Where Do Your “Rights” Come From?

If your rights are not endowed by God, but are arbitrarily granted by man, then those rights can arbitrarily be taken away by man. We are seeing that taking place RIGHT NOW. Also, a “right” does not take away from another. If you look at many/most of the so-called “rights” granted by government, they take from one to redistribute to another. “Free” healthcare, “free” education, etc. The government takes by force from those who have earned these things to provide them to those who have not. When men and government decide that your rights are inconvenient, they can arbitrarily take them away. Right to bear arms? Government sees that as a threat, so they are trying to take it away. Right to choose your own doctor? Government views that as unnecessary and “unfair,” so they HAVE taken that away. The right to free speech? Already gone. The government can decide if your words are “hateful” and whether or not you can speak them. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Yes, now even your basic right to LIFE is at the whim of the government if we have allowed them to take our other rights AND the ability to defend them.

Do you think you STILL live in a free country? Think again. Do you want to live in a truly free country? Then fight for it.

---

---

Liberty — Endowed by Whom?

The Eternal Bequest

By Mark Alexander · Jul. 3, 2013

“God who gave us life gave us Liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.” –Thomas Jefferson (1774)

Amid all the contemporary political and cultural contests, too many conservatives fail to make the case for overarching eternal truths – whether in debate with adversaries across the aisles of Congress, or with neighbors across Main Street.

Lost in the din is the foundational endowment of Essential Liberty, and any debate that does not begin with this eternal truth will end with temporary deceits.

The most oft-cited words from our Declaration of Independence are these: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The eternal assertion that Liberty for all people is “endowed by their Creator” and is thus “unalienable” should require no defense, because “we hold these truths to be self-evident,” and because the rights of man are irrevocable from the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

But the root of all debate between Liberty and tyranny – or, in political parlance, between Right and left – is the contest to assert who endows Liberty – God or man.

Democrats Declare Government to be God

What are “unalienable” rights?  The dictionary defines the term as rights which are not to be separated, given away, or taken away.  Don’t confuse this with “inalienable” which implies that the rights can’t be taken away without CONSENT.  UNalienable rights are forever.  These are rights, which according to our founding fathers, were given to us by our CREATOR, God.  Our rights do not flow from government. Pay close attention to the words of Tom Harkin, because there is a difference.

What are our unalienable rights?  The founding fathers started the list with “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  It can also be extrapolated (not interpolated) since they are included in the original amendments that the right to freedom of speech, the right to practice or not practice the religion of your choice (atheism is a religion), the right to self defense (2nd Amendment), and the right to privacy are included in this list.

Find me a place ANYWHERE in the constitution that says free health care is a RIGHT, or that a senator, congressman, president, or ANY PERSON has the power to give or take away UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.

Senator Tom Harkin and his fellow democrats have declared government to be God.  Do you think God delegated this responsibility and power?  Somehow I don’t think so.

Liberals, communists, socialists, progressives, whatever they call themselves are STEALING our rights and placing themselves on the throne.  They are building a framework to allow them to completely destroy the constitution as the law of the land in America, and install an oligarchy.  Communism.

Communism has failed EVERY time it has been tried.  It fails because it ignores basic human nature.  It ignores the basic human thirst for freedom and independence, and the desire to improve ones situation.  Once you are told that you can’t move up in life, can’t “get ahead,” can’t save to buy a bigger home or things to make your life easier, and told that all you produce will be taken from you and given to those who produce nothing, the motivation to produce is gone.  When the motivation to produce EXCESS is removed, the excess on which any economy grows is removed, and the excess which communism depends on to spread around around is removed.  You are left with empty promises, poverty, and suffering which result in economic and societal collapse.

So listen with FEAR and ANGER to the words of Tom Harkin as he declares the government to be the god with the power to give or take away your rights.

These people MUST be removed from office NOW.  This destruction of our constitution can NOT be allowed to continue.

In his “starter home” analogy, what Harkin doesn’t admit is that the “starter home” they are building with the expectation of adding on to is a TAR PAPER SHACK.  It is not a good foundation to build on unless you intend to collapse the system and put the one you REALLY want in place.

---

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/30/dear-sen-harkin-these-are-terrible-materials-for-building-a-starter-home/

Dear Sen. Harkin, These Are Terrible Materials For Building A Starter Home

By: Jon Walker Wednesday December 30, 2009 3:30 pm

Sen. Tom Harkin continues to refer to the Senate health reform bill as a “starter home” in a new entry on the Huffington Post.

Instead of that “partial loaf” analogy, I like to think of this bill as like a starter home. It is not the mansion of our dreams. But it has a solid foundation, giving every American access to quality, affordable coverage. It has an excellent, protective roof, which will shelter Americans from the worst abuses of health insurance companies. And this starter home has plenty of room for additions and improvements.

This bill has a terrible foundation. It is a starter home built with the equivalent of toxic drywall, lead paint, a poorly mixed cement foundation, and faulty electric wiring.

The bill is built on the extremely wasteful and inefficient private insurance system and contains one of the biggest rollbacks in decades of women’s reproductive rights. It, in effect, gives a permanent exclusivity to expensive biologics, and still denies Americans the ability to buy cheaper drugs from overseas. It has insufficient regulations and leaves the regulator enforcement purely up to the states, which have a poor track record enforcing the current regulations on their books. Regulation without enforcement is worthless. It throws good money after bad without fixing the underlying problems. The cost of the insurance will be too high and the quality of the insurance is too low. Funneling billions of dollars and forcing millions of Americans to buy a product that is frankly a terrible bargain is not a good foundation to build on. It is only a good foundation for the private insurance companies because it further enriches and entrenches them. Rewarding the failure of the private health insurance system with even more money and more customers is not how you want to build your “starter home.”

Harkin is definitely correct when he says, “a starter home has plenty of room for additions and improvements.” There are many, many, many problems with this bill that need to be corrected. Unfortunately, no one is going to want to put additions on a terribly built home, and no one is going to want to rehire the same contractor that so completely botched the construction of the home to build the addition. I would love it if this were a smaller home, but built with a sturdy foundation.

In reality, what we have is a massive corporate giveaway that will serve to discredit the “progressive” principles that Harkin falsely claims this thing is built on. Teddy Roosevelt was the progressive trust buster. It makes a mockery of the term “progressive” to claim a plan to force Americans to buy expensive, low-quality goods from insurance companies exempt form anti-trust laws (laws that Roosevelt championed) and subsidized with taxpayer money is in anyway “progressive.”

http://ydr.inyork.com/ci_14149534?source=most_emailed

Congress — the new God?

