Thursday, August 16, 2012

American Life League president posts open letter to Cardinal Dolan about Obama's Al Smith dinner invitation

Renew America ^ | August 16, 2012 | Daniel Cassidy

The valiant Judie Brown, founder of the American Life League and America's foremost and uncompromising champion of life, has posted an open letter to His Eminence Timothy, Cardinal Dolan.

Once again, the American Episcopacy has put institutional interests ahead of what is moral and good. We have no interest in their views on the Farm Bill, trade policies or continuing budget resolutions. We do, however, expect them to speak with clarity and consistency on the great moral issues of our day. It seems Cardinal Dolan, like so many before him, would rather be a political player than a moral force for the good and true.

We salute Mrs. Brown for speaking forthrightly. We strongly agree with her that Cardinal Dolan's invitation sends, at best, mixed signals. In the face of Obama's assaults on the Church and her teachings, our bishops should be sharing only one message — that it is morally objectionable for any Catholic to vote for those whose policies are intrinsically evil and advance the culture of death.

    Your Eminence,

    During the last week, there has been much written on diocesan websites and by other bishops concerning the controversy created by your invitation to President Obama to attend the Alfred E. Smith dinner. Much of what has been written seeks to justify that invitation.

    American Life League recently launched an effort to convince you to rescind that invitation. The reason for this memo is to let you know exactly why we are doing what we are doing.

    First, let me point out that Cardinal Egan invited Mr. Obama to this same dinner four years ago and we did not object. Although we disagreed with Obama's basic philosophies, we felt that an attempt by the cardinal to show congeniality was worth trying.

    However, it is now four years later and it is clear that whatever the cardinal hoped to accomplish at the 2008 dinner did not work. In four short years, President Obama has done everything in his power to undermine the teachings of the Catholic Church. As you know, he is implementing programs and policies that may soon make it necessary for the Church to repudiate our basic beliefs or close down all of our charitable and educational organizations.

    Your Eminence, Mr. Obama has a long history with the Catholic Church. From his days as a community organizer working with Catholic churches in Chicago to his current attack on our beliefs, Obama has shown himself to be a shrewd politician with a captivating personality. How else do you explain the fact that, despite his very public support of abortion, contraception, and Planned Parenthood, he received 54 percent of the Catholic vote in 2008?

    The question is NOT why you invited Mr. Obama to the dinner. The real question is why he accepted.

    I submit to you that the reason he accepted is that he has nothing to lose. The Al Smith Foundation website touts that, at the 2008 dinner, Obama displayed "wit, wisdom, warmth, and wile." I am sure the author of those words thought he was being totally complimentary, but the fact is that he was very accurate. Synonyms for "wile" are, of course, "hoax," "ploy," "scam," and "deception."

    I believe Mr. Obama sees the 2012 Al Smith dinner as an opportunity to, once again, use his wiles to entice the Catholics in America to "trust" him — a trust that he has betrayed time and time again.

    Your Eminence, when I think of the outcome of the event — where you are seen hosting both candidates for president — I am convinced the idea that will be transmitted through the images of that dinner will be that a vote for either candidate is okay with the hierarchy.

    This is precisely why American Life League launched the No Dinner for Obama campaign. We don't want Catholics to be confused about the most pro-abortion president in American history. Our duty is to be faithful and to defend moral principles, while begging our hierarchy to do the same.

    We pray for you, and all members of the hierarchy, "Lead us out of temptation and toward truth, particularly today when so much is at stake."

    You and the bishops of the Church have convinced us over the last several months that the future of the Catholic Church in America is hanging in the balance. We MUST oppose the contraceptive mandate and all of the other affronts the current administration is throwing at us.

    Inviting the head of that administration to dinner and a night of humor and congeniality is NOT how we are going to save our Church.

    Please, your Eminence, cancel the invitation or cancel the dinner. If you do neither, I am very afraid that, at this time next year, you may be forced to cancel most Church activities that take place outside the confines of your physical churches.

    Asking the blessing of Your Eminence, I am,

    Yours respectfully in Christ,

    Judie Brown, President
    American Life League

Inside the mind of Joe Biden

Fox News ^ | 08/16/2012 | By Dr. Keith Ablow

From a psychological perspective, however, and without having had the opportunity to examine the vice president, personally (although I would welcome it), I can tell you there is more to Joe Biden than random discharges emanating from his cortex or random words emanating from his mouth. We show how ready we are to deny the truth when we candy-coat Biden’s words and actions for him.
Joe Biden isn't having a senior moment when speaks with contempt about white, wealthier Americans. He's having a moment of truth.
Remember, this vice president lied about having three undergraduate degrees, when he only has one. He lied about going to law school on a full merit-based scholarship, when he went on a half-scholarship based mostly on financial need. He lied about graduating in the top of his law school class when he graduated near the bottom. He admitted to plagiarism during law school and plagiarized a speech while running for president in 1987.
An imposter in life, without a true, authentic, core self based on reality, cannot honor and applaud and support the genuine gifts, ingenuity or entrepreneurship of others, especially if part of the lie he lives is the belief his father was laid low by capitalism.
No, it is not an accident that Barack Obama chose to run with Joe Biden. They both have a profound contempt for those arrogant oppressors who think they are exercising real gifts, unique to them (which, by the way, they must express through honesty and character, which are not in great supply in this White House). It is to such people that Barack Obama and Joe Biden assign the blame for the most painful, devastating events in their lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

On Medicare, time to take the fight to Obama (Obama steals over $700 billion from seniors)

NY Daily News ^ | 8/16/2012 | staff

When Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced he had selected Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate, many on the right rejoiced — while many on the left salivated. They drooled over the prospect of being able to run political advertisements rooted in fear, not fact, about what Ryan will do to entitlement programs.

But if there ever was a time to be careful what you wish for, it’s right now.

Since the announcement, something interesting has happened. The attention from Romney and Ryan’s plans to save Medicare has shifted the debate back onto the President and his handling of the issue.
Every chance that Romney and Ryan are asked about their proposal to help fix the borderline-bankrupt entitlement is a chance for them to actively shift the discussion, putting President Obama and his allies on the defensive for what they have already done.

