oppression ("ain't never been called a n-gg-r") but Jesus knows what it was like because he was "a poor black man" oppressed by "rich white people." While Black Liberation Theology is not mainstream in most black churches, many pastors in Wright's generation are burdened by Cone's categories which laid the foundation for many to embrace Marxism and a distorted self-image of the perpetual "victim."

Obama claimed that he didn't pay attention to Wright's rants. As Obama said, "I missed a lot of Sundays." Liberal whites gave him yet another pass.

Post-election Obama continued to flaunt his racism in the face of whites by loading his team with black racists. His first appointment was a noted Black Nationalist, Van Jones, to the post of Green Jobs Czar. Appointing a Black Nationalist to this position by Obama would be like Bill Clinton appointing a Klansman to a similar position. At least with the latter appointment, the Left might have feigned outrage.

John Bracey sketches his interpretation of Black Nationalism: [Published circa 1969.]

First, Black America exists in a state of colonial subordination to White America. Black America is a colony. It is and has always been subjected to political, economic, social, and cultural exploitation by White America. These circumstances define Black America's "underdevelopment" as a nation. Political decisions are made by whites outside the black community; no black bourgeoisie with any meaningful economic power has been allowed to develop, and the major vehicles for cultural expression such as schools, radio, television, and the printed media are under white control.

One would think that with BET and The WB, and the all-black radio stations that you can find in any major city, that there is no longer a need for Black Nationalists like Van Jones, or even a Black Nationalist movement in general. However, no sooner was Van Jones appointed than we were treated to the racist stylings of Mark Lloyd, his most famous quip being, "...white people need to relinquish their power to others." Others being "non-whites."

As for Obama's racism against blacks, you don't have to be a genius to understand it. However, it is easier to understand if you are not a product of government schools. Obama's racism against blacks is much more subtle, though exponentially more insidious.

Obama actually believes he helps blacks through his policies, when in fact the outcome devastates them. A good example is education.

Blacks recognize almost universally that education is the key to escaping the cycle of poverty and other ills plaguing the black community.

Obama's first racist act as president was to remove the voucher program that Bush had established in D.C., a program that Democrats vote against overwhelmingly. This program was producing proven positive results, but it was eliminated -- and black children in D.C. were relegated to socialized schools in crime and drug-infested neighborhoods. Simply put, why give black children the choice to opt out of the indoctrination?

Here is how one Liberal organization interpreted Obama's actions:

Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have expressed their clear opposition to voucher subsidies for religious and other private schools and their support for a strong public school system. This is a sharp contrast to the Bush administration, which lobbied relentlessly for vouchers, imposed a voucher scheme on the District of Columbia and even held a last-minute conference to push for a government bail-out of financially troubled inner-city Catholic schools.

Obama thinks so highly of the public schools in D.C. (and Chicago) that he put his children in private school.

There are many other examples of these train-wreck policies of Liberals, and particularly with this administration -- an administration that had poor blacks believing that Obama was Santa Claus. As with most policies implemented by Liberals, the real trickle-down impact ends up costing blacks more, making them that much more dependent on the government...the endgame orchestrated by then-Senator and racist Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson, when he commented in 1957:

These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don't move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there'll be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there'll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It'll be Reconstruction all over again.

The first black president's policies marginalize blacks. It is the cruelest sort of racism, as it robs blacks of hope instead of inspiring it. Blacks were left with the hope that Obama would redistribute money from creators of wealth to those who would gladly take something for nothing.

The president, voted for by overwhelming numbers of blacks and guilty whites, has likely been the most destructive force in racial politics since his fellow racist Democrat Bull Connor. And what Obama seeks for blacks -- socialism, or the leveling of the playing field -- has not benefited blacks anywhere on the planet.

On blacks' ancestral continent, there is not one country that provides a beacon of hope. Africa is where one would think Obama could prove that his policies would work for blacks. Yet in Africa today, there are wars and rumors of wars. The outcome depends only on the "cide" you are on...infanticide, homicide, fratricide, or genocide. Dictators are pillaging the countries they should be serving, and the African people have nothing to show for it but abject poverty and oppression.

In Euro-socialist countries with representative black populations like France, Sweden, and others with representative black populations, there are no black leaders now or emerging. The fact is that the place where black people thrive best is the United States of America. America boasts more multi-millionaire black athletes, entertainers, business moguls, and so on than any country in the world -- all due to capitalism.

Here's the wrap:

Is Obama a racist? Of course he is! But as I say about racists, most just need to see what the other side is like. Obama knows conservatism only anecdotally, as he has never had a conservative friend. He understands only one side -- the racist radical side. This is why sanity appears to be radical to him, why patriots are persecuted and achievers neutered.

A true conservative would never befriend a person like Obama. Obama needs to be surrounded by sycophants and suckups, or radical leaders he can admire. My hope is that Obama will actually get to know a few conservatives, black and white. Then maybe, just maybe, he will understand how he is both the best and worst kind of racist.

By Kevin Jackson is author of the Amazon Best Seller, The BIG Black Lie.

Bookmark and Share

Monday, November 23, 2009

Jesse Jackson's Broken Moral Compass

Written by Scott Strzelczyk

Rev. Jesse Jackson's acrimonious statement, that a black congressman cannot call himself black unless he votes for healthcare, has elevated the level of vitriol by interjecting race into the health care debate. At the Congressional Black Caucus foundation's reception honoring the 25th anniversary of his presidential run Rev. Jackson said:

We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama. You can't vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.

Reverend Jackson's statement was directed at Representative Artur Davis of Alabama, one of 39 Democrats and the only member of the CBC that voted against the Pelosi health care bill. Rev. Jackson's statement implies skin pigmentation, rather than morals and principles, predisposes a black person to vote up or down for a particular piece of legislation.

