Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., will also drop out of the debt talks, a source within his office confirms today. The Arizona Republican’s office will issue a formal statement shortly.
After House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) dropped out of the talks this morning, Senator Kyl was the lone Republican in the group left. And with his withdrawal late this morning, the group does not have a Republican negotiator left in the room.
The group was set to meet for the 11th time this afternoon with Vice President Biden, their third meeting of the week.
The group started as six – but is now down to four members from Congress. The remaining members are: Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Senate Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Assistant House Minority Leader James Clyburn (D-S.C.), and House Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).
This is nothing more, than the Republicans finally growing a pair and telling the Democrats, “you made this bed; now lay in it!!”
What I find amusing is this idiot spin by the Democrats:
UPDATE 12:00 p.m. – A Senior Democratic aide says, “Cantor and Kyl just threw Boehner and McConnell under the bus. This move is an admission that there will be a need for revenues and Cantor and Kyl don’t want to be the ones to make that deal.”
More liberal spin and bullcrap. The Republicans; unlike liberals, know that raising taxes on the Nation’s top earners is NOT a smart way to create jobs and generate revenue for the Country. The way to do this properly is to lower taxes for the top earners and remove regulation for the aspiring entrepreneur, who wants to follow the American dream and be his own boss.
But, no, the Democrats want to TAX the crap out of EVERYONE; not just the top earners, but everyone, to pay for their ill-conceived and hair-brained plans like so-called “economic stimulus” that did not work at all. This is why the Republicans walked out on these talks.
Less than a month after she appeared poised to shake up the Republican presidential campaign, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has once again receded from the 2012 limelight.
When Palin launched her “One Nation” bus tour on Memorial Day amid a swirl of media attention and excitement from her fervent fan base, many political observers who had once dismissed her were reminded of the jolt that her candidacy could provide to what has thus far been a relatively sleepy GOP nominating fight.
As Palin toured historical sites along the East Coast, she was clearly reveling in the tangible excitement she’d ginned up: She even eagerly answered questions — from the denizens of the “lamestream” media — ranging from matters of political process to an array of issues facing the nation.
In an apparent repudiation to those who dismissed her trip as a mere publicity stunt, Palin’s openness with reporters about her intentions to visit Iowa and South Carolina — in addition to her highly scrutinized stop in the first-in-the-nation primary state of New Hampshire — lent credence to her repeated assertions that she was indeed seriously considering a White House bid.
Though Palin and her staff never announced a timeline for the remaining legs of her trip, aides had drafted preliminary itineraries that would have taken her through the Midwest and Southeast at some point this month. But those travel blueprints are now in limbo, RCP has learned, as Palin and her family have reverted to the friendly confines of summertime Alaska, where the skies are currently alight for over 19 hours a day and the Bristol Bay salmon fishing season is nearing its peak.
As Palin enjoys her sojourn to the 49th state, she has not reconnected with key early-state figures like Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and she may have jeopardized whatever political momentum she gained from her recent reemergence in the 2012 discussion. Her political action committee’s website still greets visitors with a stale banner, announcing the nationwide bus tour beginning “[t]his Sunday, May 29th.”
More than a few of Palin’s core supporters have grown impatient and confused about her strategy, venting their frustration on Internet fan sites.
Of course, there is a reason for this, it is because Sarah Palin’s tour was about nothing more, than Sarah Palin herself. It was a way to gain attention for herself. When the media lost interest, so did she. This was nothing more than a way to generate revenue for her “Conservatism for Kindergarteners” — style of written books of hers. Which are kind of like Ann Coulter’s books. (and before you ask; yes, I have read previews for both author’s books on my iPod, both author’s writings did nothing for me.)
Which leads me to my final comment; if you honestly believe that this woman is truly interested in the future of this Country or even gives a remote damn about the people that live in it —- you are crazy. The only person that Sarah Palin gives a remote damn about; is herself. Everything she does, every move she makes, is all about her political future and her limelight image. She reminds me of another rabid feminist; Hillary Clinton. The similarities are striking and she does the very same things. The only striking difference is, that Hillary Clinton has actually worked for her political image and has some credibility to her resume and Sarah Palin does not.
And this, in turn, forces a question: Are Republicans really the heirs to the Reaganite foreign-policy vision? So far, the party line on strong defense has held; that’s the one part of government that’s good, not bad. But how long can that giant exception last? How long, that is, before conservatives acknowledge the reality that defense spending consumes a massively larger fraction of the budget than welfare spending, foreign aid, and all the other convenient bugbears? If small-government conservatism really has decisively defeated national-greatness conservatism, then its advocates may turn against the whole apparatus of the neo-Reaganite foreign policy.
Today’s conservatives seem to want to return to the party’s origins — thus the popularity of the Tea Party label. Thomas Jefferson, the first Republican president, also deeply distrusted what he called the “central” government, and opposed a standing army, a diplomatic service, and, above all, warfare, as instruments for the aggrandizement of the state and thus the diminishment of personal liberty (though he proved quite willing both to threaten and to wage war if the circumstances required it). The Republicans became the party of bellicosity only at the end of the 19th century, under Presidents William McKinley and Roosevelt, when their business base recognized the economic value of foreign conquest — and when it had forsaken its small-government principles. When the GOP again began to define itself against activist government, as it did in the face of the New Deal, its partisans also turned decisively away from engagement with the world.
Maybe it’s too soon to say that the Republican Party has committed itself to genuine small-government conservatism: Certainly Romney and Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the most politically seasoned of the current candidates and the ones most likely to be nominated, favor increasing the defense budget even as they cut everything else to ribbons. Kristol has half-seriously suggested a ticket of Rep. Paul Ryan, the zealous budget-cutter, and Marco Rubio, the freshman Florida senator, who apparently favors “more decisive action in Libya.” But the contradiction between seeking the smallest and least active federal government possible, and a muscular foreign policy can’t be sustained over time. That’s why the GOP has traditionally embraced one or the other, but not both.
