Where's the birth certificate

Free and Strong America

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Dismantling America: Part II

No, I didnt print excerpts from Part I from Thomas Sowell. Part II looks to be the best out there today as I scan the newswires. He brings up the following points among others.

  • Almost never do these reactions include factual or logical arguments against the (Obama)administration's critics. Instead, there is indignation, accusations of bad faith and even charges of racism.
  • When a President of the United States has begun the process of dismantling America from within, and exposing us to dangerous enemies outside, the time is long past for being concerned about his public image. He has his own press agents for that.
  • Internationally, Barack Obama has made every mistake that was made by the Western democracies in the 1930s, mistakes that put Hitler in a position to start World War II-- and come dangerously close to winning it.
  • At the heart of those mistakes was trying to mollify your enemies by throwing your friends to the wolves. The Obama administration has already done that by reneging on this country's commitment to put a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe and by its lackadaisical foot-dragging on doing anything serious to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. That means, for all practical purposes, throwing Israel to the wolves as well.

Sowell once again hits the nail on the head, repeatedly. Obama is WAY out of his league and with each passing day looks increasingly more clueless and inept. May God help us all.

Friday, October 30, 2009

The Ever Changing Obama Nativity Story

From today's article by Joseph Farah..

"In case you missed it, Michelle Obama stated at a public event last year during the campaign that Barack Obama's mother was unmarried when she gave birth. Now, I don't really care, except for the fact that Barack Obama has told a different story – in his autobiography and elsewhere. Yes, I am nearly alone among the press in demanding that Barack Obama actually produce some evidence that he is eligible to serve as president. I also insist on seeing documentation of other claims he has made about his life – school records, travel records, health records, selective service registration records and so on. Why?
This may be a shocker for my colleagues in the media, but politicians sometimes don't tell the truth. Not only are the news media doggedly non-curious about establishing the facts, they seem manifestly hell-bent on extinguishing any curiosity among others."

Me personally? I couldnt care less about the marital status of his parents. Why doesnt he just release the document that would settle the matter once and for all? Because, I think, people might begin to examine his past a little closer and THAT'S what he doesnt want. And the plot thickens....

Thursday, October 29, 2009

How hate-crime law works

An article today by Jack Cashill makes some damning accusations regarding the so-called "Hate Crimes Bill" that was passed into law....

"Consider the case of the bill's namesake, Matthew Shepard. As the media told and retold the story, Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, two "homophobic" desperados, killed the helpless gay Wyoming University student in a fit of "gay panic." Although Hollywood would turn out at least three TV movies about the "crucifixion" of Shepard, two of which premiered in the week before Easter 2002, the homophobic story line did not match the Wyoming reality. Best evidence now suggests that McKinney, the actual killer, had previously expressed no homophobic sentiments. One good reason why is that he was an active bisexual himself. Apparently, he and Shepard, who had a known drug problem, had done meth together a number of times. On the night in question, McKinney went on a meth-fueled rampage. He pistol-whipped the vulnerable Shepard for drug money, drove into town to rob Shepard's apartment and then pistol whipped a stranger who got in his way, fracturing his skull in the process. Matthew Shepard died just four weeks before the 1998 mid-term elections. For the next four weeks, much to their own surprise, the killers were presented to America as poster children for the religious right and one more reason not to vote Republican.
Of course, McKinney and Henderson were not products of Christian culture, but of its antithesis: a crude, soulless, fatherless, sexually libertine, drug-addled, pop culture."

Gasp! I don't remember hearing that on CNN! How convenient that these facts never came up for public discussion. As Cashill so succinctly put it "As such laws work, if your group lacks political and media influence, you can expect to be convicted of crimes you did not commit and receive longer sentences for those you did." I guess it's becoming reality after all. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Sarko Steps Into the Leadership Void

When Americans went to the polls last November and pulled the level for Obama, did they really think that they were getting anything close to someone who actually has backbone and would stand up to the thugs and dictators that do not have the best interests of the US or the world for that matter, in mind? From today's article in the NY Post.....

