Know Your Czars

These are the people that our thug, communist, dictator-wanna-be, Barack Obama, is surrounding himself with.  They are just about all, each and every one, self avowed communists and socialists.  They are all radical ‘progressives’ who think they are smarter than you, and that they should be able to run your lives for you.  They all, EACH AND EVERY ONE, think the United States Constitution is an impediment to their agenda.  They will do all they can to destroy it.

Listen to the audio “Know Your Czars” below for a Cliff’s Notes summary of the people currently advising Obama, and running our government FROM OUTSIDE THE CONSTITUTION.

Following that is an article on one of Obama’s latest HAND PICKED ADVISERS.  Remember the no-talent-keister-clown who said that conservatives, military veterans, people who disagree with abortion, and people who have Ron Paul or other conservative bumper stickers on their car should be considered ‘domestic terrorists?’  Yep.  He’s Obama’s new adviser on “military activities in the United States.”

First of all, unless you subscribe to, i.e. believe that to be true, why would you have someone who does ADVISING you on such matters?

Next, and the obvious 800 pound gorilla in the room, what does Obama mean by “military activities in the United States?”  Based upon his established history of trying to oppress and usurp power which does not belong to him, I can’t help but believe that this is something that can’t be good for America.

Keep an eye on these creeps.  Pretty soon we’re going to have to put a stop to this mess.

---

Know Your Czars_1

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=124238

Obama’s new pick: Gov. of state that linked Christians, violence

Missouri report tied ‘domestic terrorists’ with opposition to abortion, immigration

---

Posted: February 07, 2010
9:24 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Missouri Gov. Nixon

President Obama has picked to advise him on military actions inside the U.S. the Missouri governor whose state “Information Analysis Center” last year linked conservative organizations to domestic terrorism and said law enforcement officers should watch for suspicious individuals who may have bumper stickers from Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin.

Missouri Gov. Jeremiah Nixon, a Democrat, is being joined on the Obama’s special advisory panel by the governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuno, and Arizona Gov. Janice Brewer, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s replacement when she moved to Washington.

They are among Obama’s nominations for the 10 positions on Obama’s new “Council of Governors” that he will use for advice on “military activities in the United States.”

(Complete article HERE)

---

Good Night, John Murtha.

How will John Murtha be remembered?  That depends on what your economic diet consisted of.  If you were on a steady diet of ‘pork’ that Murtha ‘farmed’ from Washington (i.e. pulled from the other 49 state’s taxpayers to buy votes in his own state), then you will likely remember Murtha fondly.

However, if you hate corruption and dishonesty, you likely won’t spend much time mourning the passing of Jumpin’ Jack Murtha.

I did not wish the man ill, but I did want him out of Washington.  I wanted him away from his position of power which he abused largely for personal gain for so many years.

The one episode I will have the most difficulty forgiving John Murtha for is how he treated our United States Marine Corps (that’s pronounced “core,” Mr. Obama) over the Haditha, Iraq incident.  With no knowledge of the facts surrounding the case, Murtha raced to get in front of the cameras and microphones to declare the Marines to be wanton murderers and baby killers.  Funny how when EVERY SINGLE MARINE involved in the incident was COMPLETELY EXONERATED, Mr. Murtha couldn’t seem to find a microphone, camera, or even a reporter with a pad and pencil to say “I was wrong,” or “I’m sorry.”  He called himself a “former Marine.”  Of the many Marines I know, some of which I still work with, NOT ONE of them accepts Murtha as one of their fraternity.  Murtha disgraced himself in their eyes, and has been disowned by them.  To be disowned by perhaps the most honorable organization on earth does not speak well of your character.

Being an unindicted co-conspirator in the ABSCAM scandal, and being known as the King of Pork are among just a few of the less than honorable things that Jack Murtha will be remembered for.

He built his own legacy.  Now he’ll have to sleep with it.  God speed, Mr. Murtha.  I pray you found Jesus before you died.

---

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020802352_pf.html

John Murtha dead at 77; longtime Pennsylvania congressman

+
+

---

REAL Class Was 1st on the Scene at Ft. Hood

Hope and change.  I was HOPING enough voters would wake up and CHANGE their minds about voting for a narcissistic, undocumented communist.

Sadly, that didn’t happen.  For those who pulled the lever for Dumb-O, the big eared communist, how’s that hope and change workin’ out for ya’?  Wait, don’t answer yet.  I’ll ask you again when all of the Obama non-tax increase tax increases hit your wallet this year and next.  Answer me then, and when you see what’s left of the private sector evaporate and the economy collapse.  Answer when you see the Obama government controlling EVERY aspect of your life.  Don’t you weren’t warned.

---

This reply is from a retired Special Forces soldier in Fayetteville, NC who was sent a copy of the picture below.

What is even better is the fact George W. Bush heard about Fort Hood, got in his car without any escort, apparently they did not have time to react, and drove to Fort Hood.  He was stopped at the gate and the guard could not believe who he had just stopped.  Bush only asked for directions to the hospital then drove on.  The gate guard called that “The president Is on Fort Hood and driving to the hospital.”  The base went bananas looking for Obama.  When they found it was Bush they immediately offered escort and Bush simply told them to shut up and let him visit the wounded and the dependents of the dead.  He (George W. Bush) stayed at Fort Hood for over six hours and was finally asked to leave by a message from the White House. Obama flew in days later and held a “photo” session in a gym and did not even go to the hospital.  All this I picked up from two soldiers here who happened to be at Fort Hood when it happened.

Class shows up…

The doctor had his tv on in his office when the news of the military base shootings came on. The husband of one of his employees was stationed there.

He called her into his office and as he told her what had happened, she got a text message from her husband saying, “I am okay.”  Her cell phone rang right after she read the message. It was an ER nurse,”I’m the one who just sent you a text, not your husband. I thought it would be comforting but I was mistaken in doing so. I am sorry to tell you this, but your husband has been shot 4 times and he is in surgery.”

The soldier’s wife left Southern Clinic in Dothan and drove all night to Ft.Hood. When she arrived, she found out her husband was out of surgery and would be OK. She rushed to his room and found that he already had visitors there to confort him. He was just waking up and found his wife and the visitors by his side.

The nurse took this picture.

"Class" showed up. Obama couldn't stand being upstaged, so he asked Bush to leave. As usual, Obama was putting his own image and desires ahead of the greater good, and the welfare of "his" soldiers. This is why not a single soldier, sailor, or airman I know is in a hurry to jump in front of a bullet headed for Obama.

What?  No news crews and cameras?  This is how people with class respond and pay respect to those in uniform.

+

---

The Warrior Song

Be proud, America.  These are the finest men and women in the world, and they are out there protecting you 24/7.

http://www.thewarriorsong.com/video.html
+

---

U.S. agrees to timetable for UN Gun Ban

In the words of our Campaigner-in-Chief, “Let me be clear.”  The liberals, progressives, communists, Barack Obama and all of his supporters, Hillary Clinton, and the UN want to take away our guns.  As long as Americans are armed, we stand in the way of their desire for total control.

In the early 1900’s in what became known as the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, there were two major parties pushing for the overthrow of the Czars.  There were the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks.  Menshevik is from the Russian word for ‘minority,’  where Bolshevik is from the word for ‘majority.’  Both parties believed in the communist revolution, but the Mensheviks were more moderate, trying to use persuasion and the ballot box to persuade people.  The Bolsheviks were intent on using force.  Bolshevik has evolved into a disparaging term meaning an extreme political radical; revolutionary or anarchist.

Obama and his minions aren’t yet in a position to completely bulldoze our rights.  They will first try the ‘menshevik‘ approach to taking our guns.  They will try to convince us to give them up. When you hear their Utopian arguments trying to persuade you to pound your guns into plowshares, remember that those who do pound their guns (swords) into plowshares will plow for those who did not.

WHEN their persuasion fails, they will reveal themselves to be the Bolsheviks we know them to be.  They WILL come for our guns.  It is only a matter of time.  The guns in the hands of patriotic, (constitutional) law-abiding citizens are the last line of defense between our constitution and a nation ending tyranny.

As Charlton Heston so eloquently phrased it, “…From my cold, dead hands.”

---

http://nationalgunrights.org/blog/?p=359

The United Nations and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are moving forward with their plan to confiscate your guns.

The United States joined 152 other countries in support of the Arms Trade Treaty Resolution, which establishes the dates for the 2012 UN conference intended to attack American sovereignty by stripping Americans of the right to keep and bear arms.

Working groups of anti-gun countries will begin scripting language for the conference this year, creating a blueprint for other countries when they meet at the full conference.

The stakes couldn’t be higher.

Former United Nation’s ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners about the Arms Trade Treaty and says the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

Establishing the dates for the Arms Trade Treaty Conference is just the first step toward their plans for total gun confiscation.

The worldwide gun control mob will ensure the passage of an egregious, anti-gun treaty…

. . .and that’s where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton steps in.

Once the UN Gun Ban is passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations it must be ratified by each nation, including the United States.

As an arch enemy of gun owners, Clinton has pledged to push the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty. She will push for passage of this outrageous treaty designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

That’s why it’s vital you sign the special petition I’ve made up for your signature that DEMANDS your U.S. Senators vote AGAINST ratification of the UN’s “Small Arms Treaty.”

