Saturday, June 30, 2012

WATCH THIS VIDEO . your life is at stake

San Antonio doctors' ad
The Democratic Party has produced a television ad purporting to show Rep Paul Ryan throwing grandma off the cliff, by opposing ObamaCare.

A couple of San Antonio doctors have responded with an effective ad to counter this injustice. See the ad produced by Drs
. Jane Hughes and Kris Held.

If you like their ad, please forward widely

Friday, June 29, 2012


We were so shocked about SCOTUS decision on ObamaCare that we were oblivious to their decision to strike down the Stolen Valor Act.  Using indefensible judgment, the Supremes said that it is now acceptable to lie about military service.  Apparently, the First Amendment protects the Americans’ right to lie, even if that lie involves a person’s military service, medals, and awards received. (Lee Ferran, abcNews, June 28, 2012)

The decision vindicated Xavier Alvarez who was convicted under the Stolen Valor Act of 2006. The bill made it illegal to claim ownership of or to wear military medals and ribbons, which were not earned.  Alvarez never received the medals claimed nor served in the military.  He was sentenced to three years probation, a $5,000 fine, and community service.  His lawyers convinced the Supreme Court that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional and it violated his right to lie.

SCOTUS, through Justice Kennedy, defended its 6-3 decision in Alvarez’s favor that the Stolen Valor Act is “too broad and ignores whether the liar is trying to gain anything through his or her false statement.”  A lie by any other name is still a lie. People lie to gain influence, access, money, and positions of power.   So, if you’re having trouble finding a job, go buy yourself a Congressional Medal of Honor and enhance your resume.

While cowardly Americans exercise their SCOTUS-decreed right to lie about military accomplishments, the true heroes who receive medals and ribbons do so by sacrificing their lives, limbs, blood, treasure, and precious time with their families.

We MUST get a couple more true conservatives appointed to the court.  


If you watched any of the debate leading up to the vote to hold Holder in contempt, then you probably heard at least a couple of Democrats claim that “fast and furious started during the Bush administration.  I am sick and tired of their lies, so allow me to set the record straight.

There was indeed a sting operation during the Bush administration involving selling guns to Mexican drug dealers but it was not called “fast and furious”, it was called “Wide Receiver”.  

The differences between the two are fairly profound and distinct.  Wide Receiver involved Phoenix-based ATF agents, working with Mexican law enforcement in an attempt to build a case against violent Mexican drug smugglers.  Fast and Furious on the other hand was an effort to make a case against American gun dealers and the Second Amendment of the United States.  Both were orchestrated by their respective administrations with completely different goals.  One was to go after criminals and the other was to go after the Constitution and law abiding citizens.

Operation Wide Receiver began in 2005 and it involved 400 guns. Every weapon had RFID trackers installed on them and they were continually tracked. The Phoenix ATF and the DOJ were the ones actively involved in the operation, tracking the guns to see which cartels they would end up at for the purposed of informing the Mexican government as to where they were.

Unlike the Obama administration, the Bush administration notified the Mexican government when the weapons crossed their border. We know that at least 1,440 arrests were made a part of Wide Receiver.
Once the smugglers found out they were being tracked, they located the RFID trackers and ripped them out. The program was immediately shut down as a result in October 2007.


This operation involved 2,500 guns. There were virtually no tracking devices on these weapons. Katie Pavlich points out that out of all of these guns there were two that contained trackers, one of which was homemade.  They also had 40 hour battery lives on them, so there was no way they could seriously think they could track these weapons.

In addition to the negligence of trackers on the weapons walked across the border into Mexico, there was virtually no surveillance.  There were no helicopters, planes or anything.  The operation was conducted by four federal agencies in as many as ten cities in five states.

Unlike operation Wide Receiver, the Mexican government was not even made aware that the program even existed.

Not once were any of the “bad guys” arrested, nor was there efforts put forth to do so and the program came to an end because of the death of at least 200 Mexican civilians and two American federal agents, border patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE agent Jaime Zapata.

It is widely known that both Eric Holder and Barack Obama are anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment.  Their past statements leave no doubt that they desire to disarm the American public.  Holder has even claimed that he thinks America needs to be “brain washed” concerning guns.

Now we are in the midst of a mess in trying to unravel the details and get our hands on documents that the Justice Department and now Barack Obama himself are seeking to keep hidden.  The use of executive privilege by Obama is the tell-tale sign that he is involved and so is Holder.  They were not ignorant of what was going on and there weren’t rogue agents running around doing this.  They were in the loop and unlike the Bush administration’s attempts to catch real criminals, the Obama administration used the operation as a political maneuver to target the Second Amendment and U. S. gun dealers.

