A Tale Of Compromise
JR Dieckmann

A woman has been  driving  her older car for 20 years and is having some problems with it. The engine is clattering  with smoke coming out of the tail pipe. She takes it to "Bipartisan Brothers Auto Repair" to have it fixed. The brothers tell her to leave it with them and they will call her when it's ready. After she leaves the two brothers, a Democrat and a Republican, examine the engine and find that it needs a complete overhaul.

The Republican brother sits down at his computer and draws up a parts list and job service order. He presents it to the Democrat brother and says this is what we have to do. The Democrat brother says "I have a better idea, let's just put a couple cans of STP in it and tell the customer that we fixed it. This doesn't go over well with the Republican brother at all for he well knows that the problem will still be there.

He tells his brother "we can't do that, it won't fix the problem." The Democrat brothers says "I know that, and you know that, but it will quiet it down for a little while and that woman will never know the difference and will pay us the full price for an overhaul."

They debate the issue for some time and finally the Democrat brother says "We need to compromise on this." The Republican brother asks "What do you suggest?" The Democrat brother says "How about this: we just rebuild half of the engine. We'll just replace the bearings, piston rings, grind and reset the valves on one side only." The Republican brother says "The car is still going to break down and cost the woman even more money." The Democrat brother says "That doesn't matter, we're not paying for it, she is."

The two brothers get into a heated argument over this and the Democrat brother insists on having his way or he will refuse to do the work. The Republican brother is finally forced to go along with the compromise. They finish the job and call the customer to let her know her car is ready.

The next day she shows up for her car, pays the bill, and drives off. An hour later she returns to the shop and tells the brothers that her car is a little better but the engine still clatters and smoke is still coming from the tail pipe. She tell them that they didn't fix the car.

The two brothers tell her "We know that, but at least we got something done."

And that is precisely what is happening in Congress today!


You may have noticed that I have not done any writing or updating of the Great American Journal over the past couple of months. Don’t forget that the news and commentary column is automatically updated now several times a day by rss feeds and doesn’t require my personal attention.

In the middle of February, my employer decided it was time to close the business I have been employed by for nearly 12 years, leaving me and the other employees unemployed. The California economy along with current federal economic policies have made it impossible for the business to continue. At 67 years and receiving Social Security, I am still not ready yet to retire or go on unemployment insurance.

Over the past two months I have been busy starting up my own electrical troubleshooting and repair business. My former employer was kind enough to give me a partial list of my frequent customers’ contact information and a healthy supply of parts and materials from my service truck to get started with. This is why I have not devoted any attention to the Great American Journal over the past two and a half months.

Business has been good so far from the standpoint of being semi-retired and only wanting to work part time. I’m enjoying what I’m doing and making more money than I was able to make at the job where work had declined also to part time work. Nearly 100 of my customers have been notified of the business change and calls are coming in on a regular bases for service. But not so many that I don’t have plenty of time off from the work now.

I don’t know if I’m ready to get back into writing articles and regular commentary on current events yet, but with the release of Obama new birth certificate, I wanted to give you my observations based on 2 days and half of one night of research and analysis on this document.

Obamacare Is Doomed
Last Monday, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled that ObamaCare violates the Constitution. Judge Vinson's ruling centered on the individual mandate that requires everyone in the country to purchase health insurance. A provision in the law stipulates that Congress may repeal no portion of this law. Therefore, if any part of the law is found to be unconstitutional, then the entire healthcare law must be repealed.
Vinson therefore ruled the entire healthcare law null and void - and stated in his decision that a declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction against Obamacare. When Dingy Harry Reid inserted this clause in the bill, he may have inadvertently been instrumental in killing the entire law.
This comes on the heals of the ruling by Judge Henry Hudson in Virginia, who also found ObamaCare to be unconstitutional, Judge Hudson ruled that Congress has overstepped its constitutional authority under the Interstate Commerce Clause in the Constitution which was never intended to be used in this way. Healthcare insurance does not cross state lines and does not qualify as interstate commerce.
Obamacare is being attacked on three different fronts: In the Congress, in the courts, and in the states. A number of the states are working on nullification of the healthcare law within their states. In other words, they consider the law as being unconstitutional and will make compliance with it illegal in their states. If even a few states ban Obamacare, it will be enough to kill the law. The healthcare law depends on everyone in the country contributing money to support it through mandated health insurance.
Also, the Constitution states that all federal laws must apply to everyone and every state. Obamacare cannot apply to only some states and not to others. The fact that unions and 120 Obama crony companies have been exempted from provisions in the law alone makes it unconstitutional. Federal law must apply to everyone. This law cannot stand if America is to remain a free country under the Constitution.
So far, the Obama administration is ignoring the court rulings and proceeding with implementation of Obamacare illegally, and against court orders. Attorneys should immediately file charges against the administration for Contempt of Court. I understand that they are working on the wording of that now. If found guilty, a punishment of about 2 years in jail for Obama, Holder, and Sebelius would seem just about right, don‘t you think?

Egypt Is Just One Of The Dominos
The rioters in Egypt hate the Mubarak government and do not like the local police, but they respect the military. The riots are inspired by Iran and organized by the Muslim Brotherhood, channeled through radical mosques in Egypt that then encouraged Muslims to take to the streets in protest to the non-Islamic, secular government. The Mubarak government has been an important ally in the recognition of Israel.
The Muslim Brotherhood is making a move on the Middle East. Tunisia has collapsed and rioting has broken out in Jordan and Yemen in protest to secular government leadership. They may be the next to go. The communists and the Muslim Brotherhood are using the global economic decline and loss of employment to attack capitalism and support for the west to usher in socialism and Islamic law. But capitalism didn't cause the economic decline, socialism did.
Egypt is now experiencing the effects of Obama and his global socialist backers who caused the global recession - to bring about the destruction of capitalism. The Islamists and the communists are in this together and are now organizing protest demonstrations around the globe and across America, supposedly in support of the Egyptian protests. These are Obama's people doing what community organizers tell them to do. They are not patriots. They are typically protesting against western culture and government by the people. Why else would they be protesting here? Egypt is just an excuse for them to get out into the streets and be seen by the cameras.
The dominos are falling in the Middle East and some of those dominos are OPEC countries. The U.S. should be engaged in a "moon shot" at developing our own domestic oil supplies, not a "Sputnik moment" in green energy. Any responsible president with half a brain in his head would order cancellation of all drilling bans and a major oil rush to begin immediately on American soil and offshore. We need energy independence from OPEC and that can only come with enough domestic American and Canadian oil to sustain the country. A president who doesn't see this, or refuses to promote it, is either a fool or a traitor to this country, or both.
We don't need Middle Eastern oil; we have plenty of our own. OPEC supplies only about 10% of our oil but it does affect global oil prices. Unfortunately, an adequate domestic oil supply is not on Obama's agenda. His SOTU speech contained yet another anti-American attack on the petroleum industry. Can America survive even another 2 years of this communist bonehead in the White House?
The Egyptian people say they want hope and change. Let's send them Obama with his teleprompter. They will love him and want to make him their president. We would be glad to make this contribution to Egypt where I'm sure Obama would feel right at home and would be welcomed by the Egyptian Muslims as one of them.
Obama has shown us that his only talent is campaigning. That was over two years ago in America but he is still doing it. Send him to Egypt where he can campaign for Mubarak's job, we have no use for him anymore.