With the passage of Obamacare, Medicare has already been gutted to the tune of $716 billion dollars. Though Democrats claimed this was “savings,” it was done to pay for the law’s enormous price tag (it was also deceptively double-counted so that the left looked like they were saving money and keeping Medicare solvent). Talk about a generational Robin Hood: robbing the old to give to the young, specifically, those 26 and under who are now covered under the new health law.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

MSNBC’s Touré: Romney Engaging In The ‘Niggerization’ Of Obama [VIDEO] (Stay Classy, MSNBC!)

Mediaite ^ | 08/16/2012 | Andrew Kirell

On Thursday’s edition of MSNBC’s The Cycle the group discussed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney‘s assertion that President Obama should “take [his] campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago.” Co-host Touré saw what he believes to be explicit racial connotations beneath what Romney was saying, calling it the “niggerization” of the campaign.

“That really bothered me,” he said. “You notice he said anger twice. He’s really trying to use racial coding and access some really deep stereotypes about the angry black man. This is part of the playbook against Obama, the ‘otherization,’ he’s not like us.”

“I know it’s a heavy thing, I don’t say it lightly, but this is ‘niggerization,’” Touré said to the apparent shock of his co-panelists. “You are not one of us, you are like the scary black man who we’ve been trained to fear.”

Naturally this led to a battle between Touré and conservative co-host S.E. Cupp. She took particular issue with the fact that Touré admitted that VP Joe Biden‘s “chains” comments were divisive, but is now calling Romney a “racist” for saying the Obama campaign is “angry.”

“Do you see how dishonest that is?” she asked.
Touré denied calling anyone a racist, which prompted Cupp to say, “Certainly you were implying that Mitt Romney and the base will respond to this dog-whistle, racially-charged coding, and hate Obama, the angry black man?”
“Absolutely,” he replied.
“That’s so irresponsible,” Cupp answered back.
“This is not a revolutionary comment,” Touré said. “This is a constituency all-white party that rejects the black vote.”
“You have two white guys in Joe Biden and Mitt Romney,” Cupp clarified. “Joe Biden made the overtly racial comment and has a history of making bigoted remarks. Mitt Romney was responding to the comment. Yet he is the one responsible for the whole Republican history of racism in politics?”
“That’s not what Touré is saying,” co-host Krystal Ball interjected. “You’re twisting his words.”
“No, he can speak for himself,” Cupp shot back.
“He’s using the playbook Republicans have been using for decades now,” Touré concluded.
Take a look below, via MSNBC:

Smart: Ryan to Campaign With 80-Year-Old Mom in Florida! ^ | August 16, 2012 | Guy Benson

The Romney-Ryan ticket holds a small lead in Florida, according to two new polls. Hoping to shore up the Sunshine State, the Romney campaign is deploying Ryan to speak at a large retirement community, alongside his octogenerian mother:

How serious is the Romney campaign about seizing the offense in the Medicare battle? The campaign is dispatching Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, to a Florida retirement community this weekend. Ryan will headline a campaign event at 10 a.m. Saturday in The Villages, the sprawling retirement community frequented by GOP candidates, including by Romney during this year’s primary battle ... Ryan will be joined at the event by his mother, Betty Douglas, 80.

As I suggested this week, showcasing Ryan's mom is one of the most potent tools Republicans have to beat back Democrat disinformation on the GOP reform plan to save Medicare. If they can effectively neutralize the Left's ongoing demagoguery, they'll have more breathing room to land blows on offense. To that end, sending Ryan and his mother onto the campaign trail together is a brilliant stroke. I hope the commercials aren't far behind, to reach a larger audience. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney outlined the differences between his plan and the president's Medicare proposals earlier today, using a four-quadrant white board to illustrate his point. MSNBC lampooned Romney for this performance, but I think it's just classic, nerdy, consultant Mitt doing his thing:

Mitt Romney Uses White Board To Explain Medicare

For their part, seniors certainly do seem positively terrified by Paul Ryan. John McCormack reports from the trail:

"Hey Paul!" yelled an elderly woman while Ryan was placing his order with the cashier. "Good luck! Kick ass!" The well-wisher, Erma from Howland, Ohio, told me later that she's not worried that Ryan and Romney would end Medicare. "I don't believe it," she said. "Because Obama has a bigger plan to rob Medicare of $617 billion." "We better worry about Obamacare before we worry about Ryan," added Erma, a self-described conservative from Howell, Ohio. Erma wasn't the only conservative senior citizen at the Original Hot Dog Shoppe to demonstrate that the party faithful have absorbed the Medicare message being pushed by the Romney-Ryan campaign this week. "Oh, don't believe none of that stuff," Eleanor Costantino, a senior citizen from Warren, told me when I asked her if she was worried about Romney-Ryan taking away Obamacare. "It's all nothing but a bunch of lies!" "He's going to save Medicare," chimed in Eleanor's friend Karen Combs from Cortland, Ohio. "There's $700 billion under Obamacare coming out of Medicare, and seniors should be more frightened over that."

The Medicare debate may be backfiring on The One, but this election will still come down to jobs, the economy, and debt. Gallup's latest survey shows Obama in big trouble on all three issues, with his disapproval creeping into the the high 50's and 60's on each:


General Motors is Headed For Bankruptcy -- Again

Forbes ^ | 8/15/2012 | Louis Woodhill

President Obama is proud of his bailout of General Motors. That’s good, because, if he wins a second term, he is probably going to have to bail GM out again. The company is once again losing market share, and it seems unable to develop products that are truly competitive in the U.S. market.

Right now, the federal government owns 500,000,000 shares of GM, or about 26% of the company. It would need to get about $53.00/share for these to break even on the bailout, but the stock closed at only $20.21/share on Tuesday. This left the government holding $10.1 billion worth of stock, and sitting on an unrealized

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Special Forces to Obama: You Didn't Kill Osama bin Laden, America Did! ^ | August 16, 2012 | Katie Pavlich

A group of former special forces and intel operatives, including Navy SEALs, are speaking out against President Obama's loose lips when it comes to top secret national security details and his bragging about killing Osama bin Laden. The Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund plans to launch an ad blitz slamming Obama for his behavior and attitude toward national security.

Dishonorable Disclosures

"It is my civic duty to tell the president to stop leaking national security secret to the enemy," former Navy SEAL Benjamin Smith says in the ad. "Mr. President, you did not kill Osama bin Laden, America did. The work that the American military has done killed Osama bin Laden. You did not."
Let's not forget President Obama punted the kill shot on bin Laden three times on behalf of Valerie Jarrett before finally giving the okay according to Leading From Behind by Richard Miniter.
In response, the Obama campaign is calling the group's criticism "swift-boat politics."

