Archive for May, 2010

From Woodstock to Civility Commissions: The Hypocrisy of the Left

Posted on May 17, 2010. Filed under: General, Liberal Idiots, Politics |

This is a great article!!! The hypocrisy of the left is unbelievable! It is laughable that they think they can lecture the right on civility!! Are you kidding?

From Woodstock to Civility Commissions

By George Neumayr

To see Alinskyites, radical intellectuals, and Woodstock yuppies lecturing fellow Americans on the virtue of civility is tiresome but unsurprising. No one is more authoritarian than a successful left-wing revolutionary: he rises to power by extolling dissent, then stays in power by suppressing it.

Were the Tea Partiers rabid left-wing professors instead of patriotic Americans, they would receive tenure and places of honor at high-brow luncheons. Were they veterans of UC Berkeley’s Free Speech Movement, they would serve as nostalgic subjects for a Time retrospective. Were Tea Partiers “demonizing” the American government in the deepest sense — teaching the young to view the Founding Fathers with patronizing contempt and the documents they wrote as reactionary relics to be replaced by a “living Constitution” — they would have jobs in the Obama administration.

Barack Obama would have the public believe that placard-waving grandmothers sitting in lawn chairs pose a greater threat to the country than Bill Ayers. One would think a former Alinskyite like Obama who wrote a gushing blurb for a book by that domestic terrorist — a book addressing the subject of educating the young, no less — and sat placidly through the “God damn America” sermons of Jeremiah Wright might approach the topic of civility a little more gingerly.

Claptrap about “civility” invariably comes from pols and pundits who celebrate or condone the most dangerous and rancid violations of it. When not whining about the Tea Party or talk radio, they are usually found busying themselves with poisonous ACLU-style causes of one kind or another: from defending the right of open jihadists to teach at Ivy League schools to raising funds for Woodstock commemorations.

Nothing is more perilous to public discourse than the “demonization” of government, Bill Clinton solemnly warns. But all he means by “government” is liberals in power, and all he means by “demonization” is resistance to the contempt that those liberals show for the constitutional authority underpinning just government.

We’re seeing a replay of the inane and self-serving chatter about civility that the left cranked up after the Republicans took Congress in 1994. A memorable instance from that phony period is that very civil chaps like Paul Begala and E.L. Doctorow, a novelist who accused Ronald Reagan of perpetuating a “gangsterdom of the spirit,” sat on the “Penn Commission on Society, Culture and Community,” the University of Pennyslvania’s hastily-formed and half-baked response to what it saw as the spread of annoyingly effective Limbaughian resistance. A Who’s Who of enlightened society gathered for a few years thereafter to mull over the “explosion of incivility” and the alarming rise in “rudeness.”

But what was really on their minds? Just thwarted or stalled liberal legislation and goals, as evident in the title of many of the talks given at the sham commission’s events: “Tobacco and Its Regulation,” “Affirmative Action and the Culture of Intolerance,” “Immigration and the Fracturing of Community,” “The NEA & NEH Funding Crisis,” “The Great Health Care Debate of 1993-1994,” “Community Building in the late Twentieth Century.”

Then as now, “civility” was nothing more than a euphemism for the docile acceptance of liberalism’s advance and “incivility” was equated with effective resistance to it.

Once again blaming conservative talk radio for the Oklahoma City bombing, Bill Clinton says, “The words we use really do matter because there are, there’s this vast echo chamber. And they go across space and they fall on the serious and the delirious alike.” This is as fatuous as saying that 9/11 wouldn’t have happened if America had spoken more nicely about the Taliban. Moreover, if “words” mattered as much as the self-appointed custodians of civility now claim, they wouldn’t waste their time trying to purge Tea Partiers and talk show hosts from politics. They would spend it clearing out the Ward Churchills from their academic lounges and editorial luncheons. Timothy McVeigh’s most sympathetic chronicler was Gore Vidal.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Highland Park Basketball Team Trip to Arizona Scrapped

Posted on May 17, 2010. Filed under: Education Idiocy, General, Illegal Immigration, Politics |

Unbelievable! This is so ridiculous! If I was a parent I’d be furious at this school and I’d force them to take the team on this trip!