JOHN DOLPHIN

Updated: 01/08/2010 02:07:22 PM EST
Recently Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, asserted that Congress has succeeded in granting the American People a new “unalienable” right, the right to health care. No doubt, the use of the word “unalienable” was deliberate. Harkin went on to imply this is just the beginning. Other politicians echoed Harkin’s stance.

Harkin, although sworn to uphold the Constitution, doesn’t understand, or doesn’t care, that Congress does not grant the American People our unalienable rights. The Declaration of Independence clearly states: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” The Constitution and its amendments enumerate our rights. The amendment process provides for adding rights the American people wish to have established or more clearly delineated. That’s why the first 10 amendments are referred to as The Bill of Rights. Nowhere in our system of government is there authorization for creating rights by congressional action.

When are the American people going to wake up?

The “political class,” regardless of party or persuasion, considers itself gods! They are establishing a religion, a religion which affords them nearly divine power. It may not be a traditional theistic religion. It is nonetheless a unified system of beliefs which holds the decisions of government to be dogma.

That is statism. The statists even intend for their decisions to be eternal. Evidence the attempt to preclude future Congresses from changing certain provisions of pending health care legislation. They also hold as absolute the state’s authority to make any decision it wishes, without the consent of the governed and with no regard for constitutional constraints. Evidence the deal made with Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., which violates Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution: “. . . all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. . ..” At last count, 13 states’ attorneys generals are threatening a constitutional challenge if the “Nelson deal” survives the legislative process.

We’ve seen this before. Throughout history, whether emperors, kings, fascists or communists, the statists’ position has always been that they know best. It was the statism of King George which inspired the Declaration of Independence. Statism is antithetical to the defining principles of our nation.

No matter how persuasive the claims of altruism, government control of citizens’ rights (whether granting or denying) is oppression. Under our Constitution, there are only two ways to establish a right:

— Find it enumerated in the Constitution or existing amendments.

— Pass a constitutional amendment.

As regards rights, the only role for Congress is protecting our constitutionally established rights. If a majority of Congress believes there is a right to health care, they should explain where it is found in the Constitution as amended, or propose and have ratified a new constitutional amendment. If either method were successful, I’d be the first in line for my government medical card. Otherwise, there is no right to health care. There is only the belief of those who assert that position. Governmental action based solely on belief, without proper constitutional implementation, is the imposition of religion in its rawest form.

This is not a Democratic vs. Republican issue, nor is it a liberal vs. conservative argument. It is an essential principle of constitutional government. It is of utmost concern to all citizens regardless of all political stripes. Statism is a double-edged sword which cuts in all directions. Presently, the process of governance is in the control of “liberals.” It could as easily come under “conservative” control. Someday it could be controlled by factions as yet defined. In no case should politicians have the power they are presently assuming. To use the words of Lincoln: “government of the people, by the people and for the people” is the clear intent of our Founding Fathers and the system they codified.

Unless Americans decisively assert themselves at the ballot box (vote Democratic, vote Republican, vote independent, but for God’s sake, vote) this November and in November 2012, we will have implicitly, if not explicitly, given our consent to the dogma that Congress is the absolute power on Earth and in Heaven. We will have endorsed the belief that Congress has the authority to grant, create or deny any right it wishes by legislative fiat. In fact, we will be complicit in a violation of the establishment clause of the Constitution’s First Amendment by allowing the government to establish statism as a secular religion. Where’s the ACLU when you really need them?

Whether we agree or disagree with the current elected politicians, “We the people” better think long and hard about how we want our government to serve our interests. The day will come, if it hasn’t already, when the politicians will enforce their will and it will be in no one’s interest but their own. We will have ceded so much power to the politicians that, well, God help us. According to Jefferson, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” Please, I implore you, wake up; be vigilant.

John Dolphin is CEO of CADS-USA in Hallam.

---

Dr. Obama, can I take my medicine now?

For  you idiots that elected Uh-bama and his teleprompter, WAKE UP!  The bus that is America couldn’t make the curve that the liberals have thrown it, and it has now burst through the guard rail and is hanging halfway over the cliff.  What’s worse, rather than try to pull it back, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are at the back bumper trying to push it over.

The latest Obamanation is this health care bill which the democrats are trying to ram down our throats this week.  This will result in rationing of health care to all but the extremely rich and politically powerful (that’s what’s happening in Canada and Great Britain).  You will be forced (i.e. you will have no choice NOT to buy) to buy your “insurance” from the government.  All competing plans will be disallowed.  New medicines and procedures will no longer be developed because there will be no financial incentive to develop them.  Quality doctors will leave medical practice and be replaced by less cabable ones because of salary caps and insurance laws.  In Great Britain there are a fixed number of doctors.  To get one of those positions, a doctor must either retire or die.  You have medical interns quitting after a 20-30 year wait without ever practicing medicine because no one died or retired.  A committee will decide who gets procedures and certain kinds of health care based upon how much “utility” the state will get from you after the surgery before you die.  In other words, the older you are, the less likely you are to get needed health care because you’re more likely to die before the state can get its money’s worth (pay back) from you.  Doctors and patients from Canada, Great Britain, and pretty much any other country you can name that has socialized medicine have gone on record imploring us not to go down this road.  Of course you never hear that from the Obamedia because of their biased coverage of the Obamessiah. (See this story and its links for more on that.) WAKE UP and see that we are going down the path to becoming the next version of the Soviet Union.

Contact your representatives and senators, and several of the others, to make them hear our voice.  Once this bill passes, we won’t be able to undo it.  See the files linked below for contact information for all congressmen and senators.

2009_senateinfo

2009_congressinfo_allhousereps

– The Loft – http://www.gopusa.com/theloft –

Dr. Obama, can I take my medicine now?

Posted By Bobby Eberle On April 27, 2009 at 7:50 am

The left-wing steamroller keeps right on rolling, squashing one American institution after another. From banks to energy to the automobile industry, Obama is squeezing the life out of the private sector and injecting government where it doesn’t belong. What’s next you ask? Health care.

Obama and the Democrats are now focusing on a massive health care bill that will put government in more control than ever before. Knowing that passage of such a bill would be a crowning achievement on the way to socialized medicine, the Democrats are now considering bypassing the traditional legislative process so that Republicans would not be able to mount a filibuster. Need an operation? Please take a number and get to the back of the line.

As noted in a FOXNews.com story, Obama and Congressional leaders are considering using a tactic known as “reconciliation” to push forward Obama’s health care plan.

