Conducting experiments on blacks in Africa?!?
This Posting was crafted on my Apple iPod using WordPress Mobile Admin (Too Cool!)
Category: Obama
Message to Rep. Sheila Jackson, Maybe we should investigate militant Negros who want overthrow our Country
The headline is provocative one and for a damned good reason.
First the video:
The Story via CNSNEWS:
(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.
Update: Moonbattery Agrees with me.
The White House experiences “Blowback” from the Progressive Community
In other words a repeat of what happened in 1968?
It could very well be.
First the Unions, now this…
First a report from ABC News:
The frustrations and the fears that progressives feel about President Obama were on full display Thursday as thousands of them flocked to Minneapolis for the sixth annual Netroots Nation conference.
Former Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold said he hoped that Obama will be re-elected, but he urged the president to stand up to corporate interests, demanding that the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling become a focal point of the 2012 campaign.
“Sometimes we have to be very direct with the Democratic Party. Just as you have long pushed our Democrats to stand up for their ideals, I’m here this evening to ask you to redouble your efforts because I fear that the Democratic Party is in danger of losing its identity,” Feingold said in his keynote address to a crowd of around 2,400 progressive activists and bloggers here at the Minneapolis Convention Center, the most ever for the event.
Specifically, Feingold ripped Priorities USA, a super political action committee started last spring by former White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton.
“I think it’s a mistake for us to take the argument that they like to make that, ‘Well, what we’re going to do now is, we’re going to take the corporate money like the Republicans do and then after we win, we’ll change it.’ When’s the last time anyone did that? Most people don’t change the rules after they win by them. It doesn’t usually happen. It never happens,” Feingold said. “You know what? I think we’ll lose anyway if we do this. We’ll lose our soul when it comes to the issue of corporate domination. People will see us as weak. People will see us as corporate-lite. We’ll gut our message. I think it’s not just wrong, I think it’s a dumb strategy. It’s dumb because people will not believe us if we do this, so I strongly disagree with those who are trying to create these PACs. I know people want to win. I understand that. I like to win, too. And I know that today’s Republican party has found more ways to play dirty, so I empathize with the desire to fight fire with fire, but Democrats should just never be in the business of taking unlimited corporate contributions. It’s dancing with the devil and it’s a game that we will never win.”
“It’s not just campaigns and contributions,” Feingold noted. “We have to say to the president, ‘Mr. President, Jeff Immelt is not the right guy – the CEO of GE is not the right guy to be running your Jobs & Competitiveness Council, not when your company doubled its profits, increased his compensation, and asked its workers to take huge pay and benefits cuts.”
Then, there is this; seems like the White House and grass roots are talking past one another — Via The Hill:
President Obama’s communications czar sought to soothe frustrated liberals Friday, telling them Obama needs their support to win reelection.
White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer faced a grilling during an appearance at the Netroots Nation conference, a gathering of liberal bloggers and activists meeting this year in Minneapolis.
Pfeiffer faced tough questions from Kaili Joy Gray, an associate editor for the liberal blog Daily Kos, who often reacted to the communications director’s answers to questions with an audible sigh or a skeptical, elongated “OK.”
(“Frankly, we’re all a little sick of hearing about that one,” Gray said of Pfeiffer’s mentions of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.) Hecklers sometimes interjected during the Q-and-A, voicing their skepticism toward Pfeiffer and accusing him of being evasive in his answers.
Pfeiffer admitted that the administration has been “frustrated” with its critics on the left, but pleaded for their support heading into 2012.
“We can either work together and finish that work that we started in 2008 or we can be relegated back to the sidelines and see what a Republican president … does to this country,” he said at the event, which was streamed online.
Pfeiffer said that Obama is “absolutely” counting on his liberal base to turn out in 2012.
It’s no secret that liberals have been frustrated with the Obama White House, which has differed with the left on a host of foreign policy and economic issues.
The administration also has sometimes been frustrated with its liberal supporters.
This friction was perhaps best reflected in former press secretary Robert Gibbs’s criticism of the “professional left” in an interview with The Hill last year. The comments sparked outrage from progressive activists who saw that phrase as derogatory.
“Sometimes when our friends attack us, we get frustrated,” Pfeiffer said of the White House’s relationship with the left.