Ron Miller, candidate for Maryland State Senate who happens to be a black un-hyphenated American, said in a recent article titled "What Makes a Black Man?":

Rev. Jackson must be living in the past if he thinks following the crowd makes one a black man. As the generations pass, and young people assimilate without race as a barrier, we've learned that we don't need a leader to tell us what to do. We are unique individuals that are much more than the color of our skin, and we can stand on our own.

There is ample evidence to suggest that the health care bills under consideration in the House and Senate will lead to greatly increased costs and a reduction in the quality of care. No less an authority than the dean of the Harvard Medical School described the net effect of these proposals as adding millions more participants to a dysfunctional system. Does ignoring evidence that doesn't line up with your opinion qualify you as a black man?

Many people know, Rev. Jackson marched with and was close to the great Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In 1963, Dr. King delivered his powerfully emotional and famous "I Have a Dream Speech" on the mall in Washington D.C. Perhaps Rev. Jackson should reacquaint himself with Dr. King's speech and his message in general. Some excerpts from Dr. King's speech which are applicable to Rev. Jackson's outrageous comment are:

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Rev. Jackson was, like Dr. King, a staunch opponent of abortion. Not until Rev. Jackson gained notoriety and decided to run as a candidate for the 1984 Democratic Party presidential nominee did Rev. Jackson conveniently change his position on abortion. Rev. Jackson's political aspirations took precedence over his moral convictions thus compromising his character. Rev. Jackson once said of abortion:

That is why the Constitution called us three-fifths human and then whites further dehumanized us by calling us ‘niggers'. It was part of the dehumanizing process. The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify that which they wanted to do and not even feel like they had done anything wrong. Those advocates of taking life prior to birth do not call it killing or murder, they call it abortion. They further never talk about aborting a baby because that would imply something human. Rather they talk about aborting the fetus. Fetus sounds less than human and therefore abortion can be justified.

In subsequent years, Rev. Jackson's actions and words cannot justify his position as a leader of the black community, much less a Reverend. In 2001, Rev. Jackson acknowledged he fathered a child out of wedlock with an employee in his civil rights organization Rainbow/PUSH coalition.

In 1984, while seeking the presidential nomination Rev. Jackson referred to Jews as "hymies" and the City of New York as "hymietown".

In 2008, Rev. Jackson was taped on a Fox News broadcast saying "I want to cut Obama's nuts out" and accused Obama of "talking down to black folks".

Ron Miller eloquently summarized Rev. Jackson by saying:

Rev. Jackson's mindset is one of bondage. We shrugged off the chains of slavery and Jim Crow, only to create our own chains within the black community, demanding unanimity of thought and action, and unquestioned loyalty to one party and ideology. A black man, like all men, is meant to be free in body, mind and spirit, for we are all created in God's image. Rev. Jackson has no authority to dictate to anyone who is or isn't a black man.

Dr. King believed, as do many other Americans, it is the content of one's character that matters, not skin pigmentation. A recent American Thinker article on character aptly discusses the issue of character in modern day America. Rev. Jackson's actions and words clearly demonstrate he no longer lives and believes in Dr. King's message. Sadly, Rev. Jackson's moral compass is broken.
Written by Scott Strzelczyk

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 22, 2009

The New Nazi Party!

It's Official! The Democrat Party has now become Thee New Nazi Party! The display of Thuggery this past few months has put the New Nazi Party on the map. These Modern Day Nazis want to control us from the “Womb to the Tomb”.

We all know by now the so-called Leader we have, would put a baby in a utility room, to die alone. So you Old People are next. You better start working on that Bucket List deal. You can bet your last devalued Dollar, with rationing Obamacare, I mean HEALTH Care, that there won't be room for Seniors.
Uh oh, as a 40 something year old, former Military, Right Wing extremist into the Constitution (I bet that word, Constitution will be outlawed soon) maybe I better start my own Bucket List.

As we are bombarded on how smart Barry Soetero is, it amazes me on how stupid he really is. By destroying the American dollar and weakening our Military and angering the Common Citizen, doesn't he know we will be a sitting duck for attacks?

Did the “Radical Islamic Terrorist” (yes, that phrase, “Radical Islamic Terrorist”, will be outlawed soon. They were just poor, misunderstood Men of a certain color or religion who needed hugs) pull out any Muslims before they flew planes into the Twin Towers or Pentagon? Does B. Hussein Obama think he will take so much money from his “Chicago Way” Nazi Government that he can buy his freedom?

These Nazicrats will tell sheeple that they care about the poor people as they slam us with Obamacare or Pelosicar or Reidcare. Any of your Senators or Representatives who voted for this atrocity know darn well that there are all kinds of Reparations in this bill. If we still have any freedom to vote in 2010 & 2012, you must evict all Nazi Democrats before they evict you!
Bookmark and Share

Friday, November 20, 2009

The farce of Obama not knowing

Written by Monte Kuligowski
Mr. Obama is very skilled at insulating himself from political fallout. The administration claims that Obama doesn’t know what his left hand man, Eric Holder, is doing. But in the matter of Holder’s decision to bring Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to New York for a civilian trial, Obama’s fingerprints are inextricably attached.

Quite frankly the tacit decision to provide civilian trials was made by Obama himself earlier this year when he implemented his unprecedented policy of providing Miranda warnings to captured enemy combatants (or man-caused disaster makers, as Obama might call them).

Miranda rights have only one context: Civilian court.