History Lesson on Your Social Security Card

Know your Social Security Card -- Interesting.

Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn't know this.
It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family
and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and
it doesn't matter
whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts.

Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and
card were not to be used for identification purposes.
Since nearly everyone in the
United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the
message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.

An old Social Security card with the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message.
Our Social SecurityFranklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund'
rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to

The General Fund and Spent

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore

Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we
paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' --
you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote
as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter
and the Democratic Party.

Immigrants moved into this country,
and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of
awareness will be planted and maybe changes will
But it's worth a try.
How many people can YOU send this to?

Hillary Goes to Hollywood, Hollywood Comes to Hillary

U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor ^ | Aug. 16, 2012 | Steve Peacock

Equipping U.S. embassies with the unlimited ability to show movies to residents and visitors over the next five years could cost taxpayers more than $1.5 million. The U.S. Department of State claims the expenditure is necessary since the U.S. uses "feature films as programming tools to support foreign policy objectives."

State's Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureau awarded the sole-source contract to the Motion Picture Licensing Corp. (MPLC) , which it says is the only source that can provide a worldwide blanket-viewing license for 800 facilities. According to a Statement of Work that U.S. Trade & Aid Monitor located via routine database research, those sites include U.S. embassies and consulates plus "off-site screenings at venues under U.S. embassy sponsorship, operation and direct control such as Binational Centers, American Corners and American Centers."
State consulted with the Motion Picture Association of America and other sources, which recommended MPLC since all other major providers solely offer "title-by-title licenses on a daily rental basis," according to an accompanying Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition, or JOFOC, document.

Navy SEAL responds after Media Matters (D) staffer says Obama-critical SEALs ‘don’t have guts’

The Daily Caller ^ | August. 16, 2012 | Vince Coglianese

Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert said on Thursday that a group of former Navy SEALS “don’t have guts” after the special forces operators launched a media campaign condemning the Obama administration’s national security leaks.

“#kindalame former Navy SEALs don’t have guts to admit they’re running a GOP, anti-Obama campaign; ” Boehlert wrote on Twitter Thursday morning.

The group Boehlert lashed out at is called the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund and it’s composed of former U.S. intelligence and specials forces operators. They describe themselves as non-partisan and finger the current president as an example of a politician who uses national security secrets for political gain.

“STOP the politicians, President Obama and others, from politically capitalizing on US national security operations and secrets!” reads the organization’s website.
Scott Taylor is a former Navy SEAL of eight and a half years, and was a 2010 GOP candidate for Congress. He is now a member of the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund.
Taylor responded to Boehlert’s tweet in a phone interview with The Daily Caller and said that his group of special forces operators is “clearly not gutless.”
“We’re clearly not gutless. We’re in the public right now, completely out there,” Taylor said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Voter Fraud Kept Congressman in Office!

National Review Online ^ | August 16,2012 | John Fund

A new Washington Post poll found that 74 percent of Americans support having voters show ID at the polls, and a full 81 percent think voter fraud is a problem.

They have reason to be concerned. This month, four staffers for former Michigan congressman Thad McCotter were indicted for forging signatures on petitions to place him on the ballot. McCotter resigned from Congress after evidence surfaced that his district office had been run like a political version of Animal House.

Democrats are, of course, outraged. “It’s a real punch in the gut, and I hope that voters out there are really watching and listening,” said Natalie Mosher, who ran against McCotter as a Democrat in 2010. “I’m angry, because I think the voters of the district got taken for a ride by this guy.”
Would that Democrats summoned as much outrage over the long history of voter fraud that has surrounded Michigan elections. In 2005, Detroit city clerk Jackie Currie was removed from office after Detroit mayor Kwame Kirkpatrick won a disputed second term partly on the basis of illegal absentee ballots cast in the names of dead people. Currie’s employees were accused of illegally assisting incapacitated people to vote by absentee ballot. Kirkpatrick himself was later forced to resign after being convicted on corruption charges.
But Democrats have been vociferous opponents of Michigan’s photo-ID law and other measures to clean up the voter rolls. The McCotter scandal should remind all of us that voter fraud is serious business and can be bipartisan. The laws and safeguards against it protect all of us.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Knowledge is Power – Defer the Bullshit! (Obama caught lying again)

Risks and Lies in Obama’s “Deferred Action for Undocumented Youth”

“Defer the Bullshit” is our ongoing effort to resist the propaganda around the Obama Administration’s new Deferred Action campaign for undocumented youth. While some youth *may* have a chance at relief, Deferred Action is at best insufficient, and at worst misleading, dangerous and deliberately deceptive. They call it a relief program – we call it an enforcement campaign. As always, Mr Obama is using immigrants as guinea pigs for his own political gains. “DEFER THE BULLSHIT” It is an effort to combat misinformation, dispel the myths – and to demand Mr. Obama use his executive powers for real solutions.
Here is our first video

