Sunday, November 30, 2008

The Minority View Back at the Wheel

According to a new international poll, only 27% of citizens in 11 countries polled supported the idea of imposing Kyoto Treaty-style reforms upon themselves in an effort to battle climate change. So what you should expect to see in the coming months is an effort by world leaders, including Obama, via the United Nations to cram down our throats climate change standards that only the truly clueless would support. Nothing gives me a warmer feeling than imposing the will of the minority upon the majority. And to think that the four years hasn't even started yet.

Notes from the Culture War

I must not watch enough television (probably a good thing)...I'm about to risk exposing this fact by making the following observation: since when did "God d#@%" become acceptable on television?

This evening I decided to do a little channel surfing after watching the Bears give up another score to the Vikings on Sunday Night Football (for the record, neither are favorites of mine -- go Giants!). My first stop was D.L. Hughley's new "news" show on CNN. This has nothing to do with my main point, but I find it worth mentioning that Hughley is still celebrating Obama's victory as if it happened yesterday. I smell cancellation if he can't get any more story ideas.

Anyhoo, I then ventured to Comedy Central to see who Katt Williams was, who was doing stand-up. I thought I had heard his name before, but I must have been thinking about The Greatest American Hero, William Katt.

Needless to say, for those of you who are already familiar with Mr. Williams, I was horribly wrong. The only words not bleeped during this "comedy" bit were key articles and propositions like "the" and "when." But what truly shocked me was when he let fly a "G.D." and nothing happened. No bleep. They just let that sucker fly without interference. Dismayed, I changed the channel again. This time to catch one of my favorite cheese films "Hudson Hawk," twenty minutes in at this point. Then it happened again from Bruce Willis' own lips -- TWICE! G.D. this and G.D. that. Wow, I thought, my V-chip must be flat busted. Nope. I realized that apparently the rest of the world does not find offensive what I find to be the MOST offensive cuss word out there.

So either I'm way behind the times as to what is allowed and not allowed on television these days, or this is a new trend in the ongoing effort to diminish the importance of God.

Monday, November 24, 2008

Franken recount rep last week..."impartial" vote counter this week

Apparently Al Franken still thinks everyone in Minnesota is in stupid enough to believe that a person who represented him last week in the recount, can turn around and be considered an "impartial" vote counter this week. Worse still is the statement by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, also known to be helping Franken: "It’s not my job to second-guess county election officials." YES IT IS! He needs to check out his own web site: "Other election activities include certifying voting systems, conducting administrative recounts, accepting filings by candidates for multi-county offices, and training of local election officials. The secretary of state chairs the state canvassing board, which certifies the results of state elections."

Friday, November 21, 2008

"And I'm Proud to be an American...

...where all the dopes run free."

I know you've all see this but I had to post it for posterity. I've had it on the right column under videos all week but what actually pops up is a bit too random for my liking. So here's a direct link.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Franken's Believe It or Not!

This ballot is being challenged by Al Franken...I'm not kidding.

To stay on top of all the shenanigans and hijinx, click here.

Obamanites Curbing Their Enthusiasm

If you are in desperate need of some good news these days, the luster is apparently wearing off the gold-painted plastic trophy that is Obama for some of his supporters. Matthew Rothschild openly laments in his latest article for The Progressive that in his view, Obama has yet to appoint any real bringers of "change" as he had campaigned. Instead, of course he has been filling his cabinet with former Clintonistas and it is starting to look a lot like 1992 all over again. I don't know about you, but I already feel some states going from blue to red as I type...which has me quite giddy today! But it is December, and the glow of "I told you so" radiates only so far as Obama has yet to formally begin his four years. It's just good to know that a counter-movement from the left may well be underway that may translate into no more free passes from the media soon.

Promoting "tolerance" through tyranny

The gay/lesbian agenda is in full swing and if you disagree in any way, prepare to be attacked. First it was the success of Proposition 8 in California, in which a majority of residents there (you know...that pesky thing called majority rule, aka democracy) collectively agreed that marriage is only defined as being between one man and one woman.

Then the blacklists started...and the church protests (in MICHIGAN of all places). But today's latest takes the cake. eHarmony LOST a discrimination suit in New Jersey because it didn't provide its service to gays and lesbians. I'm sorry but that is tyranny. Since when are businesses REQUIRED to provide something that it never intended to? It's called a FREE MARKET. Just because eHarmony doesn't provide this service doesn't mean that they don't exist elsewhere. Based on this outcome, I invite everyone to begin litigation on the following:

1. If you're white, apply for the United Negro College Fund or apply to be a member of the NAACP. When you're rejected for obvious reasons, sue.

2. Go to McDonald's and try to order Chinese food. When they tell you that they don't sell that, sue.

3. This one will really turn the tables...visit a gay club of the opposite sex and when you can't find a restroom because both are designated for the same sex, sue.

4. Go to the post office and ask for commemorative stamps of Comrade Pelosi. When they tell you that they don't have those, sue.

