Author unknown
*The President at Space X*
*- His motorcade proceeded not far from the building where I
work. There is no picture for this historic moment in my life because
every building on the military instillation near his motorcade was put
into complete lockdown.*
*- The President then gave a 45 minute speech on his plans for
NASA at the Operations and Control building. 1,000 employees were given
paid leave to keep them out of the building the entire day. The O&C
building was in lockdown from 7 AM to 7 PM including the surrounding
parking lots.*
*- _The speech was given to persons who rec’d a White House
invitation._*
*- The President then flew out from the SLF around 3:45 PM.*
*The President came to “talk to us” about the future of NASA, but _NONE_
of “us” were at his speech. Nor were we able to even wave to him as he
drove around. Even his supporters that I work with were livid that they
could not even walk out of the building to view his motorcade at a
distance. One even stormed off from the single window facing the road he
traveled & stated that America is not free.*
*I can understand the desire for safety for our President, but this was
serious over-kill. The President was on a secure facility; surrounded by
unarmed nerds w/federally investigated backgrounds. Many of the
employees at NASA-KSC have been around since the beginning of the
shuttle program. I can honestly say that I do not believe we would have
been confined to our buildings or that entire buildings would have been
shut down for an entire day if Bush had ever visited … or any other past
President for that matter. We, as the media labeled us, truly were
hostile territory for this President.*
*The President’s speech did not tell us anything more than what we could
have read in /Florida Today/. We will still lose 8,000 jobs at just KSC
alone. He will “save” 2,000 jobs … not really. Tho, his logic is very
similar to the health care bill. We will spend (i.e. lose) 8,000 ($1
trillion dollars) jobs in order to save 2,000 jobs ($100 billion) in the
future. He is still cancelling Constellation. He is still relegating us
to the back of the bus in the space industry. We still do not have a
private industry that can send humans into space. We will give foreign
countries millions to employ their citizens in order to send our
astronauts into space.*
*He has proclaimed that he is giving us a “new” direction much like JFK
did when he proclaimed that America would go to the moon. Only, his new
direction does not have us going to the moon or Mars or even the ISS! He
wants us to find where the Easter bunny lives (i.e. Climate
Change). This is not a direction for NASA. This is the destruction of
America ’s lead in space.*
*This President spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to come & tell us
everything we already knew. He could have simply remained in D.C. &
given the same worthless speech to save everyone time &
money. Operations at KSC were shut down; some for the entire day. For
what? Well, we did learn something. When this President is around the
/“intelligent workforce that America ’s space industry cannot afford to
lose,”/ we will be locked down & prevented from seeing him.*
*This narcissistic, communistic President has betrayed America over &
over again. His reign of destruction will prove difficult to fix when he
is voted out in 2012. Are you, America, up for the challenge?*
Thursday, April 29, 2010
What the hell happend to REAL MEN - Borrowed from a blog I belong to - cited at the end
I've made some slight corrections where I think there were some typo-s. I hope I haven't changed what the author really intended.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Lament for the REAL MAN?
What the Hell Happened to Real Men?
When I was young it was stand up for the girl, stand up for what is right, don't back down from bullies and never hit a guy with glasses. Real men always did the right thing. They took care of their families and put food on the table.
We had role models like Mike Brady of the Brady Bunch, James Evans of Goodtimes, Steve Douglas of My Three Sons and good old Ward Cleaver of Leave it to Beaver. On the big screen there was Stallone, Eastwood, Lee Marvin, Robert Mitchum, and of course the Duke "John Wayne". They represented the man of the time:
they worked, they fought, they were faithful and honorable. They took responsibility and had accountability.
The dads I knew went to work and loved mom. He dispensed kindness and discipline with the wisdom of Solomon. He showed you how to take responsibility, treat a woman with respect, showed compassion and kindness and was willing to fight for his beliefs.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the line those ideals became outdated and antiquated to caveman proportions. Men have been force fed their feminine side. Ideals have have been replaced with "reality". "Reality" is code for shifting focus from the good to the bad. Let's face it, you watch reality shows for the train wrecks, not the triumphs.
"Reality" has become the new truth and it's perverted. Our effort to show this new "truth" men has destroyed the image of REAL MEN. We are taught that real men are narrow-minded Neanderthals incapable of being humane. They are 2 dimension throwbacks that objectify women and are prone to violence.
Real men have been taught that all violence is bad. That violence doesn't solve anything. Well, it may not solve anything, but it sure stops a lot of shit. Violence is a SOLUTION, not an ANSWER.