Based on the “Defer the Bullshit” workshop, this video is a basic introduction to Prosecutorial Discretion, Deferred Action and some of the key risks for undocumented youth who voluntarily apply.
Read our statement!
Join us this week for two events
Press Conference:
Tuesday, August 14th at 11:30am, Outside Obama’s Campaign Headquarters (One Prudential Plaza)Immigrant Justice Organizers Denounce President Obama, Congressman Luis Gutierrez and I.C.I.R.R. for Misleading the Public About Deferred Action for Undocumented Youth
Chicago IL. – Members and supporters of the Moratorium on Campaign (MDC) launch a campaign to combat misinformation around the Obama Administration’s new Deferred Action campaign. We hold ICIRR, Congressman Gutierrez and Barack Obama responsible for the lives of youth who, following their misleading statements, will end up in ICE custody or deported.
Gathering: Knowledge Is Power! – The risks behind the hype
Wednesday, August 15, 8:30-10 AM, Outside Navy Pier
President Obama has advertised a new campaign supposedly granting relief to undocumented youth who meet certain criteria. But Homeland Security documents clearly state: even people who meet all the criteria may be rejected and turned over to I.C.E. There is no guarantee they will be granted any kind of relief, and the government will be able to initiate deportation proceedings against them, at any time. In addition, even if granted, Deferred Action does not represent a legal status or safety from deportation. It simply meas the government may temporarily postpone efforts to remove you.
Undocumented people have been living under conditions of constant terror imposed by this regime’s deportation policies. Any initiative that seems to offer some relief is understandably greeted with great hope. But this campaign promises nothing more than a chance that maybe the government will postpone its efforts to deport people – while exposing them to extreme risks, including the risk of deportation simply for applying! While Deferred Action may be a good option, or the only option, for people already in custody, it is incredibly cynical to bait young people who are not yet in custody and are therefore not yet subject to deportation, promising to postpone actions that have not been initiated against them in the first place.
Mr Obama, the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) and Congressman Luis Gutierrez have been misleading the public about the benefits and risks of Deferred Action for youth. ICIRR Chief Executive Officer Lawrence Benito stated “We encourage every undocumented youth who fits the criteria to take advantage of this great opportunity to come out of the shadows by applying for deferred action.” We consider it irresponsible to encourage people to apply without appropriately analyzing the risks involved. ICIRR has also stated that undocumented youth would be “free from deportation”. This statement is false: deferred action offers no protection from deportation. ICIRR and Congressman Luis Gutierrez have been recruiting people into a dangerous and uncertain situation for their own political gains.
The document at the root of all the hype is a memo released by Janet Napolitano, addressed to three branches of the Department of Homeland Security. While there has been much propaganda around this new campaign, it is clear this memo is not about justice, it is about enforcement. Further, a Memo is not a law, it is not a pardon or an executive order. And it offers no guarantees. It is a set of instructions from the DHS boss to the people who work in agencies under her command. It outlines a set of criteria for how Prosecutorial Discretion should be applied.
Prosecutorial Discretion has been used in the immigration system for 30 years, and is fundamental to the criminal justice system as well. It allows the authorities to decide on a case-by-case basis how, and if, to enforce laws against people. Discretion can be applied in your favor or against you; it is not based on laws, accountability or rights, but on administrative “priorities” set by different agencies at different times. In the US, this has lead to unchecked powers for prosecutors, police and ICE agents, who act with impunity against poor people, immigrants and people of color.
The new memo outlines a set of priorities in order to better enforce immigration laws through Prosecutorial Discretion. Obama has fashioned himself as the “tough on immigration” president, setting deportation quotas that put pressure or every agency, and every part of the system, to make as many people as possible subject to deportation. But the courts are backlogged, the system is clearly failing and DHS is unable to meet its own quotas. Instead of using his executive powers to provide real relief, Obama is finding “innovative” solutions based in “efficiency” and disinformation. The propaganda encourages youth who have not yet been detained, and who are not yet in custody, to turn themselves in to Homeland security – in exchange for the possibility that Prosecutorial Discretion may be used in their favor and they may be granted Deferred Action.But historically we have seen that Prosecutorial discretion is overwhelmingly applied against, not in favor, of immigrants at all stages of the enforcement process. And recent data show this as not changed even after Mr Obama’s previous campaign touting relief through Prosecutorial Discretion, represented by the Morton memo. Furthermore, Deferred Action offers no protection from deportation. Defer means to postpone, action refers to any action initiated by the government with the purpose of deporting someone. So Deferred Action, even if granted, means simply this: the government will temporarily postpone efforts to deport you, and this postponement can be rescinded at any time. It does not represent status or safety from deportation; and DHS decisions are final with no possibility of appeal.
While falsely promising *maybe* relief for some, the new Obama campaign is expanding enforcement in several significant ways:
  • Making more and more people deportable. Baiting youth to turn themselves over to Homeland Security makes more people subject to deportation. This is not only about the risks faced by these youth, who may be deported as a result of applying. We understand that criminalizing immigrants is not really about deporting 12 million people, but about making entire populations deportable, and therefore exploitable.
  • Reinforcing the good immigrant vs bad immigrant divide. This campaign promises “maybe” rewards for those deemed by the administration to be like “good Americans” while pushing for more enforcement against all others, who are by default more likely to be categorized as “criminal aliens”.
  • Expanding criminalization. The new campaign introduces the notion of “significant misdemeanor”, which is a new and very fuzzy category of crime. We have seen the tendency to expand and make more flexible what constitutes a “criminal alien” for deportation purposes. Every time new language is introduced to “invent” new crime categories, this represents an expansion of criminalization that affects all immigrants
  • Social justice movements are buying into the hype and are turning their focus away from demanding real solutions. We are supposed to believe this is a victory and to become facilitators of Obama’s campaign. Just as undocumented youth are “put to work” as unwaged ICE agents in apprehending themselves, social justice advocates and organizers are put to work as recruiters for Homeland Security.
  • Our eyes off the prize: keeping us focused on case-by-case solutions pushes demands for justice for all further and further into the background.
We will not be so easily duped. We refuse to be satisfied with case-by-case solutions. Our demands continue to be: justice for all!

We now have a “Comeback Team” to save a nation too beautiful to lose! ^ | August 16, 2012 | Jerry Todd, staff writer

Do we ever make the best choices to build and serve a great nation?
A dollar given is a dollar received by the one in need, yet;
It costs $1.20 in donations to deliver $1 in services;
It costs $2 in state taxes to deliver $1 in services; and
It costs $4 in federal taxes to deliver $1 in services.
Plain talk on simple economics, from the National Association of Life Underwriters, explains why big government isn’t always a great idea. The closer to the point of need, the better and the more diverse the solutions – the American secret.
Vice Presidential nominee Congressman Paul Ryan, as few do, fully understands the combined application of the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity – the key to USA’s past success. His fiscal genius tied to Mitt Romney’s business skills will lead the way back to prosperity to enrich people and serve the common good.
Subsidiarity is the opposite of entitlement. Solidarity is “e pluribus unum” and “In God we Trust” – not “us vs. them.” The Tea Party philosophy operates under chaos theory that even Alinskyite’s can’t cope with.
It’s understandable in a free man’s daily pursuit of happiness, but lost on pundits and angry groupies of George Soros or Ron Paul who always confuse Tea Party ideals.
We’ve got your back Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. ”Progressives” are never going to love you. They hate the country because of the religious and moral values that keep it worth saving.
This is way past politics – age old spiritual warfare whose lessons are seldom passed from one generation to the next, The Administration is warring against Jews and Christians and their myriad institutions of education and mercy......
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The New AA: Dr. Kimball’s Self-Help Program for Disillusioned Liberals