So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

But looking at previous versions of the UN “Small Arms Treaty,” you and I can get a good idea of what’s likely in the works.

Don’t let any of the “experts” lull you to sleep by saying “Oh, we have it handled” or “Until you know exactly what’s in the treaty you can’t fight against it.”

Judging by Ambassador Bolton’s comments — who certainly knows what to expect from the American-freedom-hating international crowd that infests the U.N. — we are certain the treaty’s going to address the private ownership of firearms.

If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate (which is where we must ultimately make our stand), the UN “Small Arms Treaty” would almost certainly FORCE national governments to:

*** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding citizens cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

*** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL “unauthorized” civilian firearms (all firearms owned by the government are excluded, of course);

*** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons;

*** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION. So please click here to sign the petition to your U.S. Senators before it’s too late!

You see, this is NOT a fight we can afford to lose.

Here’s what you can do to help the National Association for Gun Rights fight Hillary Clinton and her United Nations cronies:

• Click here and sign our petition to DEMAND that your United States Senators vote AGAINST the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.

• Forward this petition to your friends and relatives who share your concern for American sovereignty and protecting our right to keep and bear arms.

• Please consider making a generous contribution to the National Association for Gun Rights to help us fight Hillary Clinton and the United Nations “Small Arms Treaty.”

---

Comfort: Curse or Blessing?

Don’t misunderstand me, or Mr. Marinov.  We do indeed believe that God is in control.  However, if we as Christians stand back and do nothing while Christianity and, more importantly and to the point, Christ and God are attacked, what can we hope for? God doesn’t need my defense, but as Christians we either defend Him, or deny Him. If we sit back with our hands out and do nothing like the growing generations of ‘welfare babies’ our nation, and the socialist agenda are raising, can we hope for a better life while we await Christ’s return? (Before you speak up, no, being on welfare is not in and of itself bad.  Being on welfare when you have the ability to earn your own way, is bad.  In the Christian sense, it’s like a Christian who never gets past the initial salvation and never matures, always needing to be fed and led by others.)

Does Jesus instruct Christians to sit back idly and wait on Him to return?  I don’t think so.  Matt 16:24 says

“Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.“

That implies to me an active existence.  That implies visibly “carrying” the “burden” of Christ as part of our labor.

He tells us in 1Pet 5:8-9

1Pe 5:8-9 NASB  Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.  (9)  But resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brethren who are in the world.

That says to me that we are to be vigilant, and that we are to resist evil and hold firmly to our faith (a part of which is to share it boldly).  There will be suffering, but I expect that it’s worse to suffer while doing nothing for your faith than to suffer while actively serving.

But let’s not just look at the easy verses that seem to support my position.  There are some that when taken out of context and without study would seem to say that we should simply roll over and let evil doers have their way.  Let’s take this well known passage from Matthew.

Mat 5:38-48 NASB  “You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ (39)  “But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (40)  “If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. (41)  “Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. (42)  “Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. (43)  “You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.’ (44)  “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (45)  so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. (46)  “For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? (47)  “If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? (48)  “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

One commentary from biblegateway.com suggests that “… Jesus utilized hyperbole precisely to challenge his hearers, to force us to consider what we value.”  The commentator goes on to say “… we should be so unselfish and trust God so much that we leave our vindication with him.”  What I take away from this and other commentators, and my own reading is that we are to serve ACTIVELY, and share the Good News.  The retribution, or judgment for evil is ultimately not ours to give.

So, when laws are being written to take away our free speech, when we are being told we can’t talk about God, when things are being done that cause pain and hardship not only to us, but to our brothers, do we just sit by passively and say “God is in control?”  NO!  I agree with Mr. Marinov.

We are to speak the word and truth of God boldly, even at the risk of retribution.  We are to pray.  We are to seek out good, Godly men for offices of the land and work to get them elected.  We are to counter the world’s lies with God’s truth.  If we sit and do nothing, effectively denying God, then I believe we hasten his judgment.  We are lukewarm, and will be spit out of God’s mouth if we do not stand for and with Him.

Rev 3:15-16 NASB  ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. (16)  ‘So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.

So, do not allow yourself to be comforted when there is not comfort.  Do not allow yourself to become numb.  Stand up for what is right while you can still stand.

---

http://www.americanvision.org/print/printpage.php

I Refuse to Be Comforted

by Bojidar Marinov, Feb 03, 2010

Come on.

Now.

I hear you’re feeling down.

I can ease your pain…

(Pink Floyd, “Comfortably Numb”)

I refuse to be comforted. I refuse to listen to sermons that assure me that “whatever happens, God is in control.” I refuse to read and listen to pastors, authors, and leaders that comfort me with God’s peace when everywhere around me I see God’s war.

When they banned prayer in schools, the Christians in this country were assured that in these “last days” that’s what was expected to happen. They were supposed to take comfort in the fact that Jesus was coming soon. He didn’t. And while Christians were learning to be comforted with this open attack against their faith, Roe v. Wade came. Again, words of comfort followed. Meanwhile, tens of millions of unborn children died in this government-sanctioned sacrifice of infants. Only a precious few brave men and women stood against it; the majority were comforted that “whatever happens, God is in control.”

The pulpits never gave a call for action.

Long before that the Federal government took over the control of our money supply. As a result, millions of fathers and mothers in this country saw their lifetime savings disappear in financial meltdowns where the value of their labor was offered in a massive burnt offering to the Mammon of the centralized state. Again, we were all comforted by our pastors and leaders that “God is in control,” and “He will provide for us.” Moral and industrious people worked more, made less, and the wicked kept devouring everything in a Keynesian orgy of debt and consumption. The pulpits again comforted but never gave a call for action.

They started cracking down on Christians by passing laws to silence Christianity: “Hate speech,” “separation of church and state” and all the other mantras. In a nation that was founded to proclaim the blessings of Christ, Christ was now pushed out of public life. Pastors and authors and theologians responded by . . . more comforting words. “See? He must be coming soon! 1968! No, 1988! 1989! 1996! Have comfort!”

No call for action.

Christian children were ridiculed and ostracized in schools and universities. Their faith was mocked by professors who knew nothing about their fields of study but knew everything about Marx’s Communist Manifesto. The churches started losing their young men and women by tens of thousands every year. Colleges and universities that were established to nourish and expand the Christian religion and knowledge were now openly enemies of Christ.

Again, the pulpits were silent. Except for a few comforting words. God surely must be in control.

We don’t even notice anymore when things like that happen. We are so comforted that we don’t even think of raising our voice in protest anymore. We surely value our peace and comfort—that’s what our leaders have taught us.

We have become comfortably numb.

But I refuse to be comforted. I refuse to believe in peace when I see God at war. I refuse to believe that God makes all these things happen only to teach me that He is in control and nothing else. I refuse to believe that these are blessings when I know very well they are curses. And I refuse to accept curses for comfort.

The Bible tells me that God teaches my hands to war. And my hands are itching for a fight. I don’t want to sit idly when the heathens are taking over God’s earth. I want to be out there defending it. I want my pastors and leaders to lead me, not comfort me. I want them to teach me to fight and overcome. There must be instructions for victory in the Bible. I mean, real victory, not abstract dreamy “victory” of being rescued in clouds. When we lose elections and a Communist, homosexual, or a Muslim gets elected, I want my pastor to tell me how we can elect a Biblically-qualified candidate next time. When they pass a law to ban preaching the truths of the Bible, I want my pastor to teach me how we can fight and repeal that law.

When they build an abortion clinic in my town, I want the pastors to lead their congregations in protest and teach them how to shut it down. When the liberal media attack my faith, I want my pastor to teach me how to reply and present Christ in such a way as to make them helplessly gnash their teeth in their inability to present a coherent answer. When my child is assaulted by Marxist professors in college, I want my pastor to equip me and my child with comprehensive Biblical worldview that brings down their vain imaginations.

Moses didn’t comfort the Hebrews in Egypt. He made them uncomfortable. He made them realize what they were missing: Liberty. He gave them a sense of urgency, not comfort: “Eat it with the shoes on your feet and with your staffs in your hands. No time for comfort!” He didn’t comfort them in the wilderness. He made them fight. No words of comfort came out of his mouth; no messages soothing their consciences. God is in control, he said in Deuteronomy 28, but that control isn’t necessarily good for you. It will be a curse on you and your children if you become comfortably numb. You better never become too comforted.

The Angel of the Lord didn’t comfort Gideon when he was threshing wheat. “What are you doing, mighty warrior? Hiding like a rat?” Elijah did not comfort his generation; he asked many uncomfortable questions: “Who are you going to serve, God or Baal?” The prophets did not deliver messages of comfort to Israel; they called Israel to war, to action, to repentance.

This great country, the United States of America, was not founded on sermons of comfort. The Pilgrims and the Puritans didn’t stay back in England and find comfort in the fact that “whatever happens, God is in control.” They took action. The political architect of the American Revolution, John Witherspoon, President of the College of New Jersey and signer of the Declaration of Independence, considered by most people of his time to be the “spiritual father” of the colonies, did not comfort his spiritual children; to the contrary, he worked tirelessly to instill a message of discomfort and urgency in them:

There is not a single instance in history, in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved entire. If therefore we yield up our temporal property, we at the same time deliver the conscience into bondage.