"FRENCH President Nicolas Sarkozy smells a leader ship gap.... Sarkozy's "active temperament" is the reason he is getting more deeply involved now in world affairs...what seems to motivate the French president is slightly more than mere desire to add another instrument to a beautiful musical sextet. More than a few recent reports say he's increasingly discouraged about the direction the Obama administration is leaning toward on world affairs...The best clue to what's on Sarkozy's mind can be found in a tough speech he gave at the United Nations Security Council during a September session Obama organized on nuclear disarmament. "President Obama dreams of a world without weapons," Sarkozy said, "but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite. Iran since 2005 has flouted five Security Council resolutions" and "North Korea has been defying Council resolutions since 1993." So, "what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community?" Sarkozy asked. "More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe out a UN member state off the map."

Kudos to Sarko for telling it like it is. It's almost humiliating to see the leader of France has more cahones than the usurper US president. I thought I could never be more disillusioned by a leader of a Western democracy than the Chirac regime. That was until Obama came along and now people look backward, almost longing for the comparative good old days of the Carter administration.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Penn State T-shirt too religious?

I came across this article today while surfing the net. It never ceases to amaze me how people don't have enough to do, worry about, etc. and have to make mountains out of molehills in order to find some sort of fulfillment in their lives.

"The shirts-intended to foster school spirit-sport a verticle blue line down the center with the words "Penn State White Out" emblazoned across the chest, forming a design that some say resembles a cross....Penn State says it has received six complaints about the shirt....The shirt's single blue stripe resembles the stripe on the team's football helmet..."

This is what passes for contraversy these days? A much more interesting topic would have been Penn State's lack of blocking skills earlier this year against the Iowa Hawkeyes. I admit that it vaguely resembled a cross upon first glance, but when the stripe on the football helmet reference was made then it all made sense, to me anyway. Even if it does resemble a cross, is that such a terrible thing? As one person who was quoted in the article has asked, "Are we going to ban lowercase t's in the alphabet? Where do we draw the line?"

Monday, October 26, 2009

'3 in 10 Americans believe Obama foreigner'

"Three in 10 people in the United States believe President Barack Obama is a foreigner, according to a new poll from an international leader in market research who asked residents about their beliefs regarding the president's birth place. The survey was done by Angus Reid Global Monitor, a division of Vision Critical Group, which leverages "the world's most advanced online research technology for interactive surveys, custom panels, private communities and virtual retail environments." The results of the survey, released today, said 70 percent of the respondents believe Obama was born in the U.S., "while 30 percent do not."
"While only 13 percent of Democratic Party supporters believe Obama was not born in the U.S., the proportion rises to 25 percent among Independents and 51 percent among Republican Party backers," the report said......Pollster Fritz Wenzel said at the time, "Our polling shows that the questions surrounding Barack Obama's eligibility to serve as president clearly strike a nerve across America, probably because it is a problem that everybody understands.
"Every American citizen has a birth certificate, and once in a while we all have to produce them to get a drivers license or gain entrance to school. Everyone understands the simple rules – if you don't produce it, you don't get in. And while Obama did get in to the White House, nearly half the country's adults – 49 percent – are troubled by this issue and still want him to produce his official long-form birth certificate," he said. The earlier survey found that when asked what their view of the question was, 41.5 percent of respondents answered that Obama should release all relevant documents, including the long-form birth certificate. Another 7.8 percent said they were "troubled" by the question. "

Here's the link to the full article. It would be laughable if it wasnt so serious. Instead of diffusing an entirely avoidable contraversy by the release of one document, Obama insists on avoiding to do so. Were I the C in C in question, the relavent document would have been released at the first whiff of a question concerning my place of birth. I would do it, if for no other reason, than a big "so there!" to my detractors and probably sneer at them on top of it all. This guy seems to just love the contraversy. Why else would he avoid releasing it?

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Nato backs McChrystal in snub to Biden plan

From The Independent (UK), this article gives the impression that NATO commanders have about as much regard for Joe Biden as people on this side of the Atlantic do.

"Nato defence ministers signalled their backing for the Afghan strategy put forward by the American commander General Stanley McChrystal yesterday in an implicit rejection of the alternative plan proposed by US Vice-President Joe Biden. The general had made an unscheduled appearance at the meeting of ministers in Bratislava, Slovakia, to give a presentation behind closed doors. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato secretary general, said: "What we did today was to discuss General McChrystal's overall assessment, his overall approach, and I have noted a broad support from all ministers of this overall counter-insurgency approach."......Diplomatic sources say Nato endorsement of General McChrystal has led to anger in the Biden camp. They had criticised the commander for promoting his strategy, including on a visit to London, while President Barack Obama is still weighing up the options."

