Friday, September 14, 2012

Islamist explosion not over film!

The Washington Times ^ | September 14, 2012 | Editorial

There is no rational justification for irrational mob violence!

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is emphatic that the anti-Islam video “Innocence of Muslims” is “disgusting.” This happens to be what most Americans feel about our flag being desecrated. For some reason, foreign governments don’t heap praise on the United States and its traditions every time their people commit acts of disrespect toward us. U.S. politicians could learn from their example.

In belated remarks Thursday marking the end of Ramadan, Mrs. Clinton expressed official disapproval of the film which has been blamed for the latest wave of anti-U.S. violence in the Muslim world. She made a reasonable point that people shouldn’t respond with violence when their religion is denigrated. Unfortunately, though, we aren’t dealing with reasonable people. Islamists don’t care about the Western tradition of tolerance, To them, it is one of our country’s many faults.
Mrs. Clinton has stressed that the U.S. government had nothing to do with the film, but this point is irrelevant. It didn’t matter to the extremists that the four Americans slain in Libya probably never heard of the movie clip. To the bloodthirsty mob, an American is an American. All are equally guilty; the four in Libya were simply available.
Wissam Buhmeid, commander of Libyan security forces in Benghazi, admitted his men abandoned the Americans to their fate because of the supposed insult to Muhammad. “There were definitely people from the security forces who let the attack happen because they were themselves offended by the film,” he said...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

One Year Ago: Barack Obama Declared Peace in Our Time at the United Nations!

Rush ^ | September 14, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh


RUSH: Al Jazeera is reporting that American and Israeli flags are being burned in London. Israeli and US flags being burned in London according to Al Jazeera. We know that the University of Texas has evacuated their campus after a phoned-in bomb threat from Al-Qaeda. No bombs were found. Fargo, North Dakota, state university has ordered all employees and students off campus after receiving a bomb threat. But everything's okay because I got an e-mail from the Obama campaign. Ambassadors are being murdered, former SEALs are dying, embassies are burning across the Middle East, but don't worry, we have finally outraised Romney. Right there it is, folks. That's the e-mail. There it is. There's the picture of Obama smiling at the podium. "In August, we finally outraised Mitt Romney and the Republicans. Don't let it be the last time."

I mentioned, ladies and gentlemen, that I'm confused. See, I remember that when Bush was president, Abu Ghraib was going to incite Muslims all over the world. And what happened at Abu Ghraib? Well, we had the pyramid. We had panties on the heads of Islamist terrorists. Club Gitmo was open, where we were creating terrorists. And all of this was because of Bush. All we had to do was get rid of Bush, and there would be universal love and respect for America once again. There wouldn't be any of this, and even if there were, idiots with cameras, the world wouldn't care what those idiots with cameras did because Obama was in office and we didn't have Bush anymore.
We didn't have the problem anymore. We got rid of the problem, and we had the solution. "Barack Hussein Obama! Mmm! Mmm! Mmm!" I was reminded this morning of a program that we did about a year ago, Obama at the United Nations. I want to go back, ladies and gentlemen, to last year's Obama speech at the United Nations. I had totally forgotten this until I was reminded of it. It is amazing to go back and listen to Obama a year ago, given what's happening now, and there are three of these sound bites. Here is a montage. This blew me away. I remember last year being beside myself hearing Obama say this at the United Nations.
OBAMA 2011: The fact is, peace is hard. Let us remember, peace is hard. It will be hard, but it is possible. Peace is hard. Peace is hard work. Peace is hard, but we know that it is possible.
RUSH: That was his UN speech. It's a montage of all the times he had talked about how tough peace was. Peace is hard. This was the guy who had already won the Nobel Peace Prize before he had done anything. And then at the same speech Obama reviewed how he had changed the world and buried violence with Osama Bin Laden.
OBAMA 2011: This has been a remarkable year. The Khadafy regime is over. Gbagbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak, are no longer in power. Osama Bin Laden is gone, and the idea that change could only come through violence has been buried with him. Something's happening in our world. The way things have been is not the way that they will be.
RUSH: We're going to play that again. Barack Hussein Obama, September 21st, just a week shy of one year ago, 2011 in New York City at the United Nations. This is the same thing as saying, "It was Bush that caused all the problems. Underwear on those guys' heads at Abu Ghraib. The pyramid photos. Abu Ghraib in general, all those pictures. Club Gitmo being open. Bush did it. I'm in power, world loves me, world will love me, world respects me." Here it is again.
OBAMA 2011: This has been a remarkable year. The Khadafy regime is over. Gbagbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak, are no longer in power. Osama Bin Laden is gone, and the idea that change could only come through violence has been buried with him. Something's happening in our world. The way things have been is not the way that they will be.
RUSH: How does that sound today? "Something is happening." All these things he did didn't matter. "Khadafy regime is over." Yeah, our ambassador is dead. "Gbagbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak no longer in power." Yeah, the American flag's being torn down. The Al-Qaeda flag is being raised. Embassies are burning. There are fires burning all over the world. Now we're evacuating University of Texas at Austin, in Fargo. The American flag and the Israeli flag on fire in London. Yep. Something's happening. Something's happening. Sound bite number six, Erin Burnett last night on her show on CNN. They're in crisis because the Egyptians on the street are blaming Obama.
BURNETT: Ben, obviously they feel Obama is guilty, Obama is guilty, Obama is guilty. Tell us more about that man and some of the others who were expressing such anger.
WEDEMAN: Many of the people I spoke with had no idea that the US government has come out and expressed its disgust with this video clip that appeared on YouTube, and that there seems to be an unawareness about the fact that the United States government does not control every single thing that appears on the Internet. So it seems to be one of the problems here is that there's just a lack of understanding of how the media operates in the United States and that the act of one individual is not the act of the government.

RUSH: They're blaming Obama. They're blaming Obama, but, of course, ladies and gentlemen, the people on the street don't know that Hillary has come out and condemned the video. Has anybody seen this video, by the way? Have you seen it? This video hasn't been seen by anybody. The video, in fact, may be a hoax. This isn't what's going on. This mob is no different than a mob that community organizers in this country agitate with a bunch of lies and, you know, stuff about steel mills and stuff, get 'em all worked up. Just got a bunch of community organizers over there in Egypt working the crowd up and I'm sure the video is what they're being told. But that's not why the organizers are doing this. That's not why the Al-Qaeda leaders are doing it.

It's not about a video. They're doing it because they think they can get away with it. They're doing it because they know they can get away with it. And Mrs. Clinton going on television yesterday and today speaking to people like they're five years old, (imitating Clinton) "We really hope that people wouldn't take their cameras and make videos, but we have a First Amendment, and we can't put people in dungeons like you can, at least not yet, and we can't torture people like you do. Not yet, so we have this problem. We have a Constitution, free speech and..." It was the most embarrassing. I guarantee you these people are clueless. Hillary, Obama, they don't know what's going on. I really believe that they believe their own PR. I really think they believe all this garbage Obama says. He's in office, the world will swoon, the world will love America because of the power of his personality. I think they're dumbfounded. How could they not be? All they are is theoreticians. They've never lived in the real world. Back to audio sound bite number three.

Back to Obama. September 21st, 2011, New York City, United Nations speech.

OBAMA 2011: The men and women who built this institution understood that peace is more than just the absence of war. A lasting peace -- for nations and for individuals -- depends on a sense of justice and opportunity, of dignity and freedom.

RUSH: He lifted my Undeniable Truth of Life number four! Undeniable Truth of Life number four is, "Peace does not mean the absence of war." Anyway, we clearly have somebody in over their head. I can't tell you the number of people who are asking me, "Rush, where is Obama?" He's fundraising! Tuesday he's gonna be with Jay-Z. He's gonna be on Letterman. He's out fundraising. They're sending out e-mails bragging about how they outraised Romney, finally, in August.

There are people scratching their heads, and they can't figure out what the president's doing. Now, I opened the program by saying that I'm really confused. All we've heard since Obama killed bin Laden is that Al-Qaeda's been destroyed and the War on Terror is essentially over -- and it was actually kind of a trumped-up War on Terror. We never should have actually called it a War on Terror. That was just more Bush jingoism.

Yet not only are US embassies and businesses all across the Middle East being attacked and torched, the University of Texas at Austin had to be evacuated. Bomb threat. Somebody claiming to be Al-Qaeda. Don't these people read the New York Times? Don't they listen to Obama? Don't they know there is no more War on Terror? Don't they know that with Osama being buried wherever, that that was the end of Al-Qaeda? The Associated Press... This is amazing. We found this.

The Associated Press just last week, on September 8th, the headline was: "Terror Takes Backseat; Americans Safer Now." Saturday, September the 8th, AP. "As Americans debate whether they are better off now than they were four years ago, there is a similar question with a somewhat easier answer: Are you safer now than you were when President Barack Obama took office? By most measures, the answer is yes." Six days ago!