I found this video on YouTube of Rusk Limbaugh.  He does a real good job of explaining it.


Wide Receiver - The number of guns used in the operation from the beginning until the end of the operation was 300
Fast & Furious - The number of guns used in the operation from the beginning until the end of the operation was 2,000

Wide Receiver - Guns were traced with miniature tracking devices and constant surveillance from ground and air.
Fast & Furious - No tracking devices were used, no surveillance was made whatsoever.

Wide Receiver - ATF agents were ordered to follow the gun smugglers every step of their trip from the gun store to the US/Mexico border.
Fast & Furious - ATF agents were ordered to stand down and not follow the gun smugglers after they left the gun store. The only surveillance was made through the gun store own video cameras; after gun smugglers left the store, the ATF agents were expressly ordered not to pursue.

Wide Receiver - Mexican army and police was in the loop about Wide Receiver. They took over the surveillance of the gun smugglers after they crossed with the guns in Mexico.
Fast & Furious - Mexican authorities were kept in the dark by the ATF and the US DOJ. They had no idea about Fast & Furious and the fact that guns provided to gun smugglers by the American authorities were "walked" in Mexico into the hands of drug cartel murderers.

Wide Receiver - When a small number of guns (30-40) were lost due to the malfunctioning tracking devices and / or because the gun smugglers figured out they were watched from a surveillance airplane flying overhead and learned how to take cover and evade, the operation Wide Receiver was immediately aborted and cancelled.
Fast and Furious - Operation continued even after ATF and DOJ lost track of all 2,000 guns sold to Mexican drug cartels

Wide Receiver - The operation was planned in such a way the gun smugglers and their cargo were kept under surveillance step by step, from the gun store to the US/Mexico border, across the border into Mexico and to their final destination: the hands of the drug cartel killers. This led to 1,400 arrests made in joint operations by the Mexican authorities and DEA and ATF agents. No lost Wide Receiver guns were recovered at crime scenes in Mexico or the US.
Fast & Furious - The operation was planned to let the guns go without any surveillance. Guns were supposed to be recovered at the murder scenes. One of the 150+ murder scenes where Fast & Furious guns were recovered was that of US border patrol agent Brian Terry; another one was the murder scene of ICE agent Jaime Zapata. So far DOJ and ATF didn't came with any explanation about how they were planning to make arrests of the drug cartel murderers BEFORE THEY KILLED PEOPLE with the Fast & Furious guns, and how they were supposed to do those arrest in Mexico without the Mexican authorities knowing anything about this operation.
Fast & Furious results: 300+Mexican citizens murdered; 2 US Federal agents murdered.

Do not be fooled this bunch of lying Democrats trying to cover for Holder and Obama.  The Watergate cover up was nothing compared to this cover up.   

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Obamacare a Trojan Horse for Big Labor

Now that the United States Supreme Court has narrowly upheld Obamacare, it's worth looking back at some of the provisions hidden deep within the 2,500 pages of the bill to remember that the public outcry wasn't just about the individual mandate.

You may remember that Nancy Pelosi sneered, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it

Well, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys studied the law and found obscure and overt provisions designed to hand union officials billions of new forced-dues dollars.

Here's just one example of the dangers uncovered by Foundation attorneys:
Under Title VIII -- the "Community Living Assistance Services and Supports" (CLASS) program -- ALL 50 states are ordered to create legal entities to serve as "employers" of home health care providers.
This may sound familiar to you.

Foundation attorneys know from direct experience that schemes like this are just a trick to force independent home health care providers into forced unionism.

You see, these schemes corrupt the political process by enabling Big Labor's political puppets to handpick unions as the sole representatives for thousands of care providers -- including independent contractors and parents or grandparents who take care of sick or disabled children.

In fact, Foundation attorneys currently have a case pending at the Supreme Court that could blow apart one such forced-dues bonanza in
Illinois implemented by Governor Pat Quinn and his disgraced predecessor, Rod Blagojevich.

After the Obamacare decision, the federal government remains empowered to mandate states implement similar programs.

But more than 15 states have already cooked up such schemes -- with millions of dollars in forced union dues from home health care providers up for grabs.

That's why with free legal aid from Foundation staff attorneys, Pam Harris and seven other
Illinois in-home care providers have asked the Court to invalidate the scheme.

This scheme marks a new low and is a gross violation of workers' rights under the Constitution.

While we await the Court's order in that case, much attention will understandably be paid to the Obamacare decision.

Hopefully that discussion will include a renewed discussion about what's in the bill. For more on how Big Labor stands to benefit from the government health care takeover, read my Wall Street Journal column from 2009.