The point is that this lawsuit is ridiculous. No, this wasn't about what eHarmony did or didn't was about advancing the gay agenda, and New Jersey handed them a big, fat, unwarranted win.

Tyranny is something that is supposed to only happen in communist countries...oh wait..I think this may be part of that "change" we're supposed to believe in.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Obamessiah upstarts new industry: climate change fear

In a four-minute video message to Governor Schwarzenegger's Global Climate Summit yesterday, Obama made some stark claims about the state of the environment, and his apparent ability to direct the country and its resources to overpower God regarding the climate.

Here are some of the excerpts:

"My presidency...will create millions of new jobs in the process."

Hmmm...millions, eh? You mean there will be more people presumably worldwide tacking climate change than there are lawyers in the U.S.? (There are 1.1M lawyers in the U.S. as of last year). That's almost hard to fathom.

"That will start with a federal cap-and-trade system. We'll establish strong annual targets..."

Did you catch that? That means TAX INCREASE. I're saying, "What?!? I didn't hear that!" Let me explain. In order to be in compliance with what is essentially the Kyoto Protocol, which is what this is really all about, we would have to open a market to buy and sell emissions cap allowances, hence the name "cap-and-trade"...this will have an impact on both businesses who output high levels of greenhouse gases AND consumers (raise your hand if you drive an SUV). Check out the latest bill in Congress to get a sense of what I'm talking about. It was killed back in June of this year because of fear it would cripple the economy. The economy IS crippled, and Obamessiah wants to press forward at this juncture? Buyers remorse will soon set in for the voters who put him in office when their fuel taxes go up just to drive as we do today. Curious still is the fact that under "Opposition" in the wiki page for the Kyoto Protocol it is mentioned that opponents of Kyoto argue that this is merely a mechanism to redistribute wealth under a global socialism initiative. Where have I heard that before?

Will Obama try to send God a tax bill when it is discovered that movement of the earth's tectonic plates releases far more oil into the ocean than any man-made disaster and that this happens regularly? Oh wait, the truth may interfere with the agenda, so we'll leave it to the media to ignore these sorts of annoying things others refer to as "facts."

"It will also help us transform our generating 5 million new green jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced." we're up to 5 million new jobs. Again, there are only 1.1M lawyers in the U.S. (or 1.2M plumbers if you prefer). Sounds great...of course they can't be outsourced because obviously this is a WORLDWIDE number, not a U.S.-only number. You'd think he made this announcement sitting side-straddle on a unicorn!

I think it's safe to assume that Obama will be supporting reinstating the drilling ban...enjoy the low gas prices as they won't last.

Doodle analysis: Obama and Palin

Apparently CNN isn't letting up in the election aftermath by continuing to elevate the Obamessiah and committing character assassination of Sarah Palin by having doodle "experts" analyze one sample of doodling from each. Caution: Both the extraneous effort to praise Obamessiah will make you want to vomit and the cheeky jabs at Palin will give you urges to choke your monitor.

Monday, November 17, 2008

Leadership via polling...again

People may not remember the Clinton administration, but Bill was big on polls. He couldn't hardly make a decision without first assembling a focus group. Well, for those of you who missed those days, it seems that Obama is bringing the concept back. Check out Obama's "WhiteHouse2" website...and click on "priorities" to see what his most avid supporters are advocating. You too can help influence policy by voting on your issue of choice.

Note the exactness of the real White House web site in regards to the site appearance. It's almost as if there are two White Houses right now, as Obama's web site suggests...

If you click on Obama's list of priorities, I guess you can see what bright ideas are gaining steam or waning in the mind of The One. Just heard a speech? Go to his list of priorities to see if he meant it by its position on the charts (where's Kasey Kasem?). Haven't heard the latest view of an important issue? Check his priority list to see if you're still in the Top 10, 50, or 100...

"Only McCain supporters capable of racism"

...or at least that is what you're supposed to believe after reading AP writer Jesse Washington's latest masterpiece entitled, "Election Spurs 'hundreds' of race threats, crimes." Every single example cited in the article was an anti-Obama incident. He must not have Googled the correct terms during his research, since doing so would have revealed anti-McCain vandalism in York County, South Carolina...Prince George's County, Maryland...Missouri City, Texas...Franklin County, Pennsylvania...and the incident in Prince William County, Virginia...just to name a few.

Or how about the threats of boycott against a Prince George's County hotel? You start going down a dangerous road of censorship when you call together a boycott of a business merely because of their political preference. I'm sorry but threatening someone's livelihood over the election has far more weight than even the worst reported anti-Obama act. I'm sure if it were a pro-Obama hotel being boycotted, it would have been a hate crime (what ISN'T a hate crime, by the way? Is there a LOVE crime? I digress...)

I guess Jesse Washington simply forgot to cite ANY ONE of these. Dare I speculate that it could be that Jesse Washington may have a slight bias because he himself is black?

Friday, November 14, 2008

Secretary of State Clinton?

It seems as though only Barack Obama found something special in the foreign policy experience (or lack thereof) of Hillary Clinton during the democratic primaries. That's the only way to explain the fact that she is now under consideration for Secretary of State.