Had he comforted them, the USA could have never been founded. And we wouldn’t have the freedoms we have today.

I want to have the same spirit as the Founders. And therefore I want my pastor to be like John Witherspoon. Don’t comfort me; teach me to fight and win.

Many pastors I have talked to complain of the growing influence of “para-church” organizations. No wonder. If churches give no message of victory, someone else will. And they will gain influence. People follow leaders, not drug-traffickers. And messages of comfort and peace in times of discomfort and war are nothing more than anesthetic, a narcotic to escape reality; and those who preach comfort and peace when there is no comfort and peace are spiritual drug-traffickers, not spiritual leaders.

Therefore I refuse to be comforted.

I don’t find comfort in the fact that God is in control. It makes me shiver. If we as Christians are silent, passive, compromising, His control will bring down judgment. His control will make pagans rule our land, ban preaching, take our children, destroy our property. Exactly what is happening now! I can’t find comfort in God’s judgment, and a pastor who preaches comfort in the face of God’s judgment is not doing God’s will. I refuse to be comforted. I want to be taught to turn the tide; I don’t want another dose of anesthetic.

I refuse to be comforted.

---

Consequences of Atheism

Gary does a good job of summarizing the hypocrisy and dangers of atheism in this article.

---

http://www.americanvision.org/print/printpage.php

The Temporal Consequences of Atheism for Christians

by Gary DeMar, Feb 02, 2010

There are temporal consequences for theists as there are eternal consequences for atheists. If as Christopher Hitchens believes Christianity is not good for the world, will laws be passed to outlaw or at least suppress religious expression? This has already been done in public schools. There are signs that such oppositions to religion are spreading:

[A] man talking to two willing strangers in a shopping mall was arrested because the subject of the conversation was God. The case developed several years ago when a youth pastor was arrested at the Galleria Mall in Roseville, Calif., for having a conversation about religion with two other people. Matthew Snatchko, who works with youth at his church, was interrupted in the middle of a conversation by a security guard. A second guard joined the confrontation and told Snatchko he was being placed under citizen’s arrest for “trespassing.” . . . Besides the ban on conversations with strangers about religion or politics, the mall also bans any clothing with religious or political messages.[1]

It’s one thing to have a policy that prohibits proselytizing, standing on a soapbox and preaching, or carrying a sign around that says “Repent!” Malls are private property. We’ll have to see how the courts rule on this one, but the fact that there is such a written policy is frightening. If you live in an area where malls owned by these companies, you might want to consider shopping elsewhere. By all means let the company know why you no longer will do business there: Fear of getting arrested because you might happen to strike up a conversation with a stranger in the foot court that leads to a discussion about religion.

Those who believe in God could be marginalized, and if atheists get their way politically, we might find some very bad laws passed. Here’s what prominent atheist Daniel C. Dennett wants to happen:

If you insist on teaching your children falsehoods—that the Earth is flat,[2] that “Man” is not a product of evolution by natural selection—then you must expect, at the very least, that those of us who have freedom of speech will feel free to describe your teachings as the spreading of falsehoods, and will attempt to demonstrate this to your children at our earliest opportunity. Our future well-being—the well-being of all of us on the planet—depends on the education of our descendants.[3]

If enough of these guys gain political power, will any of our children be safe? Could teaching falsehoods like creation be considered child abuse? It’s not a far-fetched fear. Hitchens broaches the subject in chapter 16 of his book God is Not Great: “Is Religion Child Abuse?” Doug Wilson comments, “Hitchens puts infant baptism, the learning of a catechism, the practice of confirmation, Sunday School lessons, and family worship into the same category that we use to describe the making of child pornography, starvation, locking up in closets, blacking eyes and breaking bones.”[4] Nicholas Humphrey writes something similar, and Richard Dawkins is not far behind:

“So we should no more allow parents to teach their children to believe, for example, in the literal truth of the Bible or that the planets rule their lives than we should allow parents to knock their children’s teeth out or lock them in a dungeon.”[5]

Yikes! Atheists rail against theocracy, but they don’t see that their worldview is oppressively theocratic with no hint of restraint. Man is god, and man’s law must be imposed on every area of life in the name of Darwin through the power of the State using reason and science as the twin authorities. These revelatory pillars of evolution—the old and new testaments of their man-centered worldview—are as infallible in their eyes as the Bible is in ours. There is no question that this is the truth.

Education is used to promote their theocratic worldview. An academic setting is viewed as far less oppressive, a neutral, fact-alone approach to truth, if you will. The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) has issued a report that says British Columbia-based Trinity Western University falls below the standard of proper academic freedom because it requires that its faculty sign a statement of Christian faith before being hired. It has also put the organization “on a list of institutions found to have imposed a requirement of a commitment to a particular ideology or statement as condition of employment.”[6] Just imagine if a Christian who did not believe in evolution applied to a state school. Do you think he would be accepted to teach in the biology department? I don’t think so.

Post Reply | View Replies

Endnotes:

[1] Bob Unru, “Mall to Christians: God talk banned!” (January 30, 2010).
[2] On the “flat-earth myth,” see Gary DeMar, America’s Christian History: The Untold Story (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1995), 221–34; Gary DeMar and Fred Douglas Young, To Pledge Allegiance: A New World in View (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1996), 75–82; Jeffrey Burton Russell, Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians (New York: Praeger, 1991).
[3] Daniel C. Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meaning of Life (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995), 519.
[4] Douglas Wilson, God Is: How Christianity Explains Everything (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2008).
[5] Quoted in Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2006), 326.
[6] Charles Lewis, “Faith as a guide in higher learning: Can academic freedom exist in overtly religious universities?” (January 30, 2010): http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=2501821

+

---

Chavez Builds Model for Obama’s Brown Shirts

Obama said during his July 2, 2008 campaign speech

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

He has attempted to follow the model of Hugo Chavez, and other dictators thus far in his illegitimate, undocumented ‘presidency.’  He has taken over financial institutions, auto manufacturers, and begun the destruction of all private business and industry.  With the aid of Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod, the Black Panthers, SEIU, ACORN, all of his communist appointees, and other union supporters, Obama has employed his thug, street organizer, Marxist, Saul Alinsky tactics to intimidate Americans and begin building the framework for his communist state.

What you see exemplified by Hugo Chavez, and quietly being put into place by Barack Obama is EXACTLY like the Nazi Brown Shirts who did Hitler’s bidding in the 30’s and 40’s, and what Lenin did in Soviet Russia.  “Oh, but you’re being too extreme and alarmist by using the Hitler analogy,” some of you will say.  If you HONESTLY examine history, there is no way that you can tell me the analogy does not fit.

Chavez is using his ‘militia’ to intimidate people into doing things his way.  Period.  It has nothing to do with the good of the people.  It is about consolidating power.

Now Chairman Maobama is quietly trying to assemble such a force.  The basis for the force is the corrupt unions that got him elected, predominantly the likes of ACORN and SEIU.  The leadership of other unions such as the UAW are also in bed with Obama, but the rank and file may not be so easily swayed.  Regardless, you have already seen his tactics employed at the voting booth intimidating voters to get him elected by either voting for him, or not voting period.  You see a ‘progressive’ congress attempting to pass laws that would essentially force unionization of the labor force.  You see attempts to publicly attack and humiliate ANYONE who disagrees with Obama’s agenda.

The words of soulless attack dog Rahm Emanuel are a perfect example.  He called those balking at Obama’s health care takeover “F—ing retarded.” This is a pretty mild attack from Mr. ‘Dead Fish’ Emanuel, who mailed dead fish to a pollster who ticked him off.  As an aide to Bill Clinton during his first presidential run, Emanuel shook up a dinner party by plunging a knife into the table and screaming “Dead!” while reciting the names of several Democrats he considered disloyal.  If Obama has a ‘Heinrich Himmler,’ Emanuel will be it.

---

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/print/61004

CNSNews.com

Chavez’s Socialist Worker Militias Swell to 150,000 in Venezuela

Friday, February 05, 2010

By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (AP Photo)

(CNSNews.com) – Venezuela’s socialist worker militias have grown to nearly 150,000 members since their formation in 2009. Organized by President Hugo Chavez in May 2009, the “workers’ militias” are intended to allow Chavez’s political party to assert control over key economic sectors.

According to a Jan. 29 report in the Venezuelan El Universal newspaper — translated by BBC Worldwide Monitoring – the ranks of Chavez’s workers militias have swelled to around 150,000 members, most of whom work in “strategic” economic sectors, such as oil, electricity, transportation, and “basic companies.”

Orlando Castillo, with the Socialist Workers Front, a Chavez-allied group, was quoted by El Universal as saying that the purpose of the militias was to use the labor troops to “defend the people,” adding that “there need to be many more” troops.  (Obama’s ‘civilian national security force’ anyone?)

“There need to be many more,” he said, “because they represent the idea of the integrated worker who is capable of producing and also of defending the people.”

The workers’ militias are an ideological remnant of the Communist coup d’etat in Russia 1917, whose leaders Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky created the groups and used them to overthrow the Czarist government, eventually turning them into units of the Red Army.