Is it the Democrats, then, who are the natural heirs to the doctrine of benevolent global hegemony? Probably not, if only because the hegemonic era is now behind us, presumably forever. In part for that very reason, and partly also in reaction to Bush’s unilateralism, this administration is prepared to lead, if not from behind, then at least from the side, giving both authority and responsibility to allies. The Obama national security strategy does not insist upon unrivaled military superiority. And Obama is a cautious figure, acutely aware of the limits of the possible. So no, today’s Democratic Party will probably not become the home for disappointed foreign-policy neoconservatives.
But the Democrats do believe in government — maybe too much. They believe that government serves deeply moral purposes. And they believe that the same government that has an obligation to help people at home has an obligation to do so elsewhere in the world as well.
(CNSNews.com) – At a congressional hearing on Muslim radicalization in U.S. prisons, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said that investigators needed to analyze Christian militants in America because they too might try to “bring down the country.”
In an exchange with witness Patrick Dunleavy, the former deputy inspector of the criminal intelligence unit, New York Department of Correctional Services, Rep. Jackson Lee mentioned the case of a man who blew up an abortion clinic and proposed that this perhaps was an attempt to undermine U.S. law that allows a woman to procure an abortion.
Rep. Lee then said, “As we look to be informational, we should include an analysis of how Christian militants or others might bring down the country. We have to look broadly, do we not?”
Dunleavy answered: “I don’t know that Christian militants have foreign country backing or foreign country financing.”
Lee then said, “I don’t think that’s the issue. The issue is whether or not their intent is to undermine the laws of this nation. And I think it is clear that that is the case. So it’s not — your distinction is not answering the question.
This proves it right here; that liberals equate small time lone wolf criminals to foreign funded Muslim terrorists. I see the point she is making; and it is a stupid one, there is no comparison.
While we’re on the subject, why don’t we investigate terrorist Negros that would like to see our so-called “White Controlled Government overthrown, like these people here:
or maybe as to the funding of this man here:
This is what we ought to be investigating in this Country, is how things like this were funded by Liberals in this Country.
We as Americans are supposed to be sane, rational people. We are told that not all blacks feel this way. We, as Conservatives, who reject the idea of “group thought” or collectivism, are not supposed to believe that all blacks feel this way. However, when you have a liberal senator comparing the actions of a few extremists to the actions of a globally funded group of Muslim terrorists; one must ask, where do her loyalties lie? One must ask, does she agree with the militant Negros like the ones in the video above? Who, by the way, agree with Al-Qaeda terrorists, — that America should be destroyed.
It is questions like this, which I ask on this blog. There is a battle for the soul of America; these are two of the groups, which wish to overthrow the power structure in this Country. This is why I blog, this is why I write, to fight against this liberal, idiotic mentality; because I do not wish to see my Country overran by those who wish to destroy her from within.
It is a fight that I will continue to battle till my dying days.
It appears that Mitt Romney is picking up in the polls.
So, he is releasing videos like this:
It really will not matter much at all; polls or no polls, Romney is viewed by many as a “squish” in the Republican Party. The whole RomneyCare thing is seen by many as problematic. Plus too, most evangelical conservative Christians have huge distust of Romney’s Mormonism.
Not to mention the fact that the man straight up lied about supporting the Auto bailouts here in Detroit. So much in fact that former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm spoke up and said, “Oh please!”
So, while the video’s message might be good; and indeed, as someone who has been out of work since 2005 and does not see himself as a bump in the road either —- the person presenting this video is no better than the person who made the tone deaf statement.
Honestly, I hate having to write stuff like this; but, as I have explained on this blog before —- this blog is not about partisan politics, nor it is about defending a particular political party. This blog, is about honesty, even when it is not popular.
But in spite of being approached by Sarah’s husband Todd only a month ago and specifically discussing the possibility, I won’t be working on any Palin presidential campaign. Why? Well, first of all, contrary to what geniuses like Andrew Sullivan and Howard Dean may want you to believe, there is absolutely no way that she can be elected. I’ve told this to her directly; more than once. While many pundits mistakenly think what she is doing is some Trump-like PR stunt, I’m pretty convinced she is running and in doing so will damage the prospects of any conservative defeating Barack Obama in 2012.
These aren’t my only concerns.
There’s also the fact that Sarah’s entire operation is increasingly managed like a CIA field office; that she’s adopted a bunker mentality; that she’s trusting the wrong people, some of whom I know are simply exploiting her. As a result, even those most loyal to her get tossed under the bus, with little or no effort to avoid the collateral damage. Which raises the question: if people like me who would once have taken a bullet for Sarah (and at least figuratively I did many times) can’t get behind her any more, what the hell happened?
Does any of that up there, that I underlined sound even vaguely familiar? It does to me; I seem to remember that President George W. Bush did the same thing; twice. The first time, when he decided that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and decided to invade that Country. There were some well-known Conservatives who objected to that invasion, and they were called unamerican and where scorned by the Neo-Conservatives at the time.
The second time that this happened, was in 2006, when it became quite obvious that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. George W. Bush went fully into the bunker, and loyalists went with him; and any who even remotely was skeptical was left out in the cold. This mentality continued up until the end of Bush’s Presidency, almost to the point when even hardened Bush supporting Conservatives, knew the man was wrong and just wanted him out of office. This was especially true after the “throwing of principles into the wind” and bailing out of the banks on Wall Street.
While comebacks in presidential politics are rare, they’re not unknown. Richard Nixon lost a national election, and then lost a state election two years later, which caused the media to declare his political career a dead letter. Six years later, he won a presidential election in the middle of a war. In what is by far a more attractive analogy, Ronald Reagan lost a bitter, narrow primary contest in 1976 that went all the way to the convention, and came back four years later to unite the GOP despite his age and his supposed inability to woo moderates. Neither man was known for his admiration of or by the media, either, although Reagan certainly knew how to use them better than almost anyone. The difference between those examples and Palin are significant (especially the resignation), but perhaps not fatal; a primary campaign would certainly prove the issue.
