The sign the Left has been waiting for, the sign that proves beyond all shadow of doubt that Barack Obama is The One, the Messiah, He Who Will Deliver Us.
He has raised the Dead.
Well, the Grateful Dead:
...already President Barack Obama has accomplished at least one task that had appeared all but impossible just a year ago: He's put The Dead back on the road.
As the core surviving members of the Grateful Dead, once the world's biggest concert draw, barrel across the country for the first time in five years, bass player Phil Lesh says they have Obama, and also Lesh's youngest son, Brian, to thank.
Great. Mobs of drug-addled hippies and wannabes, twirling around in endless circles to pointless jams, giggling emptily with glazed-over eyes - soon to infect a neighborhood venue near you.
Gee, thanks Barack. This is "progressive", reviving a band that's over 20 years past its prime? I mean, geez, if you were gonna raise dead rock stars, how about Stevie Ray Vaughn, John Lennon, or The Big Bopper?
Well, it's not all bad. Maybe you can send Hillary and Tim - and maybe Nancy! - on the road for a while to follow The Dead? Let them eat soy-based snacks, bathe in a pond, and wander around in the darkness for a few weeks.
After all, that's the socialist/communist future your policies have planned for us, no? Give the architects a taste first...
Hat tip: Gateway Pundit
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
North Korean Rocket Launch: Is Obama Lying To Us?
Yes, we know, Obama taught the deeply psychotic nation of North Korea a firm lesson when he got the UN to issue a mild rebuke to their recent launch of a ballistic missle. Such a firm lesson that North Korea in return re-started all their idled nuclear reactors, withdrew from six-party talks, threw all UN inspectors out of the country , and made passionate love to Michelle Obama (OK, I made up that last part. Yuk.)
But is Obama - knowing there is only so long he can keep this diplomatic Epic Fail from going nuclear (ha!) - also witholding the truth about how far this rocket actually traveled?
U.S. aviation and space science website Spaceflight Now on Sunday said the rocket temporarily left the atmosphere and flew up to 800 km further in the direction of Hawaii.
Based on analysis of radar data and data from the U.S. Air Force's missile warning satellite, the website said the rocket actually flew 3,846 km, rather than the 3,058 km the U.S. and Japan had estimated.
A little warning to Baracky from his friends in North Korea - sending a little firecracker to splash down harmlessly (this time) near his home town?
So the rocket launch may be a larger success than advertised, and Obama's Korean diplomacy may be a bigger failure than anyone has admitted (or will ever admit). Will we find out the truth about where the missle actually landed, and how much danger American-flagged territory is being exposed to?
Probabaly not. It might cause pressure on Barack Obama to actually do something, and that's not his forte. Better to lie to the American people, and let them think they're safe, than admit that diplomacy - and personality - has its limitations....
But is Obama - knowing there is only so long he can keep this diplomatic Epic Fail from going nuclear (ha!) - also witholding the truth about how far this rocket actually traveled?
U.S. aviation and space science website Spaceflight Now on Sunday said the rocket temporarily left the atmosphere and flew up to 800 km further in the direction of Hawaii.
Based on analysis of radar data and data from the U.S. Air Force's missile warning satellite, the website said the rocket actually flew 3,846 km, rather than the 3,058 km the U.S. and Japan had estimated.
A little warning to Baracky from his friends in North Korea - sending a little firecracker to splash down harmlessly (this time) near his home town?
So the rocket launch may be a larger success than advertised, and Obama's Korean diplomacy may be a bigger failure than anyone has admitted (or will ever admit). Will we find out the truth about where the missle actually landed, and how much danger American-flagged territory is being exposed to?
Probabaly not. It might cause pressure on Barack Obama to actually do something, and that's not his forte. Better to lie to the American people, and let them think they're safe, than admit that diplomacy - and personality - has its limitations....
DHS Memo: How About That Timing!
Funny how, depite the fact that the White House claimed that Barack Obama had no idea there were "Tea Party" protests erupting all over the nation on April 15th, they seemed desperate to manage the news around it.
First, the infamous DHS memo equating conservatives with terrorists , which apparently was rushed out against the advice of civil liberties officials the day before the protests. A great tool for the media to define a protest they couldn't understand, and if they did, certainly didn't agree with (need I say more than CNN?). Not to mention giving talking points directly to useful Democratic idiots, both on the local and congressional level.
And what about the day after? Why, how about releasing top-secret memos alleging torture in the previous administration (Barack: "a dark and painful chapter in our history," )? Obama knows that's throwing red meat to the media dogs; they'd rather write about one possible Bush trangression than almost a half-million Americans out on the street protesting Obama's policies.
Not enough smoke to cover up the Tea Parties? Well, how about releasing information suggesting that the NSA had been engaged in “over-collection” of domestic communications of Americans? During the Bush administration, of course...
Nice job of smearing 49.9% of all Americans (and the previous administration) in order to keep the other 50.1% of the public in line and voting for you.
Hey, Mr. Organizer-in-Chief - you're working too hard. As I read somewhere else on the web today...if Barack Obama was the King of England in 1776, the media wouldn't have reported the Revolution....
First, the infamous DHS memo equating conservatives with terrorists , which apparently was rushed out against the advice of civil liberties officials the day before the protests. A great tool for the media to define a protest they couldn't understand, and if they did, certainly didn't agree with (need I say more than CNN?). Not to mention giving talking points directly to useful Democratic idiots, both on the local and congressional level.
And what about the day after? Why, how about releasing top-secret memos alleging torture in the previous administration (Barack: "a dark and painful chapter in our history," )? Obama knows that's throwing red meat to the media dogs; they'd rather write about one possible Bush trangression than almost a half-million Americans out on the street protesting Obama's policies.
Not enough smoke to cover up the Tea Parties? Well, how about releasing information suggesting that the NSA had been engaged in “over-collection” of domestic communications of Americans? During the Bush administration, of course...
Nice job of smearing 49.9% of all Americans (and the previous administration) in order to keep the other 50.1% of the public in line and voting for you.
Hey, Mr. Organizer-in-Chief - you're working too hard. As I read somewhere else on the web today...if Barack Obama was the King of England in 1776, the media wouldn't have reported the Revolution....
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Media Finally Shows Concern for Overt Bias !
Alas, we are not talking about the media collective effort to ignore over 100,000 Americans taking to the street yesterday. No, we are not talking about the consistent, elistist, sneering, left-wing slant of all the major dalies and cable news shows.
We are talking about possible anti-Obama bias at...CNBC:
THE top suits and some of the on-air talent at CNBC were recently ordered to a top-secret meeting with General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt and NBC Universal President Jeff Zucker to discuss whether they've turned into the President Obama-bashing network, Page Six has learned.