State Of The Union Address

On Tuesday, Obama will deliver the State of the Union Address to Congress as mandated by the Constitution. No doubt he will start off by saying the state of the union is sound, or strong, or good - something along those lines. A more accurate description would include the word "critical." The speech, as written by Obama's speech writers, will sound optimistic, even half way conservative. The left will love it, and even some Republicans will be fooled by it.
The fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter what Obama says in the speech, it's just a bunch of words made to sound good. The thing to remember is that Obama's words and his policies are always two entirely different things and seldom have anything in common. Critical issues will be glossed over or not even mentioned at all. He well likely focus on all the great accomplishments he has achieved with a Democrat controlled Congress and that we all despise. He will tell us that the past two years have been difficult but magically, it's going to get better this year (in spite of his policies).
He will tell us how we need more government "investment" in infrastructure, green energy, and liberal causes but he won't mention his anti-energy policy against the petroleum industry that is causing gasoline prices to skyrocket. The government does not "invest," the government spends. An investment is a deposit of money that is expected to return a profit. There is never a return of profit from government spending, there is only more debt and more tax money wasted. This is just one example of how words are chosen to make a statement sound like something different than what it actually is. This has been the hallmark of the Obama administration. We, more simple minded citizens, just call it "lies." I wonder if Joe "You lie" Wilson will be in the audience this year?
The rebuttal to the State of the Union speech last year by Gov. Bobby Jindal was a total flop. This year it should be more interesting than anything Obama's teleprompter has to say when the Republican response is delivered by Rep. Paul Ryan.

It's None Of Your Business - You Have No “Tangible Interest”

Hawaii governor says Obama's birth record 'exists' but he can't find it. Rush Limbaugh hears of this and finally addresses the topic with some hard questions on his program. Then Gov. Abercrombie is informed that Hawaii law bars release of Obama birth information. But it's too late, Abercrombie.

A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says. State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual's birth documentation without the person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday. Hawaii's privacy laws have long barred the release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who doesn't have a tangible interest.

The American people have no "tangible interest" in knowing if that man in the White House, whose administration has been effecting the lives of everyone, is legally qualified to be there? According to Hawaii officials, we are not effected by Obama's alleged illegal administration. I wonder how the people who have lost their jobs and homes over the past two years feel about having no "tangible interest" in Obama's actions and legality to serve as president? Every person in this nation has a tangible interest in knowing if Obama is a natural born citizen (or even a citizen of this country at all) and if Article II of our constitution has been violated.

It's time to sue State Attorney General David Louie for misrepresenting the law, and the Hawaii Dept. of Health for that birth record, if it does exist at all. Otherwise, order them to tell the truth that it doesn't exist. This stonewalling has gone on long enough. 

Iran Nuclear Talks - Fail

Is anyone surprised to learn that diplomatic talks over Iran's nuclear program have failed once again? Are Washington diplomats and bureaucrats too naive to understand that Iran has absolutely no intentions of halting their nuclear ambitions under any circumstances? Or is it that the Obama administration has neither the courage nor the intentions of preventing Iran from building a nuclear weapon?

Diplomacy with rogue regimes is becoming synonymous with failure. Middle east peace talks have been going on for decades over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are still right back where they started. When you have two opposing groups with two opposing objectives there can be no compromise. The only solution is the defeat of one group and a victory for the other. It's the same problem we have in Congress today. The only products that result are neutered compromises that few people want and which restrict freedom and fail to resolve any real problems.

Iranians will continue down the nuclear path they have chosen until someone stands up and stops them. They will not be deterred by empty talk by diplomats. They may agree to certain terms and conditions but will not abide by them unless those terms and conditions will not hamper their progress toward their nuclear goal. They will lie and cheat on agreements. They will use deception to fool or sidestep international inspections just as Saddam Hussein did in Iraq. They will use bribes and coercion when necessary to gain the cooperation of inspectors. They will do whatever is necessary to assure the survival of their nuclear program.

The only chance of stopping Iran from building the bomb is through harsh and strong action by western allies to assure that Iran is made incapable of attaining their nuclear goal. They will not be deterred with talk. Does the Obama administration have either the will or the intestinal fortitude for such action? What do you think?

Let's just hope that Iran is unable to complete its program before 2013, when we have a real leader in the White House instead of an incompetent nincompoop from Chicago's south side with little or no understanding of how the real world actually works. Reagan said "trust but verify." We cannot trust the Iranians and they will not allow us to verify unless we give them an ultimatum with a short deadline that they cannot refuse.

Cracking Down On Organized Crime - Sort Of

January 20, 2010, the Obama administration and Eric Holder's Justice Dept. announced the massive arrests of organized crime families throughout the east coast thus eliminating competition, and creating a vacuum to be filled by the Chicago crime mobs who were not included in the arrests.

Today, more than 800 federal, state and local law enforcement officials have arrested over 110 individuals, including dozens of La Cosa Nostra members and associates.   In total, 127 people have been charged in 16 indictments unsealed today in four districts in New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.


This is one of the largest single-day operations against the mafia in the FBI’s history, both in terms of the number of defendants arrested and charged, and the scope of the criminal activity alleged.   Defendants from numerous La Cosa Nostra families have been charged, including defendants from all five New York-based families: the Bonanno, Colombo, Gambino, Genovese and Luchese families.


We have charged mob associates and mob bosses alike, including the former boss of La Cosa Nostra operations in New England; the Street Boss, Acting Underboss, and Consigliere of the Colombo family; and the Gambino family Consigliere and a member of that family’s ruling panel.

As was the case with Obama's Mafia friends in Chicago, it appears that Harry Reid's Mafia friends in Las Vegas were also unaffected. If the Justice Dept. was really interested in curbing organized crime, a good place to start would be at the White House and the Chicago mayor's office.

Some Fun With Recent Quotes

"Last night at the White House, the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Winner hosted a state dinner for the guy holding the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize Winner in prison -- and the media doesn't get the irony of this." -Rush Limbaugh

"Chinese President Hu Jintao visited the White House. Fox News said it was a gathering of the world’s most powerful communist — and the president of China." - Craig Ferguson

"Fathom the odd hypocrisy that the government wants every citizen to prove they are insured, but people don't have to prove they are citizens". - Ben Stein

"If we want to keep our nation's secrets 'SECRET,' store them where President Obama stores his college transcripts and birth certificate." - Mike Huckabee.

“I am Michelle Obama. You are in my home, welcome to my house.” - Michelle Obama welcoming visitors to the White House - our house, not hers.

Obama's Article In The Wall Street Journal?

An article appearing in the January 18th addition of The Wall Street Journal entitled "Toward a 21st-Century Regulatory System" claims to be authored by Barack Obama. This is laughable as Obama has never written and published anything in his life including during his term as editor of the University of Chicago student newspaper and those two books written by Bill Ayres that bore Obama's name as author. The contents of this article aren't even Obama's style - suggesting that thousands of his own administration's regulations are hurting business in America? The article goes against almost everything Obama has been doing since taking office. His name on the article represents a forgery.

The article is pure propaganda, I repeat, PURE PROPAGANDA in every sense of the word and was not written by Barack Obama. In all probability, it was written by 30 year old speech writer Cody Keenan who also wrote the Arizona shooting memorial speech that Obama delivered in Tucson, AR. Keenan is a new junior speech writer on Obama's staff who has a knack for making Obama sound like a moderate or centrist - as we saw first in the memorial speech in Arizona. If Keenan worked just a little harder, he could make Obama look like a conservative, unlike his boss, Senior Speech Writer, Jon Favreau, who was also the speech writer for the John Kerry campaign. It is his speeches that we are used to seeing Obama read from the teleprompter.