Reading Miranda warnings to enemy combatants necessarily foresees trial in civilian court. There is absolutely no other reason for the warnings. Miranda warnings are provided by civilian police, whether state or federal, not by military officers. Military police apply UCMJ Article 31 (similar to Miranda) to military personnel. The FBI has the unfortunate task, under Obama, of mirandizing Islamist terrorists.

Mr. Obama most certainly knew civilian trials were forthcoming for terrorists captured in battle. More importantly, without Obama’s new approach to terrorism it never would have happened.

The seismic shift reflects Obama’s mindset of placing Islamic enemy combatants into the same category with common criminals. Mr. Obama apparently has something to prove to the world. For some crazy reason he actually believes the world will love him after providing civilian trials to enemy combatants hell-bent on destroying America.

Global peer pressure to appear refined and sophisticated in overseas contingency operations motivates Obama in his decision making. What he might not realize is that, while some of the world may love him, most of it may not respect America for being against her own interests.
Written by Monte Kuligowski

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 19, 2009

The Obama Fail - Lies and Deception

A video showing Obama's pre-election promises compared to his actions in office.
One thing not in this video is Obama comments on our great Troops. Obama said they were air raiding villages, and killing innocent men, women, and children. It showed his utter contempt for the military. Dirty Hussein Obama then had the gall to salute the caskets of our fallen Heroes.
Obama is NOT turning things around. HE IS THE PROBLEM!

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Obama's Mind Game

By Robin of Berkeley

We're playing those mind games together
Pushing the barriers,
Planting seeds
Playing the mind guerrilla
Chanting the mantra, peace on earth
-John Lennon

It's a chilling moment when the light goes out in someone's eyes. A once-radiant child hardens from abuse. A woman's heart shrinks after her husband's abandonment.

The person looks the same, maybe acts the same. But something is gone, and what's lost is irretrievable. It's like when a person dies: in a heartbeat, the soul vanishes.

I witnessed this alteration recently when I visited my goddaughter, a radiant girl. Her mom, a hardcore progressive, has started exposing her to the darkest elements of the left. And the last time I looked in the girl's eyes, the light had gone out. Disappeared. Just like that.

I see this phenomenon every day: a light dimming. The friendly shopkeeper snaps at me. My cheerful neighbor seems flattened.

And you hear it in the news: people acting strangely, going off the deep end. The most bizarre behavior becoming the new normal.

A thug bites off a finger. Sarah Palin's church is torched. Bullies intimidate voters.

Last week, an esteemed Columbia University black architecture professor punched a white female coworker in the eye for not doing more about white privilege.

He has no history of violence. So why now?

Why now? This may be the most important question of our time. Why are some people reaching the boiling point? Why do many others look vacant, like an Invasion of the Body Snatchers? The shootings at military bases, from Little Rock to Fort Hood -- why now?

It's Obama, of course.

Liberals will excoriate me for writing this. They'll insist that bad behavior is not Obama's fault. He's a man of peace.

But study the phenomenon of cults, and the dynamics are always the same. The leader can incite violence without ever getting his hands dirty. Obama is controlling the marionette of the masses.

If Obamamania is a cult, then Obama is the cult leader. Cult leaders routinely pull the strings of their followers. The most extreme example is Charles Manson. He rots in prison for murders he never committed. He didn't have to do the dirty work. His brainwashed charges did his bidding.

I'm not saying Obama is a Charles Manson. There are varying degrees of manipulation, from using sexy blondes to entice men to buy cars all the way to hypnotizing them to drink poisoned Kool Aid. But there's a common denominator in all mind control: manipulating people through mind games.

As soon as Obama came on the scene, the programming began. His face was plastered everywhere like Mao. In his speeches, Obama lulled audiences with a melodious voice and feel-good phrases repeated over and over. And he began inciting people with his charming smile.

First, the vultures starting swooping down on Hillary. Obama chose not to call off the dogs.

Then thugs invaded caucuses. Again, silence.

Which led to vicious misogyny against Sarah Palin and threats on her life. From Obama: not a peep.

We even saw armed thugs at polling places. Ignored and not prosecuted by Obama's Attorney General.

The moment Obama became president, he upped the signals. At the swearing in, the entire family eerily chose to wear black and red, colors associated with communism and black nationalism. Obama's first radio address was broadcast in the Arab world.

Obama returned Britain's gift of a Winston Churchill statue while embracing dictators. He gave a white police officer a dressing down for doing his job, in effect calling him a racist.

Obama's greatest magic trick? Brainwashing the masses to believe that racism is a greater danger than radical Islam, and that Obama himself is in constant peril.

Opposing health care means you oppose Obama. Oppose Obama and you're part of a vast right-wing racist conspiracy.

Thus, more and more people are finding themselves on the receiving end of a fist, figurative or literal. After the White House released a directive for his followers to strike back hard, a frail, diabetic black man at a Town Hall was beaten up.

Even women can get slugged in the face. Obama signaled during the primary that women were fair game.

Obama and the Left are making sure that there ia an increasing number of persuadable people. By displacing workers, panicking business owners with Draconian laws, and whipping up rage and paranoia, they amass more lackeys.

The American Hard Left knows how to create a cult because it is a cult, one with a violent history. The Black Panthers, Symbionese Liberation Army, Weathermen, Black Muslims -- all nefarious cults.

Members of the Weathermen, for instance, had their spirits broken through forced wickedness, such as animal abuse. Patty Hearst morphed into bank robber Tania after weeks of isolation, rape, and beatings by the SLA. Huey P. Newton sent his Black Panthers to the hospital or to the grave if they didn't practice total obedience.

So what's the end game here?

The first goal is power. The Left has an insatiable need to control every aspect of our lives.

But there's a deeper reason, one much more insidious.