"It was an intensive, three-hour dinner at 30 Rock which Zucker himself was behind," a source familiar with the powwow told us. "There was a long discussion about whether CNBC has become too conservative and is beating up on Obama too much. There's great concern that CNBC is now the anti-Obama network. The whole meeting was really kind of creepy."
One topic under the microscope, our insider said, was on-air CNBC editor Rick Santelli's rant two months ago about staging a "Chicago Tea Party" to protest the president's bailout programs -- an idea that spawned tax protest tea parties in other big cities, infuriating the White House.
Wow...where do I begin? How about...here:
1) Doesn't CNBC, as a business network, have to - as a point of honesty - be critical of a president who is so visibly hostile towards business and money-making?
2) As MSNBC is the most overtly pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, pro-adminstration network available in any nation - dictators don't get such uncritical, glowing praise from their own handpicked state press - doesn't a little honesty from CNBC create a sort of balance between the two for GE? Power is fleeting; shouldn't these guys be hedging their bets anyway?
3) Does GE ever look at the ratings and realize that FOX News, accused of being the "conservative nutjob network" because it dares to present two points of views, has more viewers than CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, Headline News, BBC America, and the US al-Jazeera feed combined? Does that give these genuises, any, you know...ideas on how they should be running their business?
Wonder if they are more concerned about the political repecussions of criticizing the president (and who was he "infuriated" with, anyway? Santelli for his rant, CNBC for broadcasting it, or the Tea Partiers for daring to oppose Him?) than about truth in reporting and running a profitable news organization....
Nah. That would never happen in America....right?
We are talking about possible anti-Obama bias at...CNBC:
THE top suits and some of the on-air talent at CNBC were recently ordered to a top-secret meeting with General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt and NBC Universal President Jeff Zucker to discuss whether they've turned into the President Obama-bashing network, Page Six has learned.
"It was an intensive, three-hour dinner at 30 Rock which Zucker himself was behind," a source familiar with the powwow told us. "There was a long discussion about whether CNBC has become too conservative and is beating up on Obama too much. There's great concern that CNBC is now the anti-Obama network. The whole meeting was really kind of creepy."
One topic under the microscope, our insider said, was on-air CNBC editor Rick Santelli's rant two months ago about staging a "Chicago Tea Party" to protest the president's bailout programs -- an idea that spawned tax protest tea parties in other big cities, infuriating the White House.
Wow...where do I begin? How about...here:
1) Doesn't CNBC, as a business network, have to - as a point of honesty - be critical of a president who is so visibly hostile towards business and money-making?
2) As MSNBC is the most overtly pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, pro-adminstration network available in any nation - dictators don't get such uncritical, glowing praise from their own handpicked state press - doesn't a little honesty from CNBC create a sort of balance between the two for GE? Power is fleeting; shouldn't these guys be hedging their bets anyway?
3) Does GE ever look at the ratings and realize that FOX News, accused of being the "conservative nutjob network" because it dares to present two points of views, has more viewers than CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, Headline News, BBC America, and the US al-Jazeera feed combined? Does that give these genuises, any, you know...ideas on how they should be running their business?
Wonder if they are more concerned about the political repecussions of criticizing the president (and who was he "infuriated" with, anyway? Santelli for his rant, CNBC for broadcasting it, or the Tea Partiers for daring to oppose Him?) than about truth in reporting and running a profitable news organization....
Nah. That would never happen in America....right?
5,000 Attend Tea Party In...New York City ??
As much as the media and the Obama administration trys to portray the Tea Partying tax-and-spend protestors as "right wing extremists", it ain't flying. Especially when you get a turnout like this in New York City:
About 5,000 people jammed the streets around New York's City Hall...Retired NYPD Lt. Sean Jordan, 43, of Westchester, turned up with his 17-year-old son, Connor, both bearing signs describing their disgust with the economy.
"UNCLE," screamed Jordan's sign.
Scream as loud as you want, Sean...Obama's is still going to keep twisting your arm until you give him everything - everything - that you have...
Great photo album here !
About 5,000 people jammed the streets around New York's City Hall...Retired NYPD Lt. Sean Jordan, 43, of Westchester, turned up with his 17-year-old son, Connor, both bearing signs describing their disgust with the economy.
"UNCLE," screamed Jordan's sign.
Scream as loud as you want, Sean...Obama's is still going to keep twisting your arm until you give him everything - everything - that you have...
Great photo album here !
Tea Party Madness in New Jersey!
Seems like even "Blue Jersey" is getting fed up with the tax-and-spend policies of the Democrats as tea parties erupted statewide today...The Garden State Patriot has photos from Hackensack and Newark (the belly of the beast itself), here's a sample:
Check out the links for tons more photos...
Check out the links for tons more photos...
At the historic Morristown Green (where, at Arnold's Pub, a certain General George Washington drew up battle plans that would help a ragtag army of rebels defeat the mighty British), over 1000 modern-day revolutionaries spoke up against excessive taxation, just like in days of old.
The presence there of two Republican gubenatorial candidates led Democratic State Committee Chairman Joseph Cryan to release this ugly statement:
Joseph Cryan, in a prepared statement, blasted Christie and Lonegan for participating in events organized by what he described as "radical right wing groups designed to push the 'Party of No' agenda.
"...Christie and Lonegan have no answers to any of the problems people are facing in the middle of a national recession and would rather stump for votes from right wing extremist mobs while chanting slogans and yelling "no" "
Right Wing Extremist (as per Joe Crynan) in Morriston
Temperatures around 40 degrees with a cold biting wind and rain and occasional sleet didn't deter over 500 tea party teabaggers from protesting the tax and spend congress and president.
More members of the "extremist mob", here in Flemington, where hundreds of people turned out (that's between 5-10% of the tiny town's population; the equivalent 3/4 of a million NYC residents showing up)
Scary...call the DHS!
And the Church represents! Whoa!
In Newark, protesters chanted "Less Taxes, More Freedom!" and other anti-taxation remarks.
"We're here to get attention and let our government officials know that they have to represent us. We've been taxed enough already," said Dominick Cuozzo, a 28-year-old assistant pastor from the First Baptist Church of Caldwell.
The church's pastor, David Bulka held a sign that said, "Stop High Property Taxes, Forcing New Jersey Citizens Out."
"People can't afford to pay their mortgages, and high taxes," he said.
Scared yet, Democrats?
Good national coverage at Gateway Pundit...plus over 10,000 show up to protest in St. Louis!
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Liberal Fascism in North Carolina
Still don't think it's part of a plan yet? The DHS releases a report yesterday - coincidentally 24 hours before massive "tea party" protests are scheduled against Barack Obama's socialization of American society - claiming "rightwing radicals" are gaining strength in America. What makes these Americans dangerous "radicals", you ask? Well, they are:
...antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.
...as well as...longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage.
So if you are anti-abortion, pro-marriage, and voted for John McCain, well, the DHS is watching you - you radical!