Highland Park basketball team trip to Arizona scrapped

Chicago Tribune

Jeff Long

May 12, 2010

Reveling in its first conference championship in 26 years, the Highland Park High School girls varsity basketball team has been selling cookies for months to raise funds for a tournament in Arizona. But those hoop dreams were dashed when players learned they couldn’t go because of that state’s new crackdown on illegal immigrants.

Safety concerns partly fueled the decision, but the trip also “would not be aligned with our beliefs and values,” said District 113 Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson. That explanation, though, smacks of political protest to parents upset by the decision.

The news, which was broken to the team Monday by coach Jolie Bechtel, comes as critics of Arizona’s controversial law call on professional athletes and others to boycott the state.

Last month a New York congressman asked Major League Baseball to pull next year’s All-Star Game from Phoenix, and protesters recently picketed Wrigley Field when the Arizona Diamondbacks played the Cubs.

But tossing a high school team into the heated debate has left parents and players baffled and angry.

“Why are we mixing politics and a basketball tournament?” said Michael Evans, whose daughter Lauren is a junior on the team. “It’s outrageous that they’re doing this under the guise of safety.”

Lauren Evans said she thought the concern was probably that one of the players could get stopped and questioned.

“It shouldn’t be a problem,” she said. “I don’t think it makes much sense. We shouldn’t be a threat. We just want to play basketball.”

District 113 Superintendent George Fornero declined comment, saying it “wasn’t just my decision.” He referred calls to Hebson.

Hebson said Arizona is off-limits because of uncertainty about how the new law will be enforced. Signed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer last month, it makes it a crime to be in the country illegally and requires police to check suspects for immigration paperwork.

Hebson said the turmoil is no place for students of Highland Park High School, which also draws from Highwood.

“We would want to ensure that all of our students had the opportunity to be included and be safe and be able to enjoy the experience,” Hebson said of the tournament, which will be played in December. “We wouldn’t necessarily be able to guarantee that.”

Asked if there are undocumented players on the team, or if anyone associated with the team is in the country illegally, Hebson said she did not know.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Woody Allen says President Obama Should be Granted Dictatorial Powers

Posted on May 17, 2010. Filed under: General, Hollywood Idiots, Liberal Idiots, Obama |

What an idiot!!

Woody Allen says President Obama should be granted dictatorial powers (seriously)

Fox 411


Woody Allen has a strange take on the democracy that allowed him to become rich and famous.

The “Scoop” director said it would be a cool idea for President Barack Obama to be dictator for for a few years.


So he could get things done without all the hassle of opposing views getting in the way.

In an interview published by Spanish language newspaper La Vanguardia (that we translated), Allen says “I am pleased with Obama. I think he’s brilliant. The Republican Party should get out of his way and stop trying to hurt him.”

But wait – there’s more!

The director said “it would be good…if he could be a dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly.”

Of course, Allen has a famously strange relationship with reality.



Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Mexican Flag More Protected than the American Flag

Posted on May 11, 2010. Filed under: Culture, General, Illegal Immigration |

Helloooooooooo????? Does anyone else find this disturbing?

Check These Out…

Teacher Deems Student’s American Flag Drawing Offensive


Hispanic Students Knock US Flag to the Ground


Local San Diego TV Station Raises Mexican Flag


TX Student Suspended for Removing Mexican Flag


L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.


Banned: The American Flag on Cinco de Mayo


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Breaking– ObamaCare Prompts Top Companies to Consider Dropping Employee Coverage

Posted on May 6, 2010. Filed under: General, Healthcare, Obama, Politics, Socialism/Communism |

Just as we predicted!!!! I hope everybody who thought ObamaCare was such a great idea enjoys watching things fall apart.

Breaking–ObamaCare prompts top companies to consider dropping employee coverage

Anthony G. Martin – May 5, 2010

In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare–skyrocketing costs.

The companies state that after their legal experts poured over the thousands of pages in the new law, it will cost them less to pay the fines for not providing healthcare coverage for employees than continuing to provide employer-paid health insurance benefits.