The Left wants to tear Americans down. Just as the Weatherman did to those naïve lost kids, they want to break our spirits. This goal of degradation is more crucial than their one-world government.

The progressives want to turn us into them, to make us feel as deprived and depraved and deadened. It's the only way that they can silence the roar of shame and self-loathing.

What they don't understand is this: it's not going to happen. There are too many of us who won't be hypnotized.

We can see right through them. We know who they are: the most piteous of human beings, and the most dangerous. Men without a country, orphans far from home. The forsaken and disowned.

They're "hungry ghosts," to use a Tibetan phrase: tormented beings who are starving to death from their inner nothingness.

Mother Teresa was once asked how she coped with serving the poorest of the poor in Calcutta. She responded that what she saw in the cities of the United States was much more disturbing, because it was a "poverty of the spirit."

Poverty of the spirit. No truer words can be spoken of the progressive Left.

A frequent AT contributor, Robin is a psychotherapist and a recovering liberal in Berkeley.

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Napolitano Announces Obama Administration Plan to Give Amnesty to Illegal Aliens

Written by By Penny Starr
( –Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday that the Obama administration will push for “immigration reform” by giving the estimated 14 million people who are in the United States illegally “fair pathway to earned legal status.”

“A tough and fair pathway to earned legal status will mandate that illegal immigrants meet a number of requirements—including registering, paying a fine, passing a criminal background check, fully paying all taxes and learning English,” Napolitano said Friday at a panel discussion at the liberal Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C.

“These are substantial requirements that will make sure this population gets right with the law,” Napolitano said. “It will help fix our broken system.”

Napolitano said the Obama administration is working to end the recession and put Americans back to work but said giving legal status to illegal aliens will “strengthen our economy.”

“Requiring illegal immigrants to register to earn legal status, as I discussed earlier, will strengthen our economy as these immigrants become full-paying taxpayers,” Napolitano said. “As labor leaders have made clear to me, immigration reform will be a boon to American workers.

“Think about it: unions will never achieve the best terms for workers when a large part of the workforce is illegal and operates in a shadow economy,” Napolitano said. “By contrast, the status quo not only hurts American workers, it also stifles potential opportunities to grow our economy.”

Napolitano said that she has seen a “major shift” in the immigration landscape, which the Obama administration hopes will make it easier for Congress to pass new immigration laws.

Included in that shift, Napolitano said, is a more secure border between the United States and Mexico, tougher law enforcement that has resulted in more arrests of criminal illegal immigrants and confiscation of contraband, and fewer people coming into the country illegally because of current economic conditions.

“For starters, the security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” Napolitano said. “The federal government has dedicated unprecedented resources to the Mexican border in terms of manpower, technology and infrastructure—and it’s made a real difference.

“Compared to last year, seizures in all categories—drugs, smuggled cash, and illegal weapons—are up dramatically. For example, just looking at bulk cash, Customs and Border Protection has seized at the border more than $34 million in cash being smuggled southbound so far this year—more than four times as much as at this time last year.

“Moreover, the immigration debate in 2007 happened during a period of historically high levels of illegal entry into the United States. Two years later, because of better enforcement and the current economic circumstances, those numbers have fallen sharply. The flow has reduced significantly – by more than half from the busiest years, proving we are in a much different environment than we were before.

“These are major differences that should change the immigration conversation,” Napolitano said.

The secretary said the Obama administration is “committed to this issue.”

“When Congress is ready to act, we will be ready to support them,” Napolitano said.
Written by By Penny Starr

Bookmark and Share

Monday, November 16, 2009

Would Obama have saved General Custer at Little Bighorn?

Written by Harold Witkov

Weeks have slipped into months since General McChrystal, NATO commander in Afghanistan, told President Obama that the situation was getting perilous and that he needed more troops. As our President gallivants on yet another world tour while he "struggles" to make the right decision, the following thought occurred to me: "If President Obama had been given the opportunity, would he have saved General Custer at Little Bighorn?"

Many people are not aware that General Crook and more than 1,000 soldiers were only thirty miles away from Little Bighorn at the time of Custer's Last Stand. There are those who say that even General Crook's troops would not have been enough to save Custer and it is a moot point anyway because in 1876 thirty miles distance may as well have been three hundred miles. For the sake of argument, though, let us suppose General Crook had fifty thousand men, dozens of cannons, and an array of Gatling guns - and the Battle of Little Bighorn had begun right before his very eyes. What would Crook have done? Crook, no doubt, would have committed his overwhelming forces and equipment to rescue Custer and secure a military victory.

But what would President Obama have done if he were General Crook in the same situation? In my opinion, President Obama would have taken his time. He would have pretended to weigh his options. While watching the onslaught, he would have thought to himself the following:

1. Custer and his troops have no business being there. They are getting what they deserve.

2. A commitment of more troops would prove too expensive.

3. Native Americans mean more to me than American soldiers do.

4. I do not believe in the word victory.

5. I have to think about the bigger picture. I am not happy just being General Crook. Someday, I want to be President Crook.

6. I hear General Custer is thinking about running for President. This will take care of that idea.

To be sure, Afghanistan is not Little Bighorn, and our brave fighting men and women there are not on the brink of annihilation. The American military is the best in the world. They take care of themselves very well, thank you.

At the same time, however, our President knows that the situation in Afghanistan is getting more dangerous by the day. As things stand, our troops are becoming more vulnerable. Many believe we need more troops to provide a safety net for our own people. Many believe that Afghanistan needs a military surge similar to the Iraq surge. Both ideas call for more troops and equipment. Then there are those who believe it is time to cut and run.