And what does the report say about maurding groups of left-wing radicals that riot and endanger hunder of lives in order to shut down a speech at a University campus? Why, nothing, of course. They are doing Obama's and the DHS's work - by refusing to allow former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo to speak against providing in-state tuition to illegal immigrants (watch out, New Jersey!). The ugly video of the American Left violating the First Amendment is tough to watch:
Via Gateway Pundit:
Hundreds of protesters converged on Bingham Hall, shouting profanities and accusations of racism while Tancredo and the student who introduced him tried to speak. Minutes into the speech, a protester pounded a window of the classroom until the glass shattered, prompting Tancredo to flee and campus police to shut down the event.
Police escorted the women into the hallway, amid more than 30 protesters who clashed with the officers trying to keep them out of the overcrowded classroom.
About 200 protesters reconvened outside the building. "We shut him down; no racists in our town," they shouted. "Yes, racists, we will fight, we know where you sleep at night!"
So, in conclusion: Rioting, violating the First Amendment, assaulting peace officers, and threatening fellow Americans whom dare disagree with you is OK. (It must be, because the DHS did not breathe a word about it.)
But: Pro-life, pro-small government, anti-Obama? Domestic terrorist.
Still don't think there's a plan behind this? Still can't see where this is all going? Then I feel sorry for you...
...antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.
...as well as...longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage.
So if you are anti-abortion, pro-marriage, and voted for John McCain, well, the DHS is watching you - you radical!
And what does the report say about maurding groups of left-wing radicals that riot and endanger hunder of lives in order to shut down a speech at a University campus? Why, nothing, of course. They are doing Obama's and the DHS's work - by refusing to allow former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo to speak against providing in-state tuition to illegal immigrants (watch out, New Jersey!). The ugly video of the American Left violating the First Amendment is tough to watch:
Via Gateway Pundit:
Hundreds of protesters converged on Bingham Hall, shouting profanities and accusations of racism while Tancredo and the student who introduced him tried to speak. Minutes into the speech, a protester pounded a window of the classroom until the glass shattered, prompting Tancredo to flee and campus police to shut down the event.
Police escorted the women into the hallway, amid more than 30 protesters who clashed with the officers trying to keep them out of the overcrowded classroom.
About 200 protesters reconvened outside the building. "We shut him down; no racists in our town," they shouted. "Yes, racists, we will fight, we know where you sleep at night!"
So, in conclusion: Rioting, violating the First Amendment, assaulting peace officers, and threatening fellow Americans whom dare disagree with you is OK. (It must be, because the DHS did not breathe a word about it.)
But: Pro-life, pro-small government, anti-Obama? Domestic terrorist.
Still don't think there's a plan behind this? Still can't see where this is all going? Then I feel sorry for you...
"The Onion" Gets It...
...even if the mainstream media are clueless and defensive about it. Not bad for a liberal-leaning humor daily:
Media Having Trouble Finding Right Angle On Obama's Double-Homicide
More than a week after President Barack Obama's cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.
"I know there's a story in there somewhere," said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama's home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. "Right now though, it's probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in.
Since the killings took place, reporters across the country have struggled to come up with an appropriate take on the ruthless crime, with some wondering whether it warrants front-page coverage, and others questioning its relevance in a fast-changing media landscape.
....."Or maybe the story is just that murder is cool now," Kaplan continued. "I don't know. There are a million different angles on this one."
So far, the president's double-homicide has not been covered by any major news outlets. The only two mentions of the heinous tragedy have been a 100-word blurb on the Associated Press wire and an obituary on page E7 of this week's edition of the Lake County Examiner.
While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.
"There's been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all," Washington Post senior reporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show.....
Ends with a great bitch-slap on the New York Times. Read it all....
Media Having Trouble Finding Right Angle On Obama's Double-Homicide
More than a week after President Barack Obama's cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.
"I know there's a story in there somewhere," said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama's home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. "Right now though, it's probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in.
Since the killings took place, reporters across the country have struggled to come up with an appropriate take on the ruthless crime, with some wondering whether it warrants front-page coverage, and others questioning its relevance in a fast-changing media landscape.
....."Or maybe the story is just that murder is cool now," Kaplan continued. "I don't know. There are a million different angles on this one."
So far, the president's double-homicide has not been covered by any major news outlets. The only two mentions of the heinous tragedy have been a 100-word blurb on the Associated Press wire and an obituary on page E7 of this week's edition of the Lake County Examiner.
While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.
"There's been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all," Washington Post senior reporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show.....
Ends with a great bitch-slap on the New York Times. Read it all....
Why a Tea Party? Here's a Clue, Jack....
Newt Gingrich gives us three reasons to go outside today and rage against the tax-and-spend machine that is the Obama administration:
• If you’re a 50-year old-with a college degree, you will pay approximately $81,000 over your working life just to pay the interest on the debt in the Obama budget.
• If you’re a 40-year-old, you’ll pay $132,000.
• And if you’re a 20-year-old, just starting out after college, you will pay a whopping $114,000 just to service the interest on the debt created by the Obama budget.
Fight now, or live to regret later....
• If you’re a 50-year old-with a college degree, you will pay approximately $81,000 over your working life just to pay the interest on the debt in the Obama budget.
• If you’re a 40-year-old, you’ll pay $132,000.
• And if you’re a 20-year-old, just starting out after college, you will pay a whopping $114,000 just to service the interest on the debt created by the Obama budget.
Fight now, or live to regret later....
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
US Congressman Fired Upon In Somalia? Hmm...
Many of you likely saw this tidbit hit the papaers yesterday in the aftermath of the heroic Navy Seals rescue of Captain Phillips:
Representative Donald M. Payne of New Jersey, the chairman of the House subcommittee on Africa, narrowly escaped a mortar attack on Monday as he was ending a visit to Mogadishu, Somalia’s bullet-ridden capital, that he undertook against the advice of the Obama administration.
The Shabab, an Islamist insurgent group vying for control of the country, later took responsibility for the attack, Reuters reported.
“We fired on the airport to target the so-called Democratic congressman sent by Obama,” said Sheik Hussein Ali, a spokesman for the Shabab. “Let him go back with the message of our strength and enmity towards the U.S. and its allies. No single group can claim control of Mogadishu, and Al Shabab will continue its attacks.”
When there's trouble a brewin', always look for that Jersey connection...
But what the hell was Payne doing in Somalia anyway? That's what Bob Ingle wants to know:
Payne, who is chairman of the House subcommittee on health and Africa, was there to discuss piracy and security and cooperation. Since Somalia hasn't had an effective government in 18 years, it's unclear what could be achieved by talks there. There doesn't appear to be anyone in control of the country.
I guess his subcommitte seat gives him cover for this trip, but who exactly was he talking to? The Times story simply refers to "Somali officials", but since there really is no such thing - it's a badland unlike many others in modern history - what did he expect to accomplish?