They were getting creamed on the, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" economy question. So AP and the other media collaborators get in gear. Oh, and the New York Times today has a story. It is unbelievable! I can't wait to tell you about this. It is just so obviously in the tank, excusing Obama for this gaffe on Egypt not being an ally. It's hilarious. If it weren't so scary and maddening and frustrating that this is how corrupt the media has become, it's hilarious.

But so is this, if you have the ability to look at any of this as funny. September the 8th! "As Americans debate..." There's no debate! We are not better off than we were four years ago. There isn't a debate about it. But nevertheless AP says, "As Americans debate whether they're better off now than they were four years ago, there is a similar question with a somewhat easier answer: Are you safer now than you were when Obama took office."

And, of course, "By most measures," the AP says, "the answer is yes." University of Texas-Austin; Fargo, North Dakota; London; what's happening in the Middle East. Oh, yeah! "While the threat of a terrorist attack has not disappeared, the combined military, intelligence, diplomatic and financial efforts to hobble al-Qaeda and its affiliates have escalated over the past four years and paid off." This is six days ago, folks! I love this. This is what happens.
When you live by the lie, you die by it.

When you fall on the sword, it stabs you all the way to your heart.

This is AP. Shameless! A story to try to deflect attention from how woefully worse people are economically four years ago and dredge up, "Oh, yeah, but we're really safer. It's exactly what Obama said! Get rid of Bush, close Abu Ghraib, close down Gitmo, and someday everything will be safer. Obama says Al-Qaeda's gone with Osama's death," and here comes the AP now looking like absolute fools, looking like absolute idiots.

"Terror leaders," they say, "including Osama bin Laden, are dead and their networks in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia disrupted. ... As a result, terrorism worries have taken a back seat to the nation’s economic woes. Unlike previous elections, national security is not a big campaign issue this year." Well, it might not-a been six days ago.

"'I would have said four years ago that the al-Qaeda movement was emerging as a bigger problem, especially with the emergence of affiliates in places like Yemen and with the spike in homegrown attacks,' said Phil Mudd, a senior counterterrorism official at the CIA and FBI during the Bush and Obama administrations. 'But I would say today that al-Qaedaism is on the decline. By any balance, the number of places where people want to come after us has declined in the past four years.'"

This is the AP on September 8th, six days ago.

Rep. Sherman: 12 million illegals ‘need documents’ to be able to unionize!

[VIDEO at Link]

The Daily Caller ^ | September 14, 2012 | Sean Rainey

WASHINGTON — California Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman said at a press conference on immigration outside the Capitol Friday afternoon that America needs immigration reform to help those here illegally while also allowing them unionize for better wages.

“We need a regular process by which the 12 million people who are part of our society can be fully part of our society, and they need documents,” the congressman said. “It’s important for the labor market of this country because as long as there are 12 million people without documents, there are 12 million people who can’t stand up for their rights as workers, and that means there are 12 million people who can be used by unscrupulous employers to keep down wages and to prevent unions from organizing.”
Sherman was joined at the press conference by Rep. Judy Chu, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and Rep. Lloyd Doggett. Each member thanked President Obama for his executive order to stop the deportation of certain illegal immigrants, but they said it was only the first step in a process Congress needs to finish.
“We’re so glad that President Obama announced his policy for deferred action,” said Chu. “Now students who came here through now fault on their own can qualify to stay here, but that’s not enough. We need to address all the problems of our broken system. That means passing the Dream Act permanently.”
On June 15, President Obama issued an executive order announcing deferred action on deportation. “Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children will be allowed to remain in the country without fear of deportation and able to work.”
The House of Representatives in 2010 passed the Dream Act by a vote of 216–198, however, the bill died in the Senate when it failed to reach 60 votes for cloture.
The president in a statement following the House’s passage of the Dream Act said, “This vote is not only the right thing to do for a group of talented young people who seek to serve a country they know as their own by continuing their education or serving in the military, but it is the right thing for the United States of America.”
Rep. Green said it wrong for America as a country to educate children who were brought here as young children by their parents and then deport them to a country they do not even know.
“No country in the world would take a child whose grown up in their country, gone to public schools, gone to college, and tell them ‘you’re not going to get your legal residency. Go back and stand in line at our consulate in Mexico.’ That is wrong.”
Jackson Lee echoed Green’s statements. She said under a second Obama term, the United States will have its “dream kids.”
“We want comprehensive immigration reform, and we will not stop until we achieve it and as this president is re-elected we will not only have our dream kids, the ones that I’ve worked with in my office, but we’ll have their families. We’ll have their grandparents. We’ll have returning soldiers have the right to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States as American citizens.”
Supporters of the Dream Act plan to hold a march at the Lincoln Memorial at midnight on Sept. 15, 2012.

'Obama's Middle East Policy Is in Ruins' ^

After days of protests over an anti-Islam film, American diplomatic missions in the Middle East and North Africa were braced for further violence after Friday prayers. The US put its overseas missions on high alert.

Germany has closed its embassies in a number of Muslim-majority countries in fear of attacks. "We are observing how the security situation develops with great attentiveness and we have increased security precautions at a number of foreign missions," a spokesman for the German Foreign Office told SPIEGEL ONLINE. Embassies in North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan are believed to be among those affected.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

I'm Sorry!

Obama administration can’t get its embassy story straight!

The Washington Post's Right Turn ^ | September 14, 2012 | Jennifer Rubin

Jay Carney in the White House briefing room today:

This is, to put it bluntly, horrifying. At the very least it is incoherent.

On one hand, the White House press secretary says we know the attacks are completely about a film, and not about the U.S. . . . but then we don’t have any information it wasn’t about a film.
Have we done some investigation? What about reports that people storming our embassies hadn’t seen or hear about the film? And does the administration not understand that radical jihadists use such incidents to spur Muslims to violence? I don’t know how shouts of “We are all Osama!” and the raising of an al-Qaeda flag on 9-11 could be any clearer.
Moreover, if Carney’s statement is really the view of the U.S. administration — namely, that murderous mobs are simply the result of insulting provocation — then why weren’t the initial statement from the Cairo embassy and its reiteration perfectly acceptable? After all the embassy said, in effect, we really, really think that film is awful...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Bernanke And The Fed Just Gave Romney A Huge Gift

American Enterprise Institute ^ | 14 September 2012 | James Pethokoukis
Posted on Friday, September 14, 2012 5:47:43 PM by zeestephen
President Obama and his fellow Democrats spent their convention down in Charlotte trying to persuade voters that the U.S. economy is on the right track...But yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke finally admitted what most folks outside Washington already knew: The economy, three years into a supposed recovery, remains in terrible shape...

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Two weeks ago Bernanke claimed that "QE-1" and "QE-2" created 2 million jobs. No journalist asked the next logical question...
Does that mean Obama created just 750,000 jobs?
******** ********
The common wisdom among the punditocracy is that the Federal Reserve’s announcement of its new, open-ended bond-buying program will provide a big boost to President Obama’s reelection by juicing the stock market and economy.
Actually, however, the Fed’s monetary move could give a huge messaging boost to Mitt Romney if his campaign plays it right.
Imagine this speech by the Republican nominee:
President Obama and his fellow Democrats spent their convention down in Charlotte trying to persuade voters that the U.S. economy is on the right track, that the president’s policies are working, that no president could have done a better job with the mess he inherited, that all that could be done has been done by this administration, that we must stay the course.
But yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke finally admitted what most folks outside Washington already knew: The economy, three years into a supposed recovery, remains in terrible shape and is unlikely to get much better anytime soon.
In fact, Bernanke said there’s such little hope for improvement that he and the Fed are going to embark on a radical new experiment in money printing in order to try and do something, anything, to boost growth and create jobs.
In short, the Fed chairman’s move clearly suggested Obamanomics isn’t working today and is unlikely to work any better tomorrow. We cannot stay the course. And since Washington won’t act, he will.
But let’s take a step back for a second and recall how we got here.
In late 2007, a collapsed housing bubble helped push America into its worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Millions lost their jobs; millions more saw their savings disappear and salaries cut.
Now, the Great Recession officially ended more than three years ago in the summer of 2009 — at least that’s what the economists who get to decide such things tell us.
So for the past three years, we have officially been in an economic recovery. But although the economy has been growing rather than shrinking, by almost all other measures we’re still in a bad recession. Incomes are lower today than they were when the supposed recovery started. In fact, incomes have fallen faster during the recovery than during the recession itself.
And although the economy has slowly been adding jobs, the pace has been so miserably slow that unemployment has been stuck above 8% for 43 straight months, which hasn’t happened since the 1930s.
And if government number counters quit ignoring all those discouraged Americans who want a job but have given up looking, the unemployment rate would be over 11%.
For American workers, the Great Recession never ended.
Now, all those numbers I just mentioned? You didn’t hear any of them at the Democrats’ big party down in Charlotte — not from Barack Obama or Joe Biden or Bill Clinton. They also forget to mention that the president’s own economists said his policies, including the stimulus, would result in an unemployment rate this year of below 6%, not above 8%. And those same economists said the economy would be booming right now, growing at more than 4%. Instead it is growing at less than 2% — so slowly in fact, that if anything goes wrong, we’ll be right back in an official recession.
By Obama’s own standards, Obamanomics has failed. After wasting four years of precious time implementing policies that have never worked in the past, the American economy remains broken. I know it, you know it, Ben Bernanke knows it. Maybe, deep down, even President Obama knows it.
My fellow Americans, trillion dollar deficits and Fed money printing is no way to rebuild the American economy. After all, too much debt and too much cheap money is how we got into this mess in the first place.
So I propose a different way. First, we should look at what’s worked in the past.
Like JFK and Ronald Reagan, we should cut tax rates on business and entrepreneurs and small business and the middle class. And like Bill Clinton, we should reduce government spending. Cutting taxes and reducing spending will shift more resources back into the private sector where they can be used more productively than by Washington.
Second, we should look at what hasn’t worked in the past and stop doing that. Crony capitalism doesn’t work, whether it’s subsidies for pet presidential projects like Solyndra or for Obama campaign contributors like big banks. So as president, I will reform the tax code so that it promotes economic growth, not special favors and loopholes.
Third, ….
Well, Team Romney can finish the rest if it wants. This is still a close presidential race and winnable for the Republicans. But they need to seize opportunities like this one when they come along. Time is running out.