Muslim mob stones Christians – in the U.S.!


Muslim mob stones Christians – in the U.S.!

It happened in an American city: Hundreds of angry Muslim children and adults rioted against Christians, throwing chunks of concrete and eggs at their heads, spraying them with urine and cursing at them – while police stood by and threatened the Christian victims with “disorderly conduct.”

The city of Dearborn, Mich., hosted its annual 2012 Arab International festival on Father’s Day weekend. As can be seen in a video of the attack, a group of Christians holding signs were viciously assaulted by an angry mob of Arabs – as the crowd chanted “Allahu Akbar!” – Arabic for “God is the greatest!”

Starting at the 9:00 mark and continuing to about the 10:30 mark, the crowd – reminiscent of a rock-throwing “intifada” scene from the Middle East – can be seen hurling a dizzying barrage of objects at the Christians standing passively with their signs, causing some injuries.

At the beginning of the video, Christian street preachers shout, “God is good, and God is not Allah!”
First, police approached Ruben Israel of, warning him, “The city of Dearborn has an ordinance, OK, that you guys can’t use the megaphone. So, if you guys continue to use that, you will get a citation.”

Israel noted that the group was allowed to use the megaphone in 2011. Then he asked the officer, “So, if we don’t use a megaphone, can we throw water bottles at the crowd?”
The officer shook his head no.

“So what are you going to do if they throw water bottles at us?” Israel asked.

“If that happens, we will take care of that and address it,” the officer promised.

When Israel said he had captured the mob’s assault on the Christians on video, the officer suggested he “take it through the proper channels, and we’ll try to find them.”

However, at the 2:17 mark of the video, the mob can be heard screaming, “You want to jump ‘em? C’mon, let’s go!”

One boy yells, “Let’s beat the sh-t out of them!”

A girl shouts, “Go home! Do you understand English?!”

The Christians are no longer using megaphones, as the mob advances on them from all angles – hurling bottles, cans, eggs, chunks of concrete and even milk crates toward their heads.

Even young children shout obscenities such as, “F—k you, b-tch!”

Meanwhile, police are nowhere to be seen in the video.

One of the Christians asks another, “Is this worse than last year?”

He replies, “Oh my goodness, yeah!! This is insanity.”

At the 6:55 mark, an irate 18-year-old man from Iraq gets into the Christians’ faces, screaming, “If you don’t like Dearborn, then go the f—k back home! … I am an American citizen, and I have my rights. There’s freedom of religion, isn’t there?”

He screams, “So why do you guys pray like this on the bank? Oh Lord. Why don’t you get on the ground, like the prophets, huh? You’re Christian. That’s what it says in the Bible, you stupid sh-t!”
Many minutes into the video and after much of the shouting takes place, Dearborn mounted police ride through the crowd. The video states that no arrests were made.

According to the tape, the mob began chucking more stones, bottles and debris as the Christians were injured and property damaged.

“Dearborn Police finally arrive after 30 mins of assault,” a caption states.

Despite the attacks the Christians had endured, a man identified in the video as Deputy Chief Dennis Richardson of the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office tells them, “You’re a danger to the safety right now.”
Officers claim they don’t have the manpower to protect the Christians at the festival.

“Your safety is in harm’s way. You need to protect everybody,” said Deputy Chief Mike Jaafar of the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office. “You do have the option to leave. I just want to make that clear.”
Israel replied, “You have the option to stand with us” as Jaafar walked away, leaving the Christians to the mob.

When police leave, the crowd continues harassing the Christians and screaming profanities.
Then police begin escorting the Christians away from the crowd.

Deputy Chief Richardson tells Israel, “We have the responsibility of policing the entire festival, and obviously your conduct is such that it’s causing a disturbance and is a direct threat to the safety of everyone here. Someone could get hurt. You already have blood on your face. One of the festival people, one of my officers, anybody can get hurt. Now we’re going to escort you out.”

Israel explains that the mob throws things and becomes more aggressive when police leave the scene.
“Part of the reason that they throw things on someone is because you tell them stuff that enrages them,” Richardson argues.

Israel tells Richardson that the Christians aren’t even saying anything to the crowd at this point.
“We’re not even preaching,” he said. “So it’s obviously the signs. Now the signs are going to be illegal? … My thing is, if we could have a couple of officers there, that would kind of keep ‘em at bay.”

Richardson insists that the Christians leave, telling Israel, “You’re going to leave now. We’re escorting you that way.”

Israel resists, saying, “We can’t do that.”

But Deputy Chief Jaafar re-enters the scene and tells him, “It’s not your call. We’ve been very gentle and very, very respectful to you. You are jeopardizing public safety, and you need to understand it’s going overboard. … You’re attracting a crowd and affecting public safety, and you need to understand that.”