Real men have been forced into social sensitivity training. We have been told it's OK to cry. Listen, real men only cry at funerals, Old Yeller and when they retire from professional sports. They can shed an occasional tear, but no more than two.
In the media men are unfaithful, cheat are deadbeat and nonexistent. They have been portrayed as buffoons an inept providers. Cliff Huckstable has been replaced by Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin. The new series Modern Family portrays the DADS like this: One is like an impetuous child, another is an antiquated tough guy with the proverbial wife who is 25 years younger and finally the homosexual couple who have my gay friends saying "they're a little over the top." Hell, even Spider-man and Superman developed "issues".
If left to use the mass media example of a what a real man is, my son will have 3 kids with 3 different mothers, no job and be living in my basement for the next 30 years eating nothing but peanut butter and crackers, smoking pot and playing Gears of War 15.
My daughter will learn to accept any substandard behavior because her expectations will be lowered to the point of ZERO. She will be mistreated and abused while moving from one failed relationship to another. Doesn't it bother anybody that the rate of divorce is 50%.
We have been told that marriage is unnatural and outdated. That animals are not monogamous, so how can you expect humans to be? Really, have we put our intellect on the level of the rest of the animal kingdom? People cheat and there's a high rate of divorce because the men you created are little whining maggots too concerned with their fulfillment. You have made them so sensitive that they question EVERY ASPECT OF THEIR LIVES. They are insecure, congratulations on your new inner child!
Listen, there are some people who shouldn't be together. But growing apart is....BULLSHIT!!! How can you grow apart when you live together. What happens is you get too distracted by your own world and FORGOT what you promised each other....how the hell did I wind up here?
Back on track.
The media will not help you. Time to turn off the TV and teach our kids to hold themselves to a higher standard. To be accountable and assume responsibility.
So far I have created a list of rules I am going to instill in my kids. The list is a work in progress but here goes.
For starters my son will:
1. Hold the door open for a woman
2. Pick up the check
3. Know how to protect himself
4. Stand up for what he thinks is right
5. Know that NO means NO.
6. To treat women with respect and kindness
7. To own his mistakes
8. To never kiss on the first date
9. To help the little guy in trouble
10.To play hard and by the rules
11. To know that steroids are not an acceptable performance enhancer
12. To be honest and loyal to his friends and family until given sufficient reason otherwise.
13. Never send a digital image of any body part, whatsoever.
14. Always be polite
My daughter will:
1. Never wait for a boy
2. Never do anything just because it's time or for the sake of doing it
3. Know how to protect herself
4. Know how she should be treated
5. To never pick up a check
6. To be honest and loyal to friends and family until given sufficient reason otherwise
7. Know that NO means NO.
8. To treat men with respect and honesty
9. To own her mistakes
10. To never kiss on the first date
11. To help the little guy/girl in trouble
12. To play hard and by the rules
13. Never send a digital image of any body part, whatsoever
14. Always be polite
The bar for behavior has been set so low that I don't think it even exists. Other than murder and rape, most everything is fair game. Like LtCol Slade in Scent of a Woman said "Grow up! [Today]It's fuck your buddy, cheat on your wife, call your mother on Mother's Day!"
Well not on my watch. I will not accept the "anything is good enough standard" that is set. I will not let myself or my family settle. We will strive to be a better son, daughter, friend, sister, brother and coworker. They will expect more of themselves and not at the expense of losing themselves. They will understand the virtues of a REAL MAN.
Damian Ross
The Self Defense Company
Family Safe Program
The Self Defense Training System
Posted by Damian Ross at 10:21 AM
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Lament for the REAL MAN?
What the Hell Happened to Real Men?
When I was young it was stand up for the girl, stand up for what is right, don't back down from bullies and never hit a guy with glasses. Real men always did the right thing. They took care of their families and put food on the table.
We had role models like Mike Brady of the Brady Bunch, James Evans of Goodtimes, Steve Douglas of My Three Sons and good old Ward Cleaver of Leave it to Beaver. On the big screen there was Stallone, Eastwood, Lee Marvin, Robert Mitchum, and of course the Duke "John Wayne". They represented the man of the time:
they worked, they fought, they were faithful and honorable. They took responsibility and had accountability.