“I also know that beyond that, without a lot of the people in this room today, Barack Obama would not be president of the United States,” he said at the outset of the program.]
What you are seeing here; is what the CIA refers to as “Blowback.” For every action, there is a reaction and consequence for that action. You simply cannot straight lie to, or overreach in your promises to your base of voters and then when the election is over and you have won that election; tell your base to “kiss off” and show them to the door. When you do this, you lose support. You would think that Democrats would have learned this lesson, when Bill Clinton was in office; but I guess the Democrats are not the party of learning.
This is not to say that Republicans have never done this; sure, they have — President Ronald Reagan did this back during his run for the White House back in the 1980’s with the Christian Coalition. Reagan gave the Conservative Christian group a place at the table, listened to their concerns; gave them some lip service and proceeded to ignore every one of their issues. Truth is the only reason Reagan won that second term is that the Democrats ran a lousy candidate.
This is not to say that Ronald Reagan could not bring people together, that he could do. However, he was not one that was going to be told what to do by any particular group. That is because Ronald Reagan knew that he was the President of the United States and not the President of the Republican Party or the Conservative Christian community. This is the same lesson that President Barack Obama is learning now in the White House and the lesson that the progressive community also has to learn. That is, that the President of the United States of America is the President of the people; all of the people, not just the progressives that worked to get him in there.
This is not to say that I am not empathic to their frustrations; believe me when I say that I am. I understand how they feel; those grass roots people worked very hard to get this President into the White House and now they feel like they have been conned. The problem was not that these were stupid or anything of that sort. The problem is that the President knew what he was doing; in other words, he was stringing them along like little sheep and them, desiring a change from the previous President; ate it up. In other words, they were played and were played hard.
This is not to say that this is first time that this has happened; nor will it be the last. As long as there is a Democratic Party and as long as there are people foolish enough to believe that millionaire limousine liberals honestly give two flips about them, this will continue to happen. You ask, “What about the Republican Party? Do they not do this?” In a sense, they do, but usually, Republicans are not standing around with their hands open, wanting a handout from the Government. If any at all, the business owners and individuals in that party seek relief from an oppressive tax system that makes their lives miserable. Sometimes they get relief and sometimes they get lip service — as they did with George H.W. Bush, of who also was not elected to a second term.
The point is here, that when lip service and lies happen in the Republican Party, most of the time, things happen, as in elections are lost. In the Democratic Party, it is considered business as usual.
Others: CNN, The Politico, The Nation, Hot Air, Taylor Marsh, Shakesville, Balloon Juice, The Gateway Pundit, TPMDC and FrumForum, The Moderate Voice, The Note, Washington Post, CNN, Weasel Zippers and The Daily Caller — more via Memeornadum
Updated: Gold headed to 5K an ounce? Video added
This is where I start sound like Ron Paul. (oh dear…)
This report via CNBC even raised my eyebrows a bit:
An exhaustive report by Standard Chartered predicts that gold [ GCCV1 1524.40 +8.80 (+0.58%) ] will more than triple to $5,000 an ounce because of a lack of supply, not just because of a surge in demand that most bullion bugs cite in their bullish calls.
“There are very few large gold mines set to commence operation in the next five years,” said Standard’s analyst Yan Chen in a report Monday. “The limited new supply comes at a time when central banks have turned from being net sellers to significant net buyers of gold. The result, in our view, will be a gold market in deficit, even assuming flat growth in demand. With the supply-demand balance so out of kilter, we see the gold price potentially going to US$5,000/oz.”
The London-based firm is among the first to focus on the supply-side of the gold equation amid the many bullish forecasts out there on the metal. After analyzing 345 gold mines and 30 copper/base metal gold mines around the globe, the team estimates annual gold production will be just 3.6 percent over the next five years.
“They make a pretty compelling argument, especially when it comes to mine supply,” said Brian Kelly, head of Brian Kelly Capital and a ‘Fast Money’ trader. “Most analysis focuses on demand from China and India, which of course can disappear as quickly as it materialized.”
In some respects, this could be a good thing for those already invested; and in some ways this can be a bad thing. Because of there is a massive rush to buy, because of a blow up in the money supply; this could spell trouble for last minute buyers.