Maybe it was the whizzing bullets in Bosnia that never happened. Maybe it was for the time she brokered peace in Northern Ireland.

One must wonder which of Obama's own words have now convinced him that she is a good choice for Secretary of State:

She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:

Senator Clinton has said, "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland." It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, "[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord." With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that "[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one."

News of Senator Clinton's claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph's report at the time, "[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times." Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: "The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn't on it."


Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage."


Senator Clinton has said, "I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo." It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments - U.S. diplomats. President Clinton's top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, "I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue." Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration's National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that "she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations."


Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote - urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda - in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America's failure to do more to prevent the genocide.


Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama's speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women's rights. But Senator Obama's opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton's speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama's speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called "a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics." In that speech, he said prophetically: "[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would "fan the flames of the Middle East," and "strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda." He urged the United States first to "finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama's advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation's history. Some of the most "experienced" men in national security affairs - Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others - led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.


The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation - the War in Iraq - Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled "The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq." As she cast that vote, she said: "This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction."

No, after this, one must realize that Obama perhaps has something else in mind. If Clinton were to remain a senator, she could potentially become one of the biggest thorns in his side as the also-ran during the presidential race that he would then have to kowtow to in order to secure her vote for anything he wanted to do. By getting her to join his campaign, he can call the shots, not to mention put her in harm's way as the "lead patrol" in any murky relations with countries that might deem it victory for them to send a message to the U.S. with violence.

To look at it from her perspective you have to wonder if representing New York is wearing on her as a "been there, done that" situation after running for president. She wields considerable power in Congress, not to mention her voice having been the runner up this past election. It causes a scratching of the head when thinking about why she would walk away from that situation to work for her former (and arguably current) nemesis. One can only conclude that she felt particularly vulnerable on the topic of foreign policy during her campaign, and is looking at the bigger picture for a potential run in four or eight years. Maybe she feels that if she succeeds in diplomacy with some of our greatest international challenges, then she'd be a lock later on. However, I don't think that she has thought long and hard about the potential damage that can be done for her political career should she fail.

I think that her choosing correctly in this situation would require being correct about her nemesis' reasons for choosing her. She's more hawkish than he regarding foreign affairs, so perhaps she sees it as an opportunity to pick him apart from within if things go south between them after he makes some bad choices...only time will tell.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Here we go again...

Well you've got to commend them for their good timing. Only a week has gone by since the election and already the American Humanist Association has rolled out a new anti-God ad campaign that will be displayed on DC Metro during the holidays.

I usually try not to get worked up over this sort of nonsense, but the article rightfully suggests to follow the money for this organization, and you'll get a greater insight into the hostility behind this ad campaign.

Louis Appignani recently gave the AHA a $1 million gift, and incidentally founded the U.N. office for the AHA that is named after him. In his 2005 rant entitled "Roadmap to 2050 and a Humanist World," Appignani states very extreme views against religious beliefs (emphases in bold are my own):
Obsolete, literally medieval religious mythology continues to delay progress in ethics, culture, and the sciences. It must be replaced wherever possible by the humanist outlook.

Religious institutions should be viewed as historical and ceremonial artifacts only-as ancient legacies on a par with European royalty and breathtaking old cathedrals: charming, perhaps, but ultimately without purpose except as tourist attractions. Already, very few citizens of developed countries take their religion seriously-with the glaring exception of the United States. An argument can therefore be made that the United States represents a backward intellectual culture.

As the human race evolves, individuals must develop a heightened ethical consciousness based not on the Ten Commandments or other supposed commands of God but on the consequences of human actions in this world.

Interesting world view to say the least. In other words, Appignani is advocating that we do whatever we feel is right for ourselves until it reaches a point that it has consequences and causes "ethical re-evaluation." There's another word for this and it's called being unaccountable for our actions. It's also called the easy road. It's hard to believe and follow God because we are constantly in conflict with His righteousness and our natural design/inclination to do what is WRONG, and that is the heart of the problem with this ad that is going to run as it purports that all we have to be is "more good than bad" and everything will be okay. What I would LOVE to ask these people is: "according to what or who's standard?" Ridiculous!

On a related note, to illustrate the AHA's cluelessness even more, Appignani's Institute for Humanist Studies has come to believe that voting in churches must be stopped because (I will paraphrase) "people who vote in churches tend to vote more consistently with Biblical beliefs than in other voting venues so if they didn't vote in a church they would vote differently." Uh, NEWSFLASH, genius: it's called voting consistently with your beliefs. I guess that's a confusing concept since you have to have moral convictions and beliefs in order to vote in accordance with them. Try not to laugh out loud when I tell you that the "research" cited was a Stanford study led by S. Christian Wheeler, associate professor of marketing, who said of his study:

"Environmental cues, such as objects or places, can activate related constructs within individuals and influence the way they behave," says Berger. now an assistant professor of marketing at the Wharton school. "Voting in a school, for example, could activate the part of a person's identity that cares about kids, or norms about taking care of the community. Similarly, voting in a church could activate norms of following church doctrine. Such effects may even occur outside an individual's awareness."