Fatal Arab Spring ^ | September 13, 2012 | By NRO Symposium

What does the deadly violence against U.S. officials in Libya and Egypt say about the Arab Spring? Is Mitt Romney ready to lead in this international atmosphere? Is our current president?
SHOSHANA BRYEN The violence in Egypt and Libya — now spreading to Morocco and Kuwait — is an indication that the U.S. is unable to buy leverage. We bombed Qaddafi and undermined Mubarak on behalf of the revolution, but it has not engendered warm feelings toward us — or our president — in their successors. (In Morocco, they’re carrying signs that say “Death to Obama.”) Revolutionary movements either have, or are co-opted by people who have, well-developed ideologies and agendas. The Muslim Brotherhood was forged over the course of decades spent in Egyptian jails. Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, the Haqqani network, Hamas, and Hezbollah know what they want to achieve, and it has nothing to do with representative democracy. They can’t be bought by a few months, or even years, of American largesse or by America’s dumping of Israel. This should be a warning about what we think we can accomplish by arming the “Syrian rebels.”
President Obama wanted our troubles in the region to be the fault of President Bush, but it wasn’t true. The problems in the Middle East are the result of festering tribal, religious, and ethnic hatreds fueled by oil money, a reasonably educated public, and better communications.
America’s problem is that it fails to understand that the enemy of my enemy is not my friend. He is only closer to me than my enemy, and only for now.
— Shoshana Bryen is senior director of the Jewish Policy Center.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

So, evidently we've learned nothing in the past 2,067 years.

“The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance.”

Cicero , 55 BC.

So, evidently we've learned nothing in the past 2,067 years. 

‘Obama Is the Most Dangerous President We Have Ever Had on American Foreign Policy’

CNSNews ^ | September 14, 2012 | Melanie Hunter

( – Speaking at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on Friday called President Barack Obama “the most dangerous president we have ever had on American foreign policy.”

“So let’s make sure that with everything within us, we lay it on the line in the next 50 days, because it is my belief and my opinion that Barack Obama has been the most dangerous president we have ever had on American foreign policy. And we cannot sustain another four years of Jimmy Carter-like policies,” she said at the summit, which is sponsored by the conservative pro-family group the Family Research Council.

Bachmann, a former GOP presidential candidate and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, which deals with the nation’s classified secrets, called it “déjà vu all over again,” with the recent attack on U.S. embassies oversees, which led to the murders of the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three of his staff members, “in a way that we saw in the late 1970s.”
“Staggering unemployment, high gas prices, a struggling economy - you’d almost think Jimmy Carter’s back in the White House again, wouldn’t you?” she said.
Bachmann said the nation is “desperate for another Ronald Reagan,” but this time, “it’s even worse, because the fires of radical Islamic traditionalism are not just limited to one country.”
“They’re currently raging all across Africa and all across Asia. Each week, our Christian brothers and sisters from Nigeria to Kenya are being persecuted. When they go to church, they don’t even know if they’ll come home afterwards, and now the violence has come to us, the United States,” she said.
“And, on the anniversary of 9/11 no less, our Libyan ambassador and his courageous embassy staff lost their lives in Benghazi, in Libya, in a cruel, cold-blooded, gruesome, intentional terror attack. And all the while, the response of this administration has communicated both weakness and lack of resolve to the world,” Bachmann said.
“I want to be perfectly clear: This isn’t just about a movie. This was an intentional act that was done by radical Islamists who seek to impose their set of beliefs on the rest of the world, and we will not stand for it,” she said.
“No one here is suggesting that all Muslims are radical, but we should not be ignorant of the objective reality that there is a very radical wing of Islam that’s dedicated to the destruction of America, of Israel, and of Israel’s allies,” Bachmann added.
“And what we’re watching develop before our eyes today are the direct consequences of this administration’s policy of apology and appeasement across the globe, and the supposed success of the president’s foreign policy genius hailed by the media even last week is now exposed for what it really is,” she said.
“And so now you see this media doing absolutely everything they can to scramble, to make sure that their guy doesn’t get the blame for what’s going down this week. It’s important to highlight the context of what got us to this point. It didn’t just happen out of nowhere,” Bachmann added.
The Minnesota congressman said Obama’s appeasement dates back to the very beginning of his administration, when he gave his first television interview with foreign Arabic cable TV network al Arabia, “where he promised that he would provide Middle East peace in our time.”
“Then President Obama went on his first foreign policy trip to Cairo, and he spurned our longtime ally, Egyptian President Mubarak, by inviting the very violent Muslim Brotherhood, who at that time was outlawed in Egypt, to attend his speech,” she said.
“And he gave them front-row tickets to his speech in Cairo when Mubarak’s policy was to keep the destructive Muslim Brotherhood at arm’s length. Now when you hear the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission statement, I think you’ll understand why former President Mubarak or anyone would want to stop the violent Muslim Brotherhood,” she added.
“‘Allah is our objective. The prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope,’” Bachmann said, quoted the Brotherhood’s motto. “Recently, the newly elected Muslim Brotherhood president [Mohamed] Morsi even said, ‘Jerusalem will be our capital, Allah willing.’
U.S. history has shown a policy of appeasement doesn’t work, Bachmann said, citing the example of the first Democrat president, Thomas Jefferson, in 1801, who decided to the end the policy of paying extortion bribes to pirates attacking U.S. ships.
“He decided we’re going to end this policy of appeasement, and he wrote, and I quote ‘I know that nothing will stop the internal increase of demands from these pirates, but the presence of an armed force, and it will be economical and more honorable to use the same means at once for suppressing their insolencies,’” she said.
Jefferson built a Navy and deployed it to the enemy. “Our troops were victorious, and the message to the world was clear: We will not tolerate attacks on our citizens or our sovereignty, and you do so at your own peril,” Bachmann said.

Kansas Weighs Taking Obama Off [2012 Presidential] Ballot!

Fox News ^ | 22 minutes ago

The paths of President Barack Obama and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach are crossing once again.

But this time, it is not over immigration.

It is over the enduring assertion that Obama is not eligible to be president because they doubt he was born in Hawaii.

Kobach, who is an informal adviser to the Romney campaign on immigration policy, heads the all-Republican Kansas State Objections Board, which is considering removing Obama from the state's November ballot.
The issue -- which Kobach made a part of his election campaign in 2010 -- has been reignited by a claim from a Manhattan, Kan., resident that Obama is not eligible to be president because his father was from Kenya. The resident, Joe Montgomery, also questions whether Obama has a valid birth certificate.
"We have to take our responsibilities seriously," Kobach said. "Taking it seriously means that we make a decision with all of the evidence that can be obtained before we decide it."
Kobach, the architect of some of the most hard-line state-level immigration policies in the United States, including those of Arizona and Alabama, has been critical of Obama for what he says is the current administration's failure to address illegal immigration. Kobach also was the force behind a strict immigration component in the Republican party platform that was recently adopted at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla.
The board, which would have the final say on the ballot absent a court challenge, plans to meet again Monday and may rule then.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Fast and Furious Embodies Corruption at Highest Levels!