The dads I knew went to work and loved mom. He dispensed kindness and discipline with the wisdom of Solomon. He showed you how to take responsibility, treat a woman with respect, showed compassion and kindness and was willing to fight for his beliefs.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the line those ideals became outdated and antiquated to caveman proportions. Men have been force fed their feminine side. Ideals have have been replaced with "reality". "Reality" is code for shifting focus from the good to the bad. Let's face it, you watch reality shows for the train wrecks, not the triumphs.
"Reality" has become the new truth and it's perverted. Our effort to show this new "truth" men has destroyed the image of REAL MEN. We are taught that real men are narrow-minded Neanderthals incapable of being humane. They are 2 dimension throwbacks that objectify women and are prone to violence.
Real men have been taught that all violence is bad. That violence doesn't solve anything. Well, it may not solve anything, but it sure stops a lot of shit. Violence is a SOLUTION, not an ANSWER.
Real men have been forced into social sensitivity training. We have been told it's OK to cry. Listen, real men only cry at funerals, Old Yeller and when they retire from professional sports. They can shed an occasional tear, but no more than two.
In the media men are unfaithful, cheat are deadbeat and nonexistent. They have been portrayed as buffoons an inept providers. Cliff Huckstable has been replaced by Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin. The new series Modern Family portrays the DADS like this: One is like an impetuous child, another is an antiquated tough guy with the proverbial wife who is 25 years younger and finally the homosexual couple who have my gay friends saying "they're a little over the top." Hell, even Spider-man and Superman developed "issues".
If left to use the mass media example of a what a real man is, my son will have 3 kids with 3 different mothers, no job and be living in my basement for the next 30 years eating nothing but peanut butter and crackers, smoking pot and playing Gears of War 15.
My daughter will learn to accept any substandard behavior because her expectations will be lowered to the point of ZERO. She will be mistreated and abused while moving from one failed relationship to another. Doesn't it bother anybody that the rate of divorce is 50%.
We have been told that marriage is unnatural and outdated. That animals are not monogamous, so how can you expect humans to be? Really, have we put our intellect on the level of the rest of the animal kingdom? People cheat and there's a high rate of divorce because the men you created are little whining maggots too concerned with their fulfillment. You have made them so sensitive that they question EVERY ASPECT OF THEIR LIVES. They are insecure, congratulations on your new inner child!
Listen, there are some people who shouldn't be together. But growing apart is....BULLSHIT!!! How can you grow apart when you live together. What happens is you get too distracted by your own world and FORGOT what you promised each other....how the hell did I wind up here?
Back on track.
The media will not help you. Time to turn off the TV and teach our kids to hold themselves to a higher standard. To be accountable and assume responsibility.
So far I have created a list of rules I am going to instill in my kids. The list is a work in progress but here goes.
For starters my son will:
1. Hold the door open for a woman
2. Pick up the check
3. Know how to protect himself
4. Stand up for what he thinks is right
5. Know that NO means NO.
6. To treat women with respect and kindness
7. To own his mistakes
8. To never kiss on the first date
9. To help the little guy in trouble
10.To play hard and by the rules
11. To know that steroids are not an acceptable performance enhancer
12. To be honest and loyal to his friends and family until given sufficient reason otherwise.
13. Never send a digital image of any body part, whatsoever.
14. Always be polite
My daughter will:
1. Never wait for a boy
2. Never do anything just because it's time or for the sake of doing it
3. Know how to protect herself
4. Know how she should be treated
5. To never pick up a check
6. To be honest and loyal to friends and family until given sufficient reason otherwise
7. Know that NO means NO.
8. To treat men with respect and honesty
9. To own her mistakes
10. To never kiss on the first date
11. To help the little guy/girl in trouble
12. To play hard and by the rules
13. Never send a digital image of any body part, whatsoever
14. Always be polite
The bar for behavior has been set so low that I don't think it even exists. Other than murder and rape, most everything is fair game. Like LtCol Slade in Scent of a Woman said "Grow up! [Today]It's fuck your buddy, cheat on your wife, call your mother on Mother's Day!"
Well not on my watch. I will not accept the "anything is good enough standard" that is set. I will not let myself or my family settle. We will strive to be a better son, daughter, friend, sister, brother and coworker. They will expect more of themselves and not at the expense of losing themselves. They will understand the virtues of a REAL MAN.
Damian Ross
The Self Defense Company
Family Safe Program
The Self Defense Training System
Posted by Damian Ross at 10:21 AM
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
The History human policital development
For those that don't know about history ... Here is a condensed version:
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals, and
2. Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to BBQ at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement...
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly BBQ's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. They became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass for obvious reasons.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud or Miller. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, engineers, corporate executives, athletes, members of the military, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
Here ends today's lesson in world history:
It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it.