Here is the whole problem with the above thought. Now, Nixon was before my time. I will not, because I am honest try to take that apart. Here is the problem with comparing Reagan to Palin; Reagan had a four term Governorship under his belt, Sarah Palin served one year and resigned; she is seen as a quitter, by the majority of those in the G.O.P.
Further more, Ronald Reagan had a legion of friends and supporters, who were formerly Democrats from his Hollywood days. What happened was this, Ronald Reagan became angered by what he saw in the Democratic Party; that was the increasing warm embracing of the tenants of Communism by the Democratic Party in California, and by the liberal establishment in California; and by the National Party as well, This included the embracing of doctrines of Marxism; like “social justice” and so forth. Further more, Reagan became incensed when he discovered that there were several trade unions were simply Communist fronts in the 1950’s. This lead Reagan to make a list of people that he knew, divided by one thing alone; who were Democrats and who were Republicans. The list of Republicans was much longer.
This caused Reagan to switch sides; and many of Reagan’s friends followed him to the other side. Some publicly, and some not publicly. Sadly, Sarah Palin does not have that sort of support at all. All she really has, is a small group of devoted supporters, who really refuse to look at the things that disqualify her for winning an election.
Further more, Sarah Palin has people who are her “Supporters” who, quite frankly, make this writer want to wretch. Sarah Palin’s biggest supporting blog, Conservatives4Palin is ran by a supposed former Obama Supporter. The picture of that woman, is enough to cause a young man to swear off sex and join the convent. Further more, based upon some of the recent events around that woman; I am convinced that she is not a “true-blue” Conservative. But rather a secret undercover liberal operative who is working to undermine Palin’s chances.
Lastly, one of the biggest issues with Sarah Palin, is that she is a feminist. Sarah Palin appeared with Geraldine Ferraro on Fox News channel and was literally fawning over her about how she was such an inspiration for her and so forth. Feminism, especially among the Conservative Christian right, and with this writer, is considered antithetical to all things Conservative. Even one prominent female Conservative named Phyllis Schlafly wrote a book condemning the movement as a whole. But yet, Sarah Palin continues to promote this very strange idea that a woman can be a Conservative and a Feminist as well. Which is, in this writers opinion; utterly idiotic. Which does explain much of Palin’s reasoning.
The Afghan Debacle
The neocons also are fighting a rearguard action against anti-war Democrats and a few Republicans who favor a substantial drawdown of the 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The neocons insist on a longer counterinsurgency mission in Afghanistan.
However, even if Obama accedes to the slow withdrawal favored by neocon favorites Gates and Petraeus – and even if the President agrees to a renegotiation of the final U.S. departure date from Iraq – the longer troop commitments appear likely to only delay the day of reckoning.
Despite the massive commitment of blood and treasure, the United States will almost surely emerge from the two wars as the perceived loser. Still, any delay could be valuable for the neocons because the postponements will give them more time to shift blame to Obama.
The longer the wars can be stretched out the easier it will be to count on the famous historical amnesia of the American voters and fault Obama for the eventual defeats. It will be Obama who “lost Iraq” and “lost Afghanistan.”
That will play into the core Republican theme about Obama’s feckless leadership, failing to straighten out the economy and ready to accept U.S. decline around the world. Any suggestion that Bush deserves the blame will be met with the talking point, “there you go again, blaming Bush. When will Obama take responsibility for his own failures?”
The stage will be set for another Republican presidential victory in November 2012 – and a return by the neocons to the war rooms of the White House and the Pentagon.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is due in Detroit Wednesday and Thursday to fill his presidential campaign war chest. As at recent events, he’s likely to take partial credit for the extraordinary resurgence of the U.S. auto industry – a comeback that has created more than 12,000 jobs in Michigan alone over the past year.
Unfortunately for Romney, we aren’t likely to forget that, when our city most needed help, his response was simple: “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”
After the 2008 financial meltdown, America’s auto companies were in dire straits. To survive, they needed a loan to allow them to restructure. But no bank was lending.
Romney vehemently opposed helping the auto industry. But as he advocated a course that would have led to certain liquidation for Chrysler and General Motors, President Barack Obama made the bold decision to extend GM and Chrysler the support needed for the necessary restructuring.
[….]
So for him to claim now that he pointed the way toward the recovery of the auto industry is profoundly disturbing. When asked last week about Romney’s claim that Chrysler didn’t need federal loans, Chrysler chief executive officer Sergio Marchionne answered that he must be “smoking illegal material.”
That Romney is a native son of Michigan only makes his cold shoulder toward the auto industry in 2009, and his attempts to woo Detroit money today, even more shameful. His laissez-faire strategy toward our auto industry during its time of crisis was wrong from the start – and a clear indicator of the misguided leadership he would bring to the White House.
The U.S. is facing enormous economic and global challenges, so we need a leader who isn’t afraid to roll up his sleeves to do what it takes to guarantee U.S. jobs and American success. It’s obvious that Romney is not that leader.
When Romney comes here with his hand out Wednesday, his Michigan supporters should treat him in the same way he treated the auto industry.
This is one of my most hardcore rants yet. Consider this your official CONTENT WARNING!
Update: Because I am an honest person, I will correct myself. It was not Jesus who called the people “a brute of vipers” it was John The Baptist. Oops. 😳
The US has killed Ilyas Kashmiri, one of al Qaeda’s most dangerous military commanders and strategists, in a Predator airstrike yesterday in South Waziristan.
Kashmiri is said to be one of nine members of the al Qaeda-linked Harkat-ul Jihad Islami, or HUJI, who were killed in yesterday’s Predator airstrike that leveled a compound in the Wana area of South Waziristan.
A Harkat-ul Jihad Islami spokesman named Abu Hanzla Kashir told Dawn that Kashmiri was killed in the attack. Kashir also threatened to attack the US to avenge Kashmiri’s death.