I say give the guy what he needs. He's there and we arent. He should know better than such "military geniuses" as Obama and Biden. When our young men and women are in a hostile environment, let's not mess around and try to play "Teach the Angry, Militant Muslim Civility" which led to disasterous results in pre-surge Iraq. Insofar as the worth of Biden's opinion on anything, I can sum it up with three words...STAND UP CHUCK!

Friday, October 23, 2009

An Evening with Jerry Newcombe

South Florida Bible College was the setting last night for a speech by Dr. Jerry Newcombe in which he discussed the findings of his new book entitled The Book That Made America: How the Bible Formed our Nation. I took a day off from work and me and the Mrs attended. (She can't say that I never take her anywhere :-p) After Dr Newcombe's speech, he was interviewed more in depth by a gentleman and I saw that the event was being taped. Perhaps this will run on C-SPAN in the near future much like his previous "How Would Jesus Vote?" discussion.
Time quickly passed and there was only enough time left to take a few of the questions that audience members had written down before hand on index cards for the interviewer to ask him. Lo and behold, the first question asked was the one I had written down. What luck! I basically asked him if, while researching his book, he came across any information that would lead someone to believe that Thomas Jefferson was more evangelical in his beliefs than the typical deist that he is commonly portrayed as. Dr Newcombe stated that he didnt really know if Jefferson (or Benjamin Franklin for that matter) had actually made statements that they put their faith in salvation in the Blood of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice on Calvary's cross. He did mention a couple of items though that could give someone pause and wonder if in fact that was the case. First was that Jefferson OK'ed federal monies to be used in missionary efforts among Native American tribes. Secondly, while attending church service at the US Capitol Building (they were held there until about the 1880's) Jefferson once brought in the Marine Band to play during the service there. Could you imagine if something like that happened nowadays? The ACLU would have a heart-attack!

If history and Christianity are interests of yours, I would highly recommend his fine book to anyone who wishes to explore America's Christian foundations further. Interesting and well researched, it's a must read for those who are interested in where we as a country have come from and the enormous differences of today when any symbol or reminder of out Christian heritage is slowly being stripped away by our multi-culti, increasingly secular society.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Will Turkey lead a revived Islamic empire?

It's the title of an article from Joel Richardson. Some excerpts from that article include.....
  • What is interesting about the NIC's "over the horizon" assessment is that the coming caliphate would not be built on acts of terrorism, but instead would be established through peaceful means. By claiming to provide the Middle East with stability, peace and security, the emergence of the coming caliphate will be viewed positively by much of the world. Yet the conclusion of the 2020 report states that even a limited and moderate Islamic caliphate would pose problems for the United States and her global interests of immense proportions.
  • The truth is, even if al-Qaida succeeded in its dream of reviving a caliphate, it would only give the U.S. military a clearly defined target. But how would the U.S. to respond if Turkey, one of our historically greatest allies in the region, emerges as an Islamist superpower? What will our relationship be with a neo-Ottoman caliphate? Now, it is doubtful of course that such a historically loaded term would ever be used. Far more likely, we will see the use of a far less threatening term, such as the title championed by Adnan Oktar, a Turkish Muslim intellectual who has been calling for a "Turkish-led Islamic Union." Oktar, although a controversial figure, is highly respected in many circles and is the most published author in the Islamic world, with over 65 million of his works in circulation.
  • The Islamic World is incapable of uniting voluntarily. It is, however, capable of being dominated by a Muslim power. Throughout history, Turkey has been the Muslim power most often able to create an empire out of … the Islamic world.

I recall Dinesh D'souza writing in his book What's So Great About Christianity? that when it came to the secularization of the Islamic world, people often looked toward Turkey to lead the way. D'Souza wrote that the Islamic world is not going the way of Turkey and that lately, even Turkey isnt going the way of Turkey. That is to say, it is becoming more religious than secular. All of the above is speculation with about a 10 or 11 year timeline and I invite you to read Richardson's full article for yourself and form your own opinion. We'll have to watch and wait to see if these predictions come true.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

JP Morgan/Chase down to $21B

Yep. That's the most interesting thing I've heard all day. They have some other assets though, but that sure seems kinda small, doesnt it? Saw it posted over at VD's blog. Here's the link to the article.