As a side-note to the announcement, the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.

According to Business Record:

“Additionally, the penalties to businesses for not offering coverage are less expensive than the cost of providing insurance, she said. “But for those that aren’t providing coverage now, this is a huge burden to them. And for employers that have a lot of employees working 30 hours (the threshold to be considered full- ime), you may have a lot of businesses cutting them back to 29 hours.”

Business Record maintains that despite this fact most companies will probably try to continue to provide coverage.

But a report issued today in Fortune Magazine and reported by CNN indicates that the dire warnings of ObamaCare critics concerning the consequences of approving the costly legislation are in fact well-founded.

The report points to internal documents from AT&T, Verizon, John Deere, and several other large corporations which show that executives are, in fact, looking at the option of dropping healthcare coverage for employees due to what they are sure will be unsustainable increases in costs. These costs will be so prohibitive that it would benefit the corporations to pay the government fines instead:

“Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.

That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama’s statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we’ll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America’s employers would remain the backbone of the nation’s health care system.

Hence, health-care reform risks becoming a victim of unintended consequences. Amazingly, the corporate documents that prove this point became public because of a different set of unintended consequences: they told a story far different than the one the politicians who demanded them expected.

This information will most certainly be added motivation for those who are intent on repealing ObamaCare following the November 2010 midterm elections, or at the very least refusing to fund the program which was passed by Congress as an appropriations measure.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Barack Obama, America’s Selective Salary Policeman

Posted on May 3, 2010. Filed under: General, Nanny State, Obama, Politics, Socialism/Communism |

So Obama wants to be the one to decide WHO gets to make a lot of money, and apparently he and his staff get to be rich while everyone else has to be limited in what they can make.

Barack Obama, America’s Selective Salary Policeman

by Michelle Malkin

President Obama spoke the most revealing and clarifying 10 words of his control-freak administration this week: “I think at some point you have made enough money.” Peddling financial regulatory reform at a rally in Quincy, Ill., Obama then ad-libbed peculiar definitions of what he called the “American way” and the profit motive: “(Y)ou can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.”

Fundamental lesson of Capitalism 101: Governments and bureaucrats don’t make what people want and need. They only get in the way. It is individuals, cooperating peacefully and voluntarily, working together without mandate or central design, who produce the world’s goods and services. They make what people desire and demand for themselves, not what Obama and his imperial overlords ordain that the masses should have.

As usual, Obama’s populist demagoguery is telling in its omissions and selectivity. While he lectures on the morality of salary caps for everyone else, his own cabinet is filled with fabulously wealthy CEOs and statist creatures who have parlayed government employment (a “good” service) into private gain as lobbyists, consultants and advisers (“core responsibilities of the financial system”) and then back again to public stints. Revolving doors have always grown the Beltway economy.

To wit: Austan Goolsbee, head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, is the 15th wealthiest member of the Obama administration, with assets valued at between $1,146,000 to $2,715,000. He also pulled in a University of Chicago salary of $465,000 and additional wages and honoraria worth $93,000, according to the Washingtonian magazine.

What “good” did he provide? The government research fellow and Obama campaign adviser was a champion of extending credit to the un-creditworthy. In a 2007 op-ed for The New York Times, he derided those who called subprime mortgages “irresponsible.” He preferred to describe them as “innovations in the mortgage market” to expand the pool of homebuyers. Now this wrong-headed academic who espoused government policies that fed the housing feeding frenzy is in charge of fixing the loose-credit mess he advocated. This is the “American way”?