August 15, 2012 - 8:28 am - by Roger Kimball

You’re seeing these sad people everywhere these days, especially in large East-and West-Coast urban areas and on college campuses. At parties they alternate between a melancholy, far-away wistfulness and a muttering “why me?”-belligerence. They’re touchy and quick to blame others, and they seem to suffer from night sweats and vague feelings of persecution. Their symptoms worsened suddenly a few days ago when it was announced that Paul Ryan would be joining the Romney ticket as candidate for vice president.
These people are not conservatives. It’s not clear that they’re liberals, exactly, either, though in recent history they have, as it were, caucused with liberals, that is to say, with people who identify themselves as liberals (never mind how illiberal their policies and sentiments happen to be). Above all, however, they are part of the tout le monde: the people who think of themselves as being on the right side of history (corollary belief: they think history has sides and a direction). They go to the right cocktail parties. They have “advanced” (i.e., establishment) attitudes about art, culture, and morals. They are part of that group Harold Rosenberg memorably denominated “the herd of independent minds.”
Tom Wolfe exposed an extreme version of this cohort in his essay on the Black Panthers hosted by Leonard Bernstein in his elegant New York apartment. Wolfe contributed the term “radical chic” to the language to describe the Bernsteins and their wide-eyed guests. What we’re dealing with here is not quite radical (though Obama may in fact be plenty radical himself, the semi-beautiful people who support him are not), nor is it wholly chic. It is a sort of “consensus chic,” though I appreciate the aroma of contradiction the phrase communicates, since that which is genuinely chic exists self-consciously apart from the consensus of hoi polloi.

First time around, these people voted for Obama, giving themselves a little frisson of self-satisfaction when they pulled the lever and, even more, when the emitted condescension about anyone who happened to vote for John McCain — they didn’t encounter such people often, but it always gave them a little thrill of self-satisfaction when they did. It wasn’t long, however, before doubts began to accumulate. The seas didn’t subside, as promised, nor did the unemployment figures. By now, they’re thoroughly depressed. Their man has clearly let them down, and the inadvertent comedy of Joe Biden screaming that Republicans are going to “put y’all back in chains” isn’t helping. Even worse is the news that team R&R, the Romney-Ryan express, is surging among young voters.
It wasn’t supposed to turn out this way. The good “Liberals” (i.e., the illiberal liberals) who voted for Obama the first time around, the mostly white, privileged products of elite schools and progressive attitudes, were supposed to be on the winning side of all such controversies. They were the enlightened ones. Republicans, the people who voted for John McCain and — Ohmygod! — Sarah Palin, didn’t go to the right schools; didn’t ingest the proper balance of gluten free, free-range, macrobiotic, whatever; wore the wrong sorts of clothes; had funny hairdos; owned guns; and (often) were God-fearing people who took religion seriously. Such people were less objects of pity than of contempt, though when their politics were not on view they provided vast fodder for interventionist government programs aimed at transforming these unfortunates into consensus-chic, testosterone-free liberals.
The deep problem now is how to help the vast regiments of disillusioned liberals. As I’ve noted in this space before, momentum towards Romney is mounting. Soon, I predict, it will be all but irresistible. And then the consensus-chic liberals who had supported Obama in 2008 will be ideologically homeless. It is up to us to offer them a helping hand: a two-step program of recovery. Self-knowledge is the first step. They must have the courage to stand up before their friends and say, “I’m John Doe, and I supported Barack Obama.” Their friends, most of whom are likely to be in the same position, will applaud and tell their own war stories. About the time they blacked out at an Obama fundraiser, or the time they couldn’t remember who James Madison was. There will be solidarity in numbers.
Once that critical first step is taken, the rest will be easy. Sure, there will be bad days, days when a copy of the New York Times will be open beside them in a taxi, with an article by Paul Krugman staring them in the face, or nights when they find themselves at a party in which some acquaintances have yet to confront their addiction. It will be hard not to join in, to have just one sip of the old intoxicant. But with every day that passes, members of this new support group will gain in confidence. Soon they will be ready to take the important public step of declaring their support for the candidates who want to help America prosper and help Americans help themselves, who are not ashamed to criticize Obama’s dependency agenda as a prescription for national servitude. I’m not saying the process is painless. But the satisfactions of having stood up for oneself are great. More and more people are doing it today. Which means that even more will be doing it tomorrow.

Prominent Dem and Obama buddy won’t be prosecuted!

 Hot Air ^ | August 16,2012 | ED MORRISSEY

One of the relatively few criticisms of the Obama administration from the Left has been the curious lack of prosecutions over the 2008 financial collapse on Wall Street.

A criminal investigation into the collapse of the brokerage firm MF Global and the disappearance of about $1 billion in customer money is now heading into its final stage without charges expected against any top executives.

After 10 months of stitching together evidence on the firm’s demise, criminal investigators are concluding that chaos and porous risk controls at the firm, rather than fraud, allowed the money to disappear, according to people involved in the case.
Ahem. What kind of “porous risk controls” allowed MF Global to bet money that wasn’t theirs on Euro-zone debt? That seems to have faded from view as the issue at MF Global. It’s one thing for JP Morgan to bet the $6 billion farm on risky investments, but when a firm raids its customer accounts in an attempt to cover its own bad bets, that’s supposed to be a felony.
Jeff Carter at Points and Figures smells a rat:
After speaking with CCC lawyer James Koutoulas, and other pro traders I have no doubt that money was stolen from customer segregated funds. There is just too much smoking gun evidence. Anyone with experience in the industry would be able to sift through the legal machinations and malarky to understand the deception involved. If this were adjudicated in an Arbitration or Probable Cause Committee at an exchange, I am relatively confident that Corzine would be found guilty based on the circumstantial facts that I know.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Arizona governor: no public benefits for young immigrants

Reuters ^ | 8/16/2012 | David Schwartz

PHOENIX (Reuters) - Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer, in yet another clash with the White House, issued an order on Wednesday barring illegal immigrants who qualify for temporary legal status in the United States from receiving any state or local public benefits.
The action was a response to relaxed deportation rules issued by the Obama administration on Wednesday.
Brewer, whose state has been at the center of the country's immigration debate, issued an executive order denying state or local benefits to immigrants applying under the new federal immigration rules. The order would bar them from obtaining an Arizona driver's license or a state-issued identification card
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Great Political Ad That Helped Newcomer Defeat 12 Term Incumbant in Primary (must see video)

(Tea Party candidate Ted Yoho)

Twelve term Cliff Stearns, just learned that newcomer Ted Yoho has ended his career in Washington. While Stearns is a Republican, he lost in the primary to Tea Party candidate Ted Yoho. With a pledge to only serve 4 terms (8 years) in the House of Representative, Ted promises he will not become a lifetime politician like Stearns has. I would bet that this ad had a lot to do with convincing the voters to replace the intrenched Stearns. I think Republicans across the country who are tired of politics as usual, should borrow this idea to help defeat those politicians who think their seats are theirs for life.