Richardson asks Israel, “How many bottles or objects have you been hit with?”

He replies, “Uh, I lost count. It’s only because you guys weren’t around. We have video of that.”
Israel also tells him, “We did try to contact the sheriff. The problem is, he didn’t respond. We did try to contact the city attorney…. The reason this is going on now is because of what happened last year. What happened last year is you allowed it to escalate into this. And so, you guys just lost a lawsuit on free speech, and you want to do it again.”

Another Christian asks Richardson, “Why don’t you get us a bullpen that we asked for in the email?”
“OK, that’s a free-speech zone,” he replied. “And the Chamber of Commerce decided that they did not want a free-speech zone.”

At that, he insisted once again that the Christians leave.

Israel argues that the officers are jeopardizing free speech.

“Let me ask you this: If we don’t leave, are we going to get arrested?” he asked.

“Probably, we will cite you all, yes,” Richardson tells him, adding, “You are a danger to public safety. You’re disorderly.

Israel replies, “I would assume 200 angry Muslim children throwing bottles would be more of a threat than a few guys with signs.”

The Christians tell one another: “If they make us leave right now, they reward riotous behavior.”
A woman steps in to speak with the officers, and then they tell the Christians, “If you don’t leave, we are going to cite you for disorderly conduct. … Look at your people, here. This is crazy! Now let’s go.”

After they leave, the Christians are pulled over in their van by at least 12 police officers. The video does not explain why.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012


If anyone is still a little confused as to just what operation “fast and furious” was all about and why it is so important that Congress get ALL the facts, this video should explain it.


President Obama is NOT a Christian as he purports to be. 
His policies are decidedly UN-Christian. This man eagerly advances a culture of death.  He is the most radically pro-abortion president in American history.  He has dutifully signed off on - and implemented at each opportunity - every extremist demand of the radical pro-abortion and homosexual activist lobbies.

Mr. Obama has shown utter disregard - if not total disdain - for the U.S. Constitution.  Not the least of his indefensible infringements is his recent Health and Human Services mandate requiring, under penalty of law, that all Christian and Catholic organizations violate fundamental church tenets by providing abortions, sterilization and contraceptive services to employees regardless of religious beliefs.   This may be the single most egregious breach of First Amendment freedom in our lifetimes.  Thankfully, the church isn't backing down, has refused to comply and is fighting tooth and nail in court to reinstate constitutional liberty.

I can explain in one word why I am voting against him and encouraging others to do the same: judges.  The next president will likely fill at least two Supreme Court vacancies in the next four to eight years.  Appointing Supreme Court justices may be the single most significant thing any president can do.  For better or for worse, it profoundly steers law, public policy and culture at large in perpetuity.

This is our most crucial point of focus: ensuring a conservative, strict constructionist majority on the high court.  If Mr. Obama is re-elected and appoints one, two or even three more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs, forget it.  America, as our founders envisioned her, is dead.

With Mr. Obama, we know what we will get - we've already gotten it.  You need only consider his Supreme Court appointments of Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.  If he is re-elected, why would we expect anything different?  We're guaranteed additional counter-constitutionalists radicals.

SCOTUS and ObamaCare

The Supreme Court is expected to announce the fate of “ObamaCare” tomorrow.   
The White House has said it expects the high court to uphold the law.

There are basically three different ways this thing can go.  SCOTUS can uphold the entire law “as-is” which will make Obama look like he actually knows what he’s doing; but it can also set up protest and challenges to his administration he won’t want to deal with in November.  This would have major consequences as it pertains to Congressional rights addressing limits to the Commerce Clause in the future.

Or, option two; the court could strike the Single Payer Mandate. This could affect the refusal to insure “preexisting conditions” and other such regulations offered in the act. Any way this goes, there is the jeopardy of insurance payees bailing out, accepting lesser fines and avoiding multi-billions in health care costs for employers.  But it powerfully impacts government’s monetary input into the system.

Then there’s option three; the court could strike the entire law and by doing so send the entire matter back to Congress for the development of new law.

If Vegas was taking bets on the outcome, (and I don’t know that they’re not) the favorite would probably be option two with option one being the least likely.  I guess we will find out tomorrow.


Team Obama's Brother Sharpton Moment

By Michelle Malkin  6/27/2012

Attorney General Eric Holder's people have no shame. After months of stonewalling, misinformation and petulant disregard for the victims of the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal, President Obama's Justice Department is hiding behind the most despicable race-card demagogues on the planet. "Post-racial" America never looked so bitter, clingy and cowardly.