The American Thinker ^ | 14 September, 2012 | M. Catharine Evans

After government-trafficked guns were found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in 2010, higher-ups all the way to the White House started scrambling to cover their tracks.

The gun-walking program known as Operation Fast and Furious came to a head two years later on June 20, 2012, when the House voted to hold the United States attorney general in contempt for lying to Congress.
The same day of the House vote, the president himself publicly stepped into the fray. Obama invoked executive privilege in order to prevent long-awaited subpoenaed documents from seeing the light of day. Not surprisingly, the state-run media downplayed Obama's official entrance into the Fast and Furious scandal.
Now, after a 17-month-long investigation, the inspector general for the DOJ is releasing his findings. And another hearing has been scheduled for September 20 (the third time it has been rescheduled), with the IG appearing before Rep. Darrell Issa's House Oversight Committee.
Fox News has already obtained certain sections of IG Michael Horowitz's report. If this partial information is any indication of the rest of the report, it doesn't look like the investigation will be a shining example of transparency.
The IG's conclusion: Fast and Furious began in Phoenix, with most of the blame going to three ATF managers: Phoenix Agent in Charge Bill Newell, Supervisor Dave Voth, and Case Agent Hope MacAllister. Attorneys for all three vehemently defended their clients.

Debra Roth, an attorney for MacAllister, wrote to Inspector General Michael Horowitz that the report "fails to account for the abdication of oversight, guidance and responsibility by ATF headquarters and Main Department of Justice regarding the implementation of what is in essence a strategy to combat an international criminal enterprise.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama Cuts $2 Million from Protection of Foreign Missions, $129 Million from Embassy Security ^ | Sept. 14, 2012 | DANIEL HALPER

The researchers at the Republican National Committee notice this alarming fact in President Obama's sequestration plan:

Obama’s Sequestration Plan Would Cut $1.084 Billion From The State Department’s Diplomatic And Consular Program, Including $2 Million For The Protection Of Foreign Missions And Officials, And $129 Million For Embassy Security, Construction, And Maintenance. (“OMB Report Pursuant To The Sequestration Transparency Act Of 2012,” Office Of Management And Budget, pp. 135-136, 9/14/12)

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Michelle Obama: ‘No One Gets Where They Are on Their Own’ (can this family be this dumb?)

CNSNews ^

Michelle Obama: ‘No One Gets Where They Are on Their Own’ By Penny Starr September 14, 2012
( – In a campaign speech on Thursday in Fredricksburg, Va., first lady Michelle Obama said that “no one gets where they are on their own” because there is a village of people “lifting us up,” including teachers and janitors.

In her speech about the Obama family’s values, Mrs. Obama said, “We learned that the truth matters, so you don’t take shortcuts, you don’t game the system, you don’t play by your own set of rules. And we learned that no one gets where they are on their own; that each of us has a community of people who are lifting us up -- from the teachers who inspire us to the janitors who keep our schools clean.”
Mrs. Obama spoke at the University of Mary Washington, telling the crowd that she and the president learned about citizenship and service from their parents.
“And we were taught to treat everyone with value, and everyone with respect,” she said. “We learned about citizenship and service, that we’re all part of something bigger than ourselves; that with our freedoms come obligations, and with our blessings come a duty to give back to others who have less.
“See, these are the values that make Barack such an extraordinary husband and partner to me, but more importantly, such a phenomenal father to our girls,” Obama said.
Mrs. Obama said the president is “struggling” along with the American people and that progress has been made over the past four years.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama’s New American Dream Of Islamic Appeasement

Examiner ^ | September 14, 2012 | Kevin Fobbs

Do you remember where you were the day that America’s Dream was assaulted, stripped bare, and left to endure a slow and lingering death? That day began on June 4th, 2009, when President Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt and bowed his head to the Muslim World in a speech. He let the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic extremists, know that they had a fellow traveler and friend in the White House.

The president was clear, convincing and concise. The values and principles of the nation which has guided America’s founders, the defenders, and its citizens for over 233 years, by 2009, was laid upon the alter of Islam, like yesterday’s refuse. The new American dream of apology first, neutrality second and attack from behind third, was the new legal, moral and presidential construct. Mitt Romney refuses to lead America into Obama's years of apologetic Islamic darkness. He represents a clear choice for America's Dream and America's Future. There is a difference. So, as Obama planned his trek to Cairo, Egypt, according to published reports from May 28th, 2009, the president insisted that at “least 10 members of the Muslim Brotherhood be allowed to attend the speech.” to be delivered on June 4th. His speech ominously called “A New Beginning” foreshadowed the commencement of a renunciation of America’s values, its principles and time honored sovereignty. Instead in its place was Obama’s re-interpretation of America, its values and its principles. He used friendly couched phrases to be an apologist first, and allow the nation to be a scapegoat for all real or imagined misdeeds that were offensive to the Muslim world.
Obama stressed, “Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.” Obama used this as ...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Flagged (Spineless Obama submits to the Brotherhood...)

Daily Caller ^ | 09-14-2012 | Neil Munro

President Barack Obama has bowed to the Muslim Brotherhood’s demand that the federal government suppress a satirical video of Islam’s prophet, Muhammad.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council, told the Washington Post that the White House has “reached out to YouTube to call the video to their attention and ask them to review whether it violates their terms of use.”

The request complies with the Sept. 13 demand and threat by the brotherhood, which now governs the Arab’s world’s largest country, Egypt.
“Hurting the feelings of one and a half billion Muslims cannot be tolerated, and… we demand that all those involved in such crimes be urgently brought to trial,” according to an English-language statement on the brotherhood’s website.
The brotherhood’s demand included a threat of additional violence during Obama’s re-election campaign.
“The people’s anger and fury for their Faith is invariably predictable, often unstoppable,” said the website. [...]
The submission came shortly after White House spokesman Jay Carney publicly disavowed any plans to curb free speech.
Obama’s re-election campaign is being held hostage by Morsi, said Michael Rubin, an expert on Islamist parties at the American Enterprise Institute.
In response, Obama should repeatedly declare the First Amendment bars U.S. government action against Islam’s critics, and should also threaten to cut off much-needed financial aid to Egypt, Rubin said.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

- The submission came shortly after White House spokesman Jay Carney publicly disavowed any plans to curb free speech.

President Obama Skips Intel. Briefing One Day After Embassy Attacks, Media Silent on the Issue!

NewsBusters ^

In the wake of the embassy attacks in Cairo and Benghazi that left four people dead, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, you would think the White House would be on crisis alert. After all, when members of the American Foreign Service come under threat, with one being assassinated– it is comforting to have a commander-in-chief executing his leadership to make sure the situation is under control. Apparently, that isn’t the case in the Obama White House and the national news media don't seem to mind.

As reported today by Marc A. Thiessen of The Washington Post, “the president was scheduled to hold the intelligence meeting at 10:50 a.m. Wednesday, the day after the attacks, but it was canceled so that he could comfort grieving employees at the State Department — as well he should.” However, the president decided to forgo on rescheduling his planned briefing because he needed to “attend a Las Vegas fundraiser for his re-election campaign. One day after a terrorist attack.”

Obama Has Time for Fundraising with JayZ, But None for Netanyahu Or Our Embassy Attacks!

Michelle Obama's Mirror ^ | 9-14-2012 | MOTUS

Wow! Embassies are burning across the Middle East, butt don’t worry; we will not be distracted from our primary mission:

And as I understand it there are a couple of major initiatives under way to ensure we achieve our goal. One will be held on Tuesday at Jay-Z’s nightclub in Manhattan; and Jay-Z will be there! Along with Beyoncé, who has always been a “big fan” of BO and MO’s. BiBi was not invited as it’s really an event exclusively for mutual fan club members...

...I hate to interrupt this commercial for an important message, butt I see that “insurgents” have just scaled the wall of our Tunisian embassy and have set it on fire, a KFC was torched in Lebanon (luckily, Lebanon does not have that Chick-fil-A phenomenon) and the German embassy in the Sudan has also been set afire.

Boy, I think there may be a lot of people around the world today waking up to ask themselves “Are we better off today with America leading from behind than we were when the cowboy was leading from the front?”

Screenshot Studio capture #679
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Go to this link for pictures, you will not see in our left wing media:
Carter is Obama. Obama is Carter.

Both are Traitor Losers, who hate America!
Jimmy Carter's presidency was doomed by the Iranian hostage crisis after the US embassy in Tehran was stormed by Islamist extremists following the Iranian revolution.
A year after the 52 Americans were taken hostage, Carter lost the 1980 election. The hostages were released just as President Ronald Reagan, who defeated Carter, was sworn in.


As Clint noted, the Empty Chair improved by codetoad:

It is past time to fire Barack and have him hit the road back to Chicago!

Thanks to RushIsMyTeddyBear and Focault's Pendulum and for finding these morphing graphic art realities

SEIU is a vile joke...