While I am always happy to see a Tea Party candidate defeat a Rino, I must admit to being a bit confused, because Stearn is not a Rino. After all, Cliff is not only credited with leading the investigation of Planned Parenthood and Solyndra, but the National Taxpayers Union gives him an A, and the ACU gives him a 95% score over his 23 year career.
Recently, on June 14, 2012, ACU Chairman Al Cardenas issued the following statement about Stearns:
"Cliff Stearns is the clear conservative choice in Florida's Third District. His ACU lifetime congressional rating of 95 over 23 years of service reflects an outstanding and consistent commitment to conservative principles over a wide range of issues and is one of the highest in the Congress over that period of time."
"Whether the issue was reigning runaway federal spending, reducing crippling government regulation, protecting the rights of the unborn or protecting Second Amendment rights, year after year Cliff Stearns has been there for conservatives. I urge all conservatives to support Cliff Stearns for reelection in the Republican Primary August 14 and again in November."
From what I understand there was a trumped up charge of bribery against Stearns, which just brings to question of whether or not he was brought down by Obama's Alynsky friends for going after Planned Parenthood and Solyndra. Regardless of the reason for his downfall, it was quite a shock to conservatives that he lost.
As for Yoho, if he turns out to be as good as his supporters claim, then Obama and the Democrats may rue the day they helped bring down this 12 term Conservative incumbent. Time will tell, but in the mean time, let's all pray that Yoho doesn't turn out to be another wolf in sheep's clothing like Chief Justice Roberts.

Medicare Providers Paid Less So They'll Work Harder

BarackObamadotcom YouTube Channel ^ | 8/15/2012 | Obama Biden Truth Team

At about 1 minute into the video...

"Benefits to seniors actually increase under Obamacare which reduces payments to providers in exchange for more people covered by insurance."

In other words...

"Seniors get more when health providers are told they will be paid less to work harder and faster"

What a guy, our leader!

THE CLASS CLOWNS...with their leader and teacher!

THE CLASS CLOWNS...with their leader and teacher!

Obama's Shared Prosperity: A Euphemism Wrapped in a Lie

The American Thinker ^ | August 16, 2012 | Daren Jonescu

.....Forced "sharing" is coercion plain and simple. Government-enforced "sharing" is coercion at the point of a gun: "your prosperity or your life."

Go back over the list of implications of "shared prosperity" that I offered a few paragraphs back. This time, each time you see the word "sharing," try substituting "relinquishing at the point of a gun." Now you can see exactly what Obama's "new vision" for America really means. It means that you will no longer own yourself. You will no longer have first claim -- or any meaningful claim, for that matter -- on your goods, your time, the product of your sweat and thought, or the future you planned for yourself and your nearest and dearest.
And rather than thinking what an outrage this entails against you and your natural rights, turn the focus around for a moment. Could you demand that this be done to others, so that you could benefit from their coerced "sharing"? If not, then ask yourself why not. And then ask yourself what kind of people the left is hoping to appeal to, not only during this year's election in America, but always, everywhere.
This is the question any still-human supporter of a leftist party needs to have clarified for him. He must be compelled to see in a clear light just what he is supporting, and to ask himself whether, seen in this light, it is supportable. Leftism is not, and never has been, about "sharing," or "compassion," or any of the other moral euphemisms progressives use to hoodwink the intellectually and morally lazy. It is, and always has been, about that gun pointed at the prosperous -- and, ultimately, at everyone, since in the end, unfettered leftism eliminates prosperity pretty quickly, leaving only the extremely unprosperous to fend for themselves....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


Ann Coulter Dot Com ^ | 15 August 2012 | Ann Coulter

My smash best-seller "Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America" has just come out in paperback -- and not a moment too soon! Democrats always become especially mob-like during presidential election campaigns.

The "root cause" of the Democrats' wild allegations against Republicans, their fear of change, their slogans and insane metaphors, are all explained by mass psychology, diagnosed more than a century ago by the French psychologist Gustave Le Bon, on whose work much of my own book is based.
Le Bon's 1896 book, "The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind," was carefully read by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in order to learn how to incite mobs. Our liberals could have been Le Bon's study subjects.
With the country drowning in debt and Medicare and Social Security on high-speed bullet trains to bankruptcy, the entire Democratic Party refuses to acknowledge mathematical facts. Instead, they incite the Democratic mob to hate Republicans by accusing them of wanting to kill old people.
According to a 2009 report -- before Obama added another $5 trillion to the national debt -- Obama's own treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, stated that in less than 10 years, spending on major entitlement programs, plus interest payments on the national debt, would consume 92 cents of every dollar in federal revenue.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Higher Morals

Posted Image

Get Ryan!

Posted Image

The Chicago Way

Posted Image

Ohio Military Vote

Posted Image


Posted Image

Freedom of Speech

Posted Image


Posted Image

The Truth

Posted Image

Tolerance and Bigotry

Posted Image

Better Off?

Posted Image

Good Start?

Posted Image

Who built America?

Posted Image


Posted Image

Vastly Different

Posted Image


Posted Image

YIKES...slow down!

Posted Image

The End is coming!

Posted Image


Posted Image


Posted Image


Posted Image

Granny's Safety Net

Posted Image

Did Not Have Relations...

Posted Image

There is no California ^ | August 16, 2012 | Victor Davis Hanson

Driving across California is like going from Mississippi to Massachusetts without ever crossing a state line.

Consider the disconnects: California's combined income and sales taxes are among the nation's highest, but the state's deficit is still about $16 billion. It's estimated that more than 2,000 upper-income Californians are leaving per week to flee high taxes and costly regulations, yet California wants to raise taxes even higher; its business climate already ranks near the bottom of most surveys. Its teachers are among the highest paid on average in the nation, but its public school students consistently test near the bottom of the nation in both math and science.