A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off.
And there you have it. Let your next action reveal your true self.....I'm going to have another beer.
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals, and
2. Conservatives.
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to BBQ at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement...
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly BBQ's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. They became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass for obvious reasons.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud or Miller. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, engineers, corporate executives, athletes, members of the military, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
Here ends today's lesson in world history:
It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it.
A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off.
And there you have it. Let your next action reveal your true self.....I'm going to have another beer.
Only in Texas
Just read today where Governor Rick Perry was out with his dog and using the pistol he carries lawfully under his concealed weapons permit he shot and killed a coyote that was coming after the dog. What a problem for the liberals. Guns bad, no he used for protection. Animal rights, well what about the dog's rights....
Way to go Rick. I didn't vote for you in the Primary but I will next fall.
Way to go Rick. I didn't vote for you in the Primary but I will next fall.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Islam, taking over one American school at a time
With fatal terrorist attacks on the decline worldwide and al Qaeda apparently in disarray, it would seem a time for optimism in the global war on terrorism. But the war has simply shifted to a different arena. Islamists, or those who believe that Islam is a political and religious system that must dominate all others, are focusing less on the military and more on the ideological. It turns out that Western liberal democracies can be subverted without firing a shot.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the educational realm. Islamists have taken what's come to be known as the "soft jihad" into America's classrooms and children in K-12 are the first casualties. Whether it is textbooks, curriculum, classroom exercises, film screenings, speakers or teacher training, public education in America is under assault.
Capitalizing on the post-9/11 demand for Arabic instruction, some public, charter and voucher-funded private schools are inappropriately using taxpayer dollars to implement a religious curriculum. They are also bringing in outside speakers with Islamist ties or sympathies. As a result, not only are children receiving a biased education, but possible violations of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause abound. Consider the following cases:
•Last month, students at Friendswood Junior High in Houston were required to attend an "Islamic Awareness" presentation during class time allotted for physical education. The presentation involved two representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an organization with a record of Islamist statements and terrorism convictions. According to students, they were taught that "there is one God, his name is Allah" and that "Adam, Noah and Jesus are prophets." Students were also taught about the Five Pillars of Islam and how to pray five times a day and wear Islamic religious garb. Parents were not notified about the presentation and it wasn't until a number of complaints arose that school officials responded with an apologetic e-mail.
•Earlier this year at Lake Brantley High School in Seminole County, Fla., speakers from the Academy for Learning Islam gave a presentation to students about "cultural diversity" that extended to a detailed discussion of the Quran and Islam. The school neither screened the ALI speakers nor notified parents. After a number of complaints, local media coverage and a subsequent investigation, the school district apologized for the inappropriate presentation, admitting that it violated the law. Subsequently, ALI was removed from the Seminole County school system's Dividends and Speaker's Bureau.
•As reported by the Cabinet Press, a school project last year at Amherst Middle School transformed "the quaint colonial town of Amherst, N.H., into a Saudi Arabian Bedouin tent community." Male and female students were segregated, with the girls hosting "hijab and veil stations" and handing out the oppressive head-to-toe black garment known as the abaya to female guests. Meanwhile, the boys hosted food and Arabic dancing stations because, as explained in the article, "the traditions of Saudi Arabia at this time prevent women from participating in these public roles." An "Islamic religion station" offered up a prayer rug, verses from the Quran, prayer items and a compass pointed towards Mecca. The fact that female subjugation was presented as a benign cultural practice and Islamic religious rituals were promoted with public funds is cause for concern.
•Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy, a charter school in Inver Grove Heights, Minn., came under recent scrutiny after Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten brought to light concerns about public funding for its overtly religious curriculum. The school is housed in the Muslim American Society's (the American branch of the Egyptian Islamist group the Muslim Brotherhood) Minnesota building, alongside a mosque, and the daily routine includes prayer, ritual washing, halal food preparation and an after-school "Islamic studies" program. Kersten's columns prompted the Minnesota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union to issue a press release expressing its own reservations about potential First Amendment violations. An investigation initiated by the Minnesota Department of Education verified several of Kersten's allegations and the school has since promised to make the appropriate changes. In a bizarre twist, when a local television news crew tried to report on the findings from school grounds, school officials confronted them and wrestled a camera away from one of its photographers, injuring him in the process.