There's something strange about this little trip into hell Mr. Payne took - and maybe it's the Jersey in him, maybe it's the Jersey in me, but...I would not be suprised if there was a personal aspect to this trip, one that has not yet come to light...unless, of course, it is just the natural affinity one pirate has for another. Actually, the pirates of Somalia can learn a lot from the Congressional pirates of New Jersey.
Well, truth be told, the Congressman did accomplish something - getting innocent civilians maimed and likely killed by the mere fact of his presence:
Fortunately, Payne left unhurt. Others weren’t so lucky. Medina Hospital Administrator Ali Adde said 19 civilians, mostly women and children, were injured when the mortar shells landed in residential areas.
Next time, don't be a Payne, Congressman. Stay in Jersey, and just shake down the locals...
Representative Donald M. Payne of New Jersey, the chairman of the House subcommittee on Africa, narrowly escaped a mortar attack on Monday as he was ending a visit to Mogadishu, Somalia’s bullet-ridden capital, that he undertook against the advice of the Obama administration.
The Shabab, an Islamist insurgent group vying for control of the country, later took responsibility for the attack, Reuters reported.
“We fired on the airport to target the so-called Democratic congressman sent by Obama,” said Sheik Hussein Ali, a spokesman for the Shabab. “Let him go back with the message of our strength and enmity towards the U.S. and its allies. No single group can claim control of Mogadishu, and Al Shabab will continue its attacks.”
When there's trouble a brewin', always look for that Jersey connection...
But what the hell was Payne doing in Somalia anyway? That's what Bob Ingle wants to know:
Payne, who is chairman of the House subcommittee on health and Africa, was there to discuss piracy and security and cooperation. Since Somalia hasn't had an effective government in 18 years, it's unclear what could be achieved by talks there. There doesn't appear to be anyone in control of the country.
I guess his subcommitte seat gives him cover for this trip, but who exactly was he talking to? The Times story simply refers to "Somali officials", but since there really is no such thing - it's a badland unlike many others in modern history - what did he expect to accomplish?
There's something strange about this little trip into hell Mr. Payne took - and maybe it's the Jersey in him, maybe it's the Jersey in me, but...I would not be suprised if there was a personal aspect to this trip, one that has not yet come to light...unless, of course, it is just the natural affinity one pirate has for another. Actually, the pirates of Somalia can learn a lot from the Congressional pirates of New Jersey.
Well, truth be told, the Congressman did accomplish something - getting innocent civilians maimed and likely killed by the mere fact of his presence:
Fortunately, Payne left unhurt. Others weren’t so lucky. Medina Hospital Administrator Ali Adde said 19 civilians, mostly women and children, were injured when the mortar shells landed in residential areas.
Next time, don't be a Payne, Congressman. Stay in Jersey, and just shake down the locals...
Obama's Philosophical Underpinning
Is greed, as so famously posited by Gorden Gecko, good? Well, I guess that depends on what, exactly, the object of said greed is:
This veneration of killers and hatred of the productive remains with us....Communism and fascism both draw their moral authority from the idea that those who control the violent power of the state are inherently more virtuous than those who produce and trade.
Citizen #1 works his whole life to build a business, sacrificing material needs, leisure time, family time, and social gatherings as he spends every waking hour working. The first few years are tough, but he reaches the break-even point and beyond, and finally is able to turn a handsome profit, much of which he plows back into his business, which now employs many local residents.
Citizen #2 - oh, let's call him Barack Obama - has never worked a day in his life, save for teaching a few classes, writing a book while on the beaches of Bali, and sitting on a few boards. His lust is not to build any kind of business for himself - hell, he doesn't even want to work - his lust is for power. And as someone who has only distributed wealth, but never earned it, he believes firmly that the monies being earned by citizen #1, despite his years of stuggle and effort, should be confiscated from him to be redistributed as he, Barack Obama, sees fit. It is only with the force of the state - the power of a gun - that Barack Obama can redistribute the earnings of citizen #1 (while at the same time earning a nice salary for himself and his wife).
So Mr. Obama spends a lifetime chasing power, doing very little "work" once in position save for reaching for the next rung on the ladder. His insatiable lust eventually drives him to the top, where he uses the force of the state to redistribute the hard-earned wealth of the productive to those who cannot produce.
Mr. Obama's justification? Again:
Communism and fascism both draw their moral authority from the idea that those who control the violent power of the state are inherently more virtuous than those who produce and trade.
And Obama what has Obama done since in office, but exploit that statement to the max, blaming bankers and Wall street for all the nation's ills, and using them as rationale for his party's systematic rape and pillage of the nation's most productive citizens.
Obama wants you to belive that he is virtuous. And he is, only if you belive that virtue is created from the barrel of a gun, not from the hands of a working man.
Ayn Rand once gave a talk at West Point that has since become a touchstone for the field itself, entitled Philosophy: Who needs it?:
As a human being, you have no choice about the fact that you need a philosophy. Your only choice is whether you define you philosophy by a conscious, rational, disciplined process of thought and scrupulously logical deliberation--or let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarranted conclusions, false generalizations, undefined contradictions, undigested slogans, unidentified whishes, doubts and fears, thrown together by chance, but integrated by your subconscious into a kind of mongrel philosophy and fused into a single, solid weight....
Which of our citizens - the businessman, or Barack Obama - has a rational, disciplined process of thought? And which lives by generalizations, slogans, contradictions, and wishes?
The fact that we have defined the rational man as "greedy" (evil) and the irrational man as virtuous is a philosphical death sentence for our society. Prior to now, America has never accepted the "innate evil of capitalism" creedo that infects most of the rest of the world, and has limited its growth. Hence, our unparalled strength.
Up until now. We have accepted a philosophy that is guarenteed to drain us - morally, economically, and psychologically. It has proven to be the case worldwide, without exception.
If we don't "change our minds", we will have changed our nation. For the worse. Forever.
This veneration of killers and hatred of the productive remains with us....Communism and fascism both draw their moral authority from the idea that those who control the violent power of the state are inherently more virtuous than those who produce and trade.
Citizen #1 works his whole life to build a business, sacrificing material needs, leisure time, family time, and social gatherings as he spends every waking hour working. The first few years are tough, but he reaches the break-even point and beyond, and finally is able to turn a handsome profit, much of which he plows back into his business, which now employs many local residents.
Citizen #2 - oh, let's call him Barack Obama - has never worked a day in his life, save for teaching a few classes, writing a book while on the beaches of Bali, and sitting on a few boards. His lust is not to build any kind of business for himself - hell, he doesn't even want to work - his lust is for power. And as someone who has only distributed wealth, but never earned it, he believes firmly that the monies being earned by citizen #1, despite his years of stuggle and effort, should be confiscated from him to be redistributed as he, Barack Obama, sees fit. It is only with the force of the state - the power of a gun - that Barack Obama can redistribute the earnings of citizen #1 (while at the same time earning a nice salary for himself and his wife).