At a Tuesday press conference in Washington, D.C., human shield Al Sharpton condemned the upcoming House vote on a contempt motion against Holder as "reckless" and "morally reprehensible." Yes, the infamous hate-crimes hoaxer, cop-basher and riot incitement specialist is now the self-appointed sheriff of Capitol Hill morality. A Huffington Post report hyping Sharpton's protection racket decried the contempt citation as an "assault on minority rights." In typical race-baiting style, Sharpton told the leftwing website: "I'm not saying that this is because Holder is black, and I'm not calling (Republicans) racists. I'm saying what they're doing has a racial effect."

Of course Sharpton's accusing Republicans of racism -- and by extension, he's smearing every American demanding truth and justice in Obama's bloodiest scandal. That includes the family of murdered Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, whose December 2011 death came at the hands of a Mexican thug wielding a Fast and Furious weapon. What about the Mexican government officials left in the dark about the deadly operation? And the hundreds of families of Mexican victims of Fast and Furious-enabled bloodshed? Yes, yes, they are all racists and minority vote suppression advocates, too.
Sharpton forged ahead, comparing the effort to hold Holder accountable for his serial delays and deception to racial profiling. The race-hustling reverend invoked driving-while-black imagery in lambasting the Republican oversight staffers who have "stopped and frisked" Holder, the nation's first black attorney general, "without probable cause" to be "made an example of."

While he regurgitated DOJ talking points about Holder's "unprecedented" level of cooperation, Sharpton neglected to mention that the agency has delivered less than 8 percent of the 80,000 documents sought by congressional investigators. He forgot to acknowledge that of the 70 DOJ officials involved in Fast and Furious, 48 have been blocked by DOJ from testifying. He failed to detail the withdrawn Feb. 4, 2011, letter to Congress falsely denying the existence of Fast and Furious, Holder's flip-flops over what he knew and when, and Holder's blame-shifting assertion, withdrawn last week, that falsely accused former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey of being briefed on a separate gunwalking operation.

Lest we forget, the White House's racial guardian and MSNBC host is the same bigoted clown who manufactured the Tawana Brawley fake hate crime and tried to frame police officers, railed against "Chinamen," "Greek homos" and "n****rs," inveighed against Jewish "diamond merchants," and stoked black mobs at white-owned Freddy's Fashion Mart in Harlem, which was burned to the ground in 1995 after protesters broke in and gunned down four employees.

Team Obama can no more dissociate itself from Sharpton's bloody legacy than Sharpton can dissociate himself from his own poisonous tongue. In return for his blind and tireless defense over the past year and a half, Holder has publicly embraced Sharpton and endorsed his toxic racial smokescreen. In April, Holder lavished praise on Sharpton "for your partnership, your friendship and your tireless efforts to speak out for the voiceless, to stand up for the powerless and to shine a light on the problems we must solve and the promises we must fulfill." Obama himself addressed Sharpton's spring convention, as did several other Cabinet secretaries. White House visitor logs show more than a dozen entries for "Al Sharpton" or "Alfred Sharpton" over the past three years.

President Clinton had his Sister Souljah moment: a public attempt in 1992 to distance Democrats from radical racial demagoguery. The current White House has turned that centrist maneuver on its head, and American voters of good will shouldn't forget it. Obama's Brother Sharpton moment, a calculated deflection from the Fast and Furious scandal, is an unrepentant bear hug of racial extremism. Shame, shame, shame.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012


Holder Has Long Been Contemptible

By Aaron Goldstein, on June 23rd, 2012

I say Eric Holder should remain as Attorney General. The longer Holder remains in office and the angrier Americans become about “Fast & Furious”, the bigger an albatross Holder remains around the neck of President Obama.

While the House Oversight Committee has now recommended that Congress hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for his conduct during the Fast & Furious Scandal, one could make the case that Holder has long held the American public in contempt. After all, how many Cabinet level officials begin their tenure by calling fellow Americans “a nation of cowards” where it concerned the question of racism? (1) Never mind that America has become a nation where racism is not only unacceptable but a nation where, outside of being called a murderer or a rapist, nothing is worse than being called a racist. If anyone has behaved in a cowardly manner where it concerns racism, it is Holder. What can one say about a man who sees fit to drop a successfully prosecuted case of voter intimidation?