“We confirm that our Amir (leader) and commander in chief, Mohammad Ilyas Kashmiri, along with other companions, was martyred in an American drone strike on June 3, 2011, at 11:15 pm,” Kashir told the Pakistani news channel, according to The Telegraph.
If you have come looking for any and all postings related to this idiotic so-called scandal by Anthony Weiner. Let me stop you here, there are none on here anymore —well, except for this posting here. Why you ask?
Because I pulled the posting —- really, it was nothing anyhow, just a casual mention of it. I also mentioned it one of my “Daily Rant!” videos. I stated on there, that I thought he was guilty as sin. I officially retract that statement.
Why the change all of a sudden towards this story?
Simple.
I do not wish to be one of the hoards of people in on the persecution of this man.
Folks, I have mentioned here in the past, it has been a while; but I do need to mention it again. I am not, nor have I ever been a hyper-partisan or a partisan blogger at all —- period, end of story. Corruption exists on both sides of the aisle. There are corrupt Republicans and there are corrupt Democrats. I do not buy into that whole idea that somehow or another that Democrats are more corrupt than Republicans are. That is partisan nonsense and I simply do not play that game, at all.
It is obvious to the writer of this article; that this persecution of this man is of a partisan base. Anything that Andrew Breitbart is involved in is purely of a partisan nature. I will never give Breitbart, that vulgar piece of human excrement, any more attention or bandwidth than this man really honestly deserves.
The second reason why I am not allowing myself to become involved in such idiocy is the following:
I am a former “Left of center” person and blogger, who now finds himself in a happy place between the camps of Classic Liberal/ Paleo-Conservative/ libertarian. Because I have an opinion on the Zionist Movement, and on Neo-Conservatism and its foreign policy idiocy, I have been branded by some as an Anti-Semite and by liberals as being a racist bigot and by some as a white nationalist.
Because of this, I have decided that this “scandal” is not worth my time or trouble. The way I feel about it, is this; If Anthony Weiner is even remotely as guilty as some are making him out to be, this whole thing will, as they put it, “Come out in the wash.” What I do not support is the pathetic continual hounding of the man. It is ridiculous!
Right now, our Nation is facing some serious issues. Unemployment is at an ultimate high; our Nation’s debt is also at an ultimate high. We have a President and a federal reserve bank that is literally ruining our money supply by pumping more currency into the money supply, thereby creating hyperinflation. We also have a President that is more interested in importing oil from Brazil than he is drilling here and now; which sending gas prices over four dollars a gallon. We are in the midst of all this and the best thing my fellow Conservative bloggers can do is fret and worry whether some idiot Democrat in congress tweeted a picture of his penis in a pair of men’s briefs? Are you people damned Serious?!
Do you mental giants realize that this whole thing could blow up in our faces and that Conservatives, Republican Party, Tea Party (Pick a damn name!) could be perceived by those who are just mildly paying attention as Anti-Semites who are on the hunt for a Jewish politico to mess up, so that we can go after them? Do you really what to know what the fallout from this all blowing up in your faces could be? How about four more years of Barack Obama, you damned ninnies! — Forget Sarah Palin, Forget even being taken seriously again; forget the damned Tea Party —- none of it will even matter, if this blows up and you all are proven to be wrong.
Because I will issue a hallow warning to the Republican Party and to every damned blogger who dared to cover this silly story. If you think that, the Democrats will not use this little situation against the Republican Party in the 2012 election cycle, think again. The Democrats will, they have no honor and in election cycles, perception is 90% of the rule and the socialist liberals will use their unlimited resources to drill this moron story in the sub-conscience of the Country; believe me when I tell you this.
If you want to return to the Bush-era of being perceived as downright evil, fine, do so. However, do so at your own peril and possibly not being able to take the White House until 2016 —- or later.
Please note: While I have always respected our Military and always will; and I do believe in the Reagan mantra of “Peace through Strength.” I have always and will always questioned the legality the so-called Patriot Act. -Pat
If Americans needed another reminder of why the Democratic Party is absolutely worthless, they got it during last week’s Patriot Act extension debate when Senate Majority leader Harry Reid again behaved exactly like the Bush-era Republicans he once vigorously opposed. In 2005, Reid bragged to fellow Democrats, “We killed the Patriot Act.” Today, Reid says that anyone who opposes the Patriot Act might be responsible for the killing of Americans. Dick Cheney now hears an echo and Americans deserve congressional hearings—as to whether Harry Reid is a sociopath, mere liar, or both.
But while Democrats stand pat for Bush Republicanism, the GOP now debates the extent to which it will remain the party of Dubya. Tea Party favorites like Senators Rand Paul and Mike Lee and Congressmen Ron Paul, Justin Amash, Allen West and others, all voted against the Patriot Act. To varying degrees, each of these GOP representatives questioned the act’s effectiveness and legality. But unfortunately, most Republicans still won’t ask any questions.
The “War on Terror” that defined and preoccupied Republicans during the Bush era brought with it not only massive government growth and debt, but an unprecedented expansion of extra-constitutional state power, symbolized most famously by the Patriot Act. In the name of national security, government officials could begin wiretapping phones, hacking into email accounts, prying into business records and spying on citizens—all without a warrant and at government officials’ own discretion. Defenders say the Patriot Act did what needed to be done after 9/11. Critics say it did away with the 4th amendment.
Let us say both have a point, and that for arguments sake, both Harry Reid and Dick Cheney are correct in arguing that it is sometimes necessary to surrender our liberties for increased security. Is this still true a decade after 9/11? Will it be true two decades after 9/11? How about three? Have the actions of Osama Bin Laden and his fellow terrorists forever altered our Bill of Rights?
Allegedly, the default position for conservatives is to distrust the government and defer to the Constitution. Concerning the Patriot Act, too many conservatives blindly trust the government at the expense of the Constitution. This type of thinking mirrors the logic of the Left, in which the constitutionality of a big government program like Obamacare is considered irrelevant due to the severity of the problem at hand. The liberal healthcare ends justify the unconstitutional means. This characteristic mentality of the Left is exactly how most of the Right approaches the Patriot Act—though it is an outright rejection of what most conservatives of any generation have held most dear.