The fast-track process would protect Obama’s ambitious plan to overhaul the U.S. health care system from a potential GOP filibuster and limit the Republicans’ ability to get concessions. It also would give Democrats far more control over the specifics of the health care legislation.

Under typical Senate rules, 60 votes are needed to advance a bill, but reconciliation would enable Democrats to enact the health care plan with just a simple majority and only 20 hours of debate.

In case you missed the 2006 and 2008 elections, Democrats hold majorities in the Senate and the House and, using tactics such as that described above, could pass almost any legislation. Add to that a few weak-kneed Republicans, and the situation becomes even more serious.

In a story on CNSNews.com, the leading Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, said that Obama’s health care plan would not result in “government-mandated health care rationing.” Obama currently says that he will pay for his health care “reform” plan by creating “efficiencies” in the medical system.

“There is no rationing of health care at all,” Baucus told CNSNews.com on Friday. “You choose your own doctor. You choose your own health insurance that you want to have. This is all a choice.

“What we are talking about is squeezing cost out of the system because of an emphasis on quality care, not quantity,” Baucus told CNSNews.com. “Today the emphasis in the reimbursement is quantity whether you are a doctor, or a medical equipment manufacturer, whatever you are. It’s quantity. You get paid for the number of units that you provide.

Baucus went on to say that this plan is a “whole new way of doing business,” but then added that “there may be some cuts.” Oh really!

The news story then quotes the White House’s director of the National Economic Council as saying, “Look at health care, the frequency of different procedures, whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies in different parts of the country — and what you see is that in some parts of the country procedures are done three times as frequently and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population.”

No benefit to the health of the population? What in the world does that even mean? I’m sure the person getting the procedure doesn’t care about the rest of the population.

Of course, the language in Obama’s plan is vague, to say the least, and Republicans are questioning where the “savings” would come from.

“If you’re going to quantify [savings] with certainty, that means you feel you’re going to ration with certainty,” said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Feb. 26.

“How do they propose to go about doing this?” asked Ryan. “Do they propose to set up a system where the government is in the nucleus of our health care system, where the government is telling providers — physicians — how to practice medicine?”

As he did with the bailout, Obama is appealing to the media by saying that he wants the health care plan to be “bipartisan.” Give me a break. Yes, he wants to work with Republicans just as long as Republicans agree with him. As noted in the FOXNews.com story, “Democrats, including Obama, have said repeatedly that they want the health care debate to be bipartisan and that the filibuster-proof terms would be used only if the GOP obstructs.” Does that sound like a bipartisan environment to you?

“Reconciliation is basically a nuclear weapon to use against the negotiators so what happens is nobody negotiates seriously because they can always go to reconciliation … tilting the playing field unfairly,” said Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, top Republican on the Budget Committee.

The Democrats do deserve credit for one thing… once given control of government (because Republicans turned away from their principles); they have absolutely no problems in pushing forward their agenda. Given the opportunity they are ramming socialism down our throats. Imagine all we could have passed with our missed opportunity.

The more government gets involved in health care, the worse the health care system becomes. That is a simple fact.

Let’s Play, Pirates!

Evil can not be defeated with acquiescence. Evil must be confronted and defeated. To defeat these pirates, we do not have to go and “nation build” in Somalia. We need to defend our ships, sink any pirate ships that threaten us, and kill all pirates involved. The remaining pirates will get the message that if they screw with us, they die. Piracy of American ships stops. We’ve done it before, but I don’t think we have the guts to do it again.

Let’s Play, Pirates

by Ted Nugent (more by this author)
Posted 04/14/2009 ET

Ah, the open sea. An adventurous captain’s dream, we sail the vast oceans of the world. I’ve got this big old scow, sailing from port to port, loading up with merchandise, goods and raw materials to deliver to buyers from sellers around the globe.

Been doing it for time immemorial. Pretty simple, logical procedure really. No rocket science here. I simply pay attention, think and do the right thing. A responsible professional must never let his guard down and will always be prepared. Captain Nuge, reporting for duty. The last Boy Scout lives.

My ship is always maintained in tip-top shape for the grueling conditions that Mother Nature hits us with constantly. Fresh paint every other year or so, and I must keep my engines purring, rudder strong, propeller sturdy and straight and anchors and chains ready to do their jobs. Lifeboats and floatation gear for all on board are checked and double checked regularly.

My crew is the best there is: tough, rugged, jacks of all trade, professional sailors, ready, willing and capable to accomplish any task an angry sea could bring our way. Standard operating procedures all.

Our cook is the best there is. He always has fresh fruits and vegetables, quality beef, pork, poultry and all our favorite seafoods. He has quite the touch in the galley, preparing hearty meals for a hearty band of seafarers, so we can remain healthy and strong during our extended voyages.

We have never had a fire on board, but we do make certain that all the fire extinguishers, strategically located throughout the ship, are charged up to the max and that everyone knows how to handle them, just in case.

As captain of my ship, it is my duty to study weather conditions, political variations in all the geographical zones of our travels, and keep in constant touch with my government agencies so that I can avoid dangerous conditions, whether they be weather or politically related.

For example, though self defense is the most basic of human instincts, and no individual, much less a ship cruising international waters in these uncertain times would ever accept the irresponsible condition of unarmed helplessness, it is our routes along the coast of Somalia that demand my maximum attentiveness in these days of global terrorism.

Everyone knows about the horrors of Blackhawk Down, and this coastal hell zone of voodoo gangs is more unstable now than ever, virtually overrun with the lowest forms of life, the worst terrorist evildoers the world has ever known.

Knowing of this outrageously dangerous state of affairs, made that much more volatile by increased, nonstop attacks on shipping vessels by Somalian pirates, threatening lives, kidnapping and demanding enormous ransoms, I took the prudent steps to adequately protect myself, crew, ship and cargo. That other countries have made the insane mistake of emboldening these pirates by paying their ransoms, I knew it would just be a matter of time before these punk gangs would attack a ship sailing under the American flag. Bring it.

So, awhile back, after a briefing with my fellow sailors, we increased our artillery and ammunition on board and trained more diligently for a worse case scenario.

Each man on board has his own M-16 and 2000 rounds of ammo. Every third sailor is also equipped with a standard M-37 grenade launcher attached to his M-16 with a gross of grenades. And because the lives of my crew are sacred, I found a small company right here in the good old US of A that makes kits to protect them. I bought four, two fore and aft and two port and starboard. They are armored plate and sandbags, with a nice swivel mount for something on top. They didn’t cost much: about what I’d pay for a really good guitar.