My suggestion to everyone who reads here, is to invest now to avoid the rush. Please, check out the links on the right, top sidebar on this blog. You mobile users will have to go your laptops to do that; or if there is a gold ad at the top, on your mobile device, click to take advantage of that offer.
Being smart, and buying early; can save much headaches later.
Update: This video here will give you some good reasoning as to why investing with Gold is such a good idea.
Democrats are waking up the realities of Barack Obama
This is proof of that:
MIAMI, Fla. — A low-dollar fundraiser here Monday felt like a throwback to the 2008 campaign.
There was the same old soundtrack – including “City of Blinding Lights” by U2, the president’s 2008 anthem — the enthusiastic organizers and the abundant appeals for supporters to rally behind President Obama.
The one missing element? Overflowing crowds.
Granted, it was a fundraiser, not a free rally. But the empty seats were hard to miss.
The top level of the 2,200-seat concert hall at the Adrienne Arsht Center for Performing Arts was entirely empty, as were the seats along the side of the second and third levels.
“The expectation was 900,” a Democratic official said, and more than 980 tickets were sold.
Tickets for the Gen 44 event started at $44, the official said.
“This is going to be a very tough fight,” said Alonzo Mourning, the former Miami Heat player, who spoke ahead of the president. Once Obama took the stage, a protester interrupted him at one point, repeatedly yelling: “Keep your promise, stop AIDS now.” But the protester was quickly drowned out by the audience chanting, “Obama, Obama, Obama.”
If there was ever proof that the thrill is gone; this might be it!
Cue the Music!
I could say a whole bunch more; but I have written it all before, in fact, I’ve been writing about it since 2007, when I started this blog.
Enjoy this music! 😀
Others: Political Punch, Washington Times, americanthinker.com, The Daily Caller, The Lonely Conservative, The Gateway Pundit, Don Surber, White House Dossier and HotAirPundit
Video: Bump in the road
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.
Is Sarah Palin making the same fatal mistake as George W. Bush?
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.
Having said all that, John Ziegler over at the Daily Caller dishes on some brutal honesty about Sarah Palin:
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.
Defenders of Sarah Palin, like Ed Morrissey over at HotAir.com; where I saw the link to this story, says the following:
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.
Others: GOP 12, Hot Air, Sister Toldjah, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, New York Magazine, pandagon.net, Patterico’s Pontifications, FrumForum, Mediaite, RedState, The Lonely Conservative and The Daily Dish
Aw Man: Fox News Host uses some rather stupid racially charged language — About the President
I hate writing about this kind of stuff, It’s because I know that the Republican Party is supposed to be the Party of Lincoln.
However, when you have stupid people, doing stupid stuff; like this. It is pretty freaking hard to defend that line.
This is Fox News Host Eric Bolling:
Yeah, I know where I got that video from; and I personally do not give a flying flip what ya’ll think about it either. You see, I feel about this; like I feel about other Republicans, who have dared to be this stupid. Get them the hell off the air and out of a job. You do something like that; I do not give a flying flip what your political views are, you’re an idiot and do not need to be on a Network representing a Conservative point of view.
For the record, I griped and bitched about a Fox News anchor that used the term “Terrorist Fist Bump” on the air, when referring to Obama. Her name was E.D. Hill and they got rid of her from that channel as well. At thought at the time, that it was lame, rude, and condescending towards a black man and I said so too! Not to mention the narrative that it was flaming; it was stupid and this is too.
Here is hoping that Eric Bolling goes to the unemployment line…..quickly.
Before anyone says it, don’t hand me no B.S. about “Freedom of Speech” either, okay? Because this was not free speech; this was speech designed to inflame and stoke Racial Bigotry and Division. This sort of ignorant crap is not even remotely Conservative or Republican.
Others: Firedoglake, Little Green Footballs, Balloon Juice, Oliver Willis and Hullabaloo
Update: Jeff Goldberg over at The Atlantic nails it, as does Mediaite — sorta.
Quote of the Day – Part 2
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.
Video: Anthony’s Weiner by Jack Hunter
I do not always agree with Jack, but more often than not; he is right on point.
This Posting was crafted on my Apple iPod using WordPress Mobile Admin (Too Cool!)
AFL-CIO Boss says, “We have enough of Democrats crap”
Normally, I would rip on something like this; but because I come from a union family and because I have a very long memory, I get it.