I am not the leader of the free world and it is not for me to say what President Obama should or should not do. I just want him to know that, while he ponders, America's finest are being lost.
Written by Harold Witkov
Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Obama Bows Again

U.S. President Barack Obama bows as he is greeted by Japanese Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko as he arrives at the Imperial Palace in Tokyo, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009.

Of course B. Hussein Obama's Sheeple will simply deny this ever happened. These Pictures must be from a Right Wing Conspiracy.

Obama is the laughingstock of Dictators. Laughing does America no good, as this weak so-called Leader destroys our Country and takes our Liberty.

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Justice Denied

War On Terror: Eric Holder's move to try the 9/11 masterminds in Manhattan makes it official: This administration has reverted to pre-9/11 "crime" fighting.

Amid all the talk during the attorney general's surreal press conference of the "crime" committed eight years ago, the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon wasn't even mentioned.

Lest anyone forget, the military headquarters of the United States was attacked that day along with the Twin Towers.

An entire wedge of the Ring was gutted when the Saudi hijackers slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into it. Nearly 200 military personnel were killed, along with the passengers and crew of the hijacked jet.

The jet was a weapon used to attack the very center of our military. That was not a "crime," as some say. It was an act of war.

And 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, along with the four other al-Qaida terrorist co-conspirators Holder wants to try, are no mere criminals. They are enemy combatants — and should be treated as such.

Yet this administration has adopted the same crime-centered mentality as the last Democratic administration. The one that treated al-Qaida's first World Trade Center bombing as a "crime." And al-Qaida's attack on the U.S. embassies in Africa as a "crime." And even al-Qaida's attack on the USS Cole as a "crime."

All were prosecuted in U.S. courts. A lot of good that did.

While President Bill Clinton was busy preparing indictments against the terrorists, al-Qaida was already plotting its next move. It hit the Pentagon just nine months after Clinton and his crime-fighters left office.

Maddeningly, this administration is repeating the Clinton administration's mistake.

KSM and the other terrorists, er, "defendants" aren't even U.S. citizens. They don't deserve all the rights afforded citizens in our civilian court system. They shouldn't be allowed to use our courts as a platform to promulgate their ideology of hate. Which they will, sure as Osama bin Laden is smiling right now.

This will only serve to inspire more homegrown terrorists — and stab at the hearts of the relatives of 9/11 victims.

Holder clucked that the "trials will be open to the public and the world." And they will turn into circuses, playing right into the hands of the enemy.

These trials will drag on for years, perhaps even decades, as defense lawyers file endless motions and appeals. Meanwhile, valuable intelligence about interrogation techniques and other methods we've used against al-Qaida will be revealed to the enemy during trial discovery.

This move to a civilian court makes no sense at all, except viewed through a political prism. Maybe the White House wants to make its Jan. 22 deadline to close Gitmo. Or maybe it's keen to publicly differentiate itself from the previous administration, which was considerably tougher on terrorists.

Either way, it's an unwise move. It will only remind people how much America has shrunk in the last nine months.

Bookmark and Share

Friday, November 13, 2009


Written by ANN COULTER
The massacre at Fort Hood last week is the perfect apotheosis of the liberal victimology described in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."

According to witnesses, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan entered a medical facility at Fort Hood, prayed briefly, then shouted "Allahu akbar" before he began gunning down American troops. Now I don't know which to be more afraid of: Muslims or government-run health care systems.

President Obama honored the victims by immediately warning Americans not to "jump to conclusions" -- namely, the obvious conclusion that the attack was an act of Islamic terrorism. As conclusions go, it wasn't much of a jump.

But the mainstream media waited for no information -- indeed actively avoided learning any information -- before leaping to the far less obvious conclusion that the suspect's mass murder was set off by "stress."

The day after the slaughter, The New York Times ran one editorial and two of three op-eds asserting as much -- which was at least one more than the Times usually runs about psycho-killer soldiers going on rampages.

Two days after the mass shooting, the Times' laughably predictable headlines about the Fort Hood bloodbath were:

-- "Preliminary Inquiry Finds No Link to Terror Plot"

-- "Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists"

-- "When Soldiers' Minds Snap"

The Los Angeles Times jumped to the exact same conclusion, running an article on the massacre titled: "Fort Hood Tragedy Rocks Military as It Grapples With Mental Health Issues." Time magazine followed suit, posting an article titled: "Stresses at Fort Hood Were Likely Intense for Hasan."

Inasmuch as Maj. Hasan had never been deployed overseas, much less seen combat, liberals seem to have discovered the first recorded case of "pre-traumatic stress syndrome."

Their point was: The real victim of Fort Hood was Maj. Hasan. Indeed, all Muslims were the victims that day.

The media quickly set to work assembling lachrymose accounts of taunts Hasan had been subjected to in the military for being a Muslim, the most harrowing of which seems to have been his car being keyed at his off-base apartment complex.

I suppose we should be relieved that liberals weren't claiming Hasan snapped because of the dimming prospects for a health care bill by the end of the year.

The evidence for the manifestly obvious conclusion we were supposed to avoid jumping to is rather more extensive.

According to numerous eyewitness accounts, Hasan denounced the "war on terror" as a war against Islam, said Muslims should attack Americans in retaliation for the war in Iraq, defended suicide bombers and said he was "happy" when a Muslim murdered a soldier at a military recruiting center in Arkansas earlier this year.

Stranger still, he wasn't auditioning for his own show on MSNBC when he made these statements.

Hasan shared a "spiritual adviser" with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, whose unseemly enthusiasm for jihad got him banned from speaking in Britain, even by video link.

A few years ago, Hasan delivered an hour-long PowerPoint lecture to an audience of doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, arguing that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have burning oil poured down their throats.