And so, on top of the ones fore and aft is mounted a .Ma Deuce .50 caliber machinegun with 10,000 rounds, protecting our freedom one half-inch at a time. Port and starboard we have quad mounts of M-240 .30 cal machineguns with 10,000 rounds each. Every crew member is trained extensively in mastering each weapon, and these boys are all-American Sgt. York sniper marksmen, I assure you. We are not Navy SEALs, but we do our best.

We train diligently trained and keep a ten-man rotating 24 hour red alert watch detail, with instructions to identify any vessel approaching within 1000 yards of our ship, sound an “all hands on deck” alarm, fire one 20-round .50 cal burst across the bow of any invader vessel, then if it does not turn back, to literally blow it out of the water. Seems like the prudent thing to do.

Just as God gave us the individual right to keep and her arms to protect ourselves, our family and our homes, that self evident truth logic clearly applies to my ship and crew as well. We have a flag flying under our American flag with a coiled yellow snake that reads — “Don’t tread and me.” It is not just a cool phrase: we actually mean it.

I, for the life of me, cannot fathom the soulless mindset of choosing unarmed helplessness. It goes against the very pulse of mankind. This is my life, this is my ship, these men and this cargo are in my care. Helplessness invites and promotes evil to do as evil does.

On my ship of life, just the opposite message resonates. Keep your little terrorist dinghy at home boys, or I will turn you into shark food. Bon voyage.

(PS: As a very fortunate man, privileged and honored to train and hangout with the greatest warriors the world has ever known, it comes as no surprise to me that the mighty US Navy SEALs came through in this recent pirating of a US Merchant Martine ship, saved the kidnapped captain, killed three bad guys and captured a fourth. Those of us who cherish justice and good over evil salute the heroes of the American special ops and a Commander in Chief who gave the green light to do the right thing. God bless the warriors.)

Rock legend Ted Nugent is noted for his conservative political views and his vocal pro-hunting and Second Amendment activism. His smash bestseller Ted, White & Blue: The Nugent Manifesto, is now available at http://www.amazon.com. Nugent also maintains the Official Ted Nugent Site at http://www.TedNugent.com.

Mexico, Don’t Blame Us

The answer to gun crime is giving MORE guns to law-abiding citizens, not taking them away. When a criminal knows that there is a better than even chance that he/she will be shot if they break into a home, breaking into that home doesn’t seem like such a good idea anymore. If we let our Border Patrol, police, and military actually shoot bad guys trying to get into our country instead of forcing them to be foot servants to the criminals and illegal aliens, the illegal aliens would stay away, and the crime rate would be a lot lower. Nugent for President!

by Ted Nugent (more by this author)

Spoons Made Michael Moore Fat

Here comes the continuous, faulty logic used to attack gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.  And worse than simply applying faulty logic to the gun control argument, liberals are intellectually dishonest in that they don’t apply their “logic” consistently across the board.  Let’s look at a few examples:

Object of Liberal Attention	Liberal Logic	Truth
Guns	Guns Kill People	People Kill People
If Liberal Logic were applied across the board…
Cars	Drunk drivers use cars to kill people, therefore we must ban cars	Drunk drivers kill people, therefore we must punish (ban) drunk drivers
Fat People	Fat people use spoons to eat, therefore we must ban spoons	Fat people lack self control. If there is a penalty for being fat, then the individual must suffer the consequences

__
__

Let’s All Surrender Our Weapons — You First!

by Ann Coulter (more by this author)

Posted 04/08/2009 ET
Updated 04/08/2009 ET

The rash of recent shooting incidents has led people who wouldn’t know an AK-47 from a paintball gun to issue demands for more restrictions on guns. To be sure, it’s hard to find any factor in these shootings that could be responsible — other than the gun.So far, this year’s public multiple shootings were committed by:– Richard Poplawski, 23, product of a broken family, expelled from high school and dishonorably discharged from the Marines, who killed three policemen in Pittsburgh.

— Former crack addict Jiverly Wong, 41, who told co-workers “America sucks” yet somehow was not offered a job as a speechwriter for Barack Obama, who blockaded his victims in a civic center in Binghamton, N.Y., and shot as many people as he could, before killing himself.

— Robert Stewart, 45, a three-time divorcee and high school dropout with “violent tendencies” — according to one of his ex-wives — who shot up the nursing home in Carthage, N.C., where his newly estranged wife worked.

— Lovelle Mixon, 26, a paroled felon, struggling to get his life back on track by pimping, who shot four cops in Oakland, Calif. — before eventually being shot himself.

— Twenty-eight-year-old Michael McLendon, child of divorce, living with his mother and boycotting family funerals because he hated his relatives, who killed 10 of those relatives and their neighbors in Samson, Ala.

It might make more sense to outlaw men than guns. Or divorce. Or crack. Or to prohibit felons from having guns. Except we already outlaw crack and felons owning guns and yet still, somehow, Wong got crack and Mixon got a gun.

After being pulled over for a routine traffic violation, Lovelle Mixon did exactly what they teach in driver’s ed by immediately shooting four cops. Mixon’s supporters held a posthumous rally in his honor, claiming he shot the cops only in “self-defense,” which I take it includes the cop Mixon shot while the officer was lying on the ground.

I guess Mixon also raped that 12-year-old girl in “self-defense.” Clearly, the pimping industry has lost a good man. I wish I’d known him. I tip my green velvet fedora with the dollar signs all over it to him. Why do the good ones always die young? Pimps, I mean.

Liberals tolerate rallies on behalf of cop-killers, but they prohibit law-abiding citizens working at community centers in Binghamton, N.Y., from being armed to defend themselves from disturbed, crack-addicted America-haters like Jiverly Wong.

It’s something in liberals’ DNA: They think they can pass a law eliminating guns and nuclear weapons, but teenagers having sex is completely beyond our control.

The demand for more gun control in response to any crime involving a gun is exactly like Obama’s response to North Korea’s openly belligerent act of launching a long-range missile this week: Obama leapt to action by calling for worldwide nuclear disarmament.  (or more accurately, Obama is yielding our power and sovereignty to the UN, who as usual is paralyzed and unable to do anything.  If the UN accomplishes anything, it’s only because America gets it done.)

If the SAT test were used to determine how stupid a liberal is, one question would be: “The best defense against lawless rogues who possess _______ is for law-abiding individuals to surrender their own _______________.”

Correct answer: Guns. We would also have accepted nuclear weapons.

Obama explained that “the United States has a moral responsibility” to lead disarmament efforts because America is “the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon.”

So don’t go feeling all morally superior to a country whose business model consists of exporting heroin, nuclear bombs and counterfeit U.S. dollars, and of importing Swedish prostitutes, you yahoo Americans with your little flag lapel pins.