Vladimir Lenin, the Marxist leader who helped establish the Soviet Union, which lasted in Russia from 1917 to 1991

In Venezuela today the militias are made up of individual workers who are armed with guns and trained to ensure that their respective companies comply with the agenda of the ruling United Socialist Party. (As I said, it’s all about CONTROL.)

“With rifles there beside them, in case anybody makes a mistake with us,” Chavez is quoted as saying at a May 2009 socialist transformation workshop where he announced the militias’ creation.

So-called socialist patrols are also growing, with an estimated 20,000 separate patrols totaling 300,000 Venezuelans. Each patrol has an average of 15 members. Castillo said the patrols are “forging the party [United Socialist Party] in the middle of the workers [movement].”

Like the militias, these socialist patrols are intended to allow the ruling socialist government to exert greater control over key industries. However, they also operate in Venezuela’s shrinking private sector companies.

The purpose of both is “production control,” according to socialist leader Castillo, allowing members of the ruling party to wield greater influence in economic decisions.

Chavez’s government plans for companies to have a socialist triumvirate of sorts, comprised of socialist patrols, workers’ councils and labor unions. (Do you think Obama’s total support and nurturing of unions in this country is an accident?  Don’t be naive.  It is part of his plan in laying the ground work for his communist state.)

---

Rahm Emanuel Meant to Say “Obama is an F’ing Retard.”

Well, it looks like Comrade O-bow-ma has had his Dan Quayle potato(e) moment.  Seems that the left-proclaimed smartest man in the room isn’t so smart after all.  Or it could be that TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States) is at it again.  He displayed words that were just too difficult for “the One” to understand or pronounce.  I’m sure TOTUS will be fired and replaced by Monday.

Remember the other day when Rahm, the ballerina, Dead Fish, Emanuel said that Republicans were ‘F*#@ing retards’ for not going along with the democrats’ health care reform?

I think he was actually referring to his idiot boss, who despite supposedly being a smart-guy professor of law, can’t even pronounce the word ‘corpsman.’  Proving further that he is an idiot, he surrounds himself with idiots who also don’t know better, and can’t keep him from making an idiot of himself.

If Obama actually respected the military, he would take an hour or two out of his communist plotting to learn a little about the men and women he ‘commands,’  the least of which would be how to pronounce their job titles.

---

Barack O-Bankruptus’ Budget: Stake Through America’s Heart

Here are some facts about the new Obama budget that should just piss you off.

• President Obama just submitted a $3.8 trillion budget
  • the largest federal budget EVER
  • $700 billion larger than Pres. George W. Bush’s last budget
  • TWICE the size of Pres. Bill Clinton’s last budget of $1.9 trillion
  • The projected deficit of that budget would be $1.6 trillion

Yet does the All Barack Channel (ABC), the New Barack Channel (NBC), or Consistent Barack Supporter (CBS) speak out AT ALL about this record spending?  Do they call it irresponsible?  Do they say he is spending too much?  NOT ON YOUR LIFE!  He’s ‘the one,’ the m-O-ssiah, Chairman Maobama, JoBama Stalin.  They won’t question him for one second, because they share his values and agenda.  And what’s worse, they cover up and/or spin the truth and paint him as a ‘fiscal conservative.’

The idiots in the media, and the one economist out of millions who actually believes that government created jobs create wealth or stimulate the economy are lying saying that the hundreds of billions of dollars Obama plans to spend will ‘spur job growth.’  It will only stimulate GOVERNMENT job growth.

These same purveyors of Obama propaganda quote Obama who said:

“The bottom line is this. We simply cannot continue to spend as if deficits don’t have consequences, as if waste doesn’t matter, as if the hard-earned tax dollars of the American people can be treated like Monopoly money.”

Does any of these propagandists address the fact that Obama’s budget does EXACTLY what he is saying we ‘cannot continue’ to do?  Not on your life.

Are any of them reporting that in one single year, Obama has increased discretionary spending nearly 85%?  Are they reporting the hypocrisy of then saying he wants to ‘freeze’ spending at these unsustainable, bloated levels?  Not a peep.

These propagandists report favorably on Obama’s budget and quoted administration officials (Obama, budget director Peter Orszag, press secretary Robert Gibbs) a number of times, but mostly ignored tax or economic experts critical of the budget.

To top it all off, Obama’s budget is based on many faulty assumptions.

• Bush proposed spending at a rate that would rise to $2.71 trillion by 2011
  • Projections missed the mark and spending actually hit $3 trillion by 2008
  • Bush/Cheney spent $916 billion more annually by 2009 than they had planned
  • Obama’s budget figures passage of health care reform (which is currently in limbo) into the budget
  • The costs of Cap-and-Trade, which he intends to pass, are not figured into his budget
  • Obama’s budget assumes an economic growth rate of 3% per year plus inflation
    • This ignores a historic rate of 2.89% since 1980, and the current and projected state of our economy

So while Obama is spending money like a sex addict with a bottomless checkbook at the Moonlite BunnyRanch, what is he telling Americans about tough times?

“When times are tough, you tighten your belts.  You don’t go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage.  You don’t blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you’re trying to save for college. You prioritize. You make tough choices.”

He made these statements in front of a crowd at a Nashua, NH highschool.

WHAT A FREAKING HYPOCRITE!

He is personally living it up, partying his skinny little Kenyan a$$ off at taxpayer expense, and jet-setting all over the world unnecessarily while Americans are sliding into poverty by the millions.  He flies in for a photo op, says “I understand,” and hops back on AF1, at a cost of thousands of dollars per flight hour, so he can make it back to the crib for the latest party, with entertainment provided by big name rock bands.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is much more than just a budget. It is a blue print for fundamentally changing America from a representative republic to a socialist/communist nation.

How will the Obama budget impact you directly?  Here are a few examples.

• Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire (this is a tax increase)
• Obama’s stated tax focus on people making over $250,000 per year is a lie.  Many of these are small business corporations filing as individuals who personally take home less than $70,000 per year.  Their corporation may gross $250K, but most of that goes to expenses and wages for employees.  These businesses will close their doors when hit by these new taxes.

Middle class family backdoor tax increases

• George W. Bush 2001 targeted tax provision.
  • Lowered individual tax rates
  • Slashed capital gains taxes
  • Scaled back estate tax (death tax) to zero
  • Democrats call this tax cuts for the ‘wealthiest Americans’
  • If these provisions are allowed to expire in December 31^st, 2010 as Obama plans,
    • 10% tax bracket that existed under G.W. Bush will no longer exist
    • 25% tax bracket will increase to 28% (rich people, huh?)
    • 28% tax bracket will increase to 31%
    • 33% tax bracket will increase to 36%
    • Top tier personal income tax rate will rise from 35% to 39.6%
    • Estate (death) tax will go from 0% under Bush’s cuts in 2010 to 55% of everything you will to someone
      • Oh, by the way, all of this has already been taxed at least once by the government when it was earned in the first place
• Investors, (anyone who has a 401K, IRA, Union retirement account, or retirement account of any kind is considered an ‘investor’) tax on dividends will increase from 15% to 39.6%
• Capital Gains tax will increase from 15% to 20%
  • This will freeze money because no one will want to pay more than twice the penalty on their dividends
  • Say goodbye to the stock market
  • Congress also failed to renew the Alternative Minimum Tax ‘patch’
    • AMT originally intended to keep the VERY rich from avoiding income taxes
    • Some wealthy people were FOLLOWING THE TAX LAWS AS WRITTEN BY CONGRESS and were able to write off so much stuff that they owed no taxes
    • Congress acting on anger and class envy imposed the AMT
    • It has never been indexed for inflation, so now it applies to millions of Americans that it should not apply to
      • The government KNEW what they were doing when they did this.  They have been reluctant to correct their ‘mistake’ because it has become such a large source of income for the government
• Without renewing the patch, people with incomes as low as $33,000 will be affected
  • That means that if you earn more than $33,000 you are ‘rich’ under Obama’s definition
  • $250 teacher tax credit for buying classroom supplies will go away
    • School systems are receiving between $9,000 and $18,000 per student depending on the district which is being wasted in everything BUT the student
    • Dedicated teachers are paying for basic needs for their students from their own inadequate salaries
    • Taxpayers who itemize will lose ability to deduct state and local sales tax
    • Taxpayers who DON’T itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid
    • Tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses: GONE
    • First $2,400 of UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS will now be TAXABLE
      • These were tax free under the Bush plan through 2009
      • Obama wants to eliminate the home mortgage deduction for people make over $250K/year
        • This will drive the final stake through the housing market
        • Construction, landscaping, housekeeping, and other jobs associated with these homes will disappear
        • People buy expensive houses so they can write them off

Ladies and gentlemen, this is tyranny worth fighting over. You and I are about to be enslaved, and our country destroyed by the whims of a communist president, and his willing accomplices in the house and senate. He has already sold us to China, who now dictates Obama’s policies and actions. We are now number 2 or 3 in the world economically, and soon to be militarily. He must be stopped.

We are approaching the tipping point, the precipice, the point of no return. If this agenda, and these people are not stopped from finishing the destruction of our constitution and our economy, we are soon to see a collapse of America that will make the “Great Depression” look like the “good ole’ days.” Your wheelbarrow full of money will not buy you a loaf of bread, and the cities like New York and LA will be charnel houses of anarchy because those people are completely dependent on outside sources for EVERYTHING they have.