He had tried to contact al-Qaida, and at least one U.S. intelligence official says the Army knew it.

Despite being well aware of Hasan's disturbing views and conduct, the Army did nothing.

Far less offensive speech has been grounds for discipline or even removal from duties in the military. In the aftermath of the Tailhook scandal, for example, two Navy officers were reprimanded and reassigned after putting up a sign with the words of a nursery rhyme altered to include a vulgar sexual reference to liberal congresswoman Patricia Schroeder.

But a Muslim Army doctor can go around a military installation somberly advocating the beheading of infidels, and the girls running the military treat him like he's Nicole Kidman and they're press junket reporters.

The Army's top brass, Gen. George Casey, responded to the military's shocking decision to keep a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim in the Army by announcing: "Our diversity ... is a strength." And I thought gays couldn't openly serve in the military.

On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslims moved to the top of liberals' victim pantheon on the basis of having slaughtered 3,000 Americans. Muslims were "victims" of Americans' displeasure with them for the biggest terrorist attack in world history. The only American deserving of more coddling than a Muslim is the first African-American president.

So, now any dyspeptic expression toward a Muslim is grounds for calling in a diversity coordinator. And when the "victim" attacks, as at Fort Hood, the rest of us are supposed to feel guilty because Hasan's car got keyed once. As with all liberal "victims," it is the victim who is massively guilty.

Written by the Great ANN COULTER

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Thank you former President George W. Bush & former First Lady Laura Bush

In light of the moral obscenity that is Barack Hussein Obama, a prominent blog site devoted to Hillary Clinton has written a piece apologizing to the Bushes and the Cheney's.
As many of us knew, B. Hussein Obama is out of his league. He is hopeless if he does not have a Teleprompter in front of him. Let's not even get into his Racist friends and loved ones.

We know absolutely no one in Bush family circles and have never met former President George W. Bush or his wife Laura.

If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.

Oh, how we RAILED against Bush in 2000…and how we RAILED against the surge in support Bush received post-9/11 when he went to Ground Zero and stood there with his bullhorn in the ruins on that hideous day.

We were convinced that ANYONE who was president would have done what Bush did, and would have set that right tone of leadership in the wake of that disaster. President Gore, President Perot, President Nader, you name it. ANYONE, we assumed, would have filled that role perfectly.

Well, we told you before how much the current president, Dr. Utopia, made us realize just how wrong we were about Bush. We shudder to think what Dr. Utopia would have done post-9/11. He would have not gone there with a bullhorn and struck that right tone. More likely than not, he would have been his usual fey, apologetic self and waxed professorially about how evil America is and how justified Muslims are for attacking us, with a sidebar on how good the attacks were because they would humble us.

Honestly, we don’t think President Gore would have been much better that day. The world needed George W. Bush, his bullhorn, and his indominable spirit that day…and we will forever be grateful to this man for that.

As we will always be grateful for what George and Laura Bush did this week, with no media attention, when they very quietly went to Ft. Hood and met personally with the families of the victims of this terrorist attack.


The Bushes went and met privately with these families for HOURS, hugging them, holding them, comforting them.

If there are any of you out there with any connection at all to the Bushes, we implore you to give them our thanks…you tell them at a bunch of gay Hillary guys in Boystown, Chicago were wrong about the Bushes…and are deeply, deeply sorry for any jokes we told about them in the past, any bad thoughts we had about these good, good people.

You may be as surprised by this as we are ourselves, but from this day forward George W. and Laura Bush are now on the same list for us as the Clintons, Geraldine Ferraro, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, and the other political figures we keep in our hearts and never allow anyone to badmouth.

Criticize their policies academically and intelligently and discuss the Bush presidency in historical and political terms…but you mess with the Bushes personally and, from this day forward, and you’ll answer to us.

We hope someday to be able to thank George W. and Laura in person for all they’ve done, and continue to do. They didn’t have to head to Ft. Hood. That was not their responsibility.

The Obamas should have done that.

But didn’t.


Thank goodness George W. is still on his watch, with wonderful Laura at his side.

We are blessed as a nation to have these two out there…just as we are blessed to have the Clintons on the job, traveling the world doing the good they do.

And we are blessed to have Dick Cheney, wherever he is, keeping tabs on all that’s going on and speaking out when the current administration does anything too reckless and dangerous.

Cheney’s someone else we villainized and maligned in the past who we were also wrong about. There has never been a Vice President, including Gore, Biden, or Mondale, who was more supportive of gay rights than “Darth Cheney”. There has never been a Vice President more spot-on right about the dangers facing this country from Islamic terrorism.

We live in strange, strange times indeed.

We are now officially committed fans of George W. and Laura Bush. We are fans of Dick Cheney. Our gratitude for them makes us newly protective of them, and the continued role they play in this country.

After the primary battle of 2008, we never thought we’d go back to Texas for anything, but sometime in 2010 we want to find some event in Dallas the Bushes will be at so at least one of us can go up to them, tell them we are deeply sorry for ever thinking ill of them, and thank them from the bottom of our hearts for their service to America.

We’re sure they will just stare at us and wonder why these gay Chicagoans are crying, but we don’t think we can get through a meeting with them without being emotional.

What they did at Ft. Hood for those families humbles us. Every day, the Bushes are most likely doing something just like it behind the scenes.

We hope if any of you encounter them you will let them know this is deeply appreciated beyond partisan lines.

We will never look at the Bushes, the Bush presidencies, or their legacies the same again…and someday when his presidential library is built, we will be so proud to visit there and tell anyone will listen about November 10th, 2009, the day we finally appreciated former President George W. Bush and his wife Laura.