On the other hand, the Japanese haven’t acted up much in the last, say, 64 years …

Fortunately, our sailors didn’t wait around for Obama to save them when Somali pirates boarded their ship this week. Stop right now or I’ll ask the U.N. to remind the “international community” that “the U.S. is not at war with Somali pirates.”

Gun-toting Americans are clearly more self-sufficient than the sissy Europeans. This is great news for everyone except Barney Frank, who’s always secretly wondered what it would be like to be taken by a Somali pirate.

Police — whom I gather liberals intend to continue having guns — and intrepid U.N. resolution drafters can’t be everywhere, all the time.

If a single civilian in that Binghamton community center had been armed, instead of 14 dead, there might have only been one or two — including the shooter. In the end, the cops didn’t stop Wong. His killing spree ended only when he decided to stop, and he killed himself.

“The shooter will eventually run out of ammo” strategy may not be the best one for stopping deranged multiple murderers.

But it’s highly unlikely that any community center in the entire state would be safe from a disturbed former crack-addict like Wong because New York’s restrictive gun laws require a citizen to prove he has a need for a gun to obtain a concealed carry permit.

Instead of having Planned Parenthood distribute condoms in schools, they ought get the NRA to pass out revolvers. It would save more lives.

Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “Slander,” ““How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must),” “Godless,” “If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans” and most recently, Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and their Assault on America.

Democrats Unveil Climate Bill

Very few of those on Capitol Hill are really stupid enough to believe that any “climate change” we might experience is actually caused by man.  We might be POLLUTING the environment, but to credit climate change to anything we are doing is more than pretentious.  The REAL science does not back up the assertion.  I’m not talking about the discredited “hockey stick” graph that our environmental savior Al Gore likes to display, or the NASA data that was proven to be falsified and faulty.  I’m talking about data from scientists that number at least as many as the global warming/climate change crowd, but are silenced and/or ignored by government and their willing accomplices the mainstream media.  As I said in my post “Stop the Obama Plan to Take Total Control,” this is not about protecting the climate or environment, it’s about control of wealth and power.

…Have no doubt that they will find another way to put this over on us, and here’s why.  Don’t miss this.  Cap-and-Trade, carbon tax, or whatever label they place on it is the one, single way to tax and control EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR LIFE.  Think about it.  We are a carbon based economy.  Is there ANYTHING that you use, consume, buy, etc. that isn’t produced with carbon based energy, made from carbon fuel derivatives (i.e. plastics come from oil), and/or delivered in a vehicle that burns carbon based fuel?  This includes the electricity that lights, heats, and cools your home, and cooks your food.  The producers will be taxed on the carbon used to produce, this tax will of course be passed on to you, the consumer.  The consumer will also be taxed on the carbon they consume.  This will doubly and heavily burden you and I with massive taxes, and will eventually drive producers out of business because we can’t afford to buy their products.  They close, we lose jobs, the tax base of both producers and consumers shrinks, the government has fewer dollars they can tax, the nation goes deeper in debt, and the death spiral of our country’s economy continues.)

Here are a few key points to remember.  CO2, carbon dioxide, is PLANT FOOD, not a “warming gas.”  If you see the GEOLOGIC data which goes back BILLIONS of years, rather than the METEOROLOGICAL data that the global warming/climate change crowd uses which only goes back at most a few HUNDRED years, you see that their assertions about the affects of CO2 on the environment are patently false.  One of the other pieces of data that shows the absurdity of the global warming claims is the evidence that Mars was warming at the same time and same rate as the earth.  I guess that means that our use of the evil SUV’s is causing such bad pollution that it’s even causing MARS to WARM.  Are you starting to see how ridiculous this climate change/global warming crap is?

April 1, 2009

By JOHN M. BRODER

WASHINGTON — The debate on global warming and energy policy accelerated on Tuesday as two senior House Democrats unveiled a far-reaching bill to cap heat-trapping gases and quicken the country’s move away from dependence on coal and oil.

But the bill leaves critical questions unanswered and has no Republican support. It is thus the beginning, not the end, of the debate in Congress on how to deal with two of President Obama’s priorities, climate change and energy.

The draft measure, written by Representatives Henry A. Waxman of California and Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, sets a slightly more ambitious goal for capping heat-trapping gases than Mr. Obama’s proposal. The bill requires that emissions be reduced 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, while Mr. Obama’s plancalls for a 14 percent reduction by 2020. Both would reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases by roughly 80 percent by 2050.

The Waxman-Markey bill, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, emerges at a time when many Americans, and their representatives in Congress, are wary of wide-ranging environmental legislation that could raise energy costs and potentially cripple industry. The bill, a version of a so-called cap-and-trade plan, also comes as the Environmental Protection Agency is about to exert regulatory authority over heat-trapping gases under the Clean Air Act.

The bill would require every region of the country to produce a quarter of its electricity from renewable sources like wind, solar and geothermal by 2025. A number of lawmakers around the country, particularly in the Southeast, call that goal unrealistic because the natural resources and technology to meet it do not yet exist.

The bill also calls for modernization of the electrical grid, production of more electric vehicles and significant increases in efficiency in buildings, appliances and the generation of electricity.

But the Waxman-Markey proposal does not address how pollution allowances would be distributed or what percentage might be auctioned or given free. Nor does it say how most of the tens of billions of dollars raised from pollution permits would be spent, or whether the revenue would be returned to consumers to compensate for higher energy bills. (Returned to the consumer? Once the government gets ANYTHING, it never gives it back) Those matters have been left to negotiations, which will begin when Congress returns from its Easter recess on April 20.

Under Mr. Obama’s plan, roughly two-thirds of the revenue from pollution permit auctions would be returned to the public in tax breaks. (Right.  More “tax breaks” for those who pay no taxes to begin with.  That’s know as “welfare.”) Some members of Congress from both parties want to see all the revenue from any carbon-reduction plan returned to the public in some form.

Mr. Waxman, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement that his measure would create jobs and provide a gradual transition to a more efficient economy. (See my comments on job and wealth creation by government from the “Stop the Obama Plan to Take Total Control” post HERE.)

“Our goal is to strengthen our economy by making America the world leader in new clean-energy and energy-efficiency technologies,” Mr. Waxman said.

The bill offers a sweetener for members from coal-producing states by including $10 billion in new financing for the development of technology to capture and store emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of coal, which currently produces half of the nation’s electricity.  (Remember Obama’s comments about the coal industry?  He promised he was going to destroy it)

Representative Rick Boucher, a Democrat from the coal-rich southwestern corner of Virginia, insisted on that provision, noting that coal would remain a major part of the nation’s energy mix for decades to come.