After 16 years in Congress, four years in the Clinton administration as budget director and chief of staff, and a lifetime of schmoozing in the halls of power, Obama’s CIA director, Leon Panetta, cashed in big. He’s sitting on up to $4 million in assets. While he has zero experience in intelligence matters, he has extensive experience in parlaying his past political tours of duty into lucrative speaking gigs, consulting fees and stock options. Welcome to Obama-approved entrepreneurship. Continued…

By Obama’s definition, first lady Michelle Obama is a model capitalist. Remember: After serving with real estate mogul Valerie Jarrett in Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s administration, Mrs. Obama took a post at the University of Chicago Medical Center, where Jarrett was serving as vice-chair of the medical center’s board of trustees. Mrs. Obama was promoted in 2005 after her husband won his U.S. Senate race with Jarrett’s invaluable aid. As “vice president for community and external affairs” and head of the “business diversity program,” her annual compensation nearly tripled from $122,000 in 2004 to $317,000 in 2005. Even after she went on leave in 2007 to help her husband on the presidential campaign trail, the hospital paid Mrs. Obama $62,709 in 2008, prompting one skeptic to ask: “We know this is Chicago, but isn’t $63,000 quite a lot for a no-show job?”

Jarrett, of course, is now White House senior adviser to the chief spender of other people’s money. And the first lady is now using her new taxpayer-funded position not only to tell folks how they should eat, but also which “good” restaurants and groceries should be built in their neighborhoods.

If there were any doubts left about the Obamas’ ideological commitment to wealth redistribution and a command-and-control economy, those doubts have been thoroughly removed. We have a commander-in-chief who presumes to know when you have earned “enough,” who believes that only those who provide what he deems “good” products and services should “keep on making it,” and who has determined that the role of American entrepreneurs is not to pursue their own self-interest, but to fulfill their “core” responsibility as dutiful growers of the collective economy.

That famous mock-up poster of Obama as the creepy socialist Joker never seemed more apt.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Happy Meal Insanity in the New Nanny State

Posted on May 3, 2010. Filed under: General, Nanny State, Politics, Socialism/Communism |

I am so fed up with gov’t interfering in our lives!!! I want them to leave us alone and let us make our own decisions. Now they’re making laws about the happy meals??? Give me a break!

Happy Meal Insanity in the New Nanny State

by Mike Gallagher

I never thought being called an “ass” on national TV could be so much fun.

It happened the other night on Fox News Channel’s “O’Reilly Factor.” I was a guest with substitute host Juan Williams, and I was brought on to debate some anti-obesity activist — who would ever think obesity could spawn activists? — named MeMe somebody. I think her name is MeMe Roth. Or maybe it’s Ross. It’s not important.

The “debate” was over a new ordinance passed by a local government in Santa Clara, California that bans toys being sold with Happy Meals at McDonald’s. Now why in the world would the local Board of Supervisors bother to ban toys being sold with Happy Meals, one might ask? Evidently, they have the peculiar belief there that allowing parents to buy their own children meals at fast food restaurants that include toys only encourages the little whippersnappers to become fat.

I’m not kidding.

So when the Fox News producer invited me to appear on the show to discuss this little slice of insanity, I didn’t expect there’d be much of a debate. What could possibly be the argument? Seemed perfectly clear to me that Santa Clara, California has a few numbskulls that masquerade as Board of Supervisors who have nothing better to do with their time than to tell adults what products they may or may not purchase from a private business like McDonald’s.

But there would be a debate!

MeMe whats-her-name was ready and loaded for bear.

She seemed to center on what she called “the nag factor.” She lectured me about how parents shouldn’t have to be subjected to their little bundles of joy nagging them into buying things that aren’t good for them, namely chicken strips or cheeseburgers that include little toy characters or plastic thing-a-ma-jigs, or whatever they’re putting in Happy Meals these days.

As the parent of four grown boys, I asked her if she was a parent, too. She sarcastically told me that she was quite capable of reproducing (this was not a very pleasant lady), and that yes, she did have two children.

At that point, I suggested that she might consider doing what my wife and I always did when our kids wanted something, and perhaps ponder the reaction of millions and millions of parents since the beginning of time — say no.

That prompted a most interesting reply on her part: “Oh, don’t be an ass, Mike.”

Which led to guest-host Juan Williams, to give a, “Whoa, whoa there, MeMe!”

Whoa there, MeMe, indeed.

I hate to continue to pick on the anti-obesity activist. I think I got under her skin enough already.

But she advocates a point of view that is becoming an increasingly pervasive aspect of life in these United States. The belief that government must be the ultimate nanny to our children is one of the fundamental philosophical disagreements between the right and left. And the ideology that dictates more government instead of less is what is driving people into the streets with tea party rallies and protests.