So Mr. Obama spends a lifetime chasing power, doing very little "work" once in position save for reaching for the next rung on the ladder. His insatiable lust eventually drives him to the top, where he uses the force of the state to redistribute the hard-earned wealth of the productive to those who cannot produce.
Mr. Obama's justification? Again:
Communism and fascism both draw their moral authority from the idea that those who control the violent power of the state are inherently more virtuous than those who produce and trade.
And Obama what has Obama done since in office, but exploit that statement to the max, blaming bankers and Wall street for all the nation's ills, and using them as rationale for his party's systematic rape and pillage of the nation's most productive citizens.
Obama wants you to belive that he is virtuous. And he is, only if you belive that virtue is created from the barrel of a gun, not from the hands of a working man.
Ayn Rand once gave a talk at West Point that has since become a touchstone for the field itself, entitled Philosophy: Who needs it?:
As a human being, you have no choice about the fact that you need a philosophy. Your only choice is whether you define you philosophy by a conscious, rational, disciplined process of thought and scrupulously logical deliberation--or let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarranted conclusions, false generalizations, undefined contradictions, undigested slogans, unidentified whishes, doubts and fears, thrown together by chance, but integrated by your subconscious into a kind of mongrel philosophy and fused into a single, solid weight....
Which of our citizens - the businessman, or Barack Obama - has a rational, disciplined process of thought? And which lives by generalizations, slogans, contradictions, and wishes?
The fact that we have defined the rational man as "greedy" (evil) and the irrational man as virtuous is a philosphical death sentence for our society. Prior to now, America has never accepted the "innate evil of capitalism" creedo that infects most of the rest of the world, and has limited its growth. Hence, our unparalled strength.
Up until now. We have accepted a philosophy that is guarenteed to drain us - morally, economically, and psychologically. It has proven to be the case worldwide, without exception.
If we don't "change our minds", we will have changed our nation. For the worse. Forever.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Katie Couric Lets A Little Truth Slip....
The Perky One stands up to big bad Dick Cheney and all those teabag-packin' conservatives, when she discusses some of the criticism the Obama administration has recieved lately. Katie knows who's side her bosses are on, so she wags her finger at us and says:
We should never shy away from insightful criticism. And in the white hot spotlight of the presidency a fair amount of back seat driving simply comes with the territory.
But it's fair to give the new kids on the block a chance to get their learner's permits first.
That's a page from my notebook.
Hmmm...where was that notebook when many right-thinking Americans considered the lack of experience to be their #1 question about Barack Obama? Oh right, Katie was whacking Sarah Palin over the head with it, while she and her liberal comrades were assuring us there was nothing to worry about with Obama, so go vote for him, you racist cracker!
New kids on the block? Learner's permits? (not even a license?) Is this who we have put in charge of our nation at a time fraught with peril?
Why are you first telling us this now, Katie C.? Making excuses for the party in power, like a good media figure, or concerned about protecting your own reputation against a popular backlash?
Well...if you're interested in seeing it, check out the link as well...
We should never shy away from insightful criticism. And in the white hot spotlight of the presidency a fair amount of back seat driving simply comes with the territory.
But it's fair to give the new kids on the block a chance to get their learner's permits first.
That's a page from my notebook.
Hmmm...where was that notebook when many right-thinking Americans considered the lack of experience to be their #1 question about Barack Obama? Oh right, Katie was whacking Sarah Palin over the head with it, while she and her liberal comrades were assuring us there was nothing to worry about with Obama, so go vote for him, you racist cracker!
New kids on the block? Learner's permits? (not even a license?) Is this who we have put in charge of our nation at a time fraught with peril?
Why are you first telling us this now, Katie C.? Making excuses for the party in power, like a good media figure, or concerned about protecting your own reputation against a popular backlash?
Well...if you're interested in seeing it, check out the link as well...
Seals save Captain Phillips, Media Slobbers on Obama
What did Barack Obama do in the Great Pirate Standoff last week? Why, nothing, except doing his best to hinder the use of lethal force by putting into play dangerous and subjective conditions. Nevertheless, the media will drool all over Obama, as if he did something wise and brave...first, the bootlicks that make up MSNBC:
Analysis: Obama scores win on pirate crisis
His administration passes its first critical national security test
Obama's quiet backstage decision to authorize the Defense Department to take necessary action if Capt. Richard Phillips' life was in imminent danger gave a Navy commander the go-ahead to order snipers to fire on the pirates holding the cargo ship captain at gunpoint.
For Obama, the benefits were instantly clear: an American life saved and a major victory notched against an increasingly worrisome scourge of the seas off the Horn of Africa.
...The sniper operation Sunday, with pirate guns aimed at Phillips, was a daring, high-stakes gambit, and it could have easily gone awry. If it had, the fallout would have probably landed hardest on Obama.
Fallout? On Obama? From who, the media? HA! They would have been the first to jump into the Obama Express and roll right over the Seals, had anything gone awry....
Daring and high-stakes, indeed. I guess anytime a Democrat allows someone else to pull a trigger for him (as close as they'll get to courage), it's high-stakes...
The Washington Post is mere lickspittle as well:
An Early Military Victory for Obama
...it may help to quell criticism leveled at Obama that he came to office as a Democratic antiwar candidate who could prove unwilling or unable to harness military might when necessary.
I remain unconvinced that shooting three pirates is actually an example of using "military might". Then again, for Obama, the media tends to define everything - especially "success" - down.
Again - having Seals shoot three pirates is hardly any type of genius-level display of military expertise, or of foreign policy skill. It is, I guess, if you are as desperate and insecure as the media seems to be about their handpicked commander-in-chief....
Analysis: Obama scores win on pirate crisis
His administration passes its first critical national security test
Obama's quiet backstage decision to authorize the Defense Department to take necessary action if Capt. Richard Phillips' life was in imminent danger gave a Navy commander the go-ahead to order snipers to fire on the pirates holding the cargo ship captain at gunpoint.
For Obama, the benefits were instantly clear: an American life saved and a major victory notched against an increasingly worrisome scourge of the seas off the Horn of Africa.
...The sniper operation Sunday, with pirate guns aimed at Phillips, was a daring, high-stakes gambit, and it could have easily gone awry. If it had, the fallout would have probably landed hardest on Obama.
Fallout? On Obama? From who, the media? HA! They would have been the first to jump into the Obama Express and roll right over the Seals, had anything gone awry....
Daring and high-stakes, indeed. I guess anytime a Democrat allows someone else to pull a trigger for him (as close as they'll get to courage), it's high-stakes...
The Washington Post is mere lickspittle as well:
An Early Military Victory for Obama
...it may help to quell criticism leveled at Obama that he came to office as a Democratic antiwar candidate who could prove unwilling or unable to harness military might when necessary.