A coalition of business and environmental groups, the United States Climate Action Partnership, welcomed the measure as a “strong starting point” for addressing emissions of heat-trapping gases and said it had incorporated many of the partnership’s recommendations.

But the group, which includes major manufacturing corporations like Alcoa, DuPont and General Motors, said that it would push for a “substantial” number of free pollution allowances so that its members could make a gradual transition to less-polluting technologies.

Stop the Obama Plan to Take Total Control

Stop the Obama Plan to Take Total Control

The extreme-left is desperately trying to take over every aspect of your life.

In case you haven’t noticed, they’re taking control of the banking industry, they’re trying to take control of your family’s healthcare, they’re taking control of the auto industry and the energy industry… .

But, most horrifically, THEY’RE TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL OF YOU. And, make no mistake; the so-called $3.6 TRILLION BUDGET ABOMINATION IS THEIR MEANS TO DO IT.

Some critics, to borrow a phrase from the good folks at FreedomWorks, are saying that this $ 3.6 trillion budget abomination “taxes too much, spends too much, and borrows too much.”

But the simple fact that $3.6 trillion is a mind-boggling figure is just one small piece of the puzzle.

The one thing that no one is really taking about (the 800 pound gorilla in the room) is that this $3.6 trillion budget abomination is ALSO the LARGEST AND MOST AMBITIOUS GOVERNMENT POWER GRAB IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY.

And if it passes, you can kiss the free-market system goodbye. If it passes, you can kiss your personal liberties goodbye.

Here are just a handful of the highlights:

Health Care: According to the typically pro-Obama New York Times: “Mr. Obama asked Congress to set aside $634 billion in a ‘reserve fund for health care reform.’ He provided no new information about how to cover the uninsured, saying he would work out the details with Congress later this year.” (The only plan they have is to take your money and your choice on what you can get for your health care dollar. Under this system, a government agency will decide what treatment is available to you, and whether you will get that treatment based on how much value (i.e. tax paying potential) you have left in your life. Are you nearing retirement age? Don’t count on that hip replacement or triple-bypass. It doesn’t matter if you (still) have enough of your own money to pay for the procedure. You will not be allowed to have that health care. Oh, but if you’re part of the ruling class as designated by emperor Uh-Bama, you’ll have your own private doctors and first class medical care.)

The Times also stated that Obama “would also increase premiums charged to Medicare beneficiaries….” No, your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Obama is asking Congress for $634 billion dollars of your money, is offering no clear plan as to what he wants to do with the money (he’ll get to that later, after the money is appropriated) and wants to cut back on benefits. The only thing that is certain is the government will start taking money out of your pocket and start making your healthcare decisions for you.

Taxes: Moveon.org, while promoting the $3.6 trillion budget abomination, repeats the Obama mantra that it: “Reduces taxes for 95% of working Americans. And if your family makes less than $250,000, your taxes won’t go up one dime.”

The truth of the matter, however, is that this $3.6 trillion budget calls for a number of hidden taxes. One of these is a cap-and-trade energy tax which, according to The Wall Street Journal “would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3 percent of its after-tax income every year. That’s about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9 percent to 2.7 percent of income.” (This was supposedly removed from the current version of the budget because even some democrats were asking how we could possibly afford this. Have no doubt that they will find another way to put this over on this, and here’s why. Don’t miss this. Cap-and-Trade, carbon tax, or whatever label they place on it is the one, single way to tax and control EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR LIFE. Think about it. We are a carbon based economy. Is there ANYTHING that you use, consume, buy, etc. that isn’t produced with carbon based energy, made from carbon fuel derivatives (i.e. plastics come from oil), and/or delivered in a vehicle that burns carbon based fuel? This includes the electricity that lights, heats, and cools your home, and cooks your food. The producers will be taxed on the carbon used to produce, this tax will of course be passed on to you, the consumer. The consumer will also be taxed on the carbon they consume. This will doubly and heavily burden you and I with massive taxes, and will eventually drive producers out of business because we can’t afford to buy their products. They close, we lose jobs, the tax base of both producers and consumers shrinks, the government has fewer dollars they can tax, the nation goes deeper in debt, and the death spiral of our country’s economy continues.)

The Wall Street Journal concludes: “Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth–but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street ‘green tech’ investors who know how to leverage the political class.” (Do you understand how this will redistribute wealth? Whatever international agency is in charge of issuing carbon credits will issue lots of credits to underdeveloped nations that will never be able to use all of the credits they are given. Developed nations such as the U.S. will not be given enough credits to operate at a level that sustains our economy and way of life. To operate at our current economic level under the cap-and-trade system, we would be forced to buy excess credits from 3^rd world countries at exorbitant prices, thus transferring the wealth we have produced and earned to nations, dictators, and people who have not earned it, and DO NOT DESERVE IT.)

Jobs: MoveOn.org claims the budget “Invests more than $100 billion in clean energy technology, creating millions of green jobs that can never be outsourced.”

The folks at FreedomWorks have this to say: “The numbers being used here, like the numbers used in the stimulus debate, are deceptive in that they hide the less rosy bigger picture. It is a classic case of ‘what is seen and what is not seen’ as described so clearly by economists Frederic Bastiat and Henry Hazlitt. What is seen are the jobs that will certainly result from the government spending $100 billion. What is not seen are all the jobs that are lost because the government has to take those $100 billion out of one part of the economy to spend it somewhere else.” (Government, by definition, CAN NOT create wealth or jobs. Government acquires all of its money and resources from the private sector (that’s businesses that earn a profit and create REAL jobs, and you and me the taxpayers). Because of the inefficiencies and corruption of government, the level of which is directly proportional to the size of government, much of the wealth that is TAKEN from the private sector evaporates long before it reaches its intended recipients. Imagine you see a homeless person and want to give him $10 to get something to eat. If you give it directly to him, he gets the full $10. If government taxes that $10 from you in order to “end homelessness,” “feed/house the underprivileged,” or whatever feel-good label the government puts on their excuse to take your money, the value of that $10 immediately gets diluted. The agency that is taxing you takes a cut for their overhead. Portions of it are taxed away for other government causes. Portions of it are lost to outright corruption. By the time the $10 that were liberated from you works its way through the government system to the homeless person you wanted to help in the first place, he will be lucky to get $1 out of the original $10.)

You’re starting to get the picture. This $3.6 trillion budget has nothing to do with stimulating the economy, or making life better for the average Joe; unless, of course, you believe that the redistribution of YOUR income and government intrusion into YOUR life are good things.