Minus Public Option, Obamacare Still Stinks

An article from Deroy Murdock. It lays bare the complete cluster that is becoming the Obama administration's current running gag, "Obamacare" or so-called "health insurance reform".
  • Arizona Republican John Kyl offered an amendment to assure that senior citizens not suffer healthcare rationing under the Physicians Feedback Program. On a party-line vote, Democrats crushed Kyl’s language and paved the road for rationing the treatment of elderly Americans under ObamaCare.
  • Democrats torpedoed Idaho Republican Mike Crapo’s amendment to block any Medicaid expansion that imposes unfunded mandates on the states.
  • Democrats killed Kentucky Republican Jim Bunning’s amendment to require that the Finance Committee’s website feature its ObamaCare bill with an official price tag for 72 hours before the Committee’s final vote. Seizing 17 percent of the American economy apparently is too urgent a task to withstand a three-day wait.
  • Democrats enshrined waste, fraud, and abuse when their party-line vote squelched Texas Republican John Cornyn’s amendment to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicaid.

The above cited article contains more nightmarish stories of the type that this administration will long be remembered for. Couple that with the fact that the all of this is fresh on the heels of (gasp) a CNN report that indicates that a full half of the country disagrees with Obama's policies, might a slumbering giant have finally been awoken? Developing......

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

CNBC, Reuters fall for climate hoax

Here's the link to the accompanying piece from politico.com. It seems like in the mad dash to A) appease the Obama White House and B) continue the charade that AGW is real, both Rueters and CNBC showed their true colors on this one.....

"In a dramatic shift, the Chamber of Commerce announced Monday that it is throwing its support behind climate change legislation making its way through the U.S. Senate. Only it didn’t. An email press release announcing the change is a hoax, say Chamber officials.
Several media organizations fell for it. A CNBC anchor interrupted herself mid-sentence Monday morning to announce that the network had “breaking news,” then cut away to reporter Hampton Pearson, who read from the fake press release. Pearson quickly followed up with a second report saying the “so-called bulletin” was an “absolute hoax.” Smelling a rat, CNBC’s Larry Kudlow demanded to know whether the White House had been involved.
In a story posted Monday morning, Reuters declared: “The Chamber of Commerce said on Monday it will no longer opposes climate change legislation, but wants the bill to include a carbon tax.” Reuters updated the story to acknowledge the hoax, but it was too late: The Washington Post and the New York Times had already posted the fake story on their Web sites."

The article goes on to identify the hoaxsters. Whatever happened to verifying sources and professionalism amongst journalists? I guess this story was just too juicy to sit on and after all, when it fits your worldview, why wait and check the facts?

Monday, October 19, 2009

Fighting Satan in Afghanistan

It's the title of Ellis Washington's latest article in which he raises several interesting questions, including.....

  • In Afghanistan, we are dealing with a vile form of human swine called the Taliban, a zealous branch of Muslim fanatics hell-bent on imposing their murderous version of Islam upon the entire world.
  • Since the Korean War (1950-53) and especially since the Vietnam War (1959-75), Neville Chamberlain socialists in Congress and every president of the past 65 years (except Ronald Reagan) have fought wars not to win, but to make the corrupt bureaucrats of the United Nations happy with us. Those are two very diametrical war objectives – peace through victory vs. compromise through appeasement.
  • The United Nations has always had ideas and policies antithetical to America's long Natural Law traditions rooted in liberty, morality, the rule of law and Veritas (truth). The U.N. and the corrupt politician in Congress all believe in Positive Law (legal fascism), humanism and moral relativism – that no one country or people are any better than another, that one's morality is predicated upon one's own culture, which should not be imposed on others. Therefore, all these imbedded socialists, fascists and communists believe in an impotent America that negotiates with other world powers not from a position of strength, but from our knees!

During the last presidential campaign and early on in the Obama administration, Afghanistan, for some reason, was portrayed as the war and that greater emphasis would be placed on that theater of engagement. When one is a Chamberlain-esque appeaser like Obama, it must be difficult to try and actually win a war as opposed to playing not to lose, which would spell disaster for US and coalition forces.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Who Else Will Challenge Gore's 'Truth'?