Via The Hill:
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka amplified his call for a politically independent labor movement Tuesday and said unions too often are holding “a canceled check” after Election Day.
Trumka rallied hundreds of nurses at a conference hosted by the National Nurses United. The nurses are in Washington this week to lobby lawmakers for a financial transactions tax that could help pay for social services.
Trumka said unions want “an independent labor movement” that doesn’t support just one political party or candidate. Labor has often been unhappy with its traditional allies in the Democratic Party, and Trumka said friends of unions in Congress have often paid little heed to workers’ needs.
“For too long, we have been left after Election Day holding a canceled check waving it about — ‘Remember us? Remember us? Remember us?’ — asking someone to pay a little attention to us. Well, I don’t know about you, but I’ve had a snootful of that s–t,” Trumka said to cheers.
Now, there are some on my far right, that would say, ” See? This proves that labor controls the Democratic Party!” Well, there is much more to this than that.
You see, I happen to remember the 1990’s and the era of the Clinton Administration. I also remember the signing of the NAFTA bill. I also remember the labor movement; especially the UAW and related unions never forgave Bill Clinton for signing that bill.
Because you see, to the labor movement, Clinton’s signing of that bill was the ultimate abdication of the progressive principles that the Democratic Party. To them, Clinton sold the unions and the members who work in the auto plants here in Detroit up the river.
So, what you are seeing here is simply “blowback” from those actions. Also too, it has been reported that the attitude of the Obama Administration is; or at least was, “f—- the big three!” That sort of attitude, does not bode very well amongst the union members or with the labor movement at all.
Now, for the realist “right of center” view of this; any attempt by the labor movement to create a new political party will be an abject flop and could be a disaster for the labor movement. My reasons for thinking this are:
1. The Democratic Party is very highly financed. Not to mention Party bosses carry a good deal weight and are known to use questionable tactics to get what they want. I predict a “Battle of the overpass” style of attack, if this plan of the AFL-CIO goes through with such a plan.
2. The second most important reason that this approach will flop is this; the labor movement simply does not have the numbers anymore
Way back in the 1940’s; before, during, and after World War 2, union membership was at its zenith and on into the 1950 and 1960’s union membership blossomed. However, those days of union growth and strength are over. They simply do not have the clout anymore in the progressive movement anymore.
Because if this; I personally believe that this idea would be a foolish move. While I greatly admire those who strongly believe in their convictions; I believe this would do more to hurt the labor movement, than it would ever help.
This Blog entry was crafted on my Apple iPod using WordPress Mobile Admin (Too Cool!)
To my liberal friends: is this acceptable?
File this one under, “If Rush Limbaugh had said this about Obama.”
This comes via The Daily Caller (with video, be sure and watch it, please!!!)
Sometimes there is a line that is crossed between what appropriate for comedy and what’s likely off limits. But did comic Christopher Titus cross that line?
In an appearance on Monday’s “The Adam Carolla Show” podcast, Titus may have waded into that territory. In responding to a question about former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” in which Palin defended her interpretation of what happened during Paul Revere’s pre-Revolutionary War famous ride, Titus launched into a description of what he would do if Palin were elected.
“You know what man?” Titus said. “I am going to literally — if she gets elected president, I am going to hang out on the grassy knoll all the time, just loaded and ready — because you know what? It’s for my country. It’s for my country. If I got to sacrifice myself, it’s for my country.”
To my liberal Democratic Party friends: Is jokes about assinating a conservative female acceptable? Is joking about assinating ANY sort of political figure, even remotely funny?
If not, then why are not more liberals speaking out about it?
In the name of decency; we need to stop this; before something awful happens again.
This Posting was crafted on my Apple iPod using WordPress Mobile Admin (Too Cool!)
WeinerGate Continues: TMZ reports that Weiner asked porn star to lie
Oh boy…:
From TMZ.com
Congressman Anthony Weiner instructed one of his Internet women how to lie about their relationship … and even offered PR help from his team, which could create major legal issues for him … TMZ has learned. Weiner and former porn star Ginger Lee exchanged scores of sexual emails over a long period of time. When the underwear scandal broke on May 28, Lee began receiving calls from the media, and Weiner was more than happy to help her control the situation … by lying. On June 2, Weiner emailed Lee, “Do you need to talk to a professional PR type person to give u advice? I can have someone on my team call. [Yeah, my team is doing great. Ugh].” It’s unclear if Weiner’s PR team is from his Congressional staff. If so, Weiner could run afoul of House Ethics Rules as well as the law.