Most all of those in their union management fight each other for control 24/7. It's like a giant chicken coop with in-fighting around every corner...Even the membership is not aware of this epic bitch fighting which occurs within their union management... It's all they do!

As the members pay these people 85,000 to 300,000k per year....These corrupt assholes live like kings as they spend most of their time gossiping, squabbling and scratching each others eyeballs out.
SEIU is one ugly disgusting group of AH's.

SEIU Dues Skim All About Electing Democrats

Michigan Capitol Confidential ^ | 9/13/2012 | Jarrett Skorup

If a corporation in Michigan teamed up behind the scenes with government officials to extract money from the checks of taxpayers and promised to spend that money electing Mitt Romney and other Republicans, what would be the reaction?

MLive reporter David Eggert wrote that "Michigan’s union-backed ballot measures are a hot topic at the Democratic National Convention." How the union heads frame the issue of the home health care ballot is significant.

Marge Faville, president of SEIU Healthcare Michigan, "a union of home health workers headed toward extinction unless voters are persuaded to keep it alive" is quoted in the story.
"Why do they want to [defeat the ballot initiative]? The same reason they're going after the teachers, the child care workers, the auto workers — because unions are effective, we make sure Democrats get (into office) and we're going to make sure Obama gets in." (Bold added.)
The article, like many in the media, misses the larger point: The home health care ballot initiative is not about the collective bargaining "rights" of workers. Those workers will maintain the exact same ability to bargain that they have now. The issue is over whether the SEIU can forcibly extract dues money from people who are not state employees and who are largely looking after their own special-needs children or the children of friends and family.
The union's own attorney has admitted as much. When the SEIU filed suit in federal court in June to block a new state law that would have ended its dues skim, Scott Kronland told Judge Nancy Edmunds that, "The union, a First Amendment advocacy organization, will suffer irreparable damage" because it would be denied use of the dues money in the upcoming election cycle.
The alteration to the Michigan Constitution would lock in money for a select union which, by its president's admission, would like to continuing using that money to "make sure Democrats" are elected and that "Obama gets in." The union has taken nearly $32 million from Michigan workers so far.

Ridiculous Democrat over weighted polls aside the news for Romney is very good! ^ | Sept. 14, 2012 | Kevin "Coach" Collins

According to the post conventions polls, Barack “the bump” Obama and Mitt Romney are now “tied.” The internals of one of the more comical polls, The CNN/ORC International poll of registered and likely voters released Tuesday claimed Obama was ahead by 52/46.
The survey grossly over polled Democrats and shut Independents out almost totally speaking to just five dozen or so out of about 850 responding. A closer look reveals two very important pieces of information.
Among the few Independent voters the survey did gather data from, Romney holds a significant 54/40 lead. This becomes still more important in light of Obama’s 52/44 edge in 2008 that was the underpinning of the 54% overall support he rode to victory.
As Leftist loony as the CNN/ORC was its 16 point spread lines up perfectly with the 53/38 lead James Carville and Stan Greenberg’s Democracy Corps found two weeks ago. The most important measurement of voter sentiment is the enthusiasm they have for actually showing up at the polls to vote.
The CNN/ORC poll found Republicans who are “very enthusiastic” to vote provide a 6 point (62/56) edge for Romney.
Romney spokesman put this edge into perspective saying, “This Republican enthusiasm advantage has manifested itself in an unprecedented and historic grassroots effort that will have a significant impact on turnout in battleground states on Election Day”
" news for Romney was whispered out last Sunday during the middle of the Labor Day weekend when Rasmussen reported Republican voter registration is now at the highest level in recorded history – 37.6% and Democrat voter registration at 33.3% is now less than a point above its historic low.
The importance of this 4.3 point registration gap can not be overstated...... 1.3 point Republican edge going into the 2010
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Prominent Members of Chicago Black Community Confirm: those closest to Obama know there is no second term coming!

by // Best of Hillbuzz, Featured Content

[ Former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama en route to an event at the Obama Center for Social Justice in Hawaii, circa 2033 or so...twenty years after Obama's single term as US President ended. ]

I’m just back from a delightful trip down to a little sandwich shop on the Southside of Chicago where prominent members of the black community enjoy lunch served up with a side of political gossip. I relish the occasions I get invited to these little meetings and never know who’ll be sitting at the table with me but love the jerk chicken combo with extra “bodacious sauce”. In a corner over by a colorful mural celebrating the roaring-twenties and jazz I got an earful about the black community’s feeling about both the Obamas and their abandonment of Chicago for the sunny shores of Oahu in January.