It's the title of an article in yesterday's Investors.com by Phelim McAleer. It contains some stunning example of what we can expect if so-called "cap and trade" legislation ever passes in the US and what is currently going on in Britain that we can soon look forward to here. Some excerpts....

"Last week at the Society of Environmental Journalists conference in Wisconsin, former Vice President Al Gore took questions from journalists about global warming for the first time in years. I attended to ask him about factual errors in his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth."
You wouldn't know it from the sparse media coverage, but the British High Court found so many errors in Gore's movie in 2007 that British schools no longer can show the film without the equivalent of a health warning. I asked Gore if he intends to correct the record. He dodged the question, and the so-called reporters defended his right to be evasive by shutting off my mic.... The Senate is now considering a bill that Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., co-authored to create a European-style "cap and trade" system for carbon dioxide emissions, and he just won the endorsement of a key swing senator. International pressure on the United States to adopt such legislation also will increase in December at climate talks in Copenhagen.
That's bad news for taxpayers. The Obama administration reluctantly admitted last month that cap-and-trade would cost the average American family $1,761 a year.
That is a rosy prediction. A Heritage Foundation analysis pegs the cost at an average of $2,979 a year and as much as $4,600 a year by 2035. Jobs will disappear, energy prices will skyrocket, and the American Dream will become an unattainable fantasy for many......The British government is now spending nearly $10 million to air ads that feature an animated puppy drowning, a rabbit crying and a carbon monster spewing soot from the sky.
The ad is so laughable that even the journal Nature mocked it. But Britain wouldn't be spending that kind of money unless it expected a return on the investment in the form of new converts to the false doctrine of global warming."

The IS no warming. The last year in which tempuratures actually rose was 1998. Why do you think you hear so much about "climate change" these days as opposed to "warming"? Amidst all of the blather and hysteria, we can see in today's edition of Pennsylvania's Centre Daily Times that they are forecasting the possibility of "the earliest local snowfall in recorded history."

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

The Dumbing Down of America Continues..

While surfing the net today, I checked out the latest installment from one of my favorite columnists, economist Walter E. Williams. I knew that America's universities were going downhill but I never imagined that it was at such breakneck speed.

"a record 91 percent of Harvard University students were awarded honors during the spring graduation. The newspaper called Harvard's grading practices "the laughing stock of the Ivy League." Harvard is by no means unique. For example, 80 percent of the grades given at the University of Illinois are A's and B's. Fifty percent of students at Columbia University are on the Dean's list. At Stanford University, where F grades used to be banned, only 6 percent of student grades were as low as a C. In the 1930s, the average GPA at American colleges and universities was 2.35, about a C plus; today the national average GPA is 3.2, more than a B. Today's college students are generally dumber than their predecessors. An article in the Wall Street Journal (1/30/97) reported that a "bachelor of Arts degree in 1997 may not be the equal of a graduation certificate from an academic high school in 1947." The American Council on Education found that only 15 percent of universities require tests for general knowledge; only 17 percent for critical thinking; and only 19 percent for minimum competency. According a recent National Assessment of Adult Literacy, the percentage of college graduates proficient in prose literacy has declined from 40 percent to 31 percent within the past decade. Employers report that many college graduates lack the basic skills of critical thinking, writing and problem-solving and some employers find they must hire English and math teachers to teach them how to write memos and perform simple computations."

All of this comes as no suprise to me. I learned quite a bit after I finished school, when I had the opportunity to read books on subjects that I was unfamiliar with and basically taught myself. Only then did I realize that there's alot more out there to learn than what is taught behind classroom walls. Remember the above stats when someone starts fawning about how so-and-so is so well "educated", because after all, they have a college degree and all.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

America's last chances in 'AfPak'

One of the better articles that I've seen lately on Afghanistan-Pakistan and the situation on the ground. I like Ralph Peters and he's quite informative with this installment, giving us all a look at the man who is charged with one of the more difficult tasks in that part of the world.