Looks like Weiner might be gone by the end of the week. This stuff is building and sooner or later, he is going to have to go. Much to her credit Nancy Pelosi is ordering an investigation into whether Weiner broke any ethics laws or not. Time will tell or not whether he faces any charges or not.
Either way, this is a huge blow to the Deomcrats on the hill and in New York.
This Posting was crafted on my Apple iPod using WordPress Mobile Admin (Too Cool!)
Video: The Daily RANT!: Terrorism, Abortionists, and Ron Paul supporting idiots
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. 😳
Related:
One down, many more to go: Top al Qaeda leader Ilyas Kashmiri killed in US Predator strike
What having an abortion does to a woman
Living proof that Adam Kokesh/Ron Paul Supporters are unhinged leftists in disguise
Video: Guest Voice: Jack Hunter Says “The Patriot Act Is Not Conservative”
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
Video:
Transcript Via The American Conservative:
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.
Think Al-Qaeda is done? Think again, they’re in Yemen
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.
via Islamic militants seize Yemen city, locals say – CNN.com.
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!
That…..is all.
Cross-posted at Alexandria
Video: Voices from the Gulf
This video comes via HotAir.com…
I want to share this video, but first a few thoughts of my own…
Over the course of my blogger career here, I have written repeatedly about the Internationalist Democrats, who have sold the American Worker up the river on more than one occasion. President Bill Clinton did it, with the signing of the NAFTA and TAFTA agreements and now President Barack Obama is doing it with exporting oil from Brazil. The problem is, Obama wants to fight against the American oil companies and their monopoly on the prices of gas. In the process of this, he is tossing under the bus, the most important part of his own base —- The American Worker.
Honestly, If President Obama wants to do something to lower gas prices, then maybe he should put pressure on the OPEC cartel and start demanding that they lower prices of oil, further more; President Obama should start going after the oil speculators, who drive up the cost of oil. Again, it is another example of how Internationalist Democrats fight battles, exactly backwards of how they should be fought. This video proves that.
To my Democratic Party friends — this is whom you elected in 2008.
Enjoy the Video:
Clank! — President’s Limo hits a…. snag?
This is rather funny.
Via the Daily Mail U.K.: (H/T to Memeornadum)
I bet every drive-train mechanic in the world went “Ouch!” and shuttered when that happened. That “CLANK!” was the drive shaft clanking after getting nailed. Either that or it was armor plating that you heard.
Either way, it was not a good day in Dublin; especially for the President.
Ace of Spades and AllahPundit Snark away.
Update: Doug Powers, writing over at Michelle Malkin’s Blog, really pours on the snark:
The “Moe hits Curly in the head with a ball peen hammer” wacky sound-effect is certainly a bonus.
Hmmmmm….:
Close enough for Government work. 😉
Video: Bill O’Reilly on Obama and the Jewish Voters
Whether my fellow Paleo-Conservatives and Traditionalists want to admit it, or not; the Jewish vote, is a big one. Obama might have just shot his own damned foot off. This, for the Republican Party, is a very good thing.
H/T to Bill O’Reilly’s website.
“Hey! Don’t be dissing my liberal President!” Says Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic
What a freaking joke….
For whatever reason, I tend to react strongly when a foreign leader disrespects the United States, and its President. I didn’t like it when Hugo Chavez of Venezuela insulted President Bush; I don’t like listening to Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan lecture the U.S. on its sins, and I’m not happy when certain Pakistani leaders gin-up righteous indignation about American behavior when it was their country that served as a refuge for the greatest mass murderer in American history.
And so I was similarly taken aback when I read a statement from Prime Minister Netanyahu yesterday that he “expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004, which were overwhelmingly supported by both House of Congress.”
[….}
Of course, he didn’t say this. Instead he threw something of a hissy fit. It was not appropriate, and more to the point, it was not tactically wise: If I’m waking up this morning feeling that the Israeli prime minister is disrespecting the President of my country, imagine how other Americans might be feeling. And, then, of course, there’s this: Prime Minister Netanyahu needs the support of President Obama in order to confront the greatest danger Israel has ever faced: the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran. And yet he seems to go out of his way to alienate the President. Why does he do this? It’s a mystery to me.