Again, ridiculous. I DO vote in a school and if the school system wanted to take out a bond to borrow money, and I happened to disagree with it, I'm not going to be influenced to change my vote to "yes" just because my polling place happens to be a school...that is essentially what this study is saying.

Remember though that it is this flawed logic that the Institute of Humanist Studies is holding up as validation of their "beliefs" (do atheists have those?) Oh, did I mention that Dr. Wheeler is all of about 35 years old? Being 37 myself, I'm not knocking him for his physical youth, but I am expressing a bit of skepticism towards the idea of attaching the word "expert" to an associate professor that has spent his entire life inside the bubble of academia.

I digress...back to the ad. Am I the only one who finds it interesting that they chose to depict a guy in a Santa suit, since, after all, that ISN'T what Christmas is about? But I guess to an atheist Christmas IS all about buying STUFF. Seriously, don't be complacent -- it's part of their subtle subversion of their real premise, and that is to remove the core and original belief that the holiday is all about celebrating the ultimate gift from God -- His Son...who died for all of us and our sins...including the godless.

My recommendation: Go to Zazzle and (WARNING!: shameless self-promotion) order my new sticker and stick them all over these ads (if you ride Metro).

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Makes all kinds of sense in an upside-down world...

I think I hurt my neck doing a double-take when I read today that not only would Barack Obama likely avoid audit for his campaign fundraising, and to rub salt in the wound, that John McCain would definitely be audited. As they say, no good deed goes unpunished.

This is a terrible precedent being set by the Federal Election Commission, and is yet another example of how the American people are being woefully unrepresented in government operations. In case you didn't know, the FEC is comprised of six Commissioners and are all appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. No more than three can be from one political party, and since no one except democrats and republicans have ever been president, it's safe to assume that at any given time in history, three have been democrats and three have been republicans. Since there is no mechanism to break any dead lock, not a whole lot gets done. I imagine it would be a lot like playing rock, paper, scissors without the paper and scissors. I'm sorry but that is completely inept.

To get any action to be performed voluntarily the offense would apparently have to be SO bad that one of the three in the offending party would have to stand up and say, "Whoa...I'm sorry but I can't defend that." Given that, are you telling me that not one of the three current democratic commissioners aren't NOW SAYING THIS? Oh that's right...when it's their guy, the rules change. I'm sure they're secretly loving the irony that they are required to audit McCain because he accepted public campaign funding, while the decision to audit Obamessiah or not rests solely in their hands...which isn't going to happen.

Not to single anybody out, but only one of the FEC commissioners is clearly a democrat based on her professional history having had worked for Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), but Cynthia Bauerly knows full well that if she were to stand up for what is proper and appropriate, she would likely get a dead fish in the mail from Rahm Emanuel.

This is your inept government at work, everyone...getting a warm fuzzy yet?

Monday, November 10, 2008

Who is Sonal Shah?

I was forwarded an article about one of Obama's Transition Team members, Sonal Shah, and I have to admit that at first I didn't find anything of interest regarding her alleged associations to the Vishwa Hari Parishad (VHP), a group responsible for the massacre of Indian muslims in 2002 and recent violence against Christians.

Sonal Shah's involvement with these groups has yet to be proven, and it appears that her parents are the ones closely involved with the group, but after looking further into her co-founding of Indicorps, other questions emerged for me. Since she is a co-founder of this group, I decided to look at the partners of Indicorps to see what sort of company they keep.

One partner group of interest was the Manav Sadhna...I went to the "Our Projects" section, then clicked "Spiritual." Two projects of interest are entitled, "Spiritual Prayer" and "Love All, Serve All."

The "Spiritual Prayer" project shows a list of prayers, and I found clues to their underlying beliefs from them, which basically promote the idea that all religions are the same. Here are some examples (bold is my emphasis):

od you are the Hindu Gods, Narayan and Purushottama
God you are Buddha, you are you the sun and the fire (Parsis)
God you are from the Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian faiths
God you are in the form of Vasudeva and Vishva. You are in the form of happiness
God, you are only one.

This promotes the idea that no one is wrong and all ideas are valid...these conflict with my Christian beliefs...

Speak the truth, practice non-violence of thoughts, speech, actions, do not steal, do not accumulate more than you need
Control all your senses, perform efforts on your own, do not believe in untouchabilty, all are equal
Do not have fear of anything, use things made in your own country, sacrifice tastes, all religions are equal
Practice these principals, bow down with respect and practice these things in your life.

Again, this negates the Christian belief of Jesus and His death for our sins...

Here is the excerpt from "Love All, Serve All" (again, bold emphasis is mine):

Value education at Manav Sadhna emphasizes spiritual development. All daily activities commence with an “All Religions” prayer. Beliefs, symbols and texts of all religions are discussed, so that children develop a respect for all faiths. Children are also encouraged to practice meditation for inner spiritual strength. Manav Sadhna sees every religious festival as an occasion of joy to celebrate with vigor and enthusiasm. Festivals like Christmas, Eid, and Diwali are observed with equal zeal, and are used to encourage children from all castes and all religions to celebrate, in unison. By inculcating children with the concept of communal harmony at an early age, we hope to prevent communal violence in the future generations.