"Last week, our president nominated the ideal soldier, Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, to take on the toughest job of herding cats in our Army's history -- feral Afghan cats and NATO house cats. Caldwell's official title will be commander, Combined Security Transition Command, Afghanistan, and NATO Training Mission. In plain language, he's tasked to build a reliable Afghan army and a competent police force. I'm skeptical about the Afghans, but not about Bill Caldwell. I've know him since we served together as junior officers in the 1st Battalion, 46th Infantry, three decades ago. Brought in to replace a failed company commander, he swiftly became the star of our tougher-than-tungsten battalion, the guy you'd instantly peg as the future general -- an exemplary trainer of soldiers, calm and controlled amid exploding tempers and unexploded ordnance. I know Caldwell can train the Afghans. I'm just not sure anyone can motivate them. We're sending the best we've got, a man who's led a division in combat and even battled the media to a standstill in Baghdad. But how do we get the Afghans to send their best? If Caldwell can't build an Afghan security establishment willing and able to defend a non-Taliban Afghan government, we'll know it can't be done."

I don't remember the MSM stressing how important this gentleman's job was going to be but that's not suprising. God bless
Lt. General Caldwell. May all troops someday leave that part of the world and may they eventually join the community of nations where the rule of law governs the affairs of the people and not the Taliban.

Globalist cover-up hiding Obama's past?

It's the title of Mychal Massie's article that came out today. A short exerpt from it....

"Joan Swirsky writes that Douglas Hagmann, in an interview with Dr. Laurie Roth, revealed, "The reason for the media blackout about [Obama's] birth-certificate issue was nothing less than organized Mafia-like dire threats to members of the media, issued not only from the heads of major TV and radio stations, but also from Federal Communication Commission officials. According to Hagmann and [his investigative partner] Judi McCleod, who conducted a nine-month investigation and documented their findings scrupulously," threats were made to fire major talk-show hosts if they mentioned Obama's birth certificate, threats were made by FCC officials to yank broadcasting licenses, and memos were circulated by corporate TV headquarters to all on-air employees advising them not to mention the birth-certificate issue, his lawyer's license or his college records. ("Who is behind quashing the birth-certificate issue?"; Aug. 26, 2009; RenewAmerica.com)"

I invite you to read for yourself, Mr Massie's hypothesis as to why MASSIVE amounts of information concerning Obama' past have not been released to the public and as to why " Barack Obama has spent (or had spent for him) between $1.8 million and $3.2 million in legal fees to keep his personal records secret. These include his birth certificate, his college records and all else that could provide more insight into his past". I'm not prepared to state that I share Massie's reasons as to why there is little in the way of documentation on Obama's background. But it is quite interesting when you consider that there are entire YEARS missing on this guy's resume.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

What I Heard in Honduras

It's the title of Sen. Jim DeMint's (R-SC) article that ran in yesterday's Wall Street Journal. Check it out. The guy GETS IT when it comes to Honduras as well as our immigration policy.....

"In the last three months, much has been made of a supposed military "coup" that whisked former Honduran President Manuel Zelaya from power and the supposed chaos it has created.
After visiting Tegucigalpa last week and meeting with a cross section of leaders from Honduras's government, business community, and civil society, I can report there is no chaos there. There is, however, chaos to spare in the Obama administration's policy toward our poor and loyal allies in Honduras. That policy was set in a snap decision the day Mr. Zelaya was removed from office, without a full assessment of either the facts or reliable legal analysis of the constitutional provisions at issue. Three months later, it remains in force, despite mounting evidence of its moral and legal incoherence. While in Honduras, I spoke to dozens of Hondurans, from nonpartisan members of civil society to former Zelaya political allies, from Supreme Court judges to presidential candidates and even personal friends of Mr. Zelaya. Each relayed stories of a man changed and corrupted by power. The evidence of Mr. Zelaya's abuses of presidential power—and his illegal attempts to rewrite the Honduran Constitution, a la Hugo Chávez—is not only overwhelming but uncontroverted."

As Thomas Sowell stated in his article I cited a couple of days ago, "Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Muammar Qaddafi and Vladimir Putin have all praised Barack Obama. When enemies of freedom and democracy praise your president, what are you to think? When you add to this Barack Obama's many previous years of associations and alliances with people who hate America-- Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Father Pfleger, etc.-- at what point do you stop denying the obvious and start to connect the dots?". It's becoming at least superficially evident that Mr Obama is throwing his lot in with the likes of such honored names in Latin America as Castro, Ortega and Chavez.