If two members of the Ku Klux Klan had wielded a baton in front of polling station in Philadelphia, Mississippi to intimidate black voters, Holder would have spared no effort to prosecute them. But when it comes to two members of the New Black Panthers doing the same in front of polling station in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to intimidate white voters, Holder could not care less. During testimony before a House Appropriations Subcommittee hearing in March 2011, Holder said: When you compare what people endured in the South in the ’60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, to compare what people subjected to that with what happened in Philadelphia… I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line for my people. (2)

No, the great disservice here is an Attorney General who does not comprehend the basic legal concept of “equal justice under law”. Eric Holder is the Attorney General of the United States, not the Attorney General of “my people.” Yet what can we expect of a public official who does not have the courtesy to read legislation he contended would lead to increased racial profiling? Oh, pardon me. Holder did say he “glanced” at the Arizona immigration law. It would have been nice if Holder taken the copy of S.B. 1070 that Texas Congressman Ted Poe so generously offered him. (3) Then again it probably wouldn’t have made a difference. Holder’s Department of Injustice was going to sue Arizona whether he read the bill or not. After all, what can we expect of a public official who wanted to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York?

Holder looked like a first-year law student back in November 2009 when Senator Lindsey Graham asked him if he could cite a case where an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court. (4) His embarrassing reply is probably the reason why the Obama Administration chose to kill Osama bin Laden rather than capture him. Like other members of the Obama Administration, Holder cannot bring himself to utter the words “radical Islam”. (5)

But for all of Holder’s trespasses during his tenure as Attorney General, “Fast & Furious” is his most serious transgression. An ill-advised scheme to ship arms to Mexican drug lords; it resulted in the deaths of two law enforcement officers and numerous Mexican citizens. Liberals like Alan Colmes can argue that Holder stopped “Fast & Furious” and blame the Bush Administration until they are blue in the face. (6) But how could Holder have stopped something he claimed to have no knowledge of in the first place? (7) Besides if Holder had stopped “Fast & Furious” dead in its tracks wouldn’t someone in the Obama Administration have seen fit to leak such information? Alas, no. Instead we have an Attorney General who uses the race card to immunize himself from criticism.

In December 2011, Holder told The New York Times, “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.” (8) Ah yes, from the Janeane Garofalo School of Government which states that all Republican criticism of President Obama and, by extension, Eric Holder is motivated solely by race. It looks like Chris Matthews is giving the valedictory address. (9) If Holder is suggesting that Republicans would not have called a white Attorney General in a Democrat administration to account for something like “Fast & Furious” is patently absurd. But President Obama rewards Holder’s loyalty by invoking executive privilege.

Last week, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Texas Senator John Cornyn called on Holder to resign to his face. (10) I humbly disagree. I say Holder should remain as Attorney General. The longer Holder remains in office and the angrier Americans become about “Fast & Furious”, the bigger an albatross Holder remains around the neck of President Obama. All of which reflects poorly on President Obama’s judgment or lack thereof in appointing Holder as his Attorney General in the first place. If the American public should now hold Eric Holder in contempt, the American public may do the same with President Obama in November.




A political website which contained stinging criticism of the Obama administration and its handling of the Fast and Furious scandal was ordered to be shut down by the Obama campaign’s ‘Truth Team’, according to private investigator Douglas Hagmann, who was told by ISP GoDaddy his site contained information that was “maliciously harmful to individuals in the government.”

Hagmann, CEO of Hagmann Investigative Services, Inc., a private investigative agency serving a roster of Fortune 500 clients, was given 48 hours by GoDaddy to find a new home for his website before it was deleted.

Hagmann was told the reason for the shut down was because the website featured “morally objectionable” material.  After GoDaddy refused to identify the complainant, only saying that it was not “any official government agency,” further investigation by Hagmann revealed that the order came from a group tied to Obama campaign headquarters.

The web site, which I had never heard of before this unconstitutional act of government   censoring is, and it is still up and running, but is no longer hosted by GoDaddy. I have bookmarked it in my browser will be checking it out frequently.  I recommend everyone do the same.  THANK YOU OBAMA FOR POINTING THIS INTERESTING WEB SITE OUT FOR ME.

Here is a video about the whole ordeal.  

A Political Glossary

A Political Glossary

By Thomas Sowell   6/26/2012


Since this is an election year, we can expect to hear a lot of words -- and the meaning of those words is not always clear. So it may be helpful to have a glossary of political terms.

One of the most versatile terms in the political vocabulary is "fairness." It has been used over a vast range of issues, from "fair trade" laws to the Fair Labor Standards Act. And recently we have heard that the rich don't pay their "fair share" of taxes.

Some of us may want to see a definition of what is "fair." But a concrete definition would destroy the versatility of the word, which is what makes it so useful politically.

If you said, for example, that 46.7 percent of their income -- or any other number -- is the "fair share" of their income that the rich should have to pay in taxes, then once they paid that amount, there would be no basis for politicians to come back to them for more -- and "more" is what "fair share" means in practice.