•The controversy surrounding the founding of New York City's Arabic language public school, Khalil Gibran International Academy, last year continues. Former principal Dhabah "Debbie" Almontaser was asked to step down after publicly defending T-shirts produced by Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media, an organization with whom she shared office space, emblazoned with "Intifada NYC." But KGIA has other troublesome associations. Its advisory board includes three imams, one of whom, New York University Imam Khalid Latif, sent a threatening letter to the university's president regarding a planned display of the Danish cartoons. Another, Shamsi Ali, runs the Jamaica Muslim Center Quranic Memorization School in Queens, a replica of the type of Pakistani madrassa (or school) counter-terrorism officials have been warning about since 9/11. Accordingly, several parents founded Stop the Madrassa: A Community Coalition to voice their contention that KGIA is an inappropriate candidate for taxpayer funding.
Equally problematic are the textbooks used in American public schools to teach Islam or Islamic history. Organizations such as Southern California's Council on Islamic Education and Arabic World and Islamic Resources are tasked with screening and editing these textbooks for public school districts, but questions have been raised about the groups' scholarship and ideological agenda. The American Textbook Council, an organization that reviews history and social studies textbooks used in American schools, and its director, Gilbert T. Sewall, have produced a series of articles and reports on Islam textbooks and the findings are damning. They include textbooks that are factually inaccurate, misrepresent and in some cases, glorify Islam, or are hostile to other religions. While teaching students about Islam within a religious studies context may be appropriate, the purpose becomes suspect when the texts involved are compromised in this manner.
Such are the complaints about "History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond," a textbook published by the Teachers' Curriculum Institute, to the point where parents in the Scottsdale, Ariz., school district succeeded in having it removed from the curriculum in 2005. TCI is based in Mountain View, and the textbook is now being used in the state's public schools, where similar concerns have arisen. A Marin County mother whose son has been assigned "History Alive!" has been trying to mount an effort to call school officials' attention to the problem. Similarly, a San Luis Obispo mother filed an official complaint several years ago with her son's school authorities over the use of Houghton Mifflin's middle school text, "Across the Centuries," which has been widely criticized for whitewashing Islamic history and glorifying Islam. Its inclusion in the Montgomery County, Md. public school curriculum among other districts across the country, could lead to further objections.
But the forces in opposition are powerful and plenty. They include public education bureaucrats and teachers mired in naivete and political correctness, biased textbook publishers, politicized professors and other experts tasked with helping states approve textbooks, and at the top of the heap, billions of dollars in Saudi funding. These funds are pouring into the coffers of various organs that design K-12 curricula. The resultant material, not coincidentally, turns out to be inaccurate, biased and, considering the Wahhabist strain of Islam promulgated by Saudi Arabia, dangerous. And again, taxpayer dollars are involved. National Review Online contributing editor Stanley Kurtz explains :
"The United States government gives money — and a federal seal of approval — to a university Middle East Studies center. That center offers a government-approved K-12 Middle East studies curriculum to America's teachers. But in fact, that curriculum has been bought and paid for by the Saudis, who may even have trained the personnel who operate the university's outreach program. Meanwhile, the American government is asleep at the wheel — paying scant attention to how its federally mandated public outreach programs actually work. So without ever realizing it, America's taxpayers end up subsidizing — and providing official federal approval for — K-12 educational materials on the Middle East that have been created under Saudi auspices. Game, set, match: Saudis."
Along with funding textbooks and curricula, the Saudis are also involved in funding and designing training for public school teachers. The Saudi funded Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University now offers professional development workshops for K-12 teachers. The workshops take place at the hosting institution and provide teachers with classroom material. They are free of charge and ACMCU throws in lunch to boot.
But this generosity likely comes with a catch, for the center is known for producing scholars and material with a decidedly apologist bent, both toward the Saudi Royal Family and Islamic radicalism. It's no accident that ACMCU education consultant Susan Douglass, according to her bio, has been "an affiliated scholar" with the Council on Islamic Education "for over a decade." Douglass also taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy in Fairfax, Va., where her husband still teaches. ISA has come under investigation for Saudi-provided textbooks and curriculum that some have alleged promotes hatred and intolerance towards non-Muslims. That someone with Douglass' problematic associations would be in charge of training public school teachers hardly inspires confidence in the system.
While groups such as People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the ACLU express outrage at any semblance of Christianity in America's public schools, very little clamor has met the emergence of Islam in the same arena. An occasional press release, such as the one put out by the Minnesota chapter of the ACLU regarding TIZA, will surface, but by and large, the arbiters of separation of church and state or in this case, mosque and state, have gone silent. The same can largely be said for the federal government and, in particular, the State Department. No doubt, Saudi dollars and influence are part of the problem.