2012 elections are coming up in 22 months. I personally never thought Obama would even consider running for reelection but his staff and advisors are now telling him that he could not possibly win reelection with his past political posture - he must move to the center. Obama himself has no clue how to do that, so enter Cody Keenan to save the day. Keenan must be getting paid a lot of money to write this stuff.

Don't be fooled by this deception. Using the talents of Cody Keenan, Obama is attempting to look like he is moving to the center while continuing the same socialist progressive policies that he has been ramming down our throats since he took office. It is nothing more than another lie from this despicable and corrupt administration. Obama even admitted, himself, that the article doesn't mean his administration is going to repeal or limit regulations, just that they will be enforced in a more sensible way. Perhaps in a way that would avoid media attention?

Cellphones Can Kill You

Cellphones are not only becoming ridiculous, they are becoming dangerous. Have you even seen someone using one of those Jupiter Jacks with their cellphone in a car? The Jupiter Jack is a device advertised on TV that connects your cellphone to your car stereo for "hands free driving!" Actually a Blue Tooth earpiece also allows you "hands free driving" but doesn't bullhorn your phone conversation to people a block away.
Then we have a lot of people with iPhones which seem to dominate their entire life. Surveys have shown that many people spend more time with their iPhone than they do with their partner or spouse or even talking to other people. Cellphones are becoming an addiction in our society. I am not saying that we shouldn't use cellphones. What I am saying is that we should try to remember that it is a telephone, not a life partner.
But probably the worst feature of a cellphone is "texting" which has come to the point of being dangerous. We see people texting while driving (even though it is illegal in most states). We see people interrupting their work to read and reply to a text message. And we see people every day walking around texting and not looking where they are going.
One young lady recently walked right into an open manhole while texting before the work crew could get the barriers up. It's only a matter of time before we see texting wanderers mindlessly walking or stumbling into the street right in front of an electric car that they didn't hear coming. Then they turn around and sue someone else for their own negligence, like the woman in this video who blindly stumbled into a fountain pool.

How Government Works

Take the Giffords shooting, for example, that has now caused a delay in the House vote on the repeal of Obamacare.

Someone in the House of Representatives will submit a resolution condemning the shooting. Then they'll have debates on the resolution and some will filibuster until finally sometime next week they will vote for cloture on debates. Then the resolution will be brought to the floor for a vote and will no doubt be passed.

It will then be sent to the Senate to concur at which time it will be debated, filibustered, amended, and sent back to the house for a revote with the amendments.

The house will again debate the revisions, amend, and eventually vote for cloture. Again it will be brought to the floor for a final vote with which it will be passed and sent back to the Senate for approval.

The Senate will debate for a couple of days, vote numerous times on amendments, and eventually a cloture vote will end the debates. The next day it will be brought to the Senate floor for a final vote at which time it will pass with 53 yeas.

It will then go back to the House for agreement on the new Senate amendments which will be approved by a vote of 218 yeas.

The resolution will then be sent to the White House for a presidential signing at which time Obama will call a press conference, make a statement condemning “right wing domestic terrorists,” Arizona's immigration law, promote gun control, praise himself for preventing the shootings of more people, and using 10 different pens, will sign the resolution into law.

The media will praise Obama for his accomplishment and interview everyone who had a hand in getting this critical law passed. After 3 or 4 weeks, Congress can get back to doing the people's work.

And that's the way government works.

Am I Missing Something?
I keep hearing that our national debt is now nearly 60% of our GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Can someone please explain to me how a debt of $14 trillion is only 60% of a $14.6 trillion GDP? Or is it that they consider only the foreign portion of the debt when they claim 60%? No, that can't be because the foreign portion of the debt is just $4.4 trillion, which is only 31.4% of the debt. So the question still remains, how is the national debt of $14 trillion (95.4% of GDP) said to be less than 60% of GDP? That is the $14 trillion question.

Obama's New Year's resolution
“To do everything I can to make sure our economy is growing, creating jobs, and strengthening our middle class. That’s my resolution for the coming year.”
Excuse me, Obama, but you've been saying that for 2 years now. Could you be a little more specific? This sounds like political rhetoric that a 5 year old would come up with. He wants to "strengthen the middle class' and screw the rest? According to Obama's own interpretation of "the middle class" he leaves out most of the small business job creators that provide the jobs for the middle class. How can you strengthen the middle class if they don't have jobs?
Obama has always used the term "middle class" as a code word for unions and government workers. By calling them "middle class," he sees this as appealing to a majority of voters. His policy of "screw the rich" also plays into appealing to the majority of voters through his class warfare tactics. The rich can be thrown overboard without the Democrats losing many votes. By now, I hope the majority of Americans are seeing what Obama and his far left progressives are really all about - the more people on the public dole, the better. Exactly what the Cloward-Piven strategy for socialist takeover prescribes.
I believe the majority of Americans are not looking for a socialist nanny state to take care of them. They want the freedom and liberty that was promised to them as American citizens, by the Constitution. Freedom and liberty is one side of the coin, but on the other side is personal responsibility. You can't have just one side of the coin without the other or you end up with no coin at all.

Repeal the 17th Amendment
With the ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913, the U.S. Senate elections of 1914 was the first time that all seats up for election were popularly elected instead of chosen by their state legislatures. The election occurred in the middle of Democratic President Woodrow Wilson's first term. Democrats gained 3 seats in the Senate.
The Constitution, as originally written, gave congressional representation to the states and to the people. The peoples' representatives were elected to the House, while the states' representatives were elected to the Senate. This gave balanced representation both to the states and to the people.
The 17th Amendment destroyed all that by mandating that Senators be elected by the people instead of the state legislatures. Since then, state governments have had no representation in the federal Congress. State leaders are not always in agreement with 51 or more percent of the states' voting public who do not represent the state interests, but only their own personal interests. As a result, Congress is now made up of two houses of representatives and no Senate - even though we still call it that.
That's not the way it was supposed to work. It puts too much power in the hands of the ignorant and the uninformed voters which can result in a Congress like we've had over the past 4 years. At the same time, matters important to the states are being ignored in Washington. The 17th Amendment should be repealed and the Congress restored to what the Founders intended it to be.

World Net Daily Reports:

A retired military officer who pursued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a legal challenge to Barack Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office says the conviction and sentencing of an active duty officer who raised similar questions signals the end of the "rule of law" in the United States.

Cmdr. Charles Kerchner's legal case, handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo, alleged that Congress failed its constitutional duty to examine the legitimacy of a successful candidate during the Electoral College vetting process on Capitol Hill. The Supremes ultimately decided not to hear arguments, leaving standing a lower court's dismissal.

What if Obama, or someone like him, was promoted by foreign powers and installed into our government for the sole purpose of wrecking our country? Would Congress and the courts just ignore the evidence because the people had voted for this fraud? Would they allow the nation to be brought down, rather than ruffle some feathers to assure that our government was legitimate? How do we really know that Obama’s presidency is legitimate when he refuses to produce any of his vital records to show that he is constitutionally qualified for the job?
If no government official or agency will carry out their responsibility to verify all candidates eligibility, then how can the citizens of this country trust their government to function in the best interests of the United States? If just anyone can be elected to serve in the Oval Office based on personal popularity, media promotion, and nothing more, it leaves our country wide open to infiltration by enemy states.
This is unacceptable. I cannot, in all good conscience, put the word “president” in front of Obama’s name until proof of his qualifications is made public, nor can I grant him the respect due a president without that proof. Until then, I must accept the preponderance of evidence that shows him not to be what he claims he is. Ronald Reagan said “trust but verify.” Now we are being told to trust but don’t verify. Sorry, I can’t be that credulous when I see Marxists and Communists in the White House.