Gee, I wonder if he felt that way, when George W. Bush was President? I highly doubt it. Despite that during the George W. Bush administration’s term, there were no more terrorist attacks after 9/11 and that Bush had one the greatest relationships with Israel —- despite all that; Bush was treated like dirt and mocked by this man’s magazine as a hick, who could not run the White House. Disrespecting Bush was no problem, after all, he was the “Great Satan” in the White House, no problem speaking disrespectful to him! But, please, no disrespecting “The One!”
This is your typical partisan double standard in the liberal media. When a Republican is in the White House, the liberal media and Presidents of other Countries can disrespect them all day long and not one person in the Lame Stream Media will say a word. But you let a Democrat get elected, much less a Black Democrat President and the rules change you see; will be no disrespecting of the black messiah of socialism and statist big Government.
This here and a litany of other reasons that I have well documented here; is why I will never, ever, vote for a Democratic Party Candidate, ever again. Because American deserves better than what we have in the White House now, and further more, American deserves a better media than what the lame stream media is giving us. This is why I actually do watch Fox News and read publications like National Review, The American Conservative, WorldNetDaily, NewsWithViews and many of the other Conservative publications and it is also the reason I read blogs and run a Blog myself. Because quite frankly, America deserves better than the idiotic bile that passes for news and fair political opinion in this Country.
Update: I no sooner hit publish and I realize, I forgot something. Oops! I wrote this; not as a Bush fan. I never was, in fact, I did not vote for him, either time. In fact, it was Bush’s handling of Iraq that started me to blogging. But, some things got well beyond whether someone is liked or not. This is one of them and I feel the need to point it out.
Others: Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion
Peter Fonda said WHAT?!
WHOA! 😯
This comes Via AFP:
Peter Fonda not one to beat around the, um, Bush?
CANNES, France — Peter Fonda launched a four-letter attack on US President Barack Obama at the Cannes film festival on Wednesday, calling him a traitor over the handling of the aftermath of the Gulf oil spill.
The star of the 1969 road movie “Easy Rider” was in Cannes for the premiere of “The Big Fix” by Rebecca and Josh Tickell, the only feature documentary in the official selection at the Cannes film festival this year.
Fonda — a keen environmentalist and co-producer of the film which centres on the explosion of the BP oil rig Deepwater Horizon, the ensuing spill and its consequences — accused Washington of trying to gag reporting on the issue.
“I sent an email to President Obama saying, ‘You are a f(expletive) traitor,’ using those words… ‘You’re a traitor, you allowed foreign boots on our soil telling our military — in this case the coastguard — what they can and could not do, and telling us, the citizens of the United States, what we could or could not do’.”
Fonda, who said he sent the email last week, appears in “The Big Fix” trying to get on to Louisiana beaches to assess the impact of the biggest oil spill in US history, only to be turned away by BP clean-up personnel.
Speaking at a press event at the American Pavilion to promote the film, Fonda denounced BP as “a bunch of Brits — I thought we kicked them out a long time ago. They tried to get back in in 1812, but they didn’t make it.”
I am in awe. It is not everyday that you see a Hollywood type say stuff like that. Good show. I think you will see more of this, as the Hollywood types figure out what President Obama is about.
Others: JammieWearingFool, Weasel Zippers and Pajamas Media
This is why I advocate for an armed Church Congregation
This video comes via The Blaze:
My friends, I believe that the video that you have just watched is a sign of things to come. I believe that before the great and glorious rapture of the Church comes; there will be events like this taking place in Church, of all denominations around the United States and abroad.
This reason above, as shown in this video is why I advocate, and firmly believe that ALL Churches and their members should be owners, active users, and carriers of firearms. There is a book that supports my feelings about this, and that book is called ”Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-defense” and it is written by By Charl Van Wyk. I very highly recommend that you buy this book and read it. Because frankly, I believe that we are headed towards dangerous times here in America. For us to remain passive about personal defense in the House of the Lord would be foolish.
Get this book and arm yourselves, today.
Check out my Guns section of my bookstore too.