Probably the single greatest weapon in the arsenal of those trying to fight the misuse of America's public schools is community involvement. As noted previously, a number of parental coalitions have sprung up across the country in an effort to protect their own children from indoctrination. The Stop the Madrassa Coalition has expanded its efforts beyond New York City by working on policy ideas for legislation and meeting privately with members of Congress. Also providing hope are Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.), whose 10-point "Wake Up America" agenda includes a call to reform Saudi-provided textbooks, and the bipartisan Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus she co-chairs. Its focus on "jihadist ideology" demonstrates an all-too-rare governmental understanding of the nature of the current conflict.
The power to educate the next generation is an inestimable one and a free society cedes control at its peril. The days of the "silent majority" are no longer tenable in the face of a determined and clever enemy. The battle of ideas must be joined.
Cinnamon Stillwell is a San Francisco writer. She can be reached at cinnamonstillwell@yahoo.com. She also writes for the blog at campus-watch.org.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/11/cstillwell.DTL#ixzz13oJ03KiV
Nowhere is this more evident than in the educational realm. Islamists have taken what's come to be known as the "soft jihad" into America's classrooms and children in K-12 are the first casualties. Whether it is textbooks, curriculum, classroom exercises, film screenings, speakers or teacher training, public education in America is under assault.
Capitalizing on the post-9/11 demand for Arabic instruction, some public, charter and voucher-funded private schools are inappropriately using taxpayer dollars to implement a religious curriculum. They are also bringing in outside speakers with Islamist ties or sympathies. As a result, not only are children receiving a biased education, but possible violations of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause abound. Consider the following cases:
•Last month, students at Friendswood Junior High in Houston were required to attend an "Islamic Awareness" presentation during class time allotted for physical education. The presentation involved two representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an organization with a record of Islamist statements and terrorism convictions. According to students, they were taught that "there is one God, his name is Allah" and that "Adam, Noah and Jesus are prophets." Students were also taught about the Five Pillars of Islam and how to pray five times a day and wear Islamic religious garb. Parents were not notified about the presentation and it wasn't until a number of complaints arose that school officials responded with an apologetic e-mail.
•Earlier this year at Lake Brantley High School in Seminole County, Fla., speakers from the Academy for Learning Islam gave a presentation to students about "cultural diversity" that extended to a detailed discussion of the Quran and Islam. The school neither screened the ALI speakers nor notified parents. After a number of complaints, local media coverage and a subsequent investigation, the school district apologized for the inappropriate presentation, admitting that it violated the law. Subsequently, ALI was removed from the Seminole County school system's Dividends and Speaker's Bureau.
•As reported by the Cabinet Press, a school project last year at Amherst Middle School transformed "the quaint colonial town of Amherst, N.H., into a Saudi Arabian Bedouin tent community." Male and female students were segregated, with the girls hosting "hijab and veil stations" and handing out the oppressive head-to-toe black garment known as the abaya to female guests. Meanwhile, the boys hosted food and Arabic dancing stations because, as explained in the article, "the traditions of Saudi Arabia at this time prevent women from participating in these public roles." An "Islamic religion station" offered up a prayer rug, verses from the Quran, prayer items and a compass pointed towards Mecca. The fact that female subjugation was presented as a benign cultural practice and Islamic religious rituals were promoted with public funds is cause for concern.
•Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy, a charter school in Inver Grove Heights, Minn., came under recent scrutiny after Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten brought to light concerns about public funding for its overtly religious curriculum. The school is housed in the Muslim American Society's (the American branch of the Egyptian Islamist group the Muslim Brotherhood) Minnesota building, alongside a mosque, and the daily routine includes prayer, ritual washing, halal food preparation and an after-school "Islamic studies" program. Kersten's columns prompted the Minnesota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union to issue a press release expressing its own reservations about potential First Amendment violations. An investigation initiated by the Minnesota Department of Education verified several of Kersten's allegations and the school has since promised to make the appropriate changes. In a bizarre twist, when a local television news crew tried to report on the findings from school grounds, school officials confronted them and wrestled a camera away from one of its photographers, injuring him in the process.