Liberals don’t think parents can be left to their own devices when it comes to raising our children. In fact, at one point during the Fox News debate, MeMe told me that while she and I might be able to say no to our whining, nagging children, many American parents cannot. And that’s why an ordinance like this makes sense, she said.

The arrogance of the left always fascinates me. I suppose MeMe thinks she’ll be nominated for mother-of-the-year but other Americans are too stupid to know how to tell their child they’re not getting french fries for dinner.

We’re watching the government tell us what kind of health care coverage we must have, what kind of light bulbs we have to buy, how much water we can use to flush our toilets, and how much power our big screen TV’s are allowed to use. None of this comes by way of education or recommendation. These are mandates.

And now, along comes a local government that has decided to make McDonald’s Happy Meal toys the same as crack cocaine.

The Santa Clara story is the perfect snapshot of the direction our country is headed, unless we take action and put this train back on the rails again.

November 2, 2010 cannot get here quickly enough.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Bill Of No Rights

Posted on May 2, 2010. Filed under: General |

I love this! Unfortunately, everyone thinks they’re entitled to everything these days, and the Democratic party likes to make people feel good by telling them that they will provide it.


by Lewis Napper

We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our descendants, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other proponents of socialism and or authoritarianism.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that many people are confused by the Bill of Rights and apparently require a Bill of No Rights.

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country was based upon freedom, and that means freedom for everyone-not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of dolts, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free of harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who will achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free healthcare, regardless of what Hillary thinks. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public heath care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you won’t have the right to big screen color TV or life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You don’t have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won’t lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you’d like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.

ARTICLE IX: You don’t have the right to a job. All of us want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Team Obama Calls Out SWAT Team on Tea Party Patriots

Posted on May 2, 2010. Filed under: General, Obama |

You have GOT to check this out!! Obama sends out a SWAT team on these dangerous-looking tea partiers. He is such a joke. He’s trying to make the tea partiers look more dangerous than they are.

 Team Obama Calls Out Swat Team on Tea Party Patriots!


Riot police shield Obama from tea-party grandmas

Rooftop snipers eye patriots singing ‘God Bless America’

 April 29, 2010
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Patriotic tea partiers in Quincy, Ill. (photo: Jim Hoft of

When hundreds of tea-party protesters – including many elderly women – gathered outside a civic center where President Obama was giving a public speech Wednesday, they were surprised to be greeted by police dispatched in full riot gear.

Obama spoke in Quincy, Ill., at the Oakley Lindsay Civic Center. The event was open to the public, and about 2,000 tickets were distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis.

About 200 protesters peacefully rallied outside the civic center, carrying signs that read “Give Us Liberty Not Debt” and yellow “Don’t Tread On Me” flags, the Quincy Herald-Whig reported. Protesters waved U.S. flags and shouted “Remember in November” and “You work for us.”

‘Look at these extremist maniacs!’

After Obama’s motorcade arrived, a Secret Service agent instructed protesters to move across the street. The crowd began singing “God Bless, America” and the National Anthem. Quincy Deputy Police Chief Ron Dreyer ordered police in full riot gear to march up the street and stand between the tea partiers and the civic center.

Snipers were also spotted on the rooftop of the building.

The tea partiers complied when they were told to move across the street, behind a sidewalk and into a parking lot. The riot police did not come into contact with the crowd, and the tea partiers sang patriotic songs while obeying the orders.

“Thanks for protecting our president,” one tea partier can be heard saying on a video of the event. “He’s the anointed One, the Messiah.”

Another man said, “Illegals are rioting, and we’re as peaceful as you can believe.”

NBC affiliate WGEM described the crowd as “rowdy,” though they could be heard singing “God Bless America” in the background during the report.

Inside, Obama told the crowd, “[W]hen I travel now, it kind of causes a ruckus.”

Michelle Malkin’s blog responded to the incident with the headline “Riot police called in to protect Obama from out-of-control tea party.”

“Thank goodness the riot police showed up quickly before something serious happened,” Doug Powers wrote. “Look at these extremist maniacs!”