Life in general has never been even close to fair, so the pretense that the government can make it fair is a valuable and inexhaustible asset to politicians who want to expand government.

"Racism" is another term we can expect to hear a lot this election year, especially if the public opinion polls are going against President Barack Obama.

Former big-time TV journalist Sam Donaldson and current fledgling CNN host Don Lemon have already proclaimed racism to be the reason for criticisms of Obama, and we can expect more and more other talking heads to say the same thing as the election campaign goes on. The word "racism" is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything -- and demanding evidence makes you a "racist."

A more positive term that is likely to be heard a lot, during election years especially, is "compassion." But what does it mean concretely? More often than not, in practice it means a willingness to spend the taxpayers' money in ways that will increase the spender's chances of getting reelected.

If you are skeptical -- or, worse yet, critical -- of this practice, then you qualify for a different political label: "mean-spirited." A related political label is "greedy."

In the political language of today, people who want to keep what they have earned are said to be "greedy," while those who wish to take their earnings from them and give it to others (who will vote for them in return) show "compassion."

A political term that had me baffled for a long time was "the hungry." Since we all get hungry, it was not obvious to me how you single out some particular segment of the population to refer to as "the hungry."

Eventually, over the years, it finally dawned on me what the distinction was. People who make no provision to feed themselves, but expect others to provide food for them, are those whom politicians and the media refer to as "the hungry."

Those who meet this definition may have money for alcohol, drugs or even various electronic devices. And many of them are overweight. But, if they look to voluntary donations, or money taken from the taxpayers, to provide them with something to eat, then they are "the hungry."

I can remember a time, long ago, when I was hungry in the old-fashioned sense. I was a young fellow out of work, couldn't find work, fell behind in my room rent -- and, when I finally found a job, I had to walk miles to get there, because I couldn't afford both subway fare and food.

But this was back in those "earlier and simpler times" we hear about. I was so naive that I thought it was up to me to go find a job, and to save some money when I did. Even though I knew that Joe DiMaggio was making $100,000 a year -- a staggering sum in the money of that time -- it never occurred to me that it was up to him to see that I got fed.

So, even though I was hungry, I never qualified for the political definition of "the hungry." Moreover, I never thereafter spent all the money I made, whether that was a little or a lot, because being hungry back then was a lot worse than being one of "the hungry" today.

As a result, I was never of any use to politicians looking for dependents who would vote for them. Nor have I ever had much use for such politicians.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

Monday, June 25, 2012

Most Arrogant Man in the World

You have probably seen the Dos Equis commercial “The Most Interesting Man in the World,” well, here is “The Most Arrogant Man in the World “

Wednesday, June 20, 2012


Why would the “most transparent administration in history” claim executive privilege to prevent access to information?   We all know the answer to that one.  Because they are responsible for the murder of a border patrol agent, guilty of a cover up, and guilty of lying to congress.

Nixon’s lies and cover up were MINOR compared to this.
If the Republicans in Congress had any cojones at all, they would start impeach proceedings TODAY.


Tuesday, June 19, 2012

'Burn in hell!' for singing 'God Bless the USA'

Young children singing “God Bless the USA” outside a New York school were shouted at by angry adult democrats and told those organizing the event were going to “burn in hell.”

U.S. Rep. Bob Turner, R-N.Y., gathered the students outside Public School 90 in Coney Island whose principal had yanked the singing of the patriotic song at a graduation ceremony, while Justin Bieber’s pop tune “Baby” reportedly remained on the roster.

“The kids don’t even know what they’re singing!” one of the hecklers yelled as the kids belted out the Lee Greenwood classic at Turner’s event.

“They got something you tell them to say! It’s ridiculous! It’s sad, sad, sad. Y’all are going to burn in hell! You all burn in hell! Shame on you! Shame on you!”

“You Republicans come go to a Republican area and do that, we don’t do that here,” the heckler said. “This is ridiculous, this is sad. This is so crazy. This is sad.”

“Excuse me sir, can you let the kids sing please?” Turner’s staffer interjected.

After the song, the shout fest continued, and the children themselves tried to drown out the noise of the protesters by chanting in unison, “USA! USA!”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh commented on the matter this afternoon, noting: “A bunch of Democrat adults show up to heckle them. ‘You are all gonna burn in hell! Burn in hell!’ That was the reaction to kids singing God Bless the USA.’ Why in the world would that make anybody mad? And the fact that it does tells us a whole lot.”

The New York Times reported that Principal Greta Hawkins had actually cut both “God Bless the USA” and Bieber’s “Baby” from the song roster at the same time.