By removing the costs of food and energy from the Consumer Price Index, The Obama administration is claiming that there has been no inflation over the past two years. In this way, the government avoids granting living wage increases to government workers and COLA increases to those on Social Security. Food and energy prices have increased at a higher rate than anything else rated in the Consumer Price Index, yet they are being ignored.

Government workers are already overpaid and not hurt by this fraud, but what of those depending on Social Security for their survival? Obama's war on seniors continues as the majority of them usually vote Republican while the left depends more on the naive young and minority vote. The largest items in a senior's budget are food and energy - so while their cost of living increases, the Obama administration refuses to acknowledge it with COLA increases.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics "seasonally adjusted" Consumer Price Index shows consumer costs going up and down, but have you ever seen your food and electric bills go down? Not on your life. I have personally noticed my grocery bill increasing steadily for years, and after a brief dip in gasoline prices, they too are back up here in California. Utility bills never decrease but regularly increase. This is just another way the administration is cooking the books to deny seniors the COLA increases they all need to keep up with inflation being caused by the Obama printing presses at the Fed.

How can there not be inflation with the Obama administration printing and borrowing trillions of dollars?

We Are Not At War With Islam?

Muslim TSA inspectorIn a recently televised statement, Obama proclaimed, “... as Americans we are not and never will be at war with Islam. It was not a religion that attacked us that September day — it was al Qaeda, a sorry band of men which perverts religion.” Obama blamed 9/11 on “some small band of murderers who slaughter the innocent and cower in caves...”

"We are not, and never will be, at war with Islam," no matter how much Islam is at war with us? Isn't that the same mistake we made before 911? Islam is not a religion. It is a culture that includes religion in its authoritarian mandates. Highest among those mandates is the destruction of western culture and the killing of those who resist the rule of Islam. Only when our elected government appeasers realize this will we be prepared to defend ourselves and accept the fact that Islam is a major threat to the very existence of our country and culture.

Infiltrating the TSA and other national security agencies with radical Muslims would make the already worthless but intrusive airport security measures even more ineffective. Does anyone think that al Qaeda doesn't know this? Political correctness will destroy us if it is not stopped. But then continuing with these policies is exactly what our enemies are counting on.

An Act of Desperation

Obama exits the White House press room leaving Bill Clinton to answer questions from the press. Not only was Obama incapable of actually answering questions from the press, it must have been embarrassing being upstaged by Clinton while he stood there like a mindless statue. It was just another example of just how really small this man is.

"I have to go because I've kept the first lady waiting to go to a party." What a lame excuse! Really shows you where his priorities lie - a party is more important than the nation‘s business. Also demonstrates his complete incompetence at handling the job he campaigned for. To explain his tax rate extension compromise with Republicans, he had to relinquish the presidency to Bill Clinton to spin the story to the press.

Don't be fooled by Obama's apparent move to the right in compromising with Republicans, he had no other choice. He is still a liberal progressive with core values in constant opposition to traditional American values. He is an incompetent ideologue trying to act the part of a president. Thirty four czars needed? That just proves that Obama is 34 brains short of being a leader who can command the executive branch and make responsible decisions on his own.

I hope the liberals are happy with their false Messiah who clearly cannot measure up even to Bill Clinton's knees. What an absolute jerk!!! I'll bet Obama's Blackberry is buzzing with angry messages from George Soros for not sticking to the progressive agenda to raise taxes on the small business job creators.

Wikileaks Is A Criminal Organization

Questions need to answered regarding from where Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange is getting classified government documents. It is being reported, although not confirmed by Assange, that documents on Afghanistan were obtained by army intelligence Pvt. Bradley Manning. It is also possible that State Dept. documents were obtained through the same source. But why would Pvt. Manning have access to State Dept. documents?

It also possible that rather than the documents having been turned over by Manning, merely passwords and logins were given to Assange so that his Wikileaks organization could access the documents themselves. Today, Wikileaks is reported to be dumpling documents on Bank of America and possibly other banks. Clearly, these documents did not come from Bradley Manning.

What you may not know is that Julian Assange had a very dysfunctional childhood in Australia and began his work as a teen computer hacker in association with other hackers. He has reportedly attended classes at six universities in 3 years in computer science, physics, and mathematics but never graduated from any.

He later worked as a software engineer and has written security code and software that is still in use today. He and his Wikileaks organization are not journalist. They are a team of expert computer hackers with vast knowledge in security code. In 1991, Assange was arrested and convicted for his criminal hacking activities in Australia. They didn't need Bradley Manning to access classified government documents but Manning may have been helpful in providing some passwords. Wikileaks is an online criminal organization of computer hackers.

The Wikileaks website has been crashed several time since the document dumps began (probably with CIA involvement), but has been able to recover each time. The American domain provider for the site, Everydns.net, withdrew the domain name due to the constant hacking of their server. Assange simply moved the site to Amazon.com. Then Amazon shut it down so Assange registered with GoDaddy.com, which also shut him down. PayPal has also closed Wikileaks' donations account. The site is now registered with a Swiss domain provider as Wikileaks.ch. The .com and .org are gone.

Assange hates America almost as much as Barack Obama and George Soros do; whom by the way, has provided Assange with an attorney from the Soros owned Open Society Institute. It is Soros' goal to bring down the U.S. Government and replace it with a socialist global government. Assange is certainly being helpful in that endeavor.

Assange has to be arrested and charged with high crimes against the United States. As a citizen of Australia, he cannot be charged with treason, but he can be charged with espionage and a host of U.S. Code security violations. Perhaps his connections to Soros should be investigated as well. It is sometimes amazing the picture that develops when you connect the dots.

UPDATE: Julian Assange has now upped the ante with blackmail. He is now threatening the release of additional "doomsday" sensitive government documents if his website is shut down or he is arrested. He claims the documents known as the "insurance" files have already been downloaded by thousands of supporters who need only a password to open and release them. Unless he is bluffing, he will probably release those files in time anyway. This man is clearly a cyber terrorist guilty of war crimes against the United States and no less dangerous than Osama bin Laden.

To prevent the release of this alleged "insurance" dump, perhaps the only way to deal with Assange is to have him shot dead on site. Short of that, how about releasing a virus to target and destroy the files no matter where they are found? If we can do it to Iran's nuclear program we can do it to Wikileaks.

Senate Blocks Obama Tax Proposal

In a Saturday special session, Senate Republicans along with four Democrats blocked Obama’s proposal, passed by the House, to extend Bush tax cuts for only those earning under $200, 000. The four Democrats showing some degree of economic sense were Senators Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and Jim Webb of Virginia — as well as by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut.

The final vote came in at 36 to 53, not enough to override a filibuster by Republicans. It’s about time that Senate Republicans found themselves a spine and stood up to Obama and his liberal progressives in Congress.

Republicans are holding out for a tax cut extension for everyone, not just one class of voter. They are wise enough to understand that extending tax cuts for only the middle class won’t do anything to help the economic recovery that needs new job creation. Raising taxes on small business job creators who provide 70% of the jobs in America is not the way to put people back to work.