Powers referenced photos of several elderly women at the protest who smiled and wore U.S. flags. “No word yet on how many crimes were carried out in town while the police were being ordered to monitor this seething cauldron of tea-party rage,” he wrote, “but it was a small price to pay to keep the area secure.”

Organizer Steve McQueen told the Herald-Whig, “We’ve always been respectful and acted with dignity. We are out to make our case and make it peacefully.” Tea-party blog P/Oed Patriot posted a video of the incident: The photos and videos sparked a wave of blogger reactions, including the following comments:

  • I hope the riot police have full auto assault weapons with armor-piercing rounds. I hear false teeth can deflect normal NATO rounds.
  • Those poor police have to be embarrassed.
  • These guys and gals look like my mom or the people in my church. Wake up America!
  • Why can’t these racist, violent tea parties be civil like the peaceful pro-illegal immigration rallies we saw in Phoenix!?
  • The cops really have to worry since protesters are shown on tape throwing bottles at them. Oh wait …
  • SWAT was there because it looked like the ladies were going to break out in a bingo game. Those daubers have ink, ya know.
  • Oh my G-d. How beyond ridiculous. This country’s “leaders” have gone stark raving insane.
  • Yeah, they look like real hoodlums. Next they’ll be going after the elementary school kids singing those crazy patriotic songs!
  • When will the AARP condemn this threatening behavior by team Obama?

Army prepping for tea-party ‘terrorists’?

Meanwhile, the Patriot Post’s Mark Alexander reports he was contacted by enlisted soldiers and officers of the military who are concerned about Army exercises at Fort Knox. According to the report, military intel advisories identify potential terrorist adversaries as “Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party.”

A purported exercise intel update issued April 23 read: “The Demonstration did not happen due to Federal and local law enforcement influence. Possible raid on the local White Supremacists Organization may have been made in the last 48 hours.”

The document for the exercise continues, “TEA Party organizers have stated that they will protest at the Gold Vault at a future date. Mint Police are on a heightened alert status to deal with a large crowd on the grounds. Anti-Government – Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity.”

The threat risk is dubbed “substantial,” with “threats against the US Bullion Depository and Fort Knox.”

A similar intel update for another exercise was purportedly issued April 26.

It stated, “Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government intervention and over taxation in Their lives. Alcohol use ‘fanned the flames.’ Many Military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc ‘shoot the Govt. Agent’ event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for thge best shot placement. Components for bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations.”

It continues, “Local detention centers are being made ready for mass arrests.”

According to the update, the 16th Cavalry Regiment Quick Reaction Force I and the 194th Armored Brigade Quick Reaction Force II were placed on two-hour recall.

“Such exercises are critical to the readiness of our forces, and the standard for the real time intel reports in these drills requires thinly veiled references to assets of existing or collateral threat vectors such as communist regimes such as China and real terrorist networks such as al-Qaida, etc,” Alexander wrote. “Perhaps the writers of such exercises today should focus on response plans for, say, an Islamic terrorist who attacks a post (See Ft. Hood / Major Nidal Malik Hasan.).”

He added, “The Fort Knox exercise is not only amateurish in its construct, but also sets an ominous political precedent.”

Alexander said he was recently contacted by the senior command staff at Fort Knox who said an officer in the security loop altered the scenario “in order to make it more realistic.” He was told the alterations were not approved at the command level and that the person who circulated the scenario through official channels will “receive appropriate counsel.” 


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

ODSD: Obama Double Standard Disease

Posted on May 2, 2010. Filed under: General, Obama, Politics |

ODSD: Obama Double Standard Disease

by Larry Elder

Obama Double Standard Disease: an affliction that causes the media to ignore, rationalize or trivialize in order to defend, support and advance the tax-the-rich, spread-the-wealth, expand-the-government agenda of President Barack Obama and his party. This stands in stark contrast with the media treatment of those who refuse to embrace the left-wing, America-bullies-the-world, dissenters-are-racist, pro-amnesty, gay marriage-is-a-right, pro-Roe v. Wade worldview.

ODSD is pandemic. Here are just a few cases.