I remain unconvinced that shooting three pirates is actually an example of using "military might". Then again, for Obama, the media tends to define everything - especially "success" - down.
Again - having Seals shoot three pirates is hardly any type of genius-level display of military expertise, or of foreign policy skill. It is, I guess, if you are as desperate and insecure as the media seems to be about their handpicked commander-in-chief....
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Seals Rescue Captain Phillips, Bail Out Barack
God bless their steady arms and sharp eyes:
...the early reports of a 'fire fight' were somewhat over stated. It seems 3 shots, 3 ex-pirates is more like the case.
Interesting:
The Defense Department twice asked Mr. Obama for permission to use military force to rescue Captain Phillips, most recently late on Friday night, senior defense officials said. On Saturday morning, the president agreed to permit action, they said, but only if it appeared that the captain’s life was in imminent danger.
Twice, huh? So obviously the first time Obama said no, and the next time (Friday night) he said, "Let me think about it". Eventually, sometime the next morning (5AM? 1145AM? who knows?) Baracky says OK, but with strict conditions.
So how do the conditions play out? Imminent danger means someone just about to pull a trigger on an automatic weapon pointed at an American's head:
...through the window of the front hatch, they saw the third pirate, pointing his AK-47 at the back of Captain Phillips, who was seen to be tied up.
That was it: the provocation that fulfilled the president’s order to act only if the captain’s life was in imminent danger....
Well. If that pirate would have had a wee bit of a twitchy trigger finger, we'd have a very different outcome today.
Wonder if the captain would have 'fessed up about the strict orders he was given? Regardless, Gibbs would have backed the Obama Cruiser right over him anyway...
Seems to me as if the Navy Seals bailed out Barack Obama's sorry ass. Next time, he may not be that lucky...
Operation updates are over at The Other McCain
...the early reports of a 'fire fight' were somewhat over stated. It seems 3 shots, 3 ex-pirates is more like the case.
Interesting:
The Defense Department twice asked Mr. Obama for permission to use military force to rescue Captain Phillips, most recently late on Friday night, senior defense officials said. On Saturday morning, the president agreed to permit action, they said, but only if it appeared that the captain’s life was in imminent danger.
Twice, huh? So obviously the first time Obama said no, and the next time (Friday night) he said, "Let me think about it". Eventually, sometime the next morning (5AM? 1145AM? who knows?) Baracky says OK, but with strict conditions.
So how do the conditions play out? Imminent danger means someone just about to pull a trigger on an automatic weapon pointed at an American's head:
...through the window of the front hatch, they saw the third pirate, pointing his AK-47 at the back of Captain Phillips, who was seen to be tied up.
That was it: the provocation that fulfilled the president’s order to act only if the captain’s life was in imminent danger....
Well. If that pirate would have had a wee bit of a twitchy trigger finger, we'd have a very different outcome today.
Wonder if the captain would have 'fessed up about the strict orders he was given? Regardless, Gibbs would have backed the Obama Cruiser right over him anyway...
Seems to me as if the Navy Seals bailed out Barack Obama's sorry ass. Next time, he may not be that lucky...
Operation updates are over at The Other McCain
Forward, Into The Darkness
We have long argued that the word "Progressive" as used by liberals to describe themselves is quite the misnomer; indeed, if the left had a shred of honesty about itself it would call themselves "Regressive", for surely that is where their policies lead.
Create the threat of "global warming" to force Americans to limit their use of electricity, only the most time-saving invention in history.
Shriek for higher gasoline taxes, to immobilize the population as if it were two hundred years prior.
Scream for carbon taxes, that will leave citizens freezing in their homes, unable to afford both food and heat. Demand that automobile companies cease production of SUV's, leaving us helpless in the face of intemperate weather, much like our horse-riding ancestors.
And civil rights? Let's revert back to pre-consitiutional days where badmouthing certain religions was an imprisonable offense. And that pesky 2nd Amendment? Begone! Wait for the government to protect you - after its lawyers have cleared the authorities to act, of course.
Is there any wonder than in this reeling trend of reverse-evolution, pirates arise to sail the high seas like in pre-civilized days of old? Of course not, says Mark Steyn:
As it happens, Somali piracy is not a distraction, but a glimpse of the world the day after tomorrow...
Once upon a time we killed and captured pirates. Today, it’s all more complicated. The attorney general, Eric Holder, has declined to say whether the kidnappers of the American captain will be “brought to justice” by the U.S. “I’m not sure exactly what would happen next,” declares the chief law-enforcement official of the world’s superpower.
Meanwhile, the Royal Navy, which over the centuries did more than anyone to rid the civilized world of the menace of piracy, now declines even to risk capturing their Somali successors, having been advised by Her Majesty’s Government that, under the European Human Rights Act, any pirate taken into custody would be entitled to claim refugee status in the United Kingdom and live on welfare for the rest of his life.
How can modern 21st-century man move forward under these types of "progressive" rules and restrictions? They can't, as Steyn channels Andrew McCarthy:
“Civilization is not an evolution of mankind but the imposition of human good on human evil. It is not a historical inevitability. It is a battle that has to be fought every day, because evil doesn’t recede willingly before the wheels of progress.”
Barack Obama and his liberal minions don't believe that. They are convinced the power of their own inherent "goodness", along with just the right amount of apologies (along with some scraping and bowing, of course) will make even the toughest enemy recede from our flag. If not, as a last resort, their is always Obama's beautific smile....
Well, for better or worse, we'll see if they're right. If they're wrong, of course, we are doomed to a hungry, cold, tepid future full of fear and despair.
Right where the "progressives" want us, ironically...
Create the threat of "global warming" to force Americans to limit their use of electricity, only the most time-saving invention in history.
Shriek for higher gasoline taxes, to immobilize the population as if it were two hundred years prior.
Scream for carbon taxes, that will leave citizens freezing in their homes, unable to afford both food and heat. Demand that automobile companies cease production of SUV's, leaving us helpless in the face of intemperate weather, much like our horse-riding ancestors.
And civil rights? Let's revert back to pre-consitiutional days where badmouthing certain religions was an imprisonable offense. And that pesky 2nd Amendment? Begone! Wait for the government to protect you - after its lawyers have cleared the authorities to act, of course.
Is there any wonder than in this reeling trend of reverse-evolution, pirates arise to sail the high seas like in pre-civilized days of old? Of course not, says Mark Steyn:
As it happens, Somali piracy is not a distraction, but a glimpse of the world the day after tomorrow...
Once upon a time we killed and captured pirates. Today, it’s all more complicated. The attorney general, Eric Holder, has declined to say whether the kidnappers of the American captain will be “brought to justice” by the U.S. “I’m not sure exactly what would happen next,” declares the chief law-enforcement official of the world’s superpower.