O's albatross

Misguided Nobel will weigh on rest of his presidency

By John Bolton (excerpts)

...how to explain the Nobel Peace Prize, the most prestigious of all, to President Barack Obama , in office less than nine month?

The Nobel Prize web site says the awards recognize "extraordinary achievements," but the Obama citation refers only to his "extraordinary efforts," a dramatic contrast.

Unfortunately, this year’s Peace Prize follows a decades-long series of politicized decisions by the Norwegian Nobel committee. The committee has repeatedly rewarded its ideological brethren, the common theme being a desire to produce a more modest role for the United States in world affairs, and a larger role for multilateral organizations, or, as some describe it, "global governance."

I tend to agree with Bolton, although I'm not sure that Obama actually returning the prize was very feasable. The committee that selected Obama can't themselves cite much "achievement" on the part of Obama., only hope.

Friday, October 9, 2009

Random Thoughts

Economist Thomas Sowell fires off a disjointed yet highly entertaining installment of his ever popular "Random Thoughts" articles. Some of the highpoints are as follows....

  • Upon learning that the Constitution requires a president to be a natural born citizen, a college student said: "What makes a natural born citizen any more qualified than one born by C-section?"
  • When politicians propose some hugely expensive new program and are asked how the government is going to pay for it, a standard ploy over the years has been to claim that they will pay for it by eliminating "waste, fraud and abuse." At a recent town hall meeting, a citizen raised the obvious question: If you can do that, why haven't you done it already?
  • After political crusades for "affordable housing" ended up ruining the housing market and much of the economy with it, many of the same politicians are now carrying on a crusade for "affordable health care." But what you can afford has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of producing anything. Refusing to pay those costs means that you are just not going to continue getting the same quantity and quality-- regardless of what any politician says or how well he says it.
  • Want to win an easy bet? Bet someone that Babe Ruth had a lower lifetime earned run average than Cy Young, Whitey Ford or Sandy Koufax. During his early years with the Red Sox, Ruth pitched nine shutouts in a season, which is still the American League record for a left-handed pitcher. He would have made the baseball hall of fame, even if he had never hit a home run.
  • Congressman Joe Wilson got into more trouble for telling the truth than President Barack Obama got into by telling a demonstrable lie about adding millions of people to the insurance rolls without adding a dime to the deficit. As regards providing medical insurance for illegal immigrants, I doubt that the president will do that. More likely, he will legalize them first and then give them medical insurance.
  • Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Muammar Qaddafi and Vladimir Putin have all praised Barack Obama. When enemies of freedom and democracy praise your president, what are you to think? When you add to this Barack Obama's many previous years of associations and alliances with people who hate America-- Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Father Pfleger, etc.-- at what point do you stop denying the obvious and start to connect the dots?

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Atheists say prayer makes them physically sick

I found this article while surfing the net today. It made me wonder exactly what percentage of the atheists I encounter regularly via the worldwide web would agree with the following article...
"Atheists recruited to be part of a lawsuit that is trying to rid government ceremonies such as the inauguration of a president of any invocation or other prayer have claimed they are made physically ill by prayer. "As I watched the inauguration, my stomach did a somersault with disgust for how much our country was violating the constitution (sic), the most important document in our country," wrote a 15-year-old in testimony being given to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia. The lawsuit was filed before President Obama's inauguration and subsequently was dismissed at the district court level. Briefs now are being submitted to the appeals court in plaintiffs' hopes the case will be reopened. "I felt a temporary state of disconnection when these religious statements and prayers were made during the inauguration," wrote another, according to an appendix of information submitted with the plaintiffs' recent arguments in the case. "
So how about it atheists? Are these particular co-religionists of yours taking it just a little too far? I can't stand frivilous lawsuits as a rule. These invocations have been going on as long as we've been a country and I think these folks just have to suck it up and "man up" for a couple of minutes. "A temporary state of disconnect", puh-leez, give me a break.

Is the US preparing to bomb Iran?

I don't know if this is news to any of you, but Michael Savage had a similar story up on his website about a week and a half ago. From ABC News....

"Back in October 2007, ABC News reported that the Pentagon had asked Congress for $88 million in the emergency Iraq/Afghanistan war funding request to develop a gargantuan bunker-busting bomb called the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). It's a 30,000-pound bomb designed to hit targets buried 200 feet below ground. Back then, the Pentagon cited an "urgent operational need" for the new weapon. Now the Pentagon is shifting spending from other programs to fast forward the development and procurement of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. The Pentagon comptroller sent a request to shift the funds to the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees over the summer.....Why now? The notification says simply, "The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments."