Perhaps that’s why Senator Judd Gregg called Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget “an extraordinary move of our government to the left.” Gregg added that President Obama “is proposing the largest tax increase in history…”

Compromise Is Not An Option. Compromise Means Obama Wins And The American People Lose

President Obama knows that when his $3.6 trillion budget is debated in the Senate that our elected officials will be inclined do what they always do… he knows the first thought that will spring to their minds is “compromise.” (This is where the Republicans who have betrayed conservative principles will once again show their true colors. Rather than going down fighting, they will go down compromising. There is a time for compromise, but now is not that time. It is time to actually stand for something, and not to compromise what you stand for. Those Republicans who claimed to be conservatives, but have compromised our nation into the position we are in now, are just as much to blame for the condition we find ourselves in now. THEY COULD HAVE STOPPED THIS WHEN THEY WERE IN CONTROL OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE, BUT INSTEAD OF PURSUING THE CONSERVATIVE AGENDA THEY RAN ON AS AGRESSIVELY AS OBAMA IS PURSUING HIS COMMUNIST AGENDA, THEY COMPROMISED!) Just as the socialists like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and the like need to be tarred, feathered, and run out of Washington D.C. on a rail, so to do the Republican compromisers who went along with them.)

Obama knows their inclination will be to put lipstick on this pig under the idiotic assumption that cutting a little bit of the fat will somehow make it palatable to the American people. After all, that’s so much easier than simply fighting for what is right.

We cannot let that happen because “compromise” simply means that Obama gets 95% of what he wants… 95% European-style socialism… 95% income redistribution… 95% economic destruction.

Cutting a few hundred-billion here or a few hundred-billion there is NOT going to make this $3.6 trillion monster significantly smaller, NOR WILL IT DAMPEN THE ASSAULT ON OUR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. OBAMA’s $3.6 TRILLION BUDGET MUST DIE!

If they “compromise,” we all lose. The American people lose… your children and grandchildren lose… even the people who are being hoodwinked into supporting this $3.6 trillion budget will lose.

If they “compromise,” the United States will take one giant leap into European-style socialism.

That’s why we must take this bull by the horns and let our elected officials know right now that we don’t want any “compromises” or any lipstick put on this pig.

We want Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget DEAD… a stake driven through its evil heart. Anything less means the American people LOSE.

This is not just a partisan budget battle. Our future and the future for our children and grandchildren hang in the balance!

Who is the THUG known as Rahm Emanuel?

There are many sayings you’ve heard from your parents and others while growing up that apply to Obama in this situation.

• “Show me your friends, and I’ll show you your future.”
• “The character and wisdom of a leader is reflected by those he surrounds himself with.”
• “Actions speak louder than words.”

Obama surrounds himself with:

• People who cheat on and don’t pay their taxes, yet want you to pay more.
• Millionaires who attained their wealth by inheritance or less than ethical means, few if any who actually EARNED their wealth.
• People who believe it is OK to forcibly take from those who deserve what they have because they earned it, and give it to those who have earned nothing and deserve nothing.
• People who have no morals, and thus have no limits or guidelines on how to properly and ethically treat people.
• People who think that destroying others is the way to better yourself.
• Generally thugs, criminals, socialists, terrorists, and others who make the Star Wars Cantina look like a church social.

Rahm Emanuel is a perfect example. Obama spits out his lies that sound good to those too mentally weak to understand what crap they are being fed while Emanuel uses his mafia strong arm tactics on any who get in the way of Obama’s (and by association those whom Obama has surrounded himself with) socialist/communist agenda.

Character matters. Right now there is none in the White House, and almost none in the House or Senate. Character is not a trait that often finds its way to Washington D.C. anymore.

Obama’s Enforcer

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
Thursday, March 26, 2009

In Obama’s entire circle of advisers, one man rises above the pack, gaining the reputation as the most ruthless political figure in America today. This man is Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff. Instead of being an impassioned ideologue, he instead enjoys utilizing Machiavellian tactics to achieve more traditional political ends. A classic Chicago-style machine politician, Rahm will do whatever is necessary to get things done his way. With his aggressive tactics, he has earned the nickname of “Rahmbo.”

He lost a finger at the age of 17, and since then Emanuel has been a driven man. Working at an Arby’s he sliced his finger but he insisted on attending his prom and swimming in Lake Michigan before going to the hospital. His finger became badly infected, forcing him to have it amputated during a lengthy stay in Children’s Hospital. Never the same after the incident, Emanuel lives with an intense passion for life and a drive that alienates people, but achieves results.

Once a skilled and disciplined ballet dancer, he attended college on a dance scholarship. He became involved in his first campaign as an undergraduate, and his political career took off from there. His climb began while working on Richard Daley’s mayoral campaigns in the late ’80s, where he proved himself an avid fundraiser. As Emanuel called donors, if they gave less than he thought they could, he would refuse to accept their contribution. Then, he resorted to goading them by stating that he thought they were wealthier and bigger donors. Oftentimes donors would call him back, apologize, and then give Emanuel’s desired amount.

Cutting his teeth in Chicago machine politics helped him develop his no- holds- barred style of campaigning. As a member of the Daley machine, Obama’s chief of staff has been involved in his share of shady dealings. In Emanuel’s 2002 congressional race, Daley forced city patronage workers to run a get-out-the vote campaign that is still being investigated for campaign violations.

Emanuel’s exploits are legendary. Once he had a disagreement with a pollster, so he sent him a rotten fish. At a dinner party in 1992, the day after Clinton’s hard-won election, Emanuel viciously attacked those whom he called betrayers. Spouting their name and shouting, “Dead! . . . Dead! . . . Dead!” he plunged a knife into the table after each name. Now, he is bringing these tactics along with his foul mouth to the White House.

This hardnosed political operative employs methods and tactics that would make Karl Rove blush. Rahm fights like a rooster in a cock fight. A political street fighter, he is the enforcer lurking behind Obama’s pretty words about bipartisanship and unity.

Emanuel retired from the Clinton White House in 1998 and moved to Wall Street to make his fortune. He worked for Bruce Wasserstein, a major Democratic donor and Wall Street financier. Over the course of two and a half years, he milked his political connections to help broker deals, and he made $18 million. Emanuel is not ashamed to look out for number one. Once rich, he headed back to politics.

As the chairman of the Democratic Campaign Committee in 2006, he is largely credited as the architect of the Democratic landslide. He did it, in large measure, by remaking the Democratic Party in his own image. He won by aggressively recruiting candidates and then relentlessly driving his candidates to raise money. With money in hand, they launched a series of negative ads that are unmatched in campaign history.