•The controversy surrounding the founding of New York City's Arabic language public school, Khalil Gibran International Academy, last year continues. Former principal Dhabah "Debbie" Almontaser was asked to step down after publicly defending T-shirts produced by Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media, an organization with whom she shared office space, emblazoned with "Intifada NYC." But KGIA has other troublesome associations. Its advisory board includes three imams, one of whom, New York University Imam Khalid Latif, sent a threatening letter to the university's president regarding a planned display of the Danish cartoons. Another, Shamsi Ali, runs the Jamaica Muslim Center Quranic Memorization School in Queens, a replica of the type of Pakistani madrassa (or school) counter-terrorism officials have been warning about since 9/11. Accordingly, several parents founded Stop the Madrassa: A Community Coalition to voice their contention that KGIA is an inappropriate candidate for taxpayer funding.
Equally problematic are the textbooks used in American public schools to teach Islam or Islamic history. Organizations such as Southern California's Council on Islamic Education and Arabic World and Islamic Resources are tasked with screening and editing these textbooks for public school districts, but questions have been raised about the groups' scholarship and ideological agenda. The American Textbook Council, an organization that reviews history and social studies textbooks used in American schools, and its director, Gilbert T. Sewall, have produced a series of articles and reports on Islam textbooks and the findings are damning. They include textbooks that are factually inaccurate, misrepresent and in some cases, glorify Islam, or are hostile to other religions. While teaching students about Islam within a religious studies context may be appropriate, the purpose becomes suspect when the texts involved are compromised in this manner.
Such are the complaints about "History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond," a textbook published by the Teachers' Curriculum Institute, to the point where parents in the Scottsdale, Ariz., school district succeeded in having it removed from the curriculum in 2005. TCI is based in Mountain View, and the textbook is now being used in the state's public schools, where similar concerns have arisen. A Marin County mother whose son has been assigned "History Alive!" has been trying to mount an effort to call school officials' attention to the problem. Similarly, a San Luis Obispo mother filed an official complaint several years ago with her son's school authorities over the use of Houghton Mifflin's middle school text, "Across the Centuries," which has been widely criticized for whitewashing Islamic history and glorifying Islam. Its inclusion in the Montgomery County, Md. public school curriculum among other districts across the country, could lead to further objections.
But the forces in opposition are powerful and plenty. They include public education bureaucrats and teachers mired in naivete and political correctness, biased textbook publishers, politicized professors and other experts tasked with helping states approve textbooks, and at the top of the heap, billions of dollars in Saudi funding. These funds are pouring into the coffers of various organs that design K-12 curricula. The resultant material, not coincidentally, turns out to be inaccurate, biased and, considering the Wahhabist strain of Islam promulgated by Saudi Arabia, dangerous. And again, taxpayer dollars are involved. National Review Online contributing editor Stanley Kurtz explains :
"The United States government gives money — and a federal seal of approval — to a university Middle East Studies center. That center offers a government-approved K-12 Middle East studies curriculum to America's teachers. But in fact, that curriculum has been bought and paid for by the Saudis, who may even have trained the personnel who operate the university's outreach program. Meanwhile, the American government is asleep at the wheel — paying scant attention to how its federally mandated public outreach programs actually work. So without ever realizing it, America's taxpayers end up subsidizing — and providing official federal approval for — K-12 educational materials on the Middle East that have been created under Saudi auspices. Game, set, match: Saudis."
Along with funding textbooks and curricula, the Saudis are also involved in funding and designing training for public school teachers. The Saudi funded Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University now offers professional development workshops for K-12 teachers. The workshops take place at the hosting institution and provide teachers with classroom material. They are free of charge and ACMCU throws in lunch to boot.
But this generosity likely comes with a catch, for the center is known for producing scholars and material with a decidedly apologist bent, both toward the Saudi Royal Family and Islamic radicalism. It's no accident that ACMCU education consultant Susan Douglass, according to her bio, has been "an affiliated scholar" with the Council on Islamic Education "for over a decade." Douglass also taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy in Fairfax, Va., where her husband still teaches. ISA has come under investigation for Saudi-provided textbooks and curriculum that some have alleged promotes hatred and intolerance towards non-Muslims. That someone with Douglass' problematic associations would be in charge of training public school teachers hardly inspires confidence in the system.
While groups such as People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the ACLU express outrage at any semblance of Christianity in America's public schools, very little clamor has met the emergence of Islam in the same arena. An occasional press release, such as the one put out by the Minnesota chapter of the ACLU regarding TIZA, will surface, but by and large, the arbiters of separation of church and state or in this case, mosque and state, have gone silent. The same can largely be said for the federal government and, in particular, the State Department. No doubt, Saudi dollars and influence are part of the problem.