I just wonder if all of this is too late. Some countries, under no circumstances, should have access to nuclear weapons IMHO.
GWB apparently had too much on his plate to take care of this during his administration and Clinton was probably either oblivious to the situation or hoped he could kick it down the road to te next administration. Sad that we have a completely ineffective chief executive at the time of this crisis and we wonder how this will all play out.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Chavez, Lula, Obama Make Honduras Unstable

It's the title of the article by Alexandre Marinis out of Sao Paolo. If there were any doubts that by through design or coincidence, due to their shared, politcal ideologies Lula, Obama AND Chavez are making a complete mess out of an already tenuous situation in Honduras.

"Reasonable people can argue whether Zelaya deserved to be tossed out of office. The fact is his ouster was legal, according to a detailed report issued by the U.S. Congressional Research Service. The Honduran Congress has the authority to rebuke the president and decide constitutional intent, the report says. “In the case against Zelaya, the National Congress interpreted the power to disapprove of the conduct of the president to encompass the power to remove him from office, based on the results of a special, extensive investigation,” it states. Chavez and Lula engaged in wise-guy diplomacy. Their actions violated international laws by helping Zelaya enter the country illegally. And they disrupted the economy of Central America’s second-poorest country, which was already reeling from the global economic crisis. Making things even worse, President Barack Obama's administration, which correctly criticized Venezuela and Brazil for letting Zelaya into Honduras, says it won’t recognize the scheduled November election unless the political crisis is resolved. That gives carte blanche to Zelaya. The more turmoil Zelaya creates, the closer to civil war the country will be. "

Is there even ONE foreign policy victory that the Obama administration can claim? The man isnt taken seriously anywhere, least of all, in Copenhagen (where VD was pointed out on his blog), a possible reason, that the US was bounced from consideration by the Olympic Committee was the Obamas themselves. According to George Will, the Obamas, both Michelle and Barack, referred to themselves a highly inordinate amount of times in speeches they gave prior to the final selection.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Dawkins continues to duck Comfort

Today's article by Les Kinsolving raises yet again the question as to why atheist Richard Dawkins will not take a $20,000 payday to debate Ray Comfort. I doubt that this is in response to Comfort's abilities as a debater as much as the lack of confidence Dawkins has in his own arguments. From Kinsolving's article....
"Newsweek magazine's Oct. 5 edition devotes four full pages to Britain's atheist, Richard Dawkins. Three of these pages are given to an article by Dawkins, under the headline "The angry evolutionist." The fourth page is headlined "Darwin's Rottweiler." It features Dawkins' twice stipulating: "The God of the Old Testament is a monster."
It appears that Comfort is watching all of this and today's entry over at his blog entitled "God and Genocide" addresses one of the main criticisms of God by Dawkins. Like PZ Myers before him who ran and hid when confronted by the possibility of a debate with Vox Day, Dawkins is hardly doing his side any justice by refusing to come down off of his perch and debate the preacher from New Zealand.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Putin's Iran plan

Today's article from Ralph Peters lays bare the plans that Russia has for the region, with or without a military strike by the US or Israel.

"Iran's traditional emblem has been the Persian lion. Russia's should be a vulture: Prime Minister Vladimir Putin intends to feed on the carcass left by any confrontation with Iran.
For Moscow, this crisis isn't about Tehran's acquisition of nukes. It's about Russia's acquisition of a stranglehold on global energy markets.
Putin's playing with fire -- but he's sure we'll be the ones burned.
As for the Obama administration's desperate (and stunningly naive) hope that economic sanctions can deter President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and his fellow thugs-for-Allah from pursuing nuclear weapons, forget it. Even were Putin to permit his front-man, President Dmitri Medvedev, to agree to half-baked sanctions, Moscow would violate them before Obama could step out of Air Force One with a piece of paper in his hand guaranteeing peace in our time."

Especially noteworthy is Peters' use of the words "stunningly naive" and the Neville Chamberlain comparison. Did people actually expect anything more from a community organizer who voted a non-commital "present" about 130 times during his tenure in the Illinois State Senate?