Eric Holder's Politics of Contempt


Finally, Eric Holder is on the ropes. House members are readying to vote him in contempt of Congress. Senators wonder aloud whether he can be trusted to investigate White House leaks that have exposed inside information about some of our most successful anti-terror operations to some of our most dangerous enemies.

Read all of article here:


The scourge called Agenda 21, better known as Sustainable development, has morphed as planned to give strong inroads to the escalation in power to destroy sovereignty and absorb America into the global collective of the United Nations.

Check out these links.
The truest definition of sovereignty is the ability to own property - your own land. Yet that is exactly what Agenda 21 is designed to destroy.

Maurice Strong a socialist, senior adviser to the United Nations Commission on Global Governance and driving force behind Agenda 21 "sustainability" wrote that the concept of sovereignty must yield in favor of the "new imperatives of global cooperation."

Meanwhile, the Green Economy, Non-Governmental Organizations, Public Private Partnerships, the EPA, Global warming and everyone's panic that we must "Save Our Planet" are working together to force Agenda 21 down America's throat.

If we lose the rights to our land as the Citizenry of the United States we will lose the United States of America with it. We The People must educate ourselves and take a stand to STOP AGENDA 21 OR OUR IGNORANCE WILL ENTOMB US IN ABJECT SLAVERY.

The issue boils down to just one question - Is it right for the United Nations to CONTROL and TAKE land that WE own?

If your answer is NO, then you MUST now fax the Senate and DEMAND THEY STOP AGENDA 21.

It sounds insane....but it's true. The United Nations intends to use the Agenda 21 treaty to force Americans off their own order to protect "biodiversity."

Take a good look at the map below. It was published by the United Nations as their desired plan for restricting land use in the United States.
Is your house located in a red area? Plan on moving if Agenda 21 is ratified by the Senate. Those areas, according to the UN, will have "little to NO human use."

Even if you house is in a yellow area, the UN says use will be "highly regulated" other words sparsely populated.
Apparently, the UN Agenda 21 seeks to drive us all into multi-family high rise super complexes in order to "save the environment."

The Obama Administration is attempting to force the United Nation's deadly Agenda 21 policies down American throats. If ratified this treaty will give the United Nations control of everything from our fishing rights, the food we eat and even where we will be allowed to live.

Obama supports beating up the U.S. Constitution and we must not let it be replaced by United Nations Agenda 21.
The UN is ruthlessly advancing a new plan that will make America a HOSTAGE to the United Nations. While Obama and the liberal media ignore gas prices streaking to $5/gal. and England is already paying $10/gal.
UN Agenda 21 could...
  • Wipe private property off the face of the earth.
  • Force you and your family to live in a multi-family energy efficient mega-complex.
  • Confiscate private farms and farmland.
  • Snatch away private landholdings.
  • Ban individual ownership of cars.
Sound too outlandish to be true? The scariest part is... IT IS TRUE! So what exactly is Agenda 21? I'll tell you in a minute. But first, I'll give you some background information that is critical to understanding how this anti-freedom scheme came about.

In 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was held in Rio de Janeiro to discuss global initiatives. 172 governments attended and 108 sent their heads of state. And about 2,400 representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) showed up for the "GLOBAL FORUM."

This group of POWERFUL world leaders and environmentalists spent their time discussing typical green movement hogwash like alternative energy, the phony science of climate change and "deadly" car emissions. Back in 1992, most people dismissed this conference as a green rant fest.

However, that was a huge mistake...
...Because the politicians came up with a plan for a centrally ruled global society. They called that plan Agenda 21. The plan's contract would make governments around the world a SLAVE to the every wish and whim of the United Nations.

We cannot make the same mistake with Agenda 21!
UN Agenda 21 would also dictate...
  • Where we live
  • What we eat
  • How and what we learn
  • Where and when we can move (if at all)
Here's how the UN describes it:
"Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
It's already happening right now.
Obama, who has vowed to "fundamentally transform America," is pushing to implement this freedom-grabbing plan UNDER THE RADAR.
On June 9, 2011 he signed EXECUTIVE ORDER 13575 and established the White House Rural Council (WHRC). This new administrative body is responsible for federally coordinating and implementing sustainable and green development locally.

Here is an excerpt from EO 13575:
Section 1. Policy- Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead.
"Sustainable" became a buzzword at the UN's 1992 Earth Summit in Brazil (where Agenda 21 was created).
Sustainable = Agenda 21

Mike Opelka of The Blaze reports,
"Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase 'sustainable rural communities' came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America."

UN Agenda 21 is a transnational attempt to erode property rights, destroy freedom and make America submissive to foreign bureaucrats.  And it has Obama's full support as well as the support of the majority of Democrats in Congress.