If enough Democrats cannot be persuaded to go along with tax cut extensions for everyone during this lame duck session, then the new Congress in January will do it and make it retroactive if it isn’t done right away. Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, has insisted that nothing will pass this current Senate until the tax cut extension is approved and the Congress has a budget passed.

Obama is still standing firm on raising taxes on small business employers. He has been counting on that revenue to continue funding his out-of-control spending, but still refuses to bring spending in line with revenue. It’s the Cloward-Piven strategy for a Marxist takeover operating in full view for everyone to see.

If Obama doesn’t agree to extend the tax cuts for everyone, it will lead to a double-dip recession with even higher unemployment, and he will be blamed for it. His campaign promise not to raise taxes will also be broken… again. If businesses have to pay higher taxes, those increases will be reflected in the price of the goods and services they provide. In the end, it will be the middle class consumers who pay for the Obama tax hikes whether their personal income taxes increase or not.

Man of the Year!

Rey Decerega has accomplished something that many Americans wish they could do. During a basketball game at the White House, Decerega took full advantage of the opportunity to smack Obama in the mouth and get away with it right under the noses of the Secret Service. The assault required 12 stitches to close the gaping wound. I submit that Rey Decerega should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor and declared Man of the Year for accomplishing something that no one else has been able to accomplish, but many wish they could. More details available at the Wall Street Journal.

Don't Do It, Sarah
Ordinarily, off site articles are found in the lower right column on this page, but this one is too important to not bring to your attention. Over the past few days I have been considering writing just such an article, but now I find that Scott Rupert at the American Thinker has done it for me. I know that Sarah Palin has many loyal supporters among conservatives - most seem to be women - but I have had reservations for quite some time about a Palin run for president. Scott Rupert seems to agree.
I see Sarah Palin as the conservative counterpart to Barack Obama. Both came splashing onto the scene from virtually nowhere. Both gave a good speech and wooed the crowds. Both said everything their constituent groups wanted to here. But then what? Palin continues to repeat her conservative talking points over and over but shows no real substance. She seems to me to be very shallow and her homey quirkiness make her often look like - forgive me for saying so - a bimbo. I have watched her in interviews and appearances and have become so bored with her that I refuse to watch or listen to her anymore. What effect will she have on the masses after two years of campaigning? She is already over exposed and by then people are going to be turned off to her, just as they are sick of seeing and hearing Obama.
Palin is a good public speaker and has her head in the right place, but she lacks substance and originality. She does not have a commanding presence and does not impress me as a leader. You have to put that in the context of the world stage where our next president will have to be strong and perform not just diplomatically, but also strongly and firmly among world leaders. Does Sarah have the strength and experience to do that? I don't think so.
But my biggest fear when considering a Palin run for president is a splitting of the conservative vote in the Republican primaries. You need only look back to the 2008 primaries where the conservative vote was split so bad among several candidates that John McCain, the most liberal of the bunch, won the nomination. A Palin campaign in 2012 would have the same effect and spoil the chances of us electing a real conservative. The fewer true conservative candidates in the 2012 primary, the better our chances of a conservative nominee in the general election.
On top of that, consider also that Sarah Palin has established herself as the most polarizing political figure in the country other than Barack Obama. What would be her chances of attracting the votes of moderates in the general election were she to win the nomination? Probably next to none, and we could be stuck with another four years of an Obama or Clinton presidency. It is vital that we select a conservative candidate who shows a commanding presence (Col. Alan West as an example) and can appeal to a majority of voters.

I Want Your Money!

Obama is still refusing to allow the Bush tax cuts to be renewed for all Americans, including the small business job creators. He refuses to acknowledge the negative effect that raising taxes on business owners will have on jobs. He has been counting on revenue from expiration of the Bush tax cuts to help pay for the wealth redistribution spending programs passed by Congress over the last two years.

 Obama had previously promised to raise taxes for the top two brackets, complaining that "we (the government) can't afford it" - while ignoring the fact that his own spending is what we can't afford. At the same time, Bill Clinton states, "If you want small government you should support the Democrats because we know how to do it" (Laughter here). Clinton must be referring to the spending limits placed on him by the Republican Congress of the late 1990s, but I really don't think the Democrats learned a thing from that.

For decades, the federal government has been assuming powers that were never granted it by the Constitution. Each of those powers were stolen from the states and from the people in violation of the Constitution. Now that Republicans have won back some congressional power, a worried Obama has been repeatedly calling for bipartisanship in Congress. No way! Where were his calls for bipartisanship while liberal progressives were running roughshod over the nation for the past two years? With the nation already having been pulled to the far left by 4 years of a liberal Democrat Congress and 2 years of Obama, it is now time to pull it back where it belongs. Getting nothing done in Congress would be far better than allowing any more progressive socialist legislation to be passed.

Now Obama is asking for a "bipartisan" meeting with Republicans at the White House. I recall their previous meeting in February where Republican leaders presented their views to Obama and were then lectured for four out of the six hours on Obama's views. It's high time for Republicans to realize that bipartisanship is not going to solve a thing. This is no time for Conservatives to back down. It's time to stand up and defeat the progressive socialists who are ruining our country and usurping our freedom and liberty. This is war, not a friendly game of checkers.

Airport Security and the Failed TSA

Machines searching for objects is not the answer. Use profiling and people to stop terrorists from boarding planes. Former military and police personnel are trained to spot deception. Hire them to screen airline passengers. Human intelligence and intuition, along with terrorist profiling would be much less expensive and more effective, and it wouldn't be causing a public revolt against the airlines.

In addition, Computer Voice Stress Analyzers (CVSA) would identify terrorists with the answering of only a few simple questions that would take less time than the current security measures, and would impose no intrusions or inconvenience on passengers. Rather than the $170,000 price tag for the full body scanners, the CVSA costs under $12,000. Paul Hollrah has written extensively about this here and here.

Some have suggested the use of threat-sniffing dogs. That seems like a really good idea, however, dog experts say that dogs are only good for about an hour and can only identify odors they have been trained to alert on. It would require 24 dogs be available at every airport terminal security point every day. That would require kennels with hundreds of trained dogs housed at every major airport in the country. It simply wouldn't be practical.

Technology such as full body scanners and random body searches are not the answer. We need to be looking for people, not objects. There are three primary manufacturers of body scanners purchased by the TSA (Transportation Security Agency): one made by L-3 Communications, one from American Science and Engineering and one from Rapiscan.

The scanner manufacturers are all located in leftist congressional districts in Massachusetts and California. George Soros owned 11,300 shares of OSI Systems Inc., the company that owns Rapiscan. Rapiscan got a $165 million contract for the new body image scanners. After the explosion in Rapiscan stock value, Soros sold his last week when public outrage at the machines and private parts pat downs hit the fan, netting him millions in profit. He knows to get out while the getting's good.

Why do you think our tax money was mandated to pay for these machines that obviously will not continue to be used? You need only to look at the Obama special interests and his puppet master, George Soros. We have a pay-to-play administration and Soros has paid dearly for the privilege and influence he has over this White House.

We need to be proactive, not reactive. I almost have to laugh at how airline security is being handled these days. First it was 9-11 where box cutters were used to take over planes. We react by banning box cutters. Next it was Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. We react by inspecting shoes. Then we had the liquid explosives plot that was foiled in Britain. We react by banning liquids. Then comes the underwear bomber. We react with nude body scans, groin groping and crotch clutching. What's next when a terrorist swallows a condom full of explosives? Is the TSA going to require everyone to vomit at the security check from then on?