Stop him now. Stop him before it’s too late. Stand together and save America.

Little Johnny is a Genius!

A teacher asked her 6th grade class how many of them were Obama fans.

Not really knowing what an Obama fan is, but wanting to be liked by the teacher, all the kids raised their hands except for Little Johnny.

The teacher asked Little Johnny why he has decided to be different…again.

Little Johnny said, “Because I’m not an Obama fan.”

The teacher asked, “Why aren’t you a fan of Obama?”

Johnny said, “Because I’m a Republican.”

The teacher asked him why he’s a Republican.

Little Johnny answered, “Well, my Mom’s a Republican and my Dad’s a Republican, so I’m a Republican.”

Annoyed by this answer, the teacher asked, “If your mom were a moron and your dad were an idiot, what would that make you?”

With a big smile, Little Johnny replied, “That would make me an Obama fan.“

Illegal Aliens: Creating That Giant Sucking Sound

Here is an excellent e-mail illustrating how illegal immigration is sucking America dry.  Now, you idiots that want to start throwing out the racist tag or something of the like, I will direct your attention to the word “illegal” in bold, underlined, italics in the first sentence.

Like most Americans, I’m COMPLETELY in support of LEGAL immigration.  That means people who wait their turn, obey our laws, come here legally, and contribute to America as a citizen, and pledge their allegiance to America.

If you sneak across our border (against the law), take our jobs, and our benefits, raise the flag of your home country while spitting on ours, and contribute nothing but a giant sucking sound to our treasury, then take your illegal posterior to the exterior of our interior before we kick your inferior posterior out.  Don’t let the door hit you in the assets as you leave, never to return.

---

JOE LEGAL vs. JOSE ILLEGAL

You have two families: “Joe Legal” and “Jose Illegal“

Both families have two parents, two children, and live in California ..

Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25..00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash “under the table”.

Ready? Now pay attention…

Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.00 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00.

Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00.

Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $9,631.00.

Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rent subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose Illegal says, “We don’t need no stinkin’ insurance!” and still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc.

Jose Illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month.

Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Joe Legal’s and Jose Illegal’s children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children’s lunches while Jose Illegal’s children get a government sponsored lunch. Jose Illegal’s children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal’s children go home.

Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.

Do you get it, now?

If you vote for or support any politician that supports illegal Aliens…

You are part of the problem!

It’s way PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!

What are you waiting for? Pass it on..

---

The Lineage of a Dictator

1883-1945 (in office 1922-1943)

1878-1953 (ruled 1922-1953)

1893-1976 (ruled 1949-1976)

1928-1967 (terrorist from 195?-his capture and execution in 1967)

???? - Present (Thug street organizer until his usurpation of the White House and then his demise in 20??)

Free Speech Update: Atheists Double Standard Challenged

The goal of the left is to destroy the moral underpinning and education of America so that there will be no resistance to their agenda.  As they dumb down America and confuse the understanding of the difference between REAL rights (given by God), and merely privileges, they also work to incrementally take away our RIGHT to free speech and religion.

Contrary to what the left will have you believe ATHEISM IS A RELIGION.  A religion is nothing more than a set of beliefs about the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.  Christians and followers of religions which believe in a higher power believe we were created, while atheists believe we are simply an accident or coincidence.  I happen to believe that we were created by God, and I have the right to say that in public.  You have the right not to listen.  Atheists believe that God doesn’t exist and that they evolved from amoeba and monkeys.  They also have the right to express that belief in public, and I have just as much right not to listen.

Notice that there is NOT a right NOT TO BE OFFENDED mentioned ANYWHERE in the constitution.  The simple sight of you might offend me, but there is little I can do about that unless the reason your appearance offends me is because you are breaking decency laws by running around naked in public, or you are appearing in my home which I can ask you to leave at any time.  The simple fact is that free expression of all ideas WILL put something out there that WILL offend some.  As long as the expression is in a form or venue where people have  a CHOICE of whether or not to listen, that expression SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.  If it’s on TV, I can change the channel.  If it is at City Hall, I can choose not to attend on that occasion.  When it is in a public location where people must see it every day, and people work in that environment, then there better be equal time given to opposing view points.  But if the atheists, homosexuals, muslims, and followers of whatever belief system are going to cast dispersions on the other religions, they better be prepared to have a few insults thrown their way as well.  As it stands now, they can say anything they want about Christianity or Judaism and get away with it, but if a Christian preacher INSIDE HIS OWN CHURCH expresses the belief that homosexuality is a sin, or that atheists will go to hell, then that is HATE SPEECH.  If you don’t like what the preacher is saying, get up and leave.

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=123565

FAITH UNDER FIRE

Atheists’ ‘hate’ sign blasted in lawsuit

Illinois candidate claims state ‘hostile’ to beliefs

Posted: January 30, 2010
10:55 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A political candidate in this week’s primary election for the office of comptroller in Illinois has filed a lawsuit against the state charging it officially expressed “hate” and “hostility” toward Christianity and other religions that include a belief in God by allowing atheists to post a sign in a state building at Christmas.

That sign, posted by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, said,:

At the time of the winter solstice, let reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is just a myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.

It was placed in the Illinois Capitol Building, through which GOP comptroller candidate William J. Kelly, a cable television executive, was required to travel for his responsibilities as a candidate.

(Read complete article HERE)

---

Craigs List Add: Victim or Victor? The 2nd Amendment Makes the Choice Possible

Whether or not this is actually true, it illustrates the benefit of being armed. It gives you a choice of whether or not to be a victim.

If the dirtbag has enough of a life to actually ruin, this would be a pretty cool way to handle the situation. However, I suspect the scumbag mugging you wouldn’t have credit cards with much of a credit limit, or anything else of much value.

Just shoot him and be done with it.

---

To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last.

Date: 2009-05-27, 1 :43 a.m. E.S.T.

I was the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend, threatening our lives. You also asked for my girlfriend’s purse and earrings. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message.

First, I’d like to apologize for your embarrassment; I didn’t expect you to actually crap in your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason. My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very intimidating weapon when pointed at your head … isn’t it?!

I know it probably wasn’t fun walking back to wherever you’d come from with that brown sludge in your pants. I’m sure it was even worse walking bare-footed since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again].

After I called your mother or “Momma” as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you’d done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as those of four other people in the gas station, — on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful!

I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go’s, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day!]

I then threw your wallet into the big pink “pimp mobile” that was parked at the curb …. after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver’s side of the car.

Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what ’s going on with that? Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA’s office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target.

The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your number etc.).

In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you … but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider, the career path you’ve chosen to pursue in life.. Remember, next time you might not be so lucky.Have a good day!

Thoughtfully yours,
Alex

---

1930’s Brownshirt Tactics Coming Back into Vogue

I don’t think you’ll find a better, more clear example of how the left and the progressives operate.  Straight up communist doctrine and right out of Saul Alinsky’s playbook.  Intimidate into silence.  At first in this country it was done slowly by sneaking in small, unconstitutional laws that most people were to complacent to resist.  The first “big stick” used against the church in this country was MONEY.  LBJ had a law passed making it illegal for preachers to speak out for or against political candidates because he didn’t like that fact that they usually spoke out against HIM.  The IRS were his “Brown Shirts.”  They would revoke the tax exempt status of a church found in violation of this law.  Sadly, far too many churches and preachers let themselves and the Gospel be pacified by this intimidation, which has resulted in a much more timid church and body of Christians overall in America.  Now that most have been pacified over time, the left is stepping up its campaign to silence the church completely.  They are boldly employing thug tactics that have never before been seen in America, and haven’t been seen in a western country since 1930’s Germany.

If Christians, and Americans in general don’t stand up for EVERYONE’S right to free speech, then it will soon be gone.

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=123535

Mall to Christians: God talk banned!

Rules challenged as violating ‘principles of free expression’

Posted: January 30, 2010

12:10 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh

WorldNetDaily

Arguments have moved to the appellate court level in a California case in which a man talking to two willing strangers in a shopping mall was arrested because the subject of the conversation was God.

The case developed several years ago when a youth pastor was arrested at the Galleria Mall in Roseville, Calif., for having a conversation about religion with two other people.

Matthew Snatchko, who works with youth at his church, was interrupted in the middle of a conversation by a security guard. A second guard joined the confrontation and told Snatchko he was being placed under citizen’s arrest for “trespassing.” (Phony charges to silence and intimidate since they knew they couldn’t arrest him for what he was doing.)

The pastor said he agreed to leave but instead, the guards grabbed him, roughly shoved him against a storefront window and handcuffed him tightly enough to draw blood. Snatchko later was taken to the police station where he was booked on charges of battery and trespassing.

A short time later the charges were dropped, but officials with the Pacific Justice Institute decided to pursue a case against the mall over the impact of the policy on free speech.  (Again, they were sending a warning.  “Don’t speak about any of that God stuff, or next time we won’t go so easy on you.”  These are the intimidation tactics of the left.  Look at Hitler’s National Socialist Party and his Brown Shirts, Stalin’s purges, and Mao’s tyrannical reign.)

After a Placer County Superior Court judge in 2008 affirmed the mall’s regulations, an appeal was launched to the 3rd Appellate District in Sacramento, and the briefs have just now been completed for that court’s review.