Thank you for your service, Mr. President. We’re sorry we didn’t appreciate you while you were in office, but we thank Heaven we’ve wised up and can see the good you are out there doing, under the radar, today.

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Time to Deal with Black Racism

Written by Lloyd Marcus

The term "racist" in America is synonymous with white. According to the liberal media elites (New York Times writers, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN), Hollywood (Jeanine Garafolo and associates) and the Obama administration, white America is automatically guilty of being racist. The burden is on whites to prove their innocence. It is wrong that decent white people always find themselves on the defensive in regards to race relations.

No one dares to mention, rebuke or even consider the possibility of minority racism. And yet, when Obama received 96% of the black vote with many thinking Sarah Palin was his Vice President, it is safe to concluded most blacks voted skin color over principles; which is racism.

Jesse Jackson said blacks cannot be racist because they are not in power. This is hog wash, liberal intellectual "double speak" and another typical liberal attempt to relieve blacks of any responsibility for wrongdoing. Such so-called black leaders have the audacity to complain about black-on-black crime and the epidemic of black males dropping out of school. Black liberal enablers cannot relieve black males of personal responsibility for their behavior, blaming everything on whitey, and expect the lives of these youths to change for the better.

Like every other sin, a measure of racism will always exist. But we cannot continue allowing minority racism to go unchecked and expect us to ever truly become united as Americans.

By Lloyd Marcus, Black Unhyphenated American

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Liberal terror at Ft. Hood: Hasan could be misjudged

Written by Monte Kuligowski

In an amazing twist of irony, Obama said we must wait for the facts before jumping to conclusions about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. How many more “facts” does Obama need about Hasan?

Many so-called journalists of the mainstream seem to be more concerned about not offending Islam than expressing outrage and mourning the deaths of the following 13 service members, one of whom (Francheska Velez) was with child:

56, San Diego

62, Cameron, Texas

52, Ciudad Juarez, Mexico

32, Evans, Ga.

29, Mountain City, Tenn.

22, Frederick, Okla.

29, Kiel, Wis.

19, West Jordan, Utah

21, Bolingbrook, Ill.

51, Mount Pleasant, Wis.

21, Chicago

55, Pittsburgh

23, St. Paul, Minn.

Of all the ridiculous statements made by journalists in reference to the terror at Ft. Hood, the one made by Martha Raddatz and passed on by Diane Sawyer is among the most offensive:

Cryptically, ABC's senior foreign affairs correspondent, Martha Raddatz, concluded a story on reaction at Fort Hood: “As for the suspect, Nadal Hasan, as one officer's wife told me, 'I wish his name was Smith.'”

Sawyer clarified that the mystery woman wished the killer’s name had been Smith “so no one would have a reflexive question about that.” That is, a reflexive question about whether Hasan was conducting a personal jihad against the U.S. military.

In context of 13 unarmed Americans having been gunned down in uniform in cold blood, the level of suspension of disbelief necessary to accept the “mystery wife” account is too high for me. Put another way, I don’t believe a word of the Martha Raddatz tale. Normal Americans don’t worry about falsely stereotyping a man after he shouts, “Allahu Akbar” and launches a bloody rampage against fellow Americans. Yet we are to believe that as the wife’s fellow patriots lay dead and wounded her thoughts were directed to political correctness; exclaiming that she wished the killer’s name was “Smith.”

I’m sure the mystery wife had some names for Hasan all right; but I doubt that “Smith” was one of them.

I believe the “officer’s wife” quote was a clever, unverifiable way to affirm the politically correct fears of the left.

Currently, the story can’t be fact checked unless every officer’s wife at Ft. Hood is interviewed. Please prove me wrong Ms. Raddatz and provide her name.
Written by Monte Kuligowski

Bookmark and Share

Monday, November 9, 2009

Suicidal Political Correctness

Written by David Limbaugh
Even as more and more realize oppressive political correctness is damaging our nation and killing our people, we still hold ourselves hostage to it. We can't criticize Obama on his policy agenda without absurd accusations of racism, and now our authorities' first instinct after the mass murder at Fort Hood is to victimize the identified shooter -- Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan -- rather than to protect our soldiers.

The military is the last place we should expect political correctness to flourish. We recognize, after all, that our armed forces exist primarily to safeguard our national security, not as a laboratory for social experimentation. Or do we?

Forget "don't ask, don't tell" policy for now. I'm referring to the reaction of the Army's top brass to the Fort Hood slaughter in the news conference and television interviews following the shooting.

The first question to Army chief of staff Gen. George Casey (and Army Secretary John McHugh) was whether he believed "this was a wake-up call to the nation that the Army is simply too small to carry out the tasks that it's been given." "You've been having suicide rates that are off the charts," the reporter went on. "Your soldiers are under great stress from multiple deployments."

Our military manpower is a legitimate concern, but I think it would be more appropriate for this type of question to come up in the context of whether we have the troops necessary to perform our missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Instead, it surfaced in relation to whether an overly stretched Army might have contributed to causing this mass murder.

Instead of telling the questioner it's far-fetched, if not outright absurd, to suggest that a soldier committed multiple homicides because he was stressed from an overstretched Army, Gen. Casey dignified the question by responding that our Army has 70,000 more soldiers than it did five years ago and beaming about the Army's new "comprehensive soldier fitness" program, which helps soldiers build resilience and strength to deal with adversity.

A follow-up question was even worse. "Sir, some other counselors are saying this is just the tip of the iceberg. Suicide rates are now higher this year than they were last year. How concerned are you about this danger to recruits?"

Notice that the questioner's concern wasn't over the danger to soldiers of suicide murderers, but of suicide -- that is, what danger soldiers are to themselves as a result of military stress.