Meanwhile, the Royal Navy, which over the centuries did more than anyone to rid the civilized world of the menace of piracy, now declines even to risk capturing their Somali successors, having been advised by Her Majesty’s Government that, under the European Human Rights Act, any pirate taken into custody would be entitled to claim refugee status in the United Kingdom and live on welfare for the rest of his life.
How can modern 21st-century man move forward under these types of "progressive" rules and restrictions? They can't, as Steyn channels Andrew McCarthy:
“Civilization is not an evolution of mankind but the imposition of human good on human evil. It is not a historical inevitability. It is a battle that has to be fought every day, because evil doesn’t recede willingly before the wheels of progress.”
Barack Obama and his liberal minions don't believe that. They are convinced the power of their own inherent "goodness", along with just the right amount of apologies (along with some scraping and bowing, of course) will make even the toughest enemy recede from our flag. If not, as a last resort, their is always Obama's beautific smile....
Well, for better or worse, we'll see if they're right. If they're wrong, of course, we are doomed to a hungry, cold, tepid future full of fear and despair.
Right where the "progressives" want us, ironically...
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Corzine's"Amnesty State" Kills Another Jersey Girl
Jon Corzine is proud to make New Jersey the home for the largest group of illegal immigrants north of the Texas border - shoot, he just finished hearing from a blue-ribbon panel he created, recommending driver's licenses and in-state tuition costs for illegals. All on the law-abiding taxpayer's dime, of course.
And no, he hasn't been deterred by the slaughter of a group of college bound kids in the Newark Massacre - actully, if you go to the link, he determined the blame for killings of these kids by a gang of illegals is "about a failure of us to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society."
So you know the death of this girl bothers Corzine and the Democrats not a whit:
Two Camden men have been charged in connection with an Evesham car crash that killed a DeMasi Middle School teacher on Wednesday.
Rest in peace, Amy.
And remember, New Jerseyans: whenever you feel your rage rise at Governor Corzine and the state Democrats for creating a situation which allows illegal immigration to flourish, and results in horrific incidents like these - that this is not Corzine's fault.
It's yours.
Because - according to Corzine - Amy's death has nothing to do with the fact he opened the gates of the state to illegals, but instead, it's "your failure to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society" that killed Amy Voorhees....
Hat tip: Enviornmental Republican
And no, he hasn't been deterred by the slaughter of a group of college bound kids in the Newark Massacre - actully, if you go to the link, he determined the blame for killings of these kids by a gang of illegals is "about a failure of us to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society."
So you know the death of this girl bothers Corzine and the Democrats not a whit:
Two Camden men have been charged in connection with an Evesham car crash that killed a DeMasi Middle School teacher on Wednesday.
Jose Luis Galindo-Sanchez, 26, is accused of driving the pickup truck that struck a vehicle driven by Amy Voorhees, 27, of Evesham, the Burlington County Prosecutor's Office said Thursday. His brother, Lucio Garcia-Sanchez, 19, was a passenger in the truck, according to the office.
Both men, originally from Mexico, are illegal immigrants and live on the 900 block of 19th Street in Camden, authorities said.
"Everyone loved her," district Superintendent Pat Lucas said of Voorhees. She called her a favorite teacher who had a positive outlook and was "always looking out after the children's best interests."
Rest in peace, Amy.
And remember, New Jerseyans: whenever you feel your rage rise at Governor Corzine and the state Democrats for creating a situation which allows illegal immigration to flourish, and results in horrific incidents like these - that this is not Corzine's fault.
It's yours.
Because - according to Corzine - Amy's death has nothing to do with the fact he opened the gates of the state to illegals, but instead, it's "your failure to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society" that killed Amy Voorhees....
Hat tip: Enviornmental Republican
Friday, April 10, 2009
Don't Distract Barack (he's not a multi-tasker)
Best headline of the day, from the lickspittle at Reuters:
Ragtag teams of modern-day Blackbeards are posing an annoying distraction for Barack Obama, forcing him to add Somalia to an already long list of foreign policy challenges...
Oh, poor Barack! He didn't know he would have to handle multiple situations at once when he ran for the presidency! Look, he's already challenged, what with him having to speak without a teleprompter every now and again...
Now here's a headline that makes more sense - from Europe, natch (via Gateway Pundit):
President Barack Obama has recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it....
.....Watch out, France and Co, there is a new surrender monkey on the block and, over the next four years, he will spectacularly sell out the interests of the West with every kind of liberal-delusionist initiative on nuclear disarmament and sitting down to negotiate with any power freak who wants to buy time to get a good ICBM fix on San Francisco, or wherever. If you thought the world was a tad unsafe with Dubya around, just wait until President Pantywaist gets into his stride.
He certainly doesn't look too stressed out here, in this picture with Hillary Clinton, enjoying a moment in the playground together:
Just the thought of these two sandbox pals working as hard as they appear to be at reconstructing the world in their image should put all your fears to rest....right?
Beat the Market - Invest With Jesus?
Looks like "investing in sin" - liquor companies, casinos, businesses involved with abortion activists, cigarette producers, porno sites - doesn't pay after all. Or at the very least, the sin market bubbles, much like housing, the internet, and any other commodity.
Interesting. If we can't count on Americans to sin, what can we count on? How about virtue? It's not making a ton of money either, but it's beating the crap out of the market:
...the Ave Maria suite of mutual funds, which invest only in companies that comply with certain Roman Catholic values, have done better. The Ave Maria Growth Fund is only down 33%. It's beaten Vice by nine points and the S&P by five.
As for the Ave Maria funds: These were launched earlier this decade by Schwartz Investment Counsel, and they are Catholic not in what they own but in what they avoid. The funds eschew stocks that breach a variety of precepts, mostly around things like involvement in abortion or giving money to Planned Parenthood.
The irony? Their rules have steered them clear of such disasters as AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup and General Motors.
...the real standout in the group is the Ave Maria Growth Fund, which is managed by stock market veteran Jim Bashaw at JLB & Associates. Not only has it beaten Wall Street handily in the past year, but it has done so by a wide margin since it was launched about six years ago. During that time investors have made about 23%, compared to average losses of about 7% in the S&P 500.
Our Good Friday lesson? Don't be a skeptic. Sin may be good for a few quick bucks, but eternal returns seem more likely if you invest with God. Morality pays in the long run, as long as one has faith and patience.
As for the skeptics, like Chuck Schumer, seen here mocking "traditional values" (scare quotes his, see the video)? The value system he follows have already left him spiritually bankrupt. What further evidence do you need?
Interesting. If we can't count on Americans to sin, what can we count on? How about virtue? It's not making a ton of money either, but it's beating the crap out of the market:
...the Ave Maria suite of mutual funds, which invest only in companies that comply with certain Roman Catholic values, have done better. The Ave Maria Growth Fund is only down 33%. It's beaten Vice by nine points and the S&P by five.