By celebrating all religious observances, it dilutes their importance and significance, in my view. Again, it promotes an "everyone's right, nobody's wrong" philosophy...the corner stone of a socialist society. I think it is reasonable to suspect that Sonal Shah shares these values, and that Barack Obama in turn shares these values. What Barack Obama seems to lack in Christian convictions, he makes up for with aspirations for a socialist society, and it is very possible that Sonal Shah is providing him a road map of a way to unite people under a national cause.

Annie, go get a gun?

There have been several news reports about a sharp increase in guns sales out of fear that Obama and the Democratic-led Congress will make it difficult to either get guns or buy ammunition. Heavy speculation is that the likely method would be to assess a hefty tax on the price of ammunition.

Here is a sampling of some recent articles:


ABC's Nightline

Oregon's Statesman Journal

Business Day

The National Rifle Association web site references a gun ban agenda that was listed on Obama's Transition web site, but has since been removed. Now the most you will see is a very vanilla statement about his general plan for the country under "The Agenda" section. Clearly, there is reason for concern as it is clear that Obama's staff is finding it harder and harder to be transparent about future plans and intentions. One needs to ask why are campaign statements floating around in cyberspace not being left alone? Why is there a constant effort to revise previous statements?

Keep this handy from Hot Air back in September in case he reneges on his promise.

See today's poll on this topic along the right column.

So of course the topic to procure our first home defense weapon is being discussed in our home. My better half wants a good old handgun...but I want something that makes more of a statement --

Meet the Mossberg 500 aka "Zombie Stopper" I've said to my wife, I want to send a gentle but firm warning as to what is about to come next for a would-be intruder with the deep, distinct sound of my first round being chambered with the pump action.

However, if I want such a weapon, I need to hurry as it is clear that Obama's definition of an "assault weapon" includes any weapon procured for the use of the military or law enforcement...and Mossberg is one of the preferred shotguns by law enforcement. Granted that the ones for law enforcement use have an "A1" designation, do you think Obama and the democrats will split hairs on that? I think that if he adopts Joe Biden's expanded definition of an assault weapon, Obama will outlaw ALL types of Mossberg 500 shotguns. Of course, we can't trust's claim that Obama would not expand the list of weapons on the assault weapons ban, since is funded by the Annenberg Foundation, a key funder of ACORN.

Friday, November 7, 2008

ACORN Alert!

According to The American Spectator, the official presiding over the recount of ballots in Minnesota between Al Franken and Norm Coleman is closely tied to ACORN.

This fact has yet to be noticed or mentioned by the mainstream media. At the time of this article (early Friday morning on November 7,2008), the gap was 341 votes...twelve hours later, the gap is now only 221.


UPDATE: The Liberal Power Struggle Begins

Take THAT, Senator Reid! Today it was reported that Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), is in talks with the GOP to join its caucus.

Apparently Joe is sending a clear message that he's not waiting around for the Senate Supreme Leader to rule on his "case."

UPDATE: Related to the original story below (see "The Liberal Power Struggle Begins"), the Henry Waxman power play on John Dingell's chairman seat was apparently orchestrated by the Obama camp.

Ohio official responsible for looking into Joe the Plumber confronted

Fox News' Jesse Waters (for The O'Reilly Factor) confronts Helen E. Jones-Kelley, Director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, who illegally looked into the background of Joe The Plumber.

Caption this pic contest

Make your own caption for this picture in "comments". Winner gets posted.

Teacher berates students with military parents for supporting McCain

UPDATE: It appears that the Superintendent of the Cumberland County Schools system has no intention of letting this incident go. Hopefully we'll see that tenure doesn't make you iron-clad.

Check THIS out!

Fayetteville, NC teacher Diantha Harris browbeats soldier's daughter for parent's choice to vote for McCain. Looks like teacher may face disciplinary action...but here's the kicker (Kool Aid alert)...

...she claims that her comments were "doctored." Watch the video yourself and judge for the way...the subtitles are in Swedish.

Info on how to let her school board know how you feel

FCC Czar selection pending

The man who has been tapped to play hatchet man for conservative talk radio is rumored to be none other than democrat DC lawyer Henry Rivera. Who is this guy you ask? He's a former FCC Commissioner under Reagan who resigned in frustration over the inability to obtain greater regulation of television programming for children. Here's an excerpt summary of his view on the matter found in a record of his testimony at a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Consumer Protection and Finance:

At a meeting of the Albuquerque, New Mexico Bar
Association last November, Commissioner Rivera said that
"Broadcasters haven't been paying enough attention to the needs
of children. .. .the sad shape children's television is in today
serves to remind me that although reliance on market forces is
normally preferable to regulation, blind, unthinking or
rhetorical reliance on the marketplace is an abdication of our
duty to the public under the Communications Act."