What are these people smoking? How lopsided has our thinking become that we view this murder through the prism of the shooter's stress and victimhood rather than focus on how to prevent such murders in the future? Besides, the shooter didn't commit suicide here.

Again, this kind of thinking isn't limited to the liberal press. Neither Secretary McHugh nor Gen. Casey challenged the questioner's implication or emphasis; they eagerly described the Army's "groundbreaking program ... to try to understand the dynamics and the forces behind suicides, particularly in the military."

Nor was their response merely a defensive reflex to a misguided question. Casey volunteered similar boasts about the Army's "huge" mental fitness efforts in his interview with CNN's John Roberts.

Casey -- in this interview and others, on ABC and NBC -- also expressed his concern about a "potential backlash" to Muslim soldiers. On NBC's "Meet the Press," he told host David Gregory, "Our diversity, not only in our Army but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse."

I'm not sure I believe Casey is more concerned about the ethnic or religious composition of our armed forces or overblown threats to it than the actual murder of its innocent soldiers. I doubt he would express similar concerns in private, but I would be more concerned about the state of our officer corps if he did than if he didn't.

Does anyone really think we're going to discriminate against or expel Muslims from the service as a result of these murders? On the other hand, doesn't the safety of innocent soldiers and our national defense demand that we get to the bottom of why such an obviously radical Islamist was not purged from our ranks and whether inflated diversity concerns handcuffed us and, at least indirectly, led to these murders?

You've surely already heard about the shooter's radicalism, his ties to al-Qaida, his statement that infidels should have their throats cut and boiling oil poured down their throats, his profession as a "Muslim first and American second," his anti-American rants, his harassment of fellow doctors about religion, and our government's paralytic inaction despite awareness of all these things and more.

We're heading the way of Europe in not only our adoption of socialism and smothering of liberty but also our suicidal abandonment of national security. We will survive as a nation only if we radically reverse these trends.

Written by David Limbaugh

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Jihad's 5th Column

War On Terror: The Fort Hood terrorist is being portrayed as an "anomaly," an "aberration," a "lone wolf." Sadly, he's just one of many examples of jihadist traitors in the ranks of the military.

Together they form a dangerous Fifth Column, and the Pentagon — thanks to institutionalized political correctness — is doing next to nothing to root them out.

Instead, brass are actively recruiting Muslim soldiers — whose ranks have swelled to more than 15,000 — and catering to their faith by erecting mosques even at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va. More, they're hiring Muslim chaplains endorsed by radical Islamic front groups, who convert and radicalize soldiers.

In the wake of the worst domestic military-base massacre in U.S. history, this is an outrage to say the least. And the PC blinders explain how Fort Hood commanders could have failed so horrifically in protecting their force from the internal threat there.

The terrorist suspect, an Islamic fanatic, penetrated deep into the Army's officer corps before gunning down, execution-style, more than 40 of his fellow soldiers. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly killed 13 at the Texas post, which boasts some 40 Muslims.

Witnesses say he shouted "Allahu Akbar" — Allah is great! — before opening fire in a crowded building where troops were sitting ducks, waiting to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, both wars that Hasan angrily opposed. "Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor," he reportedly said earlier this year, referring to the U.S. — the country he swore to protect.

During the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, another devout Muslim in the Army had a similar conflict. Sgt. Hasan Akbar also resorted to violence, fragging 17 fellow soldiers, killing two. Why? He opposed the killing of fellow Muslims. "You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children," he was overheard by soldiers who survived the grenade attack as saying.

Clearly, his loyalties lay elsewhere. And he's hardly alone:

• Navy Signalman Hassan Abujihaad last year was convicted of tipping off al-Qaida to battle group movements in the Persian Gulf, including disclosing classified documents detailing the group's vulnerability to terror attack.

• Army reservist Jeffrey Battle in 2003 pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the U.S., confessing he enlisted "to receive military training to use against America."

• Army reservist Semi Osman in 2002 was arrested for providing material support to al-Qaida and pleaded guilty to weapons charges after agreeing to testify against other terror suspects.

• Marine Abdul Raheem al-Arshad Ali trained at a suspected al-Qaida camp and was charged with selling a semi-automatic handgun to Osman.

• Army Sgt. Ali Mohamed trained Green Berets at Fort Bragg's elite special warfare school before stealing military secrets for al-Qaida and helping plan bombings at three U.S. embassies in 1998.

• Army Spec. Ryan Anderson in 2004 was convicted of leaking military intelligence to al-Qaida terrorists, including sensitive information about the vulnerabilities of armored Humvees.

• Army sniper John Muhammad was put on death row after fatally shooting 10 in the nation's capital a year after 9/11.

While good and decent Muslim soldiers have served admirably, the list of those who have put their allegiance to Islam above country is long, and this is by no means an exhaustive accounting.

The Pentagon must do a better job of vetting such recruits. And it must do a better job of force protection — starting with beefing up its counterspying operations — before more intelligence is compromised and more soldiers are lost.

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, November 7, 2009

We Now Have A Total Gangster Government

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) speaking on the House floor: Now we've moved into the realm of gangster government. We have a gangster government when the Federal Government has set up a new cartel to control our lives.
America is so lucky we did not lose Michele Bachmann in that last election. The Politically Correct Police were out in full force to destroy her.
Think of what THEY will do to you!

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Obama Admits He Is A Muslim

Obama admits that he is a Muslim. Watch Obama bowing before a Muslim king. Listen to Obama talk about his Muslim family. Obama quoting from the Koran. Obama defends Islam and wishes to destroy America!

Bookmark and Share