Think about it. Conservatives get upset about many things on a regular basis—ACORN corruption, NPR funding, demanding that French fries be renamed “Freedom Fries.” At any given time there is always some new and outrageous rightwing distaste of the week.
But most of these controversies are a speck on a gnat’s ass compared to the damage done to the Constitution by the Patriot Act. For genuine constitutional conservatives, something like NPR funding is undoubtedly wrong but ultimately trivial and peripheral—while the protection of the Bill of Rights is crucial and integral. If George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were alive today, are we to believe that they would be more outraged that: A. The federal government helps fund public radio. B. The federal government snoops on citizens without restraint. Those who answered A. truly don’t understand the mindset of the men who founded this country.
A Republican critic of mine once asked me during a radio broadcast “Jack, can you show me where any American has been harmed due to the Patriot Act?” I replied, “Can you show me where any American has been harmed by Wikileaks?” The caller said he couldn’t, but stated that he believed private individuals shouldn’t haven’t access to private government documents. The gentleman was basically saying that whether or not Wikileaks has hurt anyone to date is irrelevant—the whistleblower outfit shouldn’t be trusted with such power to begin with. I argue the same is true of the federal government. So did the Founding Fathers. That’s why they wrote the 4th amendment.
The entire reason we have a written charter like the Constitution is to specify the enumerated powers that define the hard parameters of our federal government. Among those powers is national defense and security. But much of what we call “defense” is anything but. Similarly, a total police state could undoubtedly provide much better security, though few Americans would desire a country so void of liberty. After all, most Americans can barely tolerate the way the federal government handles air travel these days.
When Ronald Reagan said there was nothing closer to eternal life on this earth than a government program he could have easily been describing the Patriot Act. When Barry Goldwater said that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” he could have easily been describing the minority of Republicans who now at least question the Patriot Act. When James Madison wrote, “Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other,” he could have easily been describing our current state of perpetual war that now gives seemingly permanent life to the Patriot Act.
If the “War on Terror” is a perpetual war—as so many politicians readily contend—have we now permanently given up our liberties? If terrorists really do “hate us for our freedoms” is the best method of defeating them to permanently surrender our historic freedoms? And if so, who is really winning the War on Terror? Us or the terrorists?
By the very nature of their philosophy, conservatives are supposed to question their government. And given the very nature of our Constitution, this is precisely how the Founders would expect any true patriot to act.
—- Jack Hunter began his punditry career in the late 1990’s when a friend and popular alternative rock disc jockey agreed to let Jack air his political views during the afternoon drive on 96 Wave (96.1 WAVF) in Charleston, South Carolina.
Creating the moniker the “Southern Avenger,” which was borrowed from popular 90’s conservative talk radio host Ken “The Black Avenger” Hamblin, Jack assumed an anonymous super hero/ pro-wrestler persona, and entertained FM rock audiences with his antics and conservative political views until his departure from 96 Wave in 2007.
In 2007, Jack began working for WTMA 1250 AM talk radio in Charleston and began writing a column for the Charleston City Paper, that city’s premiere alternative weekly. Jack also began producing his popular video podcasts around this time, and today his You Tube Channel has received over two million views. Today, you can find Jack’s videos and columns as part of “TAC TV” at The American Conservative magazine (www.amconmag.com).
Jack is a frequent guest host for The Mike Church Show on Sirius/XM’s Patriot channel and is a frequent guest on “The Savage Nation” with nationally syndicated talk radio host Michael Savage. His writing has appeared at The American Spectator, Lewrockwell.com, CampaignforLiberty.com and in Young American Revolution, the official magazine of the youth activist organization Young Americans for Liberty, to which he is also a contributing editor. Jack also assisted Sen. Rand Paul with his book The Tea Party Goes to Washington, released by Center Street in February, 2011.
In this thread here yesterday, some idiot did a drive by and claimed that Al-Qaeda did not exist. I deleted it, because it sounded so stupid. I wish now that I kept it. Anyhow, here we go:
(CNN) — Yemeni security forces abandoned a key coastal city to Islamic militants, residents of the city told CNN Sunday, while a powerful rebel tribe kept up pressure on the government in the capital.
“The militants are everywhere and we cannot leave our homes,” said a resident of the city of Zinjibar, east of Aden.
“They suddenly arrived and in large numbers. There were no clashes when they arrived on Friday night. We tried to complain to security forces but could not find them,” said the resident, who asked not to be named for security reasons.
By Saturday, “hundreds” of masked militants controlled the main streets of the city, locals said.
Abyan province, where Zinjibar is located, is a hotbed of Islamic militancy in Yemen, a country which has become a key battleground against al Qaeda.
I crack up at the libertarians that say, “Al-Qaeda does not exist, it is invention of the U.S. Government!” All the while smoking their dope and waving their silly Ron Paul signs. I got one thing to say about that; tell that to the people living in this city in Yemen okay? Because right now, a whole bunch of people there are scared shitless and are worrying about whether these Islamic fascists will kill them or not.
I will concede one point; President George W. Bush royally screwed up, when trying to fight this war. Bush should have directed ALL of our forces into the Afghan region and fought these bastards until the very last one dropped dead. But, he didn’t. Instead the President, then, listened to his intelligence people; who supposedly had information that Saddam had WMD’s and was giving comfort to the enemy, namely Al-Qaeda. That intelligence came from Germany and one guy named “Curveball,” and the United States and yes, Bush ate it up and off we went. As as result of that, Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and that war in general were left to fester and grow.
Now, as much as I would like to harp on the above and really lay into Bush for that mistake, I cannot. That part of history is over. We cannot continue to lay blame at a man’s feet, who is no longer in office. We cannot go back and change history, what is done, is done. I can however, point out that if Bush had fought this war properly to start with, we would most likely not be in this position now.