The state's public employees enjoy some of the nation's most generous pensions and benefits, but California's retirement systems are underfunded by about $300 billion. The state's gas taxes -- at over 49 cents per gallon -- are among the highest in the nation, but its once unmatched freeways, like 101 and 99, for long stretches have degenerated into potholed, clogged nightmares unchanged since the early 1960s.

The state wishes to borrow billions of dollars to develop high-speed rail, beginning with a little-traveled link between Fresno and Corcoran -- a corridor already served by money-losing Amtrak. Apparently, coastal residents like the idea of European high-speed rail -- as long as noisy and dirty construction does not begin in their backyards.
As gasoline prices soar, California chooses not to develop millions of barrels of untapped oil and even more natural gas off its shores and beneath its interior. Home to bankrupt green companies like Solyndra, California has mandated that a third of all the energy provided by state utilities soon must come from renewable energy sources -- largely wind and solar, which presently provide about 11 percent of its electricity and almost none of its transportation fuel.
How to explain the seemingly inexplicable? There is no California, which is a misnomer. There is no such state. Instead there are two radically different cultures and landscapes with little in common, each equally dysfunctional in quite different ways. Apart they are unworldly, together a disaster.
A postmodern narrow coastal corridor runs from San Diego to Berkeley, where the weather is ideal, the gentrified affluent make good money, and values are green and left-wing. This Shangri-La is juxtaposed to a vast impoverished interior, from the southern desert to the northern Central Valley, where life is becoming premodern.
On the coast, blue-chip universities like Cal Tech, Berkeley, Stanford and UCLA in pastoral landscapes train the world's doctors, lawyers, engineers and businesspeople. In the hot interior of blue-collar Sacramento, Turlock, Fresno and Bakersfield, well over half the incoming freshman in the California State University system must take remedial math and science classes.
In postmodern Palo Alto or Santa Monica, a small cottage costs more than $1 million. Two hours away, in premodern and now-bankrupt Stockton, a bungalow the same size goes for less than $100,000.
In the interior, unemployment in many areas peaks at over 15 percent. The theft of copper wire is reaching epidemic proportions. Thousands of the shrinking middle class flee the interior for the coast or nearby no-income-tax states. To fathom the state's nearly unbelievable statistics -- as the state population grew by 10 million from the mid-1980s to 2005, its number of Medicaid recipients increased by 7 million during that period; one-third of the nation's welfare recipients now reside in California -- visit the state's hinterlands.
But in the Never-Never Land of Apple, Facebook, Google, Hollywood and the wine country, millions live in an idyllic paradise. Coastal Californians can afford to worry about the state's trivia -- as their legislators seek to outlaw foie gras, shut down irrigation projects to save the 3-inch delta smelt, and allow children to have legally recognized multiple parents.
But in the less feel-good interior, crippling regulations curb timber, gas and oil, and farm production. For the most part, the rules are mandated by coastal utopians who have little idea where the gas for their imported cars comes from, or how the redwood is cut for their decks, or who grows the ingredients for their Mediterranean lunches of arugula, olive oil and pasta.
On the coast, it's politically incorrect to talk of illegal immigration. In the interior, residents see first-hand the bankrupting effects on schools, courts and health care when millions arrive illegally without English-language fluency or a high school diploma -- and send back billions of dollars in remittances to Mexico and other Latin American countries.
The drive from Fresno to Palo Alto takes three hours, but you might as well be rocketing from Earth to the moon.

Recruit George McGovern to Speak -- at the REPUBLICAN Convention! ^ | August 16, 2012 | Larry Elder

Shrewd move in choosing House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., as running mate for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Now here's the next play: Invite George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic presidential candidate, to speak this month in Tampa at the Republican National Convention.

Yes, that old lefty McGovern. You know the expression, "A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged"? Well, McGovern has been mugged.
The most left-wing Democratic presidential candidate this side of Barack Obama, former Sen. McGovern, D-S.D., proposed giving every man, woman and child an annual $1,000 "demogrant." In his nomination acceptance speech, McGovern made the same case that Obama makes today -- capitalism and free markets let us down, and social justice require universal health coverage: "A program to put America back to work demands that work be properly rewarded. That means the end of a system of economic controls in which labor is depressed, but prices and corporate profit run sky-high. It means a system of national health insurance so that a worker can afford decent health care for himself and his family."
McGovern's left-wing bona fides are beyond questioning.
Sen. Bobby Kennedy, D-N.Y., himself a presidential candidate in 1968, called McGovern the "only decent man in the Senate." A decorated World War II bomber pilot, McGovern fiercely opposed the Vietnam War and pushed for a complete and immediate withdrawal of American troops. Name a tax hike, spending bill or new regulation, and very likely McGovern supported it. But after he left the Senate in 1981, something happened that profoundly changed several of his most deeply held views.
McGovern went into business for himself -- and went bust.
Following the recommendation of a friend with "a lifetime of hotel- and restaurant-management experience," McGovern bought a small hotel and restaurant, the Stratford Inn in Connecticut. He poured his savings into the place, investing his seven year's worth of post-Senate earnings from the lecture circuit.
A contributing factor to the failure, according to McGovern, was the regulations that make it tough to make a profit. In a mea culpa that should chill every lefty on the Hill, McGovern said: "I wish I had known more firsthand about the concerns and problems of American businesspeople while I was a U.S. senator and later a presidential nominee. That knowledge would have made me a better legislator and a more worthy aspirant to the White House. ... I learned first of all that over the past 20 years America has become the most litigious society in the world. ... The second lesson I learned by owning the Stratford Inn is that legislators and government regulators must more carefully consider the economic and management burdens we have been imposing on U.S. businesses. ... Many businesses, especially small independents such as the Stratford Inn, simply can't pass such costs on to their customers and remain competitive or profitable."
"I wish I had known more firsthand about the concerns and problems of American businesspeople." Holy Ayn Rand! Then in the spring of 2008, McGovern wrote an article called, "Freedom Means Responsibility":
"Many people can't afford the gold-plated health plans that are the only options available in their states," wrote McGovern. "Buying health insurance on the Internet and across state lines, where less expensive plans may be available, is prohibited by many state insurance commissions. Despite being able to buy car or home insurance with a mouse click, some state governments require their approved plans for purchase or none at all. It's as if states dictated that you had to buy a Mercedes or no car at all."
This is, of course, exactly what Republicans, pre-ObamaCare, offered as one of the ways to increase the affordability of health care insurance -- without further government intrusion.
McGovern, in warning about excessive regulation, sounded almost Reaganesque: "Under the guise of protecting us from ourselves, the right and the left are becoming ever more aggressive in regulating behavior. ... Since leaving office, I've written about public policy from a new perspective: outside looking in. I've come to realize that protecting freedom of choice in our everyday lives is essential to maintaining a healthy civil society.
"Why do we think we are helping adult consumers by taking away their options? We don't take away cars because we don't like some people speeding. We allow state lotteries despite knowing some people are betting their grocery money. Everyone is exposed to economic risks of some kind. But we don't operate mindlessly in trying to smooth out every theoretical wrinkle in life.
"The nature of freedom of choice is that some people will misuse their responsibility and hurt themselves in the process. We should do our best to educate them, but without diminishing choice for everyone else."
McGovern did a lot of damage while in Congress. Here's a chance for him to help undo some of it. For the sake of the country, McGovern should share his hard-earned wisdom -- at the Republican National Convention.
Invite him, Mitt. If he can't make it, then quote him.