“It’s surprising that mall owners think they can arrest patrons for engaging in casual conservations,” said PJI Staff Attorney Matthew McReynolds. “While a ‘don’t talk to strangers’ rule may be good for kids, enforcing it against adults is absurd, and we think it violates California’s free speech guarantees.”

The case is being pursued under the state’s constitutional provision for free speech, which extends protections to private locations, because the 1st Amendment to the Constitution deals directly with government restrictions.

McReynolds said had the case been argued in federal court, it would have had to focus on the discriminatory nature of the mall’s restrictions.

“Singling out religious speech for punishment violates our most basic principles of free expression,” said PJI President Brad Dacus. “If anyone can be arrested for wearing a Christian T-shirt or mentioning God in a shopping mall, we have lost not only our freedom, but our sanity as a society.”

(Read complete article HERE)

---

Honduras Gives a Constitutional Lesson to Obama and the World

The Honduran people gave us a lesson on how a constitution is supposed to work and be followed.  While we are pissing on and shredding ours, they are honoring and following theirs.  They also showed great courage to continue following their convictions and their constitution in the face of political and economic pressure to cave in to the demands of both the thinly and not so thinly veiled communist countries and organizations around the world.  They are being led by people who are actually not afraid to speak the name of God in public, and to incorporate His guidance in their actions.

Here’s to you, Honduras.  Well played.

---

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/print/60668
CNSNews.com

With New Leader Installed, Shunned Honduras Seeks International Recognition

Friday, January 29, 2010

By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

(CNSNews.com) – Honduras took a big step away from its protracted political crisis this week when its new president was sworn in and his deposed predecessor flew into exile, but the new government still faces a challenge in winning international recognition.

Only three presidents, those of Panama, the Dominican Republic and Taiwan, attended Wednesday’s swearing-in of conservative President Porfirio Lobo. Several other regional governments sent foreign ministers. (Notice that Che Gue-bama wasn’t anywhere near the place. Had it been a tin pot communist dictator taking power, Chairman Maobama would have been right there licking his boots.)

The United States, which recognizes the new government, was represented by the assistant secretary for the Western Hemisphere, Arturo Valenzuela.

Also on Thursday, Lobo’s leftist predecessor, Manuel Zelaya, left the mission and flew to the Dominican Republic. He vowed to return someday. Zelaya was ousted five months ago and later sought refuge at the Brazilian Embassy.

Wednesday’s developments in Tegucigalpa, the capital of the small Central American country, marked a defeat for Zelaya’s regional allies, led by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Critics saw Chavez as a leading behind-the-scenes player in Zelaya’s bid to change the constitution to extend presidential term limits – as Chavez and several of his leftist allies have done in their own countries. (This is a key thing to note here. Continue to read about how a constitution is SUPPOSED to work…)

Zelaya’s move violated Honduras’ constitution and triggered a Supreme Court ruling that led to his ouster by the military. His abrupt departure, says Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst Ray Walser, was “a serious blow to a key Chavez ambition: a radicalized, anti-American Honduras.”

In line with constitutional rules of succession, Zelaya was replaced by congressional speaker Roberto Micheletti, who served as interim president until the previously scheduled presidential election in November.

In the election, 62 year-old rancher Lobo of the National Party took 56 percent of the vote, easily beating his nearest rival, the candidate for the Liberal Party (to which both Zelaya and Micheletti belong.).

Zelaya’s removal was viewed by many governments, including the Obama administration, as a “coup.” (This was all going on about the same time O-bow-ma was kissing My-mood I’m-in-a-jihad’s butt, and licking Hugo Chavez’s boots. Had a communist/Marxist dictator taken over, Obama would have hailed it as a “victory for the people.”)

Micheletti’s interim administration came under sustained international pressure to allow Zelaya to serve out his term. (Only the leftists were pushing for this. Conservatives and constitutionalists cheered the fact that Honduras actually obeyed and stood up for their constitution.) The U.S. froze aid, revoked diplomats’ visas, and backed a decision by the Organization of American States (OAS) to suspend Honduras’ membership. (Again, at the behest of the O-bow-minator.)

An accord negotiated by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias called for the reinstatement of Zelaya, the creation of a national unity government, and a “truth commission” to look into the circumstances of his ouster. (All very Stalin-istic. This is what we can expect from failed organizations with leftists goals like the OAS and the UN.)

But lawmakers in December overwhelmingly voted against reinstating Zelaya. The interim government refused to back down despite the outside pressure, choosing to hold out until the date for the formal start of the new presidential term. (I only wish America would display such a spine.)

Lobo has pledged to work to promote reconciliation between Hondurans who supported Zelaya – many or most of whom boycotted the election – and those who applauded his ousting.

During his inaugural speech, the new president signed a decree, approved earlier by lawmakers, granting amnesty to Zelaya and shielding from future prosecution anyone involved in his removal from office.

The move drew criticism from Amnesty International. “Failure to sanction abuses that took place during the coup d’etat could give a green light to further violations in Honduras,” said the group’s Americas program deputy director, Kerrie Howard. (Kind of reminds you of Al Gore crying about the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, doesn’t it? These are the same voices from around the world who want to see Bush and Cheney tried for “war crimes.” To these nut jobs, it’s only a war crime if you’re not a communist dictator murdering millions of your own people.)

‘Bible and constitution’

Micheletti, who will now return to Congress, attended a special Mass Wednesday at a church in Tegucigalpa, where said he wanted to thank God and his supporters for their help during the crisis. (Finally, someone who understands that “separation of church and state” only applies if a) you’re trying to impose a state mandated religion, or b) you’re trying to destroy the moral base of a country so you can institute a communist system.)

He urged Lobo to govern with the Bible in his right hand and the constitution in his left, and called on the international community to support the new government, saying that Honduras had done nothing but defend its democracy. (I think these fellows are more in touch with our founding fathers than we are. The GET IT!)

Governments refusing to recognize Lobo base their stance on the fact he was elected in a vote organized under an “illegitimate” interim administration. (Only viewed as “illegitimate” by those who weren’t happy with the outcome. The Hondurans followed their constitution and the law to the letter. This should be viewed as a victory for law and order.)

In the region, they are led by Venezuela and its leftist allies, as well as members of the Mercosur trade bloc, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay.

Venezuela’s ambassador to the OAS, Roy Chaderton, protested during an OAS council meeting on Wednesday that Lobo’s inauguration had completed “the successful circle designed by the coup plotters in Honduras.” (Communist propaganda.)

Critics of the OAS decision to freeze Honduras’ membership over what they considered essentially an internal constitutional matter contrasted the move with the regional body’s decision just months earlier to scrap a 47 year-old resolution that expelled Cuba for its alignment with the communist bloc. (THIS says it all. A bunch of communist dictators trying to prevent a seed of freedom from sprouting in their back yard.)

With its member states divided over the issue – those recognizing the new government include Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and El Salvador – it remains unclear how the OAS envisages dealing with Lobo.

OAS Secretary-General Jose Miguel Insulza said last week developments in Honduras would have to be “evaluated by countries.”

“In the case of the OAS, a process of gradual return of Honduras to the democratic community will have to be initiated,” he said. “We hope it will happen as soon as possible, and we are ready to help in whatever is necessary.” (Unlike the communist and/or dictatorial regimes making this phony offer, the Hondurans are quite able to handle this change of administration because they followed THE LAW.)

Regional powerhouse Brazil’s role will be particularly important.

Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim on Thursday seemed to leave the door open for a shift in the future, saying that his country’s position remained unchanged “for the moment” but it would watch how Lobo governs. “Everything depends on the new president.”

Meanwhile, Lobo faces not just a struggle for recognition but also severe economic challenges. Even before the political crisis and punitive steps by the international community Honduras already had the highest proportion of people living below the poverty line in Central America and, according to the CIA World Factbook, “extraordinarily unequal distribution of income and high un- and under-employment.”

“The costs of Honduras’s isolation have been substantial,” says Walser. “It has created a climate of uncertainty for businesses and investors. Honduras also suffers from generalized economic recession and a loss of remittance earnings that undercut its already fragile economy.”

Walser said the Obama administration must quickly end sanctions against Honduras, including the denial of visas. It should also press for the country’s return to the OAS, and international recognition.

---

Bias Alert: PMS-NBC Host Illustrates How “Leading Questions” Are Asked

This is exactly why (P)MSNBC is barely clinging to life at the bottom of all the ratings.  Dishonest, disingenuous, biased reporting.

Mizzz Brewer leads Judd Gregg with the classic “so when did you quit beating your wife” type of question.  If she thought she could have gotten away with more than the quip about taking money away from schools, she would have gone for it.  “So, you’re going to leave seniors on the streets to die?” Or, “So, your plan takes food away from children.”  This is how a BIASED reporter asks questions. There are biased reporters on all sides, but the majority of them seem to find homes with media outlets that have a decidedly liberal bias.

An HONEST reporter would have simply asked how the Senator intended to cut spending, then based upon his answers ask how that would affect various programs. They would not lead with an IDEOLOGICAL supposition.