If you read the testimony, you may agree that he was onto something. Look at the paltry offerings on Saturday morning television for children these days. A lot of offerings involve fantasy violence, which I argue is hardly appropriate for children of any age. While I may admire the stance of Mr. Rivera in this 1983 hearing, you can draw the conclusion that he has an over-arching interest in using government regulation to create a supposed balance as called for in the "Fairness Doctrine." Our only hope would be that Mr. Rivera realizes the fine line being walked with the First Amendment and that any subsequent action to pursue the Fairness Doctrine would subject both radio and television to the same standards so that cable news outlets like ONN (Obama News Network) and MSLSD enjoy the same wrath by Charles Schumer who somehow attempted to draw a common link between conservative talk radio and pornography.

I personally would like to see the Fairness Doctrine, if implemented, applied to public-funded PBS Commentator Bill Moyers.

Chris Matthews: "My job is to make this new presidency work."

A funny thing happened on the way to the election. MSBHO commentator Chris Matthews claimed on "Morning Joe" the day after the election that it was his job to "make this new presidency work."

Really? So what does that encompass? Making sure that legitimate but negative news stories about the Obamessiah never see the light of day? Spinning Obama White House policies and statements that conflict with logic and common sense to the point that you get a chill up your leg? Glad to see that this arm of the Ministry of Truth will continue the same operations that made the election coverage a travesty, causing the term "journalistic integrity" to become an oxymoron.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

The Liberal Power Struggle Begins

It was reported yesterday that Henry Waxman (D-CA) is vying for democratic colleague John Dingell's (D-MI) chairman spot on the influential Energy and Commerce Committee. Apparently Dingell is too friendly to the auto industry in his state and Waxman therefore deems himself a better stewart of the liberal agenda who will likely push for punishments if Detroit doesn't start pumping out cars that get 80 mpg. Never mind that the difference between the failed American auto industry and the Japanese auto industry is largely the UAW that is more about retaining benefits than putting out quality vehicles that Americans would want to buy. This is the primary pinhead who will be pushing for us to pay in the short term at the pump in favor of green initiatives and stricter emissions controls.

This is just the beginning of much infighting that is likely to occur both within the democratic party and between the Obama White House and Congress. As another Wall Street Journal article pointed out yesterday, there are Congressional players who will undoubtedly challenge Obama with their own agendas:

David Obey (D-WI). A visit to the issues page of his web site makes it clear that Rep. Obey could give a flip about our military operations abroad, as the military isn't even one of the issues listed on his site. He's very much an advocate of spending less money on the military and more on domestic programs. As the WSJ article points out, this conflicts squarely with any Obama plans to recreate the surge in Afghanistan. I might agree with Obey that it would be ideal to spend more money on domestic programs but not before we catch Osama Bin Laden and "bring him to justice"(if I was still in the military I would look soooo forward to a military trial for "accidentally" putting a bullet into OBL upon capture). But unlike Obey, I would require domestic agencies like the Department of Education to prove that they can start turning out quality product before pumping more money into that debacle. Any messiness between Obama and Obey would help the republicans in 2012.

Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Here is the lead proponent for government take over of other American industries, Hugo Chavez style. The more bailouts this guy can issue in exchange for government control, the happier this leftist is. Next on the bailout agenda: the US auto industry.

George Miller. Have your heard of the crazy idea to nationalize all retirement plans under one linked to Social Security? Yeah, this is the guy pushing that nuttiness. Here's the real deal...the Social Security fund has been raided over and over again and is backed only by paper that says "I.O.U." This plan is nothing more than a scheme to help boomers realize full retirement benefits and punting the problem to the next generations by leaving them a ticking time bomb goose egg. This pyramid scheme is gaining traction with Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Watch to see whether Obama gets his middle class tax cuts or if this "plan" goes forward...both cannot succeed.

Want to know who will be leading the way to waste precious time in Congress to pursue the indictment of George W. Bush for war crimes after he's out of office? That would be John Conyers (D-MI). He may establish himself as one of the many poster boys for how democratic partisanship will get in the way of convincing the remaining republicans in Congress to get on board with Obama initiatives.

Pete Stark (D-CA). Like Charles Schumer, Representative Stark will be not only pushing for national health care, he'll be pushing the Canada model of a single-payer know...the one that has Canadians crossing the border into America to get basic care because of the long wait times. Liberals like Stark refuse to understand that there is nothing wrong with American health care except for the access to it.

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV). He's already throwing down the gauntlet to moderates like Joe Lieberman by taking bi-partisans like him to the woodshed by threatening to unseat them on key committees. Way to go Harry...keep showing the true colors of the new "it's our way or the highway" partisan democratic leadership while claiming a bi-partisan vision.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). This one's a hard nut to crack. According to the WSJ, she's laying down plans for a permanent tax CUT. That's so...George Bush! What the hey? Maybe republican ideas are only bad when their republican ideas? Now that they're out of office, Pelosi's Ministry of Truth is now starting to tout the same ideas from the now outgoing administration. The key thing to look for from Ms. Pelosi is the frequency of her disingenuous missives towards republicans.