Now, we are at the place, that we are; Obama ordered the taking out of Osama Bin Laden; most likely with the assumption that Al-Qaeda would die off. The problem with that is this; OBL was simply a figure-head anymore. The day-to-day stuff was being carried out by others and he was widely disconnected from the “Front Lines” of the operation. With the exception of the information carried by the carriers, OBL was just a figure-head.
I said all that above to get to this point here; anyone that believes that Al-Qaeda is not still a threat to this great Republic of ours; is a damned fool and is living in some sort of fantasy land. As someone who was almost frozen with fear on 9/11, especially when it was announced that there was plane en route to the White House. I remember that fear, and even though I am not a big fan of Nation Building and occupation; I do realize that the War on terror is a very real thing and we must not allow these bastards to gain any ground at all. As someone who watched those images on 9/11 and proceeding days and was almost driven to suicide over it. I must object to the notion that this war on terror is not winnable. Those bastards inflicted more than just physical destruction on the United States, they inflicted emotional distress on the United States as well; and for that, those fucking bastards must pay and pay dearly. Al-Qaeda and its affiliates MUST BE DESTROYED AT ALL COSTS!
Those who died on 9/11 deserve that justice and those of us, who survived the madness and the images that followed it; DEMAND IT!
If anyone reading this, thinks that because I feel this way, that I am some sort of Jewish Neo-Conservative; then by golly, when it comes to this subject and any subject related to the defense of the Republic of United States of America, I AM A DAMNED NEO-CONSERVATIVE AND ANYONE WHO LOVES THIS COUNTRY SHOULD BE TOO!
Soquel Students Suspended for White Supremacy Claims
Posted: May 26, 2011 1:29 AM EDT Updated: May 26, 2011 1:40 AM EDT
By Azenith Smith – email
SOQUEL, Calif. – Students banned from a Central Coast school for wearing a white t-shirt. On Wednesday, Soquel High School suspended at least two students. The students say it’s because of allegations, they’re part of a white supremacist group.
“All the girls wore pink, all the sports guys wore tank tops,” says Soquel High Senior Mikey Donnelly. “We were all going to wear white so that was the plan. Just wear white t-shirts to identify ourselves and look back and say that was our group of friends right there.”
Soquel High Senior Mikey Donnelly wore a white t-shirt for his senior class photo Tuesday. About 10 of his friends did the same. That decision may seem harmless. But Soquel High suspended Donnelly for three days because of it.
Donnelly said the school told him people were offended and intimidated by his group, claiming they’re a white supremacist gang.
“I do think this is BS,” says Donnelly. “I’m not a white supremacist in any way shape or form. If I did say white power, I would probably say it just as much as I say black power.”
He’s not the only one upset.
“I feel disrespected,” says Soquel High Senior David Mine.
Mine also wore a white t-shirt and was also suspended. He’s missing out on finals and that could jeopardize his graduation.
“I’m Asian,” says Mine. “I don’t see how I can be a white supremacist. I’m against it completely.”
I don’t know about you; but if I were accused of something as stupid as this, if I were not a White Supremacist, I would most likely want to become one or at the very least, I would really begin to rethink my feelings about politics and multiculturalism.
But, this is what happens when political correctness gets out of control. Not to mention, what is wrong with having a “White Pride” group? Blacks have “Black pride” groups; so why the double standard? It is because liberals and some Neo-Conservatives, like to demonize we WASP’s. (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) All because of the stupidity of the Southern Democrats of days gone by. We WASP’s will have to carry that guilt card, and demonetization for the rest of time. Just ask Rick Sanchez, Taki Theodoracopulos, Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul.
Obama is the one they ought to be blackballing. He has been a terrible disappointment to the American left. He has forsaken liberals at every turn. Yet they continue to stand by him. Which means that, in effect, they are not liberals at all. They are militant Democrats. They are Obamabots.
As long as Democrats win elections, they are happy. Nevermind that their policies are the same as, or to the right of, the Republicans.
“So what should I think about [the war in Libya]?,” asks Kevin Drum in Mother Jones. “If it had been my call, I wouldn’t have gone into Libya. But the reason I voted for Obama in 2008 is because I trust his judgment. And not in any merely abstract way, either: I mean that if he and I were in a room and disagreed about some issue on which I had any doubt at all, I’d literally trust his judgment over my own. I think he’s smarter than me, better informed, better able to understand the consequences of his actions, and more farsighted.”
Mr. Drum, call your office. Someone found your brain in the break room.
Barack Obama and the Democrats have made it perfectly clear that they don’t care about the issues and concerns that I care about. Unlike Kevin Drum, I think–I know–I’m smarter than Barack Obama. I wouldn’t have made half the mistakes he has.
So I don’t care about Obama. Or the Democrats. I care about America and the world and the people who live in them.
Pamela Geller, As a Fundamentalist Christian. I am sorry to say this, but, it must be said.
It is quite obvious to me, that you are nothing more, than an Anti-Christian Jewish Bigot. I am not a Roman Catholic, nor do I agree with that belief system; in fact, I renounce it as false Christianity. But for you to slam the Christian belief system of forgiveness, shows that you have an inbred hatred of all things Non-Jewish. Charles Johnson was right, you are nothing but a hatemonger.
The sad thing is, I have defended you, when I thought you needed it. I now regret that decision.
Jesus Christ came to die on the cross at Calvary to put and END to that dead man’s Religion of Judaism; which was a total perversion of the Law of Moses, which you Jews turned into a money-making operation. In fact, Jesus said in the Gospels, “My house shall be called a house of PRAYER and you have turned it into a DEN OF THIEVES!” Not much has changed either, the Jews are still doing that to this very day.
I thought you were better than this Miss Geller, I guess I was wrong.
Signed,
-Charles Patrick Adkins
Owner
politicalbyline.com
—-
I posted it to the comments section, and she will most likely remove it, like the little coward that she is; which will not surprise me at all.