---

http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100128060034.aspx?print=on

GOP Senator Rips Into MSNBC Host For ‘Absurd,’ ‘Dishonest,’ Statements

By: Kyle Drennen
January 28, 2010 16:56 ET

On the soon-to-be canceled ‘It’s the Economy’ program on MSNBC on Thursday, co-host Contessa Brewer grilled Republican New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg on his calls to reduce out-of-control government spending: “Which programs are you willing to cut? Are you willing to tell schools, no money for you?” Gregg shot back: “What an absurd statement to make. And what a dishonest statement to make.”

Gregg called out Brewer for her unfair framing of the issue: “…nobody’s saying no money for schools….On its face you’re being fundamentally dishonest when you make that type of statement.” He went to explain the kinds of budget cuts he would make: “I would freeze discretionary spending, a real freeze, not a – not a freeze plus inflation. I would eliminate the T.A.R.P. money….I would end the stimulus spending effective in June of this year, if not sooner….reform our entitlement programs….I’ve made very specific proposals and I’m willing to stand by them.”

Gregg was far from finished, he described the big government mentality shared by the Obama administration and the liberal media: “The problem is that this administration’s view of governance is that economic prosperity is created by growing the government dramatically. And then it gets misrepresented by people like yourself who say they’re going to – that if you do any of this stuff you’re going to end up not funding education.”

Brewer attempted to deny suggesting that Gregg wanted to cut funding for schools: “That’s not what I said.” Gregg continued undeterred: “I mean that statement alone is the most irresponsible statement I’ve heard from a reporter, probably in a month….And there are a lot of irresponsible statements made by reporters and that was the most irresponsible I’ve heard.”

Fellow co-host Melissa Francis ran to Brewer’s defense: “Senator, with respect, that’s not what she said, she was asking you what you would like to cut specifically.” Gregg replied: “That’s exactly what she said, go back and read your transcript.”

Brewer then attempted to end the interview: “We appreciate your time today-” Gregg kept going: “You can’t be duplicitous about this. You can’t make a representation and then claim you didn’t make it. You know, it just shouldn’t work that way. You’ve got to have some integrity on your side of this camera, too.”

Gregg reiterated: “…you’re suggesting we should have a zero – zero in education. Well, of course, nobody’s suggesting that. Nobody’s even implying that. But in your introduction to me, you said that, that education funding would be cut.” Brewer again denied making that exact implication: “No, I didn’t.” She then concluded the interview: “Senator, I’m sorry for any mis-communication that we’ve had. And as always, we appreciate your time, we appreciate you sharing your particular perspective on what should be done to take America into a prosperous future. Thank you.”

Here is a full transcript of the segment:

2:33PM

CONTESSA BREWER: Let’s bring in now Republican Judd Gregg, the Senator of New Hampshire, the top Republican now on the Budget Committee and a member of the Senate Banking Committee. What do you think about the money the President is proposing to spend on jobs and what [National Urban League President] Mark [Morial] was just saying that it has to go hand in hand with other programs that integrate job training, vocational skills, and certainly educating very young people.

JUDD GREGG: Well, we’re running a 3 point – a $1.3 trillion deficit this year. The government’s going to spend over $3 trillion. All of that deficit goes into the debt, which has to be paid by our children and our children’s children. I think somebody’s got to ask a more fundamental question, how are you going to get the economy going if you run up the debt to a point where we can’t afford our government? That, I think, is a much more fundamental question.

If you want to do something to energize this economy, I think you put in place some plans which control the rate of government, so the people can have confidence that we as a nation are not going to go into some form of fiscal bankruptcy in five to seven years. And that will cause people to be willing to invest, to be willing to take risks, and to be willing to create jobs. Jobs are not created by the government. You know, long-term good jobs are created by a vibrant economy. And you don’t get a vibrant economy when the government and the size of the government and the debt of the government is overwhelming the capacity of the economy to function well.

MELISSA FRANCIS: That’s good in theory, Senator. How would you practically-

GREGG: It’s not theory. It’s not theory.

FRANCIS: How would you – well, tell me-

GREGG: Don’t tell me that it’s good in theory.

FRANCIS: Well, tell me how to put it to work. Tell me – tell me very practically-

GREGG: No, you don’t tell me it’s good in theory. What are you – how do you get off saying something like that? Good in theory?

FRANCIS: Because it is good in theory. It is, it’s fantastic.

GREGG: Oh, of course.

FRANCIS: So tell me how to practically – here’s your opportunity, Senator, let me finish, to tell us how to practically put it to work. I’m all for small government.

GREGG: Well, you stop – you stop the spending spree. You stop growing government so fast that you can’t afford to pay for it. You don’t increase the size of the government from 20% of GDP to 25% of GDP in two years. You don’t add a trillion dollars of new debt to the – to our kid’s back every year for the next ten years. You don’t pass a budget – the President doesn’t send up a budget which increases – doubles the debt in five years, triples it in ten years. You don’t say that you’re for fiscal responsibility and then propose a whole panoply of new programs which you can’t pay for. That’s not theory, that’s reality. That’s what we’re facing as a nation.

BREWER: So when – when-

GREGG: The reality of a fiscal meltdown of our country which is going to have a massive impact on people’s lives and especially cost a lot of jobs in this country.

BREWER: So my partner, Melissa, Senator Gregg, is really asking for specifics. If you don’t believe that we should have a $1.3 trillion budget, which programs are you willing to cut? Are you willing to tell schools, no money for you? Do you – and do you side then, with those who say – I mean, you look back at the Great Depression, economists say we landed back into real problems in 1937 when people got onto cutting a deficit and a lot of government spending was pulled back before it should have been.

GREGG: Well, first off nobody’s saying no money for schools. What an absurd statement to make.

BREWER: Well, I’m asking-

GREGG: And what a dishonest statement to make.

BREWER: What we both are-

GREGG: On its face you’re being fundamentally dishonest when you make that type of statement.

BREWER: Senator Gregg, what we’re both asking, is which programs you expect to cut?

FRANCIS: Tell us what to cut.

GREGG: I mean do you know how much money we’re spending at the federal government on education this year?

BREWER: Which – Senator, you’re going to be asked to cut certain programs if you’re on the Senate Banking Committee, which programs would you cut?

FRANCIS: Just tell us, what do you want to cut?

GREGG: Oh I have no problem telling you, I would freeze discretionary spending, a real freeze, not a – not a freeze plus inflation. I would eliminate the T.A.R.P. money, which would get us close to $400 billion. I would end the stimulus spending effective in June of this year, if not sooner, so that we can recover all the money that’s going to be spent outside the window of this recession. And we shouldn’t be spending it and adding it to the debt. I would take a major effort to reform our entitlement programs, in fact yesterday, or the day before yesterday, we had a vote to try to do that under a bill which I proposed with Senator Conrad. I’ve made very specific proposals and I’m willing to stand by them. The problem is that this administration’s view of governance is that economic prosperity is created by growing the government dramatically. And then it gets misrepresented by people like yourself who say they’re going to – that if you do any of this stuff you’re going to end up not funding education.

BREWER: That’s not what I said

GREGG: I mean that statement alone is the most irresponsible statement I’ve heard from a reporter, probably in a month.

BREWER: It wasn’t a statement, it was a question.

GREGG: And there are a lot of irresponsible statements made by reporters and that was the most irresponsible I’ve heard.

FRANCIS: Senator, with respect, that’s not what she said, she was asking you what you would like to cut specifically.

GREGG: No, that’s what she said.

FRANCIS: And I think you answered the question.

BREWER: We appreciate your time-

GREGG: That’s exactly what she said, go back and read your transcript.

BREWER: We appreciate your time today-

GREGG: You can’t be duplicitous about this. You can’t make a representation and then claim you didn’t make it. You know, it just shouldn’t work that way. You’ve got to have some integrity on your side of this camera, too.

FRANCIS: She asked you what you would like to cut. She asked you if you’d like to cut schools. You said no. It was a question and answer.

GREGG: No, you’re suggesting we should have a zero – zero in education. Well, of course, nobody’s suggesting that. Nobody’s even implying that. But in your introduction to me, you said that, that education funding would be cut.

BREWER: No, I didn’t.

GREGG: Well, education funding isn’t going to be cut. Yes you did.

BREWER: Senator, I’m sorry for any mis-communication that we’ve had. And as always, we appreciate your time, we appreciate you sharing your particular perspective on what should be done to take America into a prosperous future. Thank you.

GREGG: Thank you.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.

---

State of the Union-Loving, Narcissistic, Undocumented President

Lie after lie after lie.  David said it quite well when he said “Obama not only wasn’t contrite about his broken promises and disastrous record; he was on the attack, daring anyone to oppose his agenda.“

Here are a few of the adjectives I would use to describe Chairman Maobama’s State of the Union(s) speech: angry, narcissistic, disjointed, dishonest, unrepentant, unpresidential, classless, lacking decorum, and pathological.

The writer of his speech should be fired, then taken to the woodshed for the number of lies, lack of facts, and other breaches of decorum in the speech.  But we know that will never happen, because O-bow-ma believed just about every word of the speech (except, of course, the part about drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants.)

The few democrats left that might remotely consider themselves as AMERICANS need to head for the life boats.  The true “progressives,” the followers of “the one,” are going down with the ship.

It’s time to start whispering “IMPEACHMENT.”