Creepy coincidence

On November 5th the winning lottery number in the Illinois pick 3 was 666.

GAO unveils new transition web site for Obama and Congress

The Government Accounting Office (GAO) published a new transition web site for President-elect Obama and the new Congress. This is nothing out of the ordinary first of's just that this is the first presidential transition that didn't occur in the analog stone age. I partially jest that back in 2000, computers, let alone the Internet, were still relatively new to the government. may be interested in the list of 13 most urgent issues facing the nation:

1 oversight of financial institutions and markets,
2 U.S. efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan,
3 protecting the homeland,
4 undisciplined defense spending,
5 improving the U.S. image abroad,
6 finalizing plans for the 2010 Census,
7 caring for service members,
8 preparing for public health emergencies,
9 revamping oversight of food safety,
10 restructuring the approach to surface transportation,
11 retirement of the Space Shuttle,
12 ensuring an effective transition to digital TV, and
13 rebuilding military readiness.

Whoa! Back the truck up...what did number 12 say? Yes that's right...if we dork up the transition to digital TV there will be RIOTS in the streets! Hopefully they're not in list of importance as I don't find it more important than rebuilding military readiness (unless you're a "Gray's Anatomy" junkie I suppose).

For more fun, check out the tab specifically for #12 to read the overstated claims. Some gem examples:

"...should the overall DTV transition not proceed smoothly, it could undermine the public’s confidence in government."

You mean the $700B bailout of Wall Street and the mortgage crisis haven't already done this? It will take a failure to be adequately prepared with television conversion kits to lose public confidence? I can hear it now...

Joe Bob: "What?!? The television stopped working? That's it! Those losers in Washington are sending our country into the crapper! You can take away my foreclosed home, but you CAN'T TAKE AWAY "The Ghost Whisperer!""

Or how about:

"Over one-third of US households are at some risk of losing television service since they have at least one television not connected to cable or satellite."

Really? One-third? One-third of homes have no cable or satellite service? Let's test that...

According to the US Census, there are 111,617,402 households in America as of 2006. Using Department of Energy stats for the percentages of homes with cable or satellite, I calculate that the figure is closer to 20%. And these stats were from 2006 and 2001...leaving out the recent mass purchasing of flat screen televisions the last couple of years as prices have come down. Maybe their own statement later on backs up my claim:

"We found that up to 35 percent of US households could be affected by the transition, however, as of August 31, 2008, only 13 percent of households had requested coupons for converter boxes." It's a stretch but if you assume that I'm right about the numbers being smaller than my 20% calculation because of increased buying of flat screens, then 13% seems plausibly in the ball park...

"Of at risk households who planned to take action, many indicated they would be likely to use the coupon subsidy program, but only a third knew how to actually obtain a coupon." Yeah, let's talk about that coupon. It's good for $40...good luck finding one for that price that won't break in a year or less. But the bigger question that is begging to be asked is: Why is the government subsidizing the purchase of conversion equipment for people who haven't bought a television since the "Golden Girls" were on prime time? Seriously, the question to ask yourself is whether or not you bought a new television since the thespian masterpiece "Karen Sisco" was on the air as the transition to digital tuners in all televisions occurred in 2004.

Unpaid Obama Campaign Workers in Indianapolis

Apparently some Obama campaign workers in Indianapolis are getting stiffed for their last-minute campaign work leading up to the election. I won’t be disingenuous so as to blame Obama of any wrongdoing here…it is clearly the responsibility of the organization involved entitled “Vote Corps.” I Googled it…I Wiki’ed it. Nothing…nada…zilch. To not have a Web presence means that this organization is seriously grassroots…which means that it is either woefully disorganized or fraudulent. The truth is always somewhere in the middle it seems, but not having been there I won’t speculate. Sike! Yes I will…this seemingly unimportant story begs some other “big picture” questions.

Let’s start with the fact that the volunteers were paid with pre-paid Visa cards. Hmmm…I think that it’s safe to assume that no one at Vote Corps was planning to send out W-2’s to these folks so as to ensure that their payments were properly recorded with the Internal Revenue Service…especially since according to the video report, the group “no longer officially exists”. I guess if you open and close an operation within a tax year you have no obligation to report any monies paid for services to individuals who would have to report that as income. I think it is also safe to assume that none of these volunteers were going to consider this as reportable income to the IRS when they filed their taxes since, after all, payment was in the form of a credit card not actual money (whatever!).

But, as the story continues, the Vote Corps people eventually showed up and started paying people, but didn’t apparently pay all that was due them…and of course the organization said in effect, “the check is in the mail.” Again, I must ask --mismanagement or fraud? Time will tell.

Further evidence of the fact that these volunteers aren’t used to paying taxes came from their own words:

“They gave us $10 an hour. So we added it. I added up all the hours so it was supposed to be at least $120. All I get is $90,” said Charles Martin. Well Charles, if you paid taxes that would be about right…welcome to the real world. But alas you may be part of the 40% of the population that doesn’t pay any taxes so you wouldn’t of course be used to this sort of concept.