This group of influential black Chicagoans calls themselves, informally, “The Think Squad” and has been a big help with stories and activities in the past. If you consider the Jesse Jacksons, Al Sharptons, and other “Justice Brothers” types on one side of the spectrum…the Think Squad is the polar opposite. These are good people who openly talk about how terrible the Democrat community has been for black people for the last four or five decades and how Obama and his acolytes have made a great many things worse for blacks since he took office. The Think Squad is not happy about the amnesty efforts for criminal Hispanics who broke American laws but are now able to push blacks out of work because of Obama’s intention to allow these people to become job-seekers in this dreadful economy. As one person at the table noted by waiving her hand at the scene out the window, “What the Hell has gotten any better since he became President. Where’s all that hope and change? All I see is crime and trash”.
“Listen bud, there’s no second term nothing and they know as much,” a Think Squader told me between bites of his bodacious sandwich. “All this is for show. Axelrod has already moved on but no one knows what to do and they’re kind of just limping around without a plan hoping those Romney people mess up or the media drags them across the finish line. But ain’t nobody in that top tier who thinks he’s going to win. It’s just not happening because they can’t fool people a second time”.
I know there are many of you who — for whatever reason — still sit in front of your televisions with your eyes pried wide open taking in all the lies the corrupt media tells you. Why you do this is beyond me. I also don’t understand why you still pay for newspaper subscriptions or think that the polls Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow recite to you are in any way accurate. I can find no gentle way to stay this but if you believe what the tee-vee tells you, then you’re foolish. After four long years of watching the corrupt media relentlessly lie to drag Obama over the finish line if you have not picked up on the fact that everyone on television is working hard under the Democrats’ banner then there is truly something wrong with you. You are a lost cause.
You need to get out into your community and get the scoop from real people on the ground.
You need to see what’s going on with your OWN EYES and listen with your OWN EARS to get the stories the media won’t ever tell you.
You need to talk to a “Think Squad” of your own wherever you can find one.
The Think Squad confirmed what I’ve been hearing through friends whose families know Marion Robinson, the current “First Grandmother” and Michelle’s mother: the Obamas and those close to them are preparing to decamp to Honolulu, Hawaii and live out his post-presidency in the post suburb of Kailua. This is Hawaii’s Beverly Hills. The Think Squad had a great time mocking the hula and pretending to sip mai-tais and pina-coladas as they regaled me with all the things Marion’s been “bragging-on” about the house she expects to live in come January when the Obamas depart the White House and Marion comes with them. They’ll still have servants, Secret Service guards, a chef, and almost all of the amenities they enjoy now. But it will be a permanent vacation mode instead of the short bursts of paradise these people experienced on their many jaunts to Hawaii over the last four years before their usual return to Washington. But now, they won’t ever have to go back to DC and Marion is especially gleeful that they won’t be coming back to Chicago ever, either.
“She hates the cold and is glad to never have to come back here,” another person at the table told me while munching on some sweet potato chips at lunch. I dipped some in hot sauce like she did and discovered a new favorite snack as she told me how she, too, would love to abandon Chicago winters forever and never have to come back here.
The general consensus is that black people will keep voting Democrat in droves because that’s “just what we do” but that there is nowhere near the excitement levels of 2008. ”People will not be lining up to do nothing for him in November ’cause he didn’t do nothing for us for four years”, any angry Think Squader told me from the other end of the table. The mood indicated that black turnout would not be anywhere in the realm of 2008 and would instead sink down to more normal participation rates — which jives with everything you should be noticing in terms of enthusiasm for Obama across the board. People are over Obama, like he’s a rapper who has not had a big hit in a while or a singer whose last few albums have bombed. You still see people peddling the Obama tee shirts on the south side, “but you ain’t see nobody BUYING them, do you?”. I was told to look closely at those shirts and see for myself that many of them were left over from years ago. Nobody’s bothered to make up new designs for 2012 here on the Southside and the raggedy shirts for sale on the street corners are still sporting HOPE and CHANGE logos alongside the usual portraits of Obama’s disembodied head floating in glory with those of Dr. King, Malcolm X, and even, randomly, Tupak Shakur at times.
The table burst out into loud laughter when I asked if anyone believed there was even a remote chance that the Obama Presidential Library and Museum could be coming to Chicago and every last member of the Think Squad said “that thing’s going on the beach somewhere in Hawaii where it belongs”. There is no delusion that Chicago would get any sort of perk or pay-back for sending the Obamas to Washington. ”What do they care about Chicago for when they got everything they needed out of this place and there’s nothing more they need?”. The consensus was that Obama has a long established pattern of taking what he needs, then moving on to someplace new to acquire new resources there, and then moving on to whatever he thinks can help him advance again.
Hawaii is the next roosting place for the Obamas because his post-presidency will be all about becoming “The President of the World” since he can’t get any higher in this country than the plateau he’s already reached. He’ll travel abroad, give big speeches, and spend the rest of his life touring Asian and Middle Eastern countries talking about how much the West misunderstands Islam and how much America has to apologize for. A good number of the Think Squaders don’t see too long of a post-presidency for Obama. Some think he’s sick (with Parkinson’s, as we’ve talked about on this site for years) and others think he might even have HIV (due to his inexplicable weight loss). ”He’s got the Slims and it shows”, somebody at the table said, drawing an awkward silence as a waitress walked around picking up trash while trying not to seem like she was listening to the boisterous group in the corner. ”The Slims” is slang in Chicago’s black community for HIV/AIDS. One in five black men in Chicago have HIV who engage in any sort of homosexual activity; this includes guys who are married and still fool around with men but don’t consider themselves bisexuals or “punks”, which is black slang for a gay man of color.
There was no doubt at the table that Barack Obama is gay and has been part of the “down low club” that’s incredibly common in big cities like Chicago where gay black men desperately seek to avoid being labeled as “punks” by taking a wife and creating a public sham of a marriage. Normally, the woman in these relationships is somehow undesirable and difficult to deal with, which is why a straight man would not want to touch her. A few good examples of this are Star Jones, Terry McMillen, Oprah Winfrey, Jada Pickett Smith, and of course Michelle Obama. All of them either married or have a longterm relationship with a gay black man (a “punk”) but who enjoy the benefits of having this man on their arm (for however long it lasts, in the case of Jones and McMillen). One of these women is a lesbian who not only has benefitted career-wise from being married to a punk but who also hides her own homosexuality by faking a marriage.
It’s hilarious sitting at a table in a sandwich shop with people who know the real score about stuff like this and realizing just how many millions of people out there who rely on the corrupt media for their news haven’t the slightest clue in Hell what’s really going on.
Some in the Think Squad believe that Obama will just come out when he ascends to that international stage in his post-presidency but others think he’ll never do that for fear of retaliation from Muslims. It’s common practice for Muslim men to continue having relations with other males while manifestly heterosexual and married, especially if the wife in question is mannish and overbearing much like Michelle. ”If you can’t see it just by looking at him, then you’re stupid” said one of my lunch mates today. I 100% agree with that and will never understand how any of this is a mystery to Americans. I guess they just don’t want to see Obama for who he really is and maybe never will.
As lunch wrapped up today and I put on my sweatshirt for the long walk back to the Red Line, the parting thoughts from the group were these:
* No — black people are not going to riot when Barack Obama loses. Black people have pretty much given up on this guy, mainly because of the fact he didn’t deliver on his promises to them but also a lot of them see that he’s gay and don’t like that and also don’t like the gay marriage “stuff” he was “talking about a lot this year”.
* No — there’s not a snowball’s chance in Hell that blacks will vote Republican this year because they will NOT vote against Obama. They will instead sit home. ”He didn’t help me, so I ain’t helping him!” is the motto this year. Count on black turnout to be at 2004 levels, not 2008 numbers the way the corrupt media is baking into all those polls that get conservatives worked up where they show Obama leading. Without blacks voting at 2008 numbers, Obama loses Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia with no hope of making up those numbers with other groups. It’s as simple as that.
* Yes — the Obamas are already planning their move to Hawaii. Michelle is actually happy about this as she does not like being First Lady. She will enjoy having all the perks of the position for the rest of her life without any of the hard work. She is looking forward to a life of luxury and fun for the rest of her days. Michelle’s mother is thrilled to be leaving Washington for Hawaii permanently. All those years of putting up with her “punk-ass son-in-law” as she called him have finally paid off for her in her mind, because she never dreamed she’d get to retire on an estate in Hawaii that can only be described as “royal”. Obama himself didn’t actually like being president. It was always a step towards something bigger. He really wants to be UN Secretary General or something and lord over the whole world. His ego and narcissism have no bounds.
* Yes — the Think Squad believes Obama will lose, despite what the corrupt media tells you, because “who in their right mind would believe this man again when he made a mess the first time?”. Without the mass-hysteria of Hopeychange and the threats of “if you don’t vote for him then you are a racist” there’s no wave of emotion for Obama to surf to re-election. That means no second term.
That’s how the Think Squad sees it as prominent members of the Chicago black community at least.

NOTE: For further coverage of the Obamas’ move to Hawaii in January 2013, click HERE to read more.
© 2012, Kevin DuJan. All rights reserved.

Read more

Romney Essentially Calls Obama a Liar...

The Blaze ^ | 9/14/2012 | Madeleine Morgenstern

Mitt Romney said preparation for his upcoming debates against President Barack Obama has led him to recognize that Obama tends to “say a lot of things that aren’t true” — essentially calling him a liar.

In an interview with George Stephanopolos for ABC News’ “Good Morning America” broadcast Friday, the Republican presidential nominee was asked what he’s learned about Obama as a debater, with the two set to face off for the first time Oct. 3. Romney responded that he thinks Obama is “going to say a lot of things that aren’t accurate.”

“I think the challenge that I’ll have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren’t true,” Romney said. “I’ve looked at prior debates. And in that kind of case, it’s difficult to say, ‘Well, am I going to spend my time correcting things that aren’t quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?’”

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

She Doesn't Go To Public School ...home schooling does have its merits!

I was eating breakfast with my 12-year-old Granddaughter and I asked her, "What day is tomorrow?"; 

She said "It's President's Day!" She is a smart kid. I asked "What does President's Day mean?" 

I was waiting for something about Washington or Lincoln .... etc. 

She replied, "President's Day is when President Obama steps out of the White House, and if he sees his shadow, we have 4 more years of Bull Shit." 

You know, it hurts when hot coffee spurts out your nose! 

When Students Cheat Liberals Retreat ^ | September 14, 2012 | Mike Adams

The best argument against liberalism is that it doesn’t work. That should be obvious to any teacher who has to deal with student cheating. Even some sociology teachers are beginning to learn this although they are not aware that they are learning it. Like rats in a Skinner box, their behavior is being modified by reality even when they lack the intellectual capacity to recognize it. It warms my heart to see old liberals changing their ways, even if mindlessly. So I have written a column about it, which I am hoping will someday be reprinted by the New York Times.

Liberals are reticent to address the issue of student cheating because it reminds them of the fallen nature of man. Utopia requires cooperation and evidence that people tend to cheat undermines the view that they are inclined to cooperate. So liberals would prefer to ignore evidence of cheating in order to preserve a vision of what “society” ought to be and could be if only they were given the means (read: more of our money) to re-engineer it.
But evidence of student cheating has become too widespread to ignore. So the liberals in my department have started circulating articles on the subject coming from reputable sources like the New York Times (sarcasm = off). Some of these articles and some of the faculty reactions to them have focused on what they describe as “a culture of cheating.” Accordingly, some liberal faculty members have started talking about what needs to be done about it. Others have started acting on it. This should be causing cognitive dissonance for several reasons:
1. Merit is irrelevant. Sociology students are frequently fed the liberal line that people do not succeed in America on the basis of their own merits. The old “it isn’t what you know, it’s who you know” maxim is more than just a cultural adage. It seeps into the college curriculum in sociology classes that focus on Marxian conflict theories. Students are routinely taught that wealth, power, and privilege are the keys to success. This tends to denigrate the importance of knowledge. It should go without saying that people are less inclined to rely on their own achievements if their efforts are thus devalued. The connection of such notions to acceptance of cheating is fairly obvious. If we teach people that they cannot succeed through legitimate efforts we will soon see them pursue success through illegitimate means. As always, liberals fail to understand that ideas have consequences. And bad ideas can have very bad consequences.
2. Ethnocentrism is unacceptable. Sociologists like to teach others that it is wrong to judge other cultures by the standards of one’s own culture. Such judgments are called “ethnocentric.” This concept has slowly crept into mainstream liberal thinking. That is unfortunate because promoting anti-ethnocentrism is problematic for at least two reasons: 1. it tends to undermine the idea that one’s actions (including cheating) can be considered objectively wrong. 2. It renders efforts to condemn a “culture of cheating” hypocritical. Remember that we aren’t supposed to judge other cultures!
3. Punishment is ineffective. Sociologists routinely teach the liberal idea that punishment is ineffective and the corresponding idea that “society” has an obligation to rehabilitate criminals. Then, in their own syllabi, they warn students that cheating will be punished. Claiming to be shocked when their threats are ignored, they send students through the campus penal system, not through rehabilitation. And the liberal campus penal system can be quite punitive and dismissive of due process. No attorneys, no tape recorders, no note taking, no soup … oops! I mean, no due process for you!
In a nutshell, sociology, like modern liberalism, teaches that we can’t get by on our own merits, we should not judge other cultures, and that punishment does not work. When students cheat, however, the sociologist urges advancement through one’s own merits, condemnation of the culture of cheating, and punishment of the transgressor.
It is little wonder that many students are intellectually lost and morally confused. They make the mistake of taking their sociology professors seriously, which means buying into contradictory liberal ideas. So my advice is two-fold: First, don’t cheat in college because it is objectively wrong to do so. Second, don’t cheat yourself by choosing a major populated by hypocrites who cannot abide by the consequences of their own ideas.