Hasn't anyone ever noticed that al Qaeda never uses the same technique twice? Why do we continue to search for methods that were used in the past? What we need is some forward thinking in Washington and a lot less political correctness. So what if Muslims are offended? It was Muslims and Islam that caused all of this trouble in the first place and continue to do so. Until the Muslim community takes it upon themselves to stop and control their terrorists then they can just deal with it.

Bring an end to political correctness which prohibits us from identifying terrorists, and instead subjects loyal American citizens to humiliation and harassment at airport security checks. Christian and Jewish Americans are not a threat. Muslims are the threat. Muslims have attacked, and are trying to further attack America. Don't punish Christians and Jews for what the Muslims are doing. Send the Muslim passengers through the body scanners and pat downs. You're not going to find weapons and explosives on the Christians and Jews while Muslims walk though unmolested.

Al Qaeda is winning the war on our freedom, thanks to Obama and the TSA. The real irony here is that the TSA is considering demands from CAIR to exempt Muslim women wearing hajabs from the scanners and body searches. Muslim men are concerned that if their wives are touched by TSA inspectors, they will have to kill them when they reach their destination. So the idea is that Muslim women hiding under a black sheet get a pass through security while Christian women and children are groped and violated. Who is TSA working for, us or the terrorists?

And now there is talk in Washington of unionizing the TSA. Have you ever wondered who bargans on behalf of the taxpayers when a government union goes into collective barganning? In the private sector you have the business owner or directors working on our behalf and their own. Who fights for the taxpayers' interests against excessive government union demands? Obviously no one.

Eliminate the TSA and privatize airport security. Airlines and airport managers would be much more motivated to prevent incidents on their planes than anyone working for the federal government. Install CVSAs and train security personnel to use them. Check backgrounds of suspicious passengers before they board, especially those with Islamic names. It's high time to start profiling people instead of objects.

What was it?
Suspected missile launch observed off the coast of Los Angeles by KCBS helicopter crew.
Our government wants us to think it was a contrail from an airplane. It was not a jet aircraft, not even close. For one thing, anyone who has ever seen a contrail being made by a jet at high altitude knows that a jet leaves two distinct white trails behind it. This is caused by ice crystals trailing off of the wing tips. The object to the right clearly has a single cylindrical smoke trail behind it. The coloration could be caused by the near-setting sun, or it could be from the chemical exhaust. Hard to tell.
For another thing, the KCBS helicopter crew knows a contrail when they see one, they've seen plenty of them. They would not have bothered to videotape this had it simply been a jet contrail. The KCBS report and video can be viewed here.
There is disagreement among scientists about the jet contrail story but it's interesting to note that those scientists on the government payroll tend to support the government story, while those in the private sector tend to reject it. It was the same with the global warming scam.
A gathering consensus of opinion now believes that the trail was the result of an intercontinental ballistic missile fired by a Chinese nuclear submarine in international waters 35 miles off the coast of Los Angeles. Don't expect this White House to react to this, they wouldn't know how. Just cover it up and pretend it never happened while China is buying up our country and undermining our economy.
The Chinese chose this opportunity for a show of military force as Obama is out of the country, selling America out in Southern Asia under the guise of making trade deals that will never benefit Americans or create American jobs. Just another world vacation for Obama to pretend to be a president and a diplomat with teleprompters.
The Chinese decided to demonstrate its military capabilities on the eve of the G-20 Summit in Seoul and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Tokyo, where President Obama is scheduled to attend during his ten-day trip. What better way to tell the Chicken-in-Chief to not get too arrogant with the Chinese.
The official report of a jet contrail also indicates that our Defense Department never detected this sub off the California coastline. I suspect that too is a lie. I suspect that they knew it was there but were reluctant to do anything about it. When the missile was fired, word got out and they had to play dumb rather than admit that they knew it was there and did nothing to defend the nation from a foreign threat.
On the other hand, we have reports of the Chinese developing stealth undersea technology that has surfaced previously. What is the Obama administration doing to protect our country from foreign threats when they won't even admit that we are at war in the middle east? It's just an "overseas contingency operation."

UPDATE: Then again, maybe it was a plane. Check this out.
Related Articles: 
Wayne Madsen: China Fired Missile Seen In Southern California (Conspiracy theory website acknowledged)

Obama's Screaming Meemies May Be A Recording

Obama is talking to his sheeple - back on the campaign trail. The only thing he knows how to do is campaign. He was doing it here in the west this week but it is always the same old story and lies. They always fill the audience with his union supporters and other special interests that will scream and cheer on cue at his every word. I am almost convinced that the screaming and cheering is a recording that they put on the videos.

It is just so silly to hear this screaming and cheering after every statement, when he has said absolutely nothing. He tells them that "undocumented workers" will get free healthcare and they all scream and cheer, why? Are they really so happy that Illegals will be given healthcare at our expense? Then he complains that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is illegally using foreign money for campaign purposes - and they all cheer. He tells them that the evil rich are going to be highly regulated and taxed - and they all cheer. Don't they understand that he is talking about their employers and killing jobs for the cheering sheeple, or are they really cheering at all?

Those are just three examples of many. Often it's just something completely meaningless that he says and gets the same response. It doesn't make sense. Why would people get so excited over policies that are killing their jobs and hurting the country? Why would they wildly cheer when he has said nothing that makes any sense in the real world?

Who are these people, whom we never see, yet scream and cheer at Obama's every word even after his failures of the past two years? When we see him making these speeches, is there really anyone there listening at all, or is it just a group of selected Marxist and communists who hate America and love to hear Obama run our country down?

I have been noticing lately that every time the cheering and screaming breaks out, it always sounds the same. It always sounds like the same voices and you never hear any clapping applause. I am becoming convinced that what we are hearing is a recording, probably recorded during the 2008 campaign. Obama has always used media tricks and Hollywood effects in his campaigns. I suspect this is just one more example of his repeated defrauding of the American people.

We have had bad presidents before, but never in our history have we had a president who hates America so much that he wants to change it into something more to his Marxist liking. During his campaign, he said he was going to change the way Washington works and clean up the corruption. After his election, he set about changing the way America works and adding to the Washington corruption. He said he would be a "post racial president" and unite the country. He has consistently turned blacks against whites and whites against blacks since his first day in office.

He threw out the free market proponents and brought in the socialists, communists, and union proponents. Then he began rewarding his own special interest groups with money borrowed from China and holding the taxpayers responsible for repayment. He shut down private businesses that were owned and operated by people who contributed to Republican candidates, and gave their customers to businesses that contributed to Democrat campaigns.

He behaves more like a propaganda hack for the Democrat party than a president of the American people. He consistently uses the same smear tactics taught by Saul Alinsky against the American citizens who support the free market system, and then proclaims that the people are just too stupid to understand the benefits and success of what he is doing. Have you ever heard this kind of partisan bashing from a president before? Obama has divided this country as no man in history ever has. In the coming election, votes are going to be based either on American exceptionalism, the Constitution, and the free market economy - or they will be a vote for socialism and communism. The choices are clear, there is no middle ground.

The real danger to our republic now is not that the persistent campaigning by Obama is going to change anyone‘s mind into voting for Democrats. With his selected audiences of worshipers, he is just preaching to the choir of confirmed Democrat voters. The real danger in this election is voter fraud and that is the only way Democrats will be able to hold onto their power in Congress.