“It should have been $480. It’s $230,” said Imani Sankofa. Congratulations Imani you’ve been deemed to have made too much money at once…this would be the “windfall tax” that your president wants to impose on corporations and probably individuals later on.

If you think these folks are mad now, just wait until Obama doesn’t come through with sending them a tax refund for taxes they didn’t pay. Do you think that they’ll come knocking on our doors?

Here's another video story of the event.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Obama White House gets a dog

Well that didn't take very long. Obama has already asked US Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-Illinois) to be his Chief of Staff. He's described in the link above as "sharp-tongued" and "sharp elbowed." That's a really nice way to say that if you have someone that needs convincing by sending the goon squad, Rahm is your man. I guess an Obama gesture of "reaching across the aisle" involves a baseball bat.

There are conflicting stories regarding who was involved, but here are some of the resume highlights for "Rahm-bo":

1. His appointment would represent Obama's first import of good, old-fashioned Chicago politics. He's quoted as saying that democrats represent a break from the status quo and cronyism, yet his own roots seem to imply that he's no different.

2. There are legendary stories of psychopathic behavior like sending an ex-girlfriend a dead fish and stabbing a table incessantly during a victory dinner akin to something you'd see in an Al Pacino or Robert DeNiro performance. There are some potential explanations for this. One might be that he was forced to take ballet as a young boy.

Let's look at his record briefly...

Just when you thought that Obama was pro-choice, we may have found a more left democrat...NARAL gives him a 100% voting record rating. Use your imagination for what all that emcompasses.

He's against defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

Curiously was in favor of making the Patriot Act permanent.

Rated by the HRC as having a 100% pro-gay stance

The Christian Coalition gave him an 8% grade...which means that he's pretty anti-family (even though he has one).

He's against the requirement to show a photo ID to vote.

Is for the immediate pull out of troops from Iraq.

Is against all anti-immigration measures.

Curiously against ending offshore tax havens.

Just some highlights for you to enjoy. Sounds like a real uniter. So the bottom line is that appointing Emanuel enables Obama to keep his nice-guy image while his junkyard dog does all the dirty work. Most likely, Emanuel will be in charge of the far left wing agenda and will meet with Obama often to determine the what and when of things that will be "safe" to unleash upon the public.

Barry the Voter

"This is my ACORN membership card...I get to vote like five times, right?"

So now what?

It is the morning after -- November 5, 2008, and I'm still processing the election results. America's desire to elect its first black president was so great that it overlooked his politics. I'm not that old but I've never seen a presidential candidate get so little vetting by the media. I won't rehash all the old factors that never got traction prior to his election. I will instead focus on where we may go from here.

I will say that I am proud for America that we have elected a black president. Blacks have indeed waited a long time for representation at this level of government so hopefully now there will be a greater sense among them that there is but ONE America. I'm not a big John Wayne fan, but I agree with him that a hyphenated America (i.e. African-American, Asian-American, etc.) is a divided America. What I think will happen though is that blacks will end up feeling lukewarm towards him by the end of his term because he will not solve poverty, though many would like to believe that. What he MAY do however is make that pool of folks BIGGER through taxation (yes, we'll ALL be taxed when he lets those Bush tax cuts expire people!). No, Obamanation won't pay your mortgage or your car loan through the magical taxation of the highest 5%.

So I see two possible models that Obama may govern. One extreme would be that Obama goes to the extreme left to appeal to the loonies. Things that come to mind are: streamlined processes for killing the unborn, stifling our free media via the Fairness Doctrine, and/or discouraging Second Amendment rights using tactics used by the idiots running Washington DC. Government-run health care (now THERE'S an oxymoron!) and overhauls of tax laws to redistribute wealth also fall into this category. Keep an eye on his appointments to see if ACORN loyalists or mutual friends of Bill Ayers get in the door -- you think I'm kidding but I'm fully expecting a disciple of Ayers to be appointed to the Department of Education so their loony "social justice" enterprise can be unleashed full scale.

The other extreme I see is Barack Obama actually being kept at bay by the remaining Republicans in Congress with the help of "Blue Dogs" (but keep an eye out for pork for these guys to vote in the affirmative for Obamanation initiatives) due to Obama's extreme ambitions being too extreme perhaps for even some liberals. If he is effectively neutered from putting into place his most extreme ambitions, his presidency could perhaps go down historically as nothing more than the second coming of JC (as in Jimmy Carter) in that he would go down in the books as a wimp with no moral compass or meaningful convictions to contribute to the American story still being written.

So this blog will be dedicated to revealing and discussing all Executive Orders by President Obama (that hurts to type that) and other shenanigans performed by liberal pinheads like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It will be amazing to see what else the demoncrats try to blame on the minority Republicans over the next four years. This blog will also bring to light stories that the liberal media tries to outright ignore or bury on page 23 in the Travel and Living section.