I’m sorry, but you do not slam Christianity like that and get away with it; I do not care what your ethnic background is, you do it, I am coming after you. Jew or non-Jew. It’s absurd and I am calling her out on this one. I want an apology on that blog of hers or I will continue to call out her hate.
After all, who is it, that is always calling out Muslim extremists and they’re hatred of freedom, Christians, and Jews? Pamela Geller. So, why should SHE get a free pass on her hatred of Christians? She will not here, I assure you of that.
Update: I feel the need to mention something; it just dawned on me, that this is the Roman Catholic of “Prayers for the dead.” Now, do I believe in that sort of thing? No. However, because I do happen to believe in the practice of freedom of Religion, I believe that people who do believe in that sort of thing, should be able to carry on that belief and practice; without some Neo-Conservative, Jewish Fascist screeching about how horrible it is and attacking people for actually practicing their faith. As for Osama bin Laden, he is in hell, he chose to reject the gospel of Jesus Christ and instead embraced Islam and chose also to embrace madness of violent jihad, for this, he is in hell. Prayers for him are useless. However, those who choose to do this, should not be attacked. As that is just what the radical Jihadists do —- attack people for practicing their faith.
After considerable deliberation and reflection, I have decided not to pursue the office of the Presidency. This decision does not come easily or without regret; especially when my potential candidacy continues to be validated by ranking at the top of the Republican contenders in polls across the country. I maintain the strong conviction that if I were to run, I would be able to win the primary and ultimately, the general election. I have spent the past several months unofficially campaigning and recognize that running for public office cannot be done half heartedly. Ultimately, however, business is my greatest passion and I am not ready to leave the private sector.
I want to personally thank the millions of Americans who have joined the various Trump grassroots movements and written me letters and e-mails encouraging me to run. My gratitude for your faith and trust in me could never be expressed properly in words. So, I make you this promise: that I will continue to voice my opinions loudly and help to shape our politician’s thoughts. My ability to bring important economic and foreign policy issues to the forefront of the national dialogue is perhaps my greatest asset and one of the most valuable services I can provide to this country. I will continue to push our President and the country’s policy makers to address the dire challenges arising from our unsustainable debt structure and increasing lack of global competitiveness. Issues, including getting tough on China and other countries that are methodically and systematically taking advantage of the United States, were seldom mentioned before I brought them to the forefront of the country’s conversation. They are now being debated vigorously. I will also continue to push for job creation, an initiative that should be this country’s top priority and something that I know a lot about. I will not shy away from expressing the opinions that so many of you share yet don’t have a medium through which to articulate.
I look forward to supporting the candidate who is the most qualified to help us tackle our country’s most important issues and am hopeful that, when this person emerges, he or she will have the courage to take on the challenges of the Office and be the agent of change that this country so desperately needs
Thank you and God Bless America!
Donald J. Trump
There are also unconfirmed reports that President Barack Obama blurted out, “That Mother $%#$!” when he was told about the news.
Please note: This quotes and news tidbits are fictional ones and intended to be humorous. So, please, don’t be silly and actually use them for news broadcasts. 😀
Honestly, I really already knew that this was going to happen. In fact, I even wrote as such:
AllahPundit is also correct, when he says that “The Donald” is playing that “Birther” group like a fiddle for purposes of political expediency. If it becomes clear that Trump is going to run; he will drop that subject like a bad habit. You watch.
Well, I was right —- sort of. I thought Donald Trump might actually try to run. However, what I think is this; Some political strategist most likely told him that he was not polling that well and he decided against it. Instead, he forced the Brither thing and dropped back into the private sector.
So, there’s that. Now for the 2012 dollar question; who the heck is going to run, that I would actually vote for?
There are many people in the Republican Party, in the Conservative Movement and in the Tea Party; who happen to believe that Governor Mike Huckabee is not that strong of a Conservative. I will full admit to being one of those people, and I also happen to believe that Governor Huckabee’s wanting to turn America into a Christian Republican, as opposed to a Constitutional Republic; is just downright wrong-headed. However, as a Born-Again Christian of the 29 year vintage, I have to admire a man who will, first freely say that he is a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ on a National Network, like Fox News. Second, be willing and able to admit that he does not have the peace of the Lord Jesus Christ in his heart to run as President of the United States.
I wish Governor Mike Huckabee and his entire family the very best; and I hope that the Lord Jesus Christ will continue to bless, prosper and keep Governor Huckabee, his wife and children and grandchildren.
This is a posting that will not endure me to or make me any fans among the hardcore Ron Paul crowd. However, I do believe that thinking Americans will agree with what I write.
This below, is why I feel Dr. Ron Paul is not fit to be President of the United States of America.
Ron Paul says in a radio interview, as reported by Politico:
“I think things could have been done somewhat differently,” Paul said this week. “I would suggest the way they got Khalid [Sheikh] Mohammed. We went and cooperated with Pakistan. They arrested him, actually, and turned him over to us, and he’s been in prison. Why can’t we work with the government?
Ron Paul also said in another Radio interview:
“I don’t think it was necessary, no. It absolutely was not necessary,” Paul said during his Tuesday comments. “I think respect for the rule of law and world law and international law. What if he’d been in a hotel in London? We wanted to keep it secret, so would we have sent the airplane, you know the helicopters into London, because they were afraid the information would get out?”
Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com, of whom I happen to respect, even if it he is a bald-headed Neo-Con; who just happens to be right here, answers Ron Paul’s foriegn policy fantasies:
For one thing, had we found him holed up in London, we would have been able to trust the British intelligence service to cooperate. MI-5 didn’t spend more than a decade helping to build up the Taliban and playing footsie with radical Islamists the way Pakistan’s ISI did, primarily as a bulwark against India. Moreover, as Paul should know, we tried trusting Pakistan once before on an opportunity to target bin Laden when Bill Clinton had a chance to target his compound. The ISI warned bin Laden, and to paraphrase President George Bush, we wound up sending a $10 million rocket into a ten-dollar tent to hit a camel’s butt.