When the economy recovered under President George W. Bush, the major news media pronounced it a “jobless recovery.” Now, despite unemployment stalled at 9.7 percent for several months, the same media call it a “surprising” or “unexpected” recovery.

Obama urged passage of an $800 billion “stimulus” package in order to prevent unemployment from reaching 8 percent. Post-stimulus passage, unemployment reached 10 percent. Consider how the media would have treated President Bush had he given varying predictions about, and then varying accounts of, the number of jobs supposedly “created or saved” — a laughably unprovable yardstick.

Obama brazenly claims that under his policies, 95 percent of “working Americans” received a “tax cut.” But nearly half of American workers pay absolutely nothing in income taxes. And after exemptions, tax credits and other deductions, the Obama tax cut even exceeded many workers’ payroll taxes. How does a check, given to someone who pays little or no taxes, become a “tax cut”?

The National Rifle Association backed the 2000 presidential candidacy of George W. Bush. Describing the organization’s relationship with Bush as “unbelievably friendly,” an NRA official said a Bush victory would mean “a president where we work out of their office.” Envisioning then-NRA President Charlton Heston sitting at a fold-out table next to the President’s desk, the media pounced.

Typical of the coverage was a Washington Post article with this headline: “The NRA Brags That They’ll Work Out Of President GW Bush’s Oval Office.” The Post pointed out that the NRA gave more than $500,000 in 1999 and 2000 to the GOP and that it expected to spend between $12 million and $15 million more on the 2000 election. These stories elicited a denial of undue influence from the Bush camp: “Neither the NRA nor any special interest sets the governor’s agenda.”

The Service Employees International Union, to elect Obama and other Democrats in 2008, spent $85 million. And in support of corporate bailouts, ObamaCare and higher taxes to “spread the wealth differently,” SEIU President Andy Stern said, “Western Europe, as much as we used to make fun of it, has made different trade-offs which may have ended with a little more unemployment but a lot more equality.”

NBC’s Matt Lauer did not ask Obama about the incredible willingness of the SEIU — his biggest financial supporter — to accept fewer jobs for “a lot more equality.” CBS’ Katie Couric did no story on the union’s admission that higher taxes mean fewer jobs. No Washington Post editorial page asked how Stern’s “trade-off” of fewer jobs squares with what Obama said about the importance of creating jobs: “That’s the single most important thing we can do.”

ACORN strongly endorsed Obama. The community activist group’s CEO, Bertha Lewis, gave a speech at the winter conference of the Young Democratic Socialists. She said: “Any group that says, ‘I’m young, I’m Democratic and I’m a socialist,’ is all right with me. You know, that’s no light thing to do, to actually say, ‘I’m a socialist.’ … Right now, we are living in a time which is going to dwarf the McCarthy era. It’s going to dwarf the internments during World War II. We are right now in a time that is going to dwarf the era of Jim Crow and segregation. … This rise of this tea party so-called ‘movement’ — bowel movement, in my opinion — and this blatant uncovering is ripping off the mask of racism.”

Did the media ask Obama about Lewis’ lunatic attack on those who disagree or about her open embrace of socialism? Did the media ask if Obama cared to comment on his promise, made during the campaign, to allow ACORN to “shape the agenda” of his presidency? Did they ask why Obama dismisses critics who call his agenda “socialism” — even as one of his biggest backers uses that very word?

ODSD ravages the country.

It guarantees a pass is given to an administration that refuses to use the term “Islamofascism”; that offends traditional allies like Israel and new ones like Poland and the Czech Republic; that apparently accepts a nuclear Iran; that ignores government’s role in the housing meltdown while blaming Wall Street “greed”; and that makes appeals to voters along racial lines.

It means that the harmful consequences of the exploding welfare state get ignored, trivialized or disputed. It means that “experts,” hand-picked and quoted by the media, overwhelmingly support the administration’s income-equality agenda. It means that inconvenient news stories — ones that question “bigger and better” government or show there is another side — are downplayed, underreported or dismissed.

The Obama Double Standard Disease is a pre-existing illness — not covered, even under ObamaCare.


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...