Would you say no to the Vice President?

Would you say no to the Vice President?
One New River Valley business owner turned Vice President Joe Biden down.

This might happen more than you think from both political parties, most businesses just don't talk about it. The owner of "Crumb and Get It" - did.

Chris McMurray's bakery has been open only since May, barely three months.

Wednesday morning, advance teams for Vice President Joe Biden walked in.
"I approached her she said Joe Biden is coming to town today," McMurray said.
"Crumb and Get It" is a mom and pop store. Literally. Chris and his wife Kelly run the place and need all the business they can get.
McMurray said the Vice President's entourage got to the point and made its pitch.
"She said they have selected 'Crumb and Get It" to be his stop on his way to Blacksburg and was wondering if that was ok."
Here's the part that might make other business owners crazy.
"This is an opportunity of a lifetime but essentially I said 'No offense to you or the campaign but I just decline you guys coming in here. At that time she said 'Are you sure? There's going to be a lot of press, a lot of activity,’" McMurray said.
Why in the world would a new business owner say "no" to a photo op with the Vice President of the United States?

McMurray said it was President Obama's recent remarks about small business and who built what.

"Very simply, ‘you didn't build that’” McMurray said. “Speaking of small businesses and entrepreneurs all across this country and actually last night my wife was up all night. No sleep, she's worked a full 24 hours."

When "Crumb and Get It" said 'no', “River City Grill,” just around the corner, said 'yes' and has the pictures to prove it, and didn't care about the politics.
"If you want to throw in some libertarians as well that's fine too. Stop in as well,” Chris Bell said. “Just bring your money. Sure, right!
Back at the bakery, a couple of guys said they'd hoped to see Biden and didn't care that the VP had been turned away.
"I mean it really doesn't matter to me. Everyone has their own views so I love the food here anyway. I agree. Everybody's different so I could care less," said Spenser Critterton of Radford.

Here's the back story, we’re told that shortly after Crumb and Get It told Biden’s advance people 'no' -- the secret service walked in and told Chris McMurray ''Thanks for standing up and saying 'no' -- then they bought a whole bunch of cookies and cupcakes.

McMurray said he's hoping folks will understand he just didn't want to be part of a photo op for an administration whose policies he doesn’t agree with.

RNC Chairman Priebus: ‘Obama stole $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obamacare’

The Examiner ^ | 8/13/2012 | Christopher Collins

Yesterday, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press and presented that Medicare will go bankrupt by 2024 if nothing is done about the problem.

He also stated that Obama stole the money, over $700 billion to fund Obamacare.

In the interview, Priebus said, “If we do nothing and if we go down this road that the president wants to go down and these Democrats, Medicare will be changed forever as we know it. It will be bankrupt by 2024. Medicare is going broke. Every person in America watching this now knows that that’s true.”
“This president stole, he didn’t — he didn’t cut Medicare. He stole $700 billion from Medicare to fund ObamaCare. If any person in this entire debate has blood on their hands in regard to Medicare, it’s Barack Obama. He is the one that’s destroying Medicare,” said Priebus. “We are the ones that are offering solutions as to how to, number one, preserve Medicare for seniors that are at or near retirement, and number two, figure out a way to make sure that for future generations, we’re talking about if you’re 54 or younger, how to save Medicare and social security.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The following is a poem written by Judge Roy Moore from Alabama

Judge Moore was sued by the ACLU for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courtroom foyer. He has been stripped of his judgeship and now they are trying to strip his right to practice law in Alabama ! The judge's poem sums it up quite well.

America? the beautiful,
or so you used to be.
Land of the Pilgrims' pride;
I'm glad they'll never see.

Babies piled in dumpsters,
Abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty;
your house is on the sand.

Our children wander aimlessly
poisoned by cocaine
choosing to indulge their lusts,
when God has said abstain

From sea to shining sea,
our Nation turns away
From the teaching of God's love
and a need to always pray

We've kept God in our
temples, how callous we have grown.
When earth is but His footstool,
and Heaven is His throne.

We've voted in a government
that's rotting at the core,
Appointing Godless Judges;
who throw reason out the door,

Too soft to place a killer
in a well deserved tomb,
But brave enough to kill a baby
before he leaves the womb.

You think that God's not
angry, that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will He wait
before His judgment comes?

How are we to face our God,
from Whom we cannot hide?
What then is left for us to do,
but stem this evil tide?

If we who are His children,
will humbly turn and pray;
Seek His holy face
and mend our evil way:

Then God will hear from Heaven;
and forgive us of our sins,
He'll heal our sickly land
and those who live within.

But, America the Beautiful,
If you don't - then you will see,
A sad but Holy God
withdraw His hand from Thee..
~~Judge Roy Moore~~

The Horse

So the Romneys are selfish for keeping a horse? And employing a groom with a family to support. And paying for feed that’s sold by someone with a family to support and transported in trucks by someone with a family to support and manufactured in a factory by people with families to support from stuff that’s grown by farmers with families to support. And having a barn built by construction workers with families to support with materials trucked by drivers with families to support from factories with workers with families to support. Sounds to me like that one horse has done more to put Americans to work than that horse’s ass in the White House. AMEN!!!!!!!!