This is going to be a very real factor throughout the country in November. Republicans have allowed this corruption to go on for far too many years - it must be stopped now. Our republic is at stake. We must not allow progressive communists to steal our election process again as they attempt to do in every election. The Republican leadership must be vigilant and keep a watchful eye on every precinct in the country this year and not let this happen again.

Nothing ever changes with the Marxist-Progressive mentality. Obama was a phony when he campaigned and he is still a phony today. It will be the same with Hillary Clinton when she tries to replace Obama in 2012 - they both belong to the same progressive club with the same objective. She would be the second term of the Obama presidency. God forbid!


Obama has recently discovered that there is no such thing as a "shovel ready project." Why didn't we notice that before? There are only three kinds of shovel ready projects. One is the potholes in our streets that need filling. One is in a cemetery after a funeral. The other is the Democrat party.

An un-funded project - that requires federal funding - is nothing more than a proposal for a project. Until there is funding for it, there is no architectural planning, no engineering, no supply chain, no materials. The people who provide these services don't work for free and hope to get paid if the project is approved. These things usually take years to complete before construction can begin.

A project isn't shovel ready until all the preliminary work has been done and paid for. Obama says governors had told him they had "shovel ready projects" that need funding from the stimulus program. What they probably told him was that they had proposals for projects and infrastructure repairs that needed attention.

Apparently, Obama knows so little about how business works that he thought that all he needed to do was start passing out the taxpayer's money to union contractors and employment would skyrocket, roads and bridges would be immediately under construction, and the recession would magically end. Oh, but we shouldn't blame him for his ignorance. After all, he has no private sector business experience. Would you expect success from someone who had no experience and knew nothing about the company he was trying to run? What is this man doing in the White House?

So with some politicians proposing another stimulus package, we have to ask: where has the previous $787 billion gone? No one knows. We know where some of it went - to bank bailouts; to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailouts; to Wall Street bailouts; to the takeover of GM and Chrysler; to union bailouts; to government bureaucracy and union expansions; to green energy development; to promotional road signs and other government propaganda. Are these what Obama calls "shovel ready projects?" Wasn’t the $750 billion TARP supposed to cover the bailouts?

That man in the White House is nothing but a common thief, stealing from the people to finance his own coup against the American business community.


Drudge is reporting that first lady Michelle Obama appears to have violated Illinois law -- when she engaged in political discussion at a polling place!

After finishing at the voting machine, and returning her voting key she stopped to talk with voters and have pictures taken.

Electrician Dennis Campbell who snapped pictures said "She was telling me how important it was to vote to keep her husband's agenda going." This happened inside the poling place just feet away from the voting booths.

Illinois state law -- Sec. 17-29 (a) -- states: "No judge of election, poll watcher, or other person shall, at any primary or election, do any electioneering or soliciting of votes or engage in any political discussion within any polling place [or] within 100 feet of any polling place."

A top Illinois State Board of Elections official told the Drudge Report that Mrs. Obama -- a Harvard-educated lawyer -- may have simply been ignorant of the law and thus violated it unintentionally. Seriously? If that's the case then Michelle must be the only person in America that doesn't know that electioneering within a poling place is illegal. How did she miss that at Haavard?

"You kind of have to drop the standard for the first lady, right?" the official explained late Thursday. "I mean, she's pretty well liked and probably doesn't know what she's doing." You mean just like her husband? No, wrong. You don't "drop the standard" and suspend the law for Washington elites! The law must apply to everyone or it applies to no one.

When questioned about the brazen nature of Mrs. Obama's campaigning, press secretary Robert Gibbs defended the action by saying, "I don't think it would be much to imagine, the First Lady might support her husband's agenda." That wasn't the question (as usual with Baghdad Bob Gibbs). Of course she supports her husband's agenda. The issue is that she was illegally campaigning verbally in the middle of a poling place.

Washington elites should never be considered above the law and must be held accountable for their actions just like the rest of us. We are sick and tired of these double standards for politicians and Democrats. So will Illinois prosecutors do their duty, or will it just be swept under the rug? What do you think?


This is just one small sample of the crap Barack Obama's "Organizing For America" is sending out to their subscribers.

"This is a threat to our democracy...And if we just stand by and allow the special interests to silence anybody who's got the guts to stand up to them, our country's going to be a very different place."

That's what the President just said about the Chamber of Commerce, a right-wing group spending $75 million to beat Democrats this fall, and reportedly taking money from foreign corporations -- some even owned by foreign governments.

Can you imagine a president of the Untied States calling the U.S. Chamber of Commerce a “threat to our Democracy?” Let’s get one thing straight, America is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. Our form of government is a republican form of government. But you will never hear Obama refer to it as that. He and his socialist party don’t even want people to know that.

Secondly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is not a “right-wing group.” It is, perhaps, the most prominent non-partisan organization representing the business interests in the country. -- the business interests, both Republican and Democrat, that create the nation’s wealth and fuel the engine of the economy. The CoC will support candidates of either party whom they consider supportive of American business interests.

Thirdly, there is absolutely no evidence that the CoC is taking any money from foreign governments, and any money donated by foreign companies doing business in the U.S. is kept separate from any monies used for political campaigns.

The email continues with:

These groups are trying to buy our elections, backing candidates who want to tear down everything that makes the middle class strong in this country: things like Medicare, Social Security, even the minimum wage.

Now the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has morphed into “these groups,” as though there is more than one. Oh, they must be affiliated with the tea parties, right? And they want to “tear down” everything that makes the middle class strong? Here again, the progressives use the term “middle class” when talking about “unions.” Were it not for the businesses represented by the CoC, there would be no middle class at all.

Then they turn from demonizing the Chamber of Commerce to their other common tactic of trying to scare the reader with saying these people want to take away your Social Security, Medicare, and minimum wage law. The latter would be a good idea since it has no basis in the Constitution and is costing million of jobs for low wage earners. The rest is just plain lies. No republican is proposing to do that.

There is more in the email begging the useful idiots to get out, knock on doors, drag people to the poles to vote Democrat, and donate $3.00. I suppose $3.00 is really all their supporters can afford with George Soros sitting this election out and holding onto his money.

Another Mortgage Crisis Is On The Way

In a bid to stem taxpayer losses for bad loans guaranteed by federal housing agencies Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) proposed that borrowers be required to make a minimum 5% down payment in order to qualify. His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, "passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it."

Instead of assuring that people can afford to buy homes before being granted a home loan, this administration and liberal Congress is now doubling down on risky, sub prime mortgages for people who cannot afford it. The very policy that brought about the current recession is now being extended to even more of the low income class with interest rates now at nearly zero.

This can only result in more bank failures, more investment failures, more mortgages being shuffled off to Fannie and Freddie, another major collapse of the mortgage giant which, while being propped up with bailout money, is still in financial trouble. The end result will be increased national debt and will again leave the taxpayers on the hook for the losses, followed by an even greater recession and/or depression.

The only way this attack on the American people can be stopped is by electing people to government who will be responsible with the taxpayers' money and answerable to the taxpayers, unlike the policy makers in the Obama administration known as czars.

The "Pledge To America"

You have probably heard about the "Pledge To America" authored primarily by Republican "young guns" Kevin McCarthy, Eric Canter, and Paul Ryan. The plan looks like the good conservative plan that we all want and need to fix the country, but in some parts I feel it doesn't go far enough. For example, in one part it proposes to "limit the growth of government" when I would prefer it said to "reduce the size of government."