As for the Ave Maria funds: These were launched earlier this decade by Schwartz Investment Counsel, and they are Catholic not in what they own but in what they avoid. The funds eschew stocks that breach a variety of precepts, mostly around things like involvement in abortion or giving money to Planned Parenthood.
The irony? Their rules have steered them clear of such disasters as AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup and General Motors.
...the real standout in the group is the Ave Maria Growth Fund, which is managed by stock market veteran Jim Bashaw at JLB & Associates. Not only has it beaten Wall Street handily in the past year, but it has done so by a wide margin since it was launched about six years ago. During that time investors have made about 23%, compared to average losses of about 7% in the S&P 500.
Our Good Friday lesson? Don't be a skeptic. Sin may be good for a few quick bucks, but eternal returns seem more likely if you invest with God. Morality pays in the long run, as long as one has faith and patience.
As for the skeptics, like Chuck Schumer, seen here mocking "traditional values" (scare quotes his, see the video)? The value system he follows have already left him spiritually bankrupt. What further evidence do you need?
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Fighting Pirates: Look to the Constitution !
...because our Founding Fathers really were freakin' geniuses....
Did you know what “letters of marque and reprisal” were? No, me either, it's a handy little section tucked inside the constitution that affords for just this type of eventuality:
The letters, specifically authorized in the Article 1 section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, allow private parties to attack and seize the property of other parties that have committed violations of international law. Congress has the power to grant the letters.
The United States made significant use of them during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 and never joined 19th Century treaties in which European nations forswore their use. The U.S. issued letters of marque to ships during the Spanish-American War of 1898; and a civilian operated airship, The Resolute, operated under a letter marque during World War II.
The letters also have a long history prior to the establishment of the United States. Elizabethan-era explorer and adventurer Sir Francis Drake operated under a letter of marque.
Barack Obama should be down with this: it saves taxpayer money, that can be better spent on growing ACORNS!
CEI policy analyst Michelle Minton agreed. “American citizens have the right to defend themselves, regardless of their location,” said Minton. “If international governing bodies fail at the task, which repeated pirate attacks seem to indicate, the US government should do something,” she said. “Issuing letters of marque are one way to foster the protection of American citizens abroad without requiring an American military presence in foreign territory.”
Why not, Baracky? You knew about this option, right? Constitutional scholar and all....right?
Did you know what “letters of marque and reprisal” were? No, me either, it's a handy little section tucked inside the constitution that affords for just this type of eventuality:
The letters, specifically authorized in the Article 1 section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, allow private parties to attack and seize the property of other parties that have committed violations of international law. Congress has the power to grant the letters.
The United States made significant use of them during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 and never joined 19th Century treaties in which European nations forswore their use. The U.S. issued letters of marque to ships during the Spanish-American War of 1898; and a civilian operated airship, The Resolute, operated under a letter marque during World War II.
The letters also have a long history prior to the establishment of the United States. Elizabethan-era explorer and adventurer Sir Francis Drake operated under a letter of marque.
Barack Obama should be down with this: it saves taxpayer money, that can be better spent on growing ACORNS!
CEI policy analyst Michelle Minton agreed. “American citizens have the right to defend themselves, regardless of their location,” said Minton. “If international governing bodies fail at the task, which repeated pirate attacks seem to indicate, the US government should do something,” she said. “Issuing letters of marque are one way to foster the protection of American citizens abroad without requiring an American military presence in foreign territory.”
Why not, Baracky? You knew about this option, right? Constitutional scholar and all....right?
Barney Frank Demands: Lie For Me!
Honesty in bond ratings is an absolute necessity for the market to operate fairly and openly. Barney Frank would agree - as far as private bond issues go - but when it's the government's bonds that are in danger of recieving a less-than-steller rating, well - Barney goes ballistic. And in true Democratic style, he threatens to use the power of the law to go after those who do not bend reality to his bidding:
On Tuesday, Moody's Investors Service said it had assigned a negative outlook to all U.S. local government ratings, the first time it assigned an outlook to the sector, which contains 52,000 cities, counties and school districts.It cited "significant fiscal challenges" facing local governments because of the housing market collapse, financial market upset and recession.
Ooooh, this got Barney so very angry:
U.S. Representative Barney Frank gave ratings companies a month to fix ``ridiculous'' standards that they apply to local government debt, as his House committee opened a hearing today on how the firms evaluate municipal bonds.``I am going to say to the rating agencies and to the insurers: they have about a month to fix this,'' Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, told reporters in Washington yesterday. ``We're going to tell them they have to straighten it out.''
Somebody ought to tell this assclown - who is so deeply responsible for the torching of the American economy - why we need these ratings in the first place:
Municipalities are less creditworthy than they used to be -- a combination of profligate spending and vanishing revenue -- and lenders would be wise to approach them with a caution.
Barney needs the money. Barney can't allow the truth to interfere with his monetary collection. Barney demands that the bond rates up their ratings or change their system to give municipal bonds their own, "special" rating system.
He's already sponsored a House Resolution:
Municipal Bond Fairness Act - To ensure uniform and accurate credit rating of municipal bonds and provide for a review of the municipal bond insurance industry.
Coming up next: Custom government weather forecasts! ("No - that's not rain you're feeling, it's liquid sunshine!")
May God protect us from the likes of Barney Frank, and the simplistic evil of willful ignorance he so ably represents...
On Tuesday, Moody's Investors Service said it had assigned a negative outlook to all U.S. local government ratings, the first time it assigned an outlook to the sector, which contains 52,000 cities, counties and school districts.It cited "significant fiscal challenges" facing local governments because of the housing market collapse, financial market upset and recession.
Ooooh, this got Barney so very angry:
U.S. Representative Barney Frank gave ratings companies a month to fix ``ridiculous'' standards that they apply to local government debt, as his House committee opened a hearing today on how the firms evaluate municipal bonds.``I am going to say to the rating agencies and to the insurers: they have about a month to fix this,'' Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, told reporters in Washington yesterday. ``We're going to tell them they have to straighten it out.''
Somebody ought to tell this assclown - who is so deeply responsible for the torching of the American economy - why we need these ratings in the first place:
Municipalities are less creditworthy than they used to be -- a combination of profligate spending and vanishing revenue -- and lenders would be wise to approach them with a caution.
Barney needs the money. Barney can't allow the truth to interfere with his monetary collection. Barney demands that the bond rates up their ratings or change their system to give municipal bonds their own, "special" rating system.
He's already sponsored a House Resolution:
Municipal Bond Fairness Act - To ensure uniform and accurate credit rating of municipal bonds and provide for a review of the municipal bond insurance industry.
Coming up next: Custom government weather forecasts! ("No - that's not rain you're feeling, it's liquid sunshine!")
May God protect us from the likes of Barney Frank, and the simplistic evil of willful ignorance he so ably represents...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)