I would have had no problem with capturing Osama bin Laden, or with killing him. He declared war on the United States and continued to pursue it until his last breath. Furthermore, I have no problem with us conducting a military mission in Pakistan to get him. Pakistan has proven themselves unreliable on high-level intelligence matters in the past, specifically on OBL, and we have had little cause to put any more trust in the Pakistani ISI ever since.
Paul has a few good ideas on fiscal policy, but is otherwise a nut. Insisting that we should have asked the Pakistanis to arrest bin Laden proves rather clearly that Paul lives in a fantasy world.
As much as it pains me to say it and believe me, I do not write this feeling good about slamming Dr. Ron Paul — but Ed is absolutely correct. As Ed wrote above, and Yes, I have known this for a long time, the Pakistani Government has been double dealing with USA and Al-Qaeda for years. President Obama knew it, Hillary Clinton knew it and they did something about it.
For the United States sake, I hope like hell that they have their most experienced men on the job. Because like we found out on September 11, 2001; The United States cannot afford to be wrong anymore. We blew it on 9/11, we blew it with Iraq — we are now active involved in the war on terror — whether Paleo-Conservatives want to admit it or not, we are in this fight now. It matters not, whether foriegn policy or whatever created it; we are in it now, and if we do not fight it, the right way and not like the Bush fought it, before 9/11 —- more Americans will be in danger, period, end of story. Anyone who say anything different than this; is living in an alternative reality. It pains me greatly to have to even write this, but, I must; America, in this dangerous new 21 century, post 9/11 world we live in — just cannot afford to be lead by Conservative politicians who live inside their own heads and who still believe in a utopian, isolationist, foriegn policy doctrine.
Back when I was younger, there was a saying around and that was, “Time to get real…” and yes, my friends; it is well beyond the time to get real in the world of foriegn policy. This is not December 6, 1941 anymore, this not even 1957; this is 2011 and this stuff is very real — and hardcore Isolationism, is not going to cut it anymore.
As you see above, I am an “America First” type of blogger and yes, I believe that I am a Paleo-Conservative. But I am not disconnected from reality. The reality is that the Republic of the United States of America does need defending from crazy people like Al-Qaeda. I do not believe in unjustified wars. But I do believe we should take great care in protecting the Republic and the people in that Republic. Anyone that says anything other than this; is just being irresponsible — and America just cannot afford to be irresponsible anymore. 2,976 people died because we were irresponsible once; let us not make that mistake again —- for their sakes.
Peace through strength, not Domination of the World by military might —- and certainly not irresponsibility through hardcore isolationism —- that my friends, is what America’s foriegn policy stance should be.
I still stand by that statement above and will continue to for the rest of my life.
(CNN) — Al Qaeda released a statement on jihadist forums Friday confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, according to SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist websites.
The development comes days after U.S. troops killed bin Laden in a raid on a compound in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad.
The statement, translated by SITE, lauded the late militant, threatened to take action against the United States, and urged Pakistanis to “rise up and revolt.”
Bin Laden’s death will serve as a “curse that chases the Americans and their agents, and goes after them inside and outside their countries,” the message said.
“Soon — with help from Allah — their happiness will turn into sorrow, and their blood will be mixed with their tears,” it said.
The statement said al Qaeda will “continue on the path of jihad, the path walked upon by our leaders … without hesitation or reluctance.”
“We will not deviate from that or change until Allah judges between us and between our enemy with truth. Indeed, He is the best of all judges. Nothing will harm us after that, until we see either victory and success and conquest and empowerment, or we die trying.”
It said that Americans “will never enjoy security until our people in Palestine enjoy it.”
Which brings me to another thought; anyone ever notice how muddled Al-Qaeda’s message is? First Al-Qaeda says they are angry at us for having an air force base in Saudi Arabia. Then, Al-Qaeda says that they are after us because of the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Ron Paul always says that Al-Qaeda hates us, because America occupies the Arabs land. The Neo-Cons say Al-Qaeda hates us, because of capitalism and our Christianity. Someone, somewhere needs to make up their minds — or at least get on the same page!
The other thought and question here is this; is this the statement from a terrorist organization that is in its last gasps of existence or is this an organization that is now energized and is going to step up its threats against the United States? That is the question that many people in the United States Government intelligence agencies are trying to figure out, I suppose. For the United States sake, I hope like hell that they have their most experienced men on the job. Because like we found out on September 11, 2001; The United States cannot afford to be wrong anymore. We blew it on 9/11, we blew it with Iraq — we are now active involved in the war on terror — whether Paleo-Conservatives want to admit it or not, we are in this fight now. It matters not, whether foriegn policy or whatever created it; we are in it now, and if we do not fight it, the right way and not like the Bush fought it, before 9/11 —- more Americans will be in danger, period, end of story. Anyone who say anything different than this; is living in an alternative reality. It pains me greatly to have to even write this, but, I must; America, in this dangerous new 21 century, post 9/11 world we live in — just cannot afford to be lead by Conservative politicians who live inside their own heads and who still believe in a utopian, isolationist, foriegn policy doctrine.
Back when I was younger, there was a saying around and that was, “Time to get real…” and yes, my friends; it is well beyond the time to get real in the world of foriegn policy. This is not December 6, 1941 anymore, this not even 1957; this is 2011 and this stuff is very real — and hardcore Isolationism, is not going to cut it anymore.
As you see above, I am an “America First” type of blogger and yes, I believe that I am a Paleo-Conservative. But I am not disconnected from reality. The reality is that the Republic of the United States of America does need defending from crazy people like Al-Qaeda. I do not believe in unjustified wars. But I do believe we should take great care in protecting the Republic and the people in that Republic. Anyone that says anything other than this; is just being irresponsible — and America just cannot afford to be irresponsible anymore. 2,976 people died because we were irresponsible once; let us not make that mistake again —- for their sakes.
Peace through strength, not Domination of the World by military might —- and certainly not irresponsibility through hardcore isolationism —- that my friends, is what America’s foriegn policy stance should be.