Obama's Dangerous Weakness

NRO ^ | 9/14/2012 | Mona Charen

President Obama’s weakness in foreign policy is a contributor to the events of the last several days in the Middle East. Though he gave the order to take out bin Laden — who wouldn’t? — and though he attacks suspected terrorists with drones, this president has nevertheless conveyed to the world that he believes in a diminished world role for the United States.

He believes in a more modest United States — remember those bows — because he comes from an intellectual tradition that is hostile to American power. His pastor and mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, expressed a common leftist view when he said, after 9/11, that the attacks represented “America’s chickens coming home to roost.” Mr. Obama’s one-time green-jobs czar, Van Jones, was of the same school, showing up at a radical leftist rally on September 12, 2001, and, amid the drum circles and curses heaped on the nation that had just suffered an attack of unprecedented savagery, joined in the denunciations of the victim. “It’s the bombs that the government has been dropping around the world that are now blowing up inside the U.S. borders.”
As if the U.S. were in the habit of bombing nations just to throw its weight around, or for the sheer joy of dominating and hurting others. In fact, of the last six wars in which the United States was involved (Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya), four were undertaken to rescue Muslims, and the other two (Afghanistan and Iraq) had the side benefit of liberating Muslims — to what end remains an open question.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Lots of Recoverable Oil, But One Non-Recoverable President ^ | September 14, 2012 | John Ransom

There was a time in this country when ordinary people understood the connection between high gas prices and a sluggish economy. The pain they felt wasn’t just at the pump, but also at the office and in the warehouse.
Higher prices for gas meant job insecurity, slashing department budgets and less money at bonus time, if bonus time actually occurred at all.
There was time in this country when even government economists and network journalists knew this fact.
Over the last decade the biggest problems in our economy has been massive new spending by state, local and the federal government and the lack of stable, low prices for energy.
After adjusting for inflation, oil prices reached a low of $16.80 in today’s dollars in 1998. Since then, with temporary lulls due to a slow economy, the price of oil has marched upward until it now stands at $98 per barrel.
The last time we saw this type of oil price action was back in the Whip Inflation Now days of Ford and Carter, who also presided over expansionist monetary policies.

Could it be that unemployment, high gas prices, massive state spending and the loose monetary policies that go along with government control are all related?
As our friends over at Political Calculations have observed, there is a connection between high gas prices and unemployment.
We define "high gasoline prices" as being when the national average price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline in the United States rises above $3.50 per gallon, in terms of 2011-12 U.S. dollars. This price level appears to be significant in affecting both the spending of U.S. consumers, who respond by cutting back their spending on other goods and services, and the cost of doing business for U.S. employers, who face higher fuel and transportation costs, both directly and indirectly through their supply chains.
Previously, we've observed that whenever the national average price of gasoline crosses this level, the number of seasonally-adjusted initial unemployment insurance claims that are filed each week is affected some two to three weeks later. If it rises above the $3.50 per gallon mark, we observe an upward shift in the number of new jobless claims being filed and if it falls below it, we observe a downward shift in the number of new jobless claims being filed each week.
So in the midst of a worldwide recession, why are oil prices continuing to stay at $98 per barrel?
Well, like all of your other questions, the answer to that one is money.
As Milton Friedman observed inflation is always a monetary phenomenon.
Central banks have worked overtime injecting liquidity into the economy worldwide. The result has been inflation in things like oil prices, houses, gold, stock markets and food while our economy continues to be stuck in neutral in the United States.
Inflation of course can be the natural outcome of an economy that is overheated. But in this case, however, it is as if bankers and policy makers have deliberately given a patient a high-grade fever in order to cure them of pneumonia.
Welcome to QE1, QE2 and now bigger than ever QE3.
And why exactly have we injected so much money into the economy?
Primarily it has been done to support an unprecedented expansion on national government.
National debt over the last decade has soared from about one third of our GDP to 106 percent of our GDP, corresponding with high gas prices and sluggish economic growth.

And this just in: Guess who has the largest amount of oil reserves in history? That’s right: the U-S-A.
“In fact, the U.S. has a mind-boggling 1.4 trillion barrels of oil,” writes Investors Business Daily, “enough to ‘fuel the present needs in the U.S. for around 250 years,’ according to the Institute for Energy Research. The problem is the government has put most of this supply off limits.”
We have lots of recoverable oil it seems, but we don’t have a recoverable president of the United States.
Or a recoverable central bank.
It’s time to change them both.
To do otherwise is just stupid. 

A Possible Explanation for Obama's Connecticut Social Security Number

By Jack Cashill

As I reported on Tuesday, Barack Obama has yet to provide an explanation for how he came to have a Social Security number that begins with the Connecticut prefix "042."

Filmmaker Joel Gilbert read the piece. He has been in Hawaii doing follow-up research on his insightful new documentary, Dreams from My Real Father, and he sent me the single best explanation I have yet to see.

What intrigued me about this story from the moment Ohio private investigator Susan Daniels first came across Obama's Connecticut SSN was the ineptness of the left-wing explanations.
"Numbers are assigned based on the return address on the request envelope, not residency," crowed Jason Linkins in the Huffington Post, as though he had said something meaningful. Linkins suggested two possible explanations, both preposterous.

One is that Obama applied for his SSN as a little boy in Indonesia for no known reason, and the application just happened to be processed in Connecticut for no known reason, too.
For the second, Linkins cited the argument of Carole Gilbert (no relation to Joel Gilbert) in the Yahoo-related "Associated Content." Said Carole Gilbert, presumably with a straight face, "In fact, Barack Obama's dad attended college in Connecticut and in 1977, Obama was college aged; is it beyond reason to consider that he might have checked out his father's alma mater?"
Last time I checked, Harvard was in Massachusetts. The closest town to Harvard in Connecticut is about 90 minutes away, and there is no record at all that Obama Sr. lived there, let alone that Obama visited his imaginary alma mater and just happened to apply for a Social Security card while visiting.
On the respectable right, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly finessed this claim. "[Obama's] father lived in Connecticut for several years," O'Reilly said inaccurately on air last April. He added that "babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents." Wrong again.
The left-leaning fact-checking service addresses the SSN issue, but evasively. It leads with a red herring about a man named Jean Paul Ludwig, whose SSN Obama is allegedly using. "False," says Snopes. But Daniels has never mentioned a Ludwig or anyone else.
Snopes then repeats the irrelevant detail that Obama would only need to have sent his application in from Connecticut, but how or why the 16-year-old Obama could or would have done so is overlooked.
Snopes concludes that "the most likely explanation" is a "simple clerical or typographical error." Obama, they contend, lived in the Hawaii zip code of 96814, while the zip code for Danbury, CT is 06814. As it happens, "clerical error" is the same excuse used to explain away Obama's claim to a Kenyan birth in his literary agent's 1991 promotional piece.
Joel Gilbert suggests a more likely explanation. In doing his research in Hawaii, Gilbert heard from several sources that pre-statehood, every institution or branch of government in Hawaii was dominated by the Japanese syndicate known as the "Yakuza, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), and a complicit bureaucracy. "After statehood in 1959 the Federal Government came in, and the syndicate went underground, but maintained the same control, and does so to this day," says Gilbert.
"Hawaii was and is a corrupt state," Gilbert continues. He was told by retired Honolulu police detectives that in the state bureaucracy, "anything could be purchased, including Social Security numbers." These were real numbers, likely available because the original card holder was dead. The sellers trafficked in SSNs that did not originate in Hawaii. That way, if the person using the phony SSN were ever caught, the crime would be traced back to the issuing state, not the Hawaii office.
Gilbert's theory is that the SSN problem is related to the question of Obama's birth certificate, which is required to get a SSN. Lacking a valid birth certificate, Obama was forced to buy an SSN so he could get his first job at the Baskin Robbins in 1977. In this theory, Obama was sold an SSN that was Connecticut-based so it couldn't be traced back to the Hawaii office.
The easiest way to test this theory and establish the truth is to ask the people who know. WND's veteran White House correspondent Les Kinsolving tried to do just this at a press briefing a few years back. Predictably, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs laughed Kinsolving off and switched the subject to the birth certificate.
In a televised address two years ago, Obama famously said, "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." So could someone in the media please ask him about that "042"? We can be sure they would be asking questions if Mitt Romney had a Hawaii-based SSN, and they would not be satisfying themselves with "clerical error."