It does talk about eliminating duplicative and unnecessary government programs in other parts. It also proposes that all legislation brought before congress will be "single issue" bills - not packed with irrelevant and unwanted legislation and pork spending - and that every bill must include constitutional authorization references.

It does call for a hiring freeze on all non-security government jobs. It also calls for congressional approval of any department regulation change that would have greater than a $100 million impact on the economy, as well as repealing all unspent TARP stimulus money. It calls for repeal of major parts of Obamacare - if not the whole thing - that will have economic impact on jobs and small businesses.

All in all, it looks exactly like the reform that we have been wanting to see in Congress. It should be a winner in November - except to those on the far left - and should put an end to the Democrats saying that the Republicans have no plan.

The big problem that the Democrats are going to have with the Republican plan is that it is just the opposite of the Obama and Democrats agenda. They will use that as a campaign issue to tell the American people that the Republicans intend to take away all of their government entitlements - healthcare, social security, food stamps, and the clothes off their backs. It's just a question of how many will believe it and place it as a higher priority than saving the country.

My biggest concern is if Republicans win back the House, will they stick to the plan? Or will they ignore it and continue doing what they always have done - more compromising with the left and putting personal interests ahead of national interests?

Remember Obama promised a Garden of Eden to the left, then when elected, went about an entirely different agenda than the one he promised, or that the left though he was promising. On the other hand, the Republicans kept their promise in the 90s with the Contract with America, so maybe they will keep this one too.

At least it's a good start in the right direction. If House Republicans are serious about this plan, then they better show it by fighting for it in Congress and allow no compromises.

"The history of government management of money has, except for a few short happy periods, been one of incessant fraud and deception." --economist Fredrich August von Hayek (1899-1992)

"It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error." --Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954)

We should have nuked them

America has become weak and disrespected in the world. We would rather lose a war than use overwhelming force to win it. We would rather lose our country than offend the enemy. We would rather beg for sanctions at the America-hating UN and let Iran become a nuclear power, than destroy their nuclear facilities ourselves. The world now sees America as a paper tiger without the will to defend herself or her allies.

Instead of being the respected superpower that we used to be, we are now the laughing stock of the world, being led into the abyss by an incompetent nincompoop in the White House with no real world experience at anything. The third world is laughing at the striking lack of American leadership, while our allies wonder how they are going to survive against Islamic aggression without U.S. support. When will we get a president and Congress that cares more about American interests and security, than what the community of international socialists think of us?

Our nation's Founders fought and pledged their lives in the defense of their newly founded country. General George S. Patton once said, “No one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won by making the other guy die for his country." There can be no peace between the west and Islam - their Qur’an instructs them to conquer the world and tells them that we can never be their friends unless we convert to Islam. The final war of the Qur’an has already begun and more will die. Will it be more of us or more of them?

When we were attacked on September 11, 2001, a proper response would have been a nuclear attack on Kabul and anywhere else that al Qaeda and the Taliban had a stronghold in Afghanistan. That would have been a justified and appropriate response to their killing of 3000 of our citizens, the havoc and destruction they brought down on New York, and the damage done to our economy. It would have wiped out both groups instantly including Osama bin Laden and there would be no more trouble from al Qaeda.

Had we used such immediate and forceful action, today the world would be a much different place and the thousands of our troops that have died in the Middle East would still be alive. The Muslim world would have learned the lesson that the United States holds zero tolerance for Islamic terrorism and is not a country to be taken lightly. The killing would end and America would have regained its respect in the world.

Sure, we would be not particularly liked by some and hated by others, but respected by all. “Don’t tread on me” would have been the message sent to the world. Saddam Hussein might even have taken note that although U.N. sanctions and resolutions really mean nothing, America has the strength and the will to act when necessary. The Iraq war may have been avoided altogether if Saddam thought he might get the same treatment. You cannot defend the free world with pacifist policies. You cannot get the Muslim world to like us when their religion tells them to hate us.

This pacifist attitude began during the Vietnam War when domestic communist Progressives organized the American young into protest groups and infiltrated the media to spread the same kind of propaganda used by Tokyo Rose during WWII. The White House refused to use proven war tactics and sufficient force for victory. Public opinion turned against the unpopular war and eventually surrendered to both the propaganda war and the communists in Vietnam as well. Now 40 years later, this pacifist attitude has only gotten worse.

We didn't need to use nukes in Vietnam, which might have provoked a Russian nuclear retaliation. We would have had the war won within a few years if the Johnson administration had given the generals the support they requested and the freedom to properly deal with the VC and North Vietnam. However, Johnson wasn't looking for victory; he wanted war without end until a peaceful resolution with the USSR could be found. That's like looking for a peaceful resolution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that has been going on for over 60 years.

Nixon came into office on a campaign of "ending" the war and proceeded to withdraw troops who had the war all but won at that point. Walter Cronkite saw it differently and told the American people that the war was lost. Sound familiar? It should. We heard the same thing from the Senate Majority leader in 2007. Instead of fighting to win in Vietnam, our great leaders forced our military to withdraw and leave Vietnam to the communists. The organizers of the protest groups were overjoyed.

Back when America knew how to win wars during WWII, the Manhattan Project became the "moon shot" of the 1940s. We didn't worry about international opinion or civilian casualties. After all, it was war and our focus was on killing the enemy. We built the bombs and we used them to end the war. Because we did, we saved an estimated 100,000 American lives that would have otherwise been lost in Japan.

We showed the world that there would be a high price to pay for attacking the United States and Because of that, Presidents Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy were able to stare down the Soviet Union when they threatened our security. No one dared to attack the U.S. for the next 60 years. Clinton’s lack of affirmative retaliation to al Qaeda attacks on our people and troops overseas throughout the 1990s emboldened Osama bin Laden and the result was 911.

The nation was behind President Bush when he ordered military strikes on Afghanistan. Many were demanding a nuclear strike and turning the country into a “glass parking lot.” I don’t know how Bush felt about this but clearly international opinion and the U.N. would have been firmly against it. That is probably why Bush elected instead to opt for what he called a 20-year ground war, which scattered al Qaeda and the Taliban into Pakistan and elsewhere but failed to destroy them.

Now we have another president in the White House who is intent on "ending" the war instead of winning it. Nine years after 911 and we still haven't brought Osama bin Laden to justice. Nor have we eliminated al Qaeda or the Taliban. When we leave the region, Afghanistan will go right back to being the violent Islamic state it has always been. The only difference is that that the Afghans will hate us even more because of the lives we have taken with our fly swatting operations. They only cooperate with us now for the money we give them. It's the same in Iraq, which still has no government established.

The War on Terror has resulted in estimates of 150,000 to a million deaths with 6,538 of those being coalition forces. The nuclear option wouldn’t have killed any more than that, but all the deaths would have been theirs. We wouldn’t still be fighting this war today had we taken that route and Obama wouldn’t have to choose between losing the war and “ending the war” to appease his liberal party base. Winning the war is out of the question with this “president.”

We will never wipe out these radical cockroaches in a ground war, and now they are so scattered out that it’s too late for the nuclear option. Perhaps we should just pull out both militarily and financially and let these 7th century primates kill each other off. But before we go, we had better gather up and remove the nukes from Pakistan. If they don’t like it, tell them to go talk to their friend, Osama bin laden. When they do, follow them with one of their own nukes and blame the resulting death and devastation on them.