Emanuel famously said, “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste.They are opportunities to do big things.” He is pushing Obama’s administration to do that now. Obama is the star of the show and Rahm is the one who is directing the play. Rahm is well connected inside DC and uses his friendships with John Podesta, James Carville and Paul Begala to great effect. Obama, the inexperienced “outsider,” is being taught the ropes by Rahm, the insider. One of the best examples of this inside- and outsid- the-White House coordination is the campaign to demonize and target Rush Limbaugh. You can bet that Rahm Emanuel helped to make it happen.

Rahm has brought his aggressive attitude to work in implementing Obama’s agenda. He personally was instrumental in rounding up votes for the stimulus bill, by intensely pressuring three moderate Republican senators and threatening conservative Democrats. Now he is working hard to push through the $3.6 trillion Obama budget. Will he be successful? If the past is any indication, Rahm will shout, curse, stab and claw his way to victory no matter what the cost. Washington, D.C. has definitely gotten uglier as Rahmbo storms through it, hell-bent on taking no prisoners.

Will the “Fairness Doctrine” Apply to NPR, too?

Don’t laugh. We all know the answer to that question is likely an emphatic “heck no!” Since according to liberals like Chucky Schummer, conservative talk radio is hate speech and akin to pornography, it should be censored. Hate speech is by definition anything a liberal disagrees with.

National Public Unfairness

By Brent Bozell
March 26, 2009

There’s a huge hole in all of the public discussion about the reimposition of a “Fairness Doctrine” or a return to “localism” on the talk-radio format: What about National Public Radio (NPR)? Liberals would like to “crush Rush” and his conservative compatriots by demanding each station balance its lineup ideologically. But since when has NPR ever felt any pressure to be balanced, even when a majority of taxpayers being forced to subsidize it are center-right?

Why no Fairness Doctrine attention to NPR? It is because those preaching “fairness” on the radio are hypocrites.

Conservatives argue that the media’s liberal bias drives people to talk radio for an opposing viewpoint. Limbaugh jokes: “I am the balance.” But new numbers from NPR suggest its ratings may be nearly as imposing as Limbaugh’s: The cumulative audience for its daily news programs — “Morning Edition” and its evening counterpart, “All Things Considered” — has risen to 20.9 million per week.

It’s not just news that’s drawing listeners in. Talk-radio programs increasingly have become part of the nationally distributed NPR diet. Indeed, NPR’s developing talk-show lineup was an obvious factor in the commercial failure of competing liberal networks like Air America. One could argue that NPR’s audience gains came directly in response to liberal desires to vent about Team Bush.

Radio shows like “Fresh Air with Terry Gross” were a regular forum for Bush-bashing authors and experts, especially on the War on Terror and the liberation of Iraq. Gross was memorably upbraided by NPR’s ombudsman in 2003 for showing great hostility to Bill O’Reilly, in stark contrast to her giggly rapport with liberal Al Franken. Now NPR is touting that “Fresh Air” was NPR’s “first non-drive-time show in public radio to better 5 million weekly listeners” on over 300 stations.

NPR also sounded thrilled at the news that its afternoon show “Talk of the Nation” showed “remarkable gains,” up 21 percent to 3.5 million listeners weekly. On Inauguration Day, that show featured NPR Baghdad Bureau Chief Lourdes Garcia-Navarro reporting that Iraqis wished good riddance to President Bush and hoped for change under Barack Obama. She said she had yet to find a single Iraqi who was grateful for the American defeat of Saddam Hussein. She asked many Iraqis: “Did this invasion, do you feel, give you a better life? And across the board, I didn’t find one Iraqi who said to me, actually, I’m glad this happened.”

Only on NPR does one hear journalism that calmly suspends logic.

The other talk show NPR publicists touted was “Tell Me More,” hosted by Michel Martin, a former reporter for ABC. Martin recently told NPR listeners she is far too similar to Michelle Obama to feel objectively about her, and she thinks Rush Limbaugh is racist, and explains thusly: “Some people hate the federal government because they can’t get past the fact that the government switched sides from being a weapon in the violent oppression of black and sometimes brown people, to being one of the tools creating opportunity for them, as well as other people.”

NPR regularly airs liberal commentators (like former CBS reporter Daniel Schorr), and its idea of a conservative is David Brooks of the New York Times. A few weeks ago, in one of their regular evening political roundtables with liberal columnist E.J. Dionne, “All Things Considered” anchor Robert Siegel asked Brooks if he, as a moderate, was comfortable with Obama: “Are you getting more or less comfortable or more or less moderate?” Brooks replied candidly: “I’m getting less comfortable. I don’t know about my gross ideological disposition these days.”

Neither do conservatives, and yet Brooks is the man who’s supposed to represent us.

Public broadcasting has been incredibly hostile to anyone who would dare to police it for fairness and balance. Conservatives ought not forget what happened to Kenneth Tomlinson, the former board chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Fur flew when liberals discovered Tomlinson had conducted a private study to determine if PBS and NPR shows tilted to the left. An inspector general’s report suggested Tomlinson somehow had violated CPB bylaws, and he was forced to resign.

Liberal congressman John Dingell insisted Tomlinson had “inserted politics” into public broadcasting, and yes, feel free to insert a laugh track at this point.

It’s only “inserting politics” when anyone bothers to object to the everyday liberal politics of NPR and PBS. Ever since Congress passed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, the nation’s taxpayer-funded news outlets have operated free of any real fear that someone would disturb their pattern of putting their big broadcasting thumb on the scale of liberalism.

If NPR’s drawing a Limbaugh-sized audience, isn’t it time someone started asking why a “Fairness Doctrine” shouldn’t apply to them?

—

L. Brent Bozell III is the president of the Media Research Center.

Your Government Might Be Socialist If…

I can just hear Jeff Foxworthy now. “If your government gets lectured by all of the socialist governments in Europe about being TOO socialistic, your government just might be socialist.”

EU leader condemns US ‘road to hell’

By Tony Barber in Brussels and Edward Luce in Washington
Published: March 25 2009 20:00 | Last updated: March 26 2009 00:12

European Union hopes for a new era in relations with the US were thrown into chaos on Wednesday when the holder of the EU presidency condemned American remedies for the global recession as “the road to hell”.

Barely a week before Barack Obama is due to arrive in Europe on his first official visit as US president, Mirek Topolanek, the Czech Republic’s prime minister, put the 27-nation EU on a collision course with Washington.

Read rest of article HERE.

HERE is another article on the same subject.

---