Page Printed from: at September 14, 2012 - 06:50:06 AM CDT 

7 Examples That Show Voter Fraud Is A Huge Problem ^ | September 14, 2012 | John Hawkins

After George W. Bush defeated Al Gore at the ballot box and in a rare show of fortitude for a Republican, didn't stand by haplessly wringing his hands when Gore tried to lawyer his way into the White House, liberals were outraged. Sure, Gore had never been ahead at any point, but OBVIOUSLY voter fraud had cost Democrats the election. Afterwards, Democrats DEMANDED that we do more to insure the integrity of our elections. Republicans agreed and for a while, we finally had an issue where there was genuine bipartisan agreement. Then came the 2004 elections and many of the same liberals who had requested better, more accurate voting machines claimed the very machines they wanted were being used for fraud because they didn't get the result they wanted. That marked the end of the Left's interest in stopping fraud at the ballot box. On the other hand, Republicans have continued to try to make our elections honest and fair. Towards that end, one of the measures the GOP is pushing for is voter identification. If you need a picture ID to get on a plane, cash a check, buy alcohol, rent a car, get a marriage license, or to get into the Democratic National Convention, then asking for a photo ID to vote is a no-brainer. However, Democrats believe that they benefit from voter fraud; so they oppose any sort of attempt to verify that voters are who they say they are. They can't admit that; so they use two excuses. The first is their patronizing and insulting claim that black Americans are so uniquely stupid and incompetent that you can't expect them to get a photo ID like white people do. It's amazing that in 2012, a major political party would make such a racist argument, but the Democrats do. Their other claim is that voter fraud is so exceedingly rare, so unlikely, such an impossibility that there's no need for any voter identification. According to the Democrats, we can afford to assume that everyone will be honest on Election Day. So, there's no need to take any basic precautions or take any steps to prevent fraud because it just doesn't happen. Well, to the contrary, voter fraud happens all the time and it does sometimes occur on a level large enough to impact close elections. Furthermore, it undoubtedly happens much more than we realize. After all, if poll workers are prevented by law from asking if people are who they say they are, how often are they going to catch people in the act? Afterwards, when you have disinterested government employees or partisan groups scanning voter data to try to find fraud, it's nearly impossible to look at a spread sheet and determine that person X was really person Y. So, if you don't bother to check for voter ID on the front end, you're probably not going to find it on the back end either. When you consider that a dedicated, well prepared team of say a dozen operatives could literally go from polling place to polling place and cast HUNDREDS of fraudulent votes a day with little chance of being caught, it's not a small issue. That's why we should have some system in place other than the Democrats' touching insistence that we can trust everyone to be honest on Election Day because as you're about to see, that's certainly not the case. 1) James O' Keefe's Project Veritas shows how easy voter fraud is without Identification: When an undercover conservative reporter can vote as Ben Jealous, Bill Maher, or David Brock if he wants, there's a hole as wide as the Grand Canyon in the system.
James O’Keefe’s new video shows Project Veritas going into poll locations in DC on April 3, being offered ballots for Ben Jealous, President & CEO of the NAACP; one Bill Maher; and David Brock (Project Veritas says they could not verify whether the David Brock for which they were offered a ballot was the same David Brock as the Media Matters president). Hilariously, Project Veritas also shows that you can’t get into Media Matters without showing ID. The video also depicts Project Veritas going to a polling place and asking about Alicia Menendez, daughter of New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez (D) and political commentator on MSNBC; a poll worker asks to see ID, preventing Project Veritas from being offered Menendez’s ballot.
2) What If Mohammed Atta had been the deciding vote in an election? As John Fund has noted, even the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote.
John Hawkins: Here’s something from your book that a lot of people may not know: “Eight of the 19 hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon had registered to vote.” How did that happen? John Fund: The Motor Voter Act of 1993, which was the first piece of legislation that Bill Clinton signed into law, mandated that states have to accept postcard voter registrations and also offer people applying for drivers’ licenses the chance to register to vote. Several of the hijackers — they registered to vote when they got drivers’ licenses and other false ID. I have no evidence they voted, but they were registered. They certainly could have voted.
3) You can thank illegal votes from felons for Al Franken: But, but, but the first two examples don't show any actual voter fraud. They just show that it’s incredibly EASY to commit voter fraud. Is there an example of it swinging an election? Absolutely. If it wasn't for fraudulent votes, Al Franken would be doing his obnoxious stand up routines in a comedy club right now instead of the U.S. Senate.
In the '08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close...After the first canvass, Coleman's lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election. During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race. Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted -- not just accused, but convicted -- of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. "The numbers aren't greater," the authors say, "because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and 'knowingly' voted unlawfully." The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong. Still, that's a total of 243 people either convicted of voter fraud or awaiting trial in an election that was decided by 312 votes. With 1,099 examples identified by Minnesota Majority, and with evidence suggesting that felons, when they do vote, strongly favor Democrats, it doesn't require a leap to suggest there might one day be proof that Al Franken was elected on the strength of voter fraud.
4) Democratic Congressional candidate Wendy Rosen commits voter fraud: Wendy Rosen was running for Congress in Maryland this year. Unfortunately, her campaign hit a little snag. Oopsy!
Wendy Rosen dropped from her race against Republican Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) today after it was discovered she had been voting in two states in recent elections – Maryland and Florida. Rosen said she was saddened to leave the race in Maryland.
5) Albany mayoral candidate Paul Etheridge commits voter fraud: Wendy Rosen is obviously some sort of freak, right? Certainly, there couldn't be another Democrat running for office who engaged in fraud, could there?
Former New Albany mayoral candidate Paul Etheridge was arrested Thursday and charged with three felony counts of voter fraud. Etheridge finished third in the Democratic Party mayoral primary in 2011, and it was during that election cycle the alleged fraud occurred, Floyd County Prosecutor Keith Henderson announced during a Thursday press conference. Arrested on the same charges for the alleged incidents — which all involved the handling and casting of absentee ballots — was Joshua A. Clemons, of Floyd County. The charges the two are facing — which are all class D felonies each carrying six months to three years of jail time — are solicitation for a fraudulent absentee ballot, forgery of official ballot endorsement and fraudulent delivery of a ballot.
6) A NAACP official is headed to jail for 5 years over voter fraud: Well, those are just politicians. We all know they're liars! It's not a big surprise that they might be engaged in voter fraud. But, how can anyone support voter ID or other measures to secure the ballot when even the NAACP opposes it? Well, about that...
While NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lashed out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme. In a story ignored by the national media, in April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee. Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently... ...Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross. ….The NAACP has had other problems with voter fraud. The NAACP National Voter Fund registered a dead man to vote in Lake County, Ohio, in 2004. That same year, out of 325 voter registration cards filed by the NAACP in Cleveland, 48 were flagged as fraudulent.
7) John Kennedy won his Democratic Primary in 1960 via voter fraud: You might say, "Well, what difference does all of this really make?" A few people cheating here and there can't have a big impact. Not true. According to the late, great Robert Novak, John F. Kennedy won his Democratic primary in 1960 via voter fraud.
John Hawkins: In the book, you talk about a couple of incidents where the Democrats rigged votes. In one district, you watched as they literally told people that they couldn’t vote anything other than a straight Democratic ticket. Robert Novak: That was outside of Chicago, yes. John Hawkins: You also said that without question, John F. Kennedy rigged the West Virginia Democratic primary in (1960), but that the Wall Street Journal killed the story. Do you think that sort of thing is still occurring with great regularity and do you wish the Journal had reported the story when it happened? Robert Novak: In my opinion, they should have. They sent two reporters down to West Virginia for six weeks and they came back with a carefully documented story on voter fraud in West Virginia, buying votes, and how he beat Humphrey in the primary and therefore got the nomination. But, Ed Kilgore, the President of Dow Jones and publisher of the Wall Street Journal, a very conservative man, said it wasn’t the business of the Wall Street Journal to decide the nominee of the Democratic Party and he killed the story. That story didn’t come out for many, many years — 30-40 years. It was kept secret all that time. Does it happen now? I don’t really know. I got a feeling it happens less often, but that incident was kept secret all those years until it was uncovered in an anti-Kennedy book by a liberal correspondent and I felt that I wasn’t bound to secrecy any more.