---

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/dlimbaugh/2010/dl_0129p.shtml
There Was the President’s Speech, and There Is Reality
By David Limbaugh
January 29, 2010

Watching President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech makes me wonder whether the reason he tells so many fibs is that he believes them himself. Either that or he is an even better actor than he is a teleprompter reader.

Obama not only wasn’t contrite about his broken promises and disastrous record; he was on the attack, daring anyone to oppose his agenda — even in the face of the Massachusetts rebuke. But let’s see how some of his statements match up with reality.

On health care, he taunted congressmen to “let me know” if any of them have “a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses,” as if his own plan would do those things.

Even the Congressional Budget Office has said most of the Democratic plans would increase the budget. Besides, you can’t reduce overall costs when government forces an increase in demand, even if it caps insurance premiums and shifts costs elsewhere and/or imposes rationing. The CBO has also reported that with Obamacare, millions would remain uninsured. So under his plan, costs would rise, quality and choice would decrease, care would be rationed, millions would remain uninsured and, worst of all, the government would acquire an unprecedented level of control over all aspects of our lives.

Do conservatives have better ideas? Of course. Restore market forces through tort reform, strengthening health savings accounts, abolishing government coverage mandates, allowing consumers to purchase policies across state lines and eliminating the tax laws incentivizing employer-provided health care, which unnecessarily increase demand by making prices invisible to consumers.

A candid Obama would have said, “If any of you have a plan that does not involve restoring market forces and reducing government’s role in the health care industry, I’ll at least pretend to look at it.” “Make no mistake,” neither Obama nor his Democratic colleagues will support genuine health care reform, because to reduce costs, we must reduce government control, and they can’t abide that. Period.

As for spending, Obama didn’t once apologize for his reckless expenditures. Instead, he blamed his soaring deficits on his predecessor, completely misrepresenting the projected deficits under President Bush and ignoring his own deliberate doubling of the national debt over the next 10 years. That’s the issue Americans are losing sleep over, and he offers only Band-Aids and smoke and mirrors.

He says he will freeze a portion of the discretionary budget, but as Cato Institute reports, 83 percent of the budget will be off-limits. Other than his “stimulus” insanity, the real explosion in spending is occurring in the entitlements that he refuses to touch. Even his mini-freeze wouldn’t begin until 2011 (why wait?), and it would be dwarfed by his planned spending increases for other socialistic projects, including a new “stimulus plan.” And how about that assault on personal and fiscal responsibility with his promise to forgive student loans after 20 years?

How Obama can stand before the nation and insist on spending more borrowed money to accomplish something his first “stimulus plan” didn’t achieve (job creation), but exacerbated, is beyond me. How he can blame President Bush for his own broken promise that unemployment wouldn’t exceed 8 percent if his “stimulus” bill were implemented is jaw-dropping. He even said he saved 2 million jobs. Scary delusional! Or scary sinister!

Speaking of chutzpah, did he actually dare to utter the words “transparent” and “accountable”? How about those phantom legislative districts receiving stimulus monies, Mr. President? How about that promise to televise the health care debates on C-SPAN?

He said he hadn’t raised income taxes “a single dime” on 95 percent of the people. Yet in almost the same breath, he promised to redouble his efforts on cap and tax, which would increase the average family’s energy costs by almost $3,000 per year. I don’t believe his campaign promise was limited to income taxes, by the way. (He also said he had CUT taxes on the middle class. Being solidly in the middle class, I think I would know if that had actually happened. Reducing my withholding so it looks like I’m getting a tax break, when it actually pushes me into a higher tax bracket forcing me to pay that much and more on April 15th is NOT a tax cut. A “stimulus” check, which just gives back a small portion of what was mine to begin with, is not a tax cut. Giving that same “stimulus” check to those who don’t pay taxes at all is just a handout, and communist redistribution of our hard earned money.)

How about his righteous ranting on earmark reform? Sorry, we’ve been down that twisted road with you before, Mr. President. (There were some 9,000 earmarks in the O-bow-ma porkulus bill. I’d call that a step in the right direction, wouldn’t you? (facetiousness intended))

Then there was his audacious riff on lobbyists. Been there, done that, too, Mr. President, with your phony promise to keep lobbyists out of the White House.

Obama also railed against “partisanship, shouting and pettiness” as he filled most of his speech with just those things, even castigating the Supreme Court, erroneously, for opening the door to foreign corporations’ campaign contributions.

How about his statement that “America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity”? Hmm. Tell that to the Iranian and Honduran peoples. He must have meant once he’s out of office.

Then there was his bizarre out-of-body pivot, when he blamed Washington for our problems. (Narcissistic clown.)

All of this, especially Obama’s obvious incapacity for self-doubt, is disturbingly surreal. (It’s like the speech he gave the other day on “tax cuts.” In that speech, he said “I” over 120 time while mentioning the subject of the speech, tax cuts, only TWICE. It’s kind of like the Toby Keith song “I wanna talk about me.” (I wanna talk about me, Wanna talk about I, Wanna talk about number one…) He is a self-centered, communist/progressive, anti-America, probably NOT American danger to America, our constitution, and our way of life.)

—

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His book “Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party” was released recently in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at www.DavidLimbaugh.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

---

Nancy Pelosi: “Let them eat cake. THEN off with their heads!”

Taking artistic liberty with the words of the great Winston Churchill,

“Never in the field of human conflict, has SO MUCH, been done BY SO MANY, for SO FEW.

We have allowed our government to gain a sense of self importance that was never intended by our founding fathers.  For those in government, the government has become more important than the people whom they are supposed to serve.  They embody the sense of entitlement which they are forcing down the throats of America, which is also dividing America.

These elitists (not to be confused with ‘elites’) have not earned, nor do they deserve the privilege they partake in, and the respect they demand.  They are confiscating and squandering the blood and treasure of Americans more for their own benefit than for the benefit of America.

Nancy Pelosi may fancy herself a modern day Marie Antoinette, but she would do well to remember the fate of Marie.

Nancy, we are about to storm the palace.

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=123472

Friday, January 29, 2010
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Taxpayers paid $101,000 for Pelosi’s in-flight ‘food, booze’

Speaker’s trips ‘are more about partying than anything else’
Posted: January 29, 2010
12:20 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily

It reads like a dream order for some wild frat party: Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer.

But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for “in-flight services” – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That’s almost $1,000 per week.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show that the Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time.

“Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said today. “And these documents suggest the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else.”

Pelosi, D-Calif., who joined President Obama on a list of Top 10 corrupt politicians, was added to that list for her “sense of entitlement,” Judicial Watch said when the “honors” were announced not long ago.

“Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline,” the evaluation said.

And WND reported almost a year ago that Pelosi was shown to have been erratically canceling and rescheduling flights, like one would with an on-call taxi service.

“We have … folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc,” said one Department of Defense e-mail then. (Having worked in a DV airlift squadron, I can tell you with certainty of personal experience that the preparation for these VIP flights is quite involved.  There’s flight planning (routing, diplomatic clearances, permission to land at certain airports), and logistics (fuel, food, hanger/tie-down space coordination, ground transportation), all of which is time sensitive and tied to the party’s request for travel.  Because the professionals in the military who make it seem effortless, and nearly always “make it happen,” these self-proclaimed royalty like Nancy Pelosi, the Botox Bolshevik Barbie, have zero appreciation for the effort and wealth expended on their behalf.  Nor do they care.)

Another official sent an e-mail questioning a series of Pelosi’s requests for aircraft.

“Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi's team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?” it stated. “[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’…”

The e-mail noted that the speaker’s office had “a history of canceling many of their past requests.”

Yet another e-mail exchange at that time revealed Pelosi’s demand that jets pick her up at Travis Air Force Base rather than San Francisco’s airport.

“She lives about 1.5 hours from SFO and much closer to Travis. … Whether it is the best use of assets is not the question. But instead is it worth upsetting the speaker…” (Heaven forbid we upset the Botox Bolshevik!  She should be traveling commercial like the rest of us commoners, especially since WE ARE FOOTING THE BILL!)

Said another,

“This is a battle that we are bound to lose if we tell the speaker(’s) office. In the end, this is what will happen. I wish that I could say this is a one-time request, but we know it will probably happen again in the future.”

Yet another indicated a deep level of frustration:

“Here is the laydown: there are five G5s. Two are broke. Two off on CODELS. One slated for priority White House… we should keep on G-III for now for Tuesday afternoon and start sacrificing goats and chickens.”

Judicial Watch said the newly obtained 2,000 pages of documentation show Pelosi’s military travel cost the U.S. Air Force $2,100,744.59 over two years – including $101,429.14 which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.

Among the newest highlights revealed:

• Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. Of 103 Pelosi-led congressional delegations (CODEL), 31 trips included members of the House speaker’s family.
• One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C., through Tel Aviv, Israel, to Baghdad, Iraq, May 15-20, 2008, “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. This flight included the purchase of the long list of alcoholic drinks.
• According to a “Memo for Record” from a March 29-April 7, 2007, CODEL that involved a stop in Israel, “CODEL could only bring kosher items into the hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. bourbon, whiskey, scotch, vodka, gin, triple sec, tequila, etc.

Pelosi’s office could not be contacted for comment. The answering machine said the office would be closed until Monday, and the mailbox was full so no messages could be left.

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.