Probably the single greatest weapon in the arsenal of those trying to fight the misuse of America's public schools is community involvement. As noted previously, a number of parental coalitions have sprung up across the country in an effort to protect their own children from indoctrination. The Stop the Madrassa Coalition has expanded its efforts beyond New York City by working on policy ideas for legislation and meeting privately with members of Congress. Also providing hope are Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.), whose 10-point "Wake Up America" agenda includes a call to reform Saudi-provided textbooks, and the bipartisan Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus she co-chairs. Its focus on "jihadist ideology" demonstrates an all-too-rare governmental understanding of the nature of the current conflict.
The power to educate the next generation is an inestimable one and a free society cedes control at its peril. The days of the "silent majority" are no longer tenable in the face of a determined and clever enemy. The battle of ideas must be joined.
Cinnamon Stillwell is a San Francisco writer. She can be reached at cinnamonstillwell@yahoo.com. She also writes for the blog at campus-watch.org.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/11/cstillwell.DTL#ixzz13oJ03KiV
Saturday, April 24, 2010
What Happens in New Orleans (to conservatives) stays in New Orleans, apparently
The New Orleans Beating: Real Violence, Real Evidence, No Media
The Hayride publisher finds vast circumstantial evidence of politically motivated mayhem, putting the MSM narrative on trial — if they ever dare talk about it.
April 20, 2010 - by Scott McKay
A brutal beating in New Orleans following the Southern Republican Leadership Conference — held in that city from April 8-11 — has challenged the myth regarding the preferred residence of political thuggery.
Circumstantial evidence is piling up that far-left anarchists viciously attacked a staffer to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, putting Allee Bautsch and her boyfriend Joe Brown in the hospital with broken bones. The story has been, unsurprisingly, ignored.
Bautsch, a rising star in Republican politics and just 25 years old, helped organize a $10,000-a-plate GOP fundraiser at the legendary Brennan’s Restaurant in New Orleans. Jindal attended the affair, as did Republican Governors Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Rick Perry of Texas.
The event drew a hostile protest from a group which had initially assembled to protest the SRLC at the Hilton Riverside Hotel, a half-mile away. That protest, which had purportedly focused on state budget cuts to higher education and health care, was organized by the Iron Rail Book Collective. The Iron Rail is a self-described anarchist commune, boasting of holding book-study groups on violent revolutionary literature and having vandalized French Quarter banks in recent months.
Iron Rail members engaged in rhetoric which, had it been used by conservative protesters, would have headlined that week’s coverage.
Video of their demonstration at Brennan’s shows a protest barely short of a riot. Attendees at the fundraiser were subjected to intense verbal abuse upon arriving and leaving the restaurant.
After Jindal, Barbour, and Perry had departed the restaurant from a rear entrance, an employee of Brennan’s announced to the demonstrators that the three were no longer present. The protesters refused to either leave or to cease the abusive chanting. Sometime either before or shortly after the New Orleans Police were called in a semi-successful effort to break up the protest, Louisiana GOP Chairman Roger Villere found himself blocked from exiting the restaurant’s front door. When Villere then tried to exit through the rear, he was chased by protesters. He made a narrow escape into a waiting taxi.
About an hour later, Bautsch and Brown exited through the front door into what appeared to be a dwindling demonstration. The duo were immediately “catcalled” by the remaining protesters, and were followed by a group of approximately five white males bearing a “counterculture” appearance. The pursuers made repeated insulting comments based largely in class-warfare rhetoric: “little blond bitch,” “you think you’re f***ing special.”
Brown told Bautsch to hurry towards their car. When they reached the 600 block of St. Louis Street, a block and a half from Brennan’s, Brown turned to gauge their progress.
At that time, the attack began.
Brown was immediately set upon by four of the assailants, thrown into a wrought-iron fence. Another assailant attacked Bautsch, knocking her to the ground and stomping on her leg. She suffered four breaks in the leg, requiring a steel rod during extensive surgery on April 10, and faces three months of recuperation.
Brown suffered a broken nose and jaw, and a concussion.
Both are deeply traumatized from the attack. And both have said that while they can’t prove the attack was an explicitly political one, they believe it was exactly that, and furthermore, was committed by the protesters.
Bautsch’s mother, Della Berning, believes that the attackers picked their target. Bautsch had ventured to the front door of the restaurant when Brennan’s employees announced to the crowd the governors had left, which may have given the protesters a good look at her — and the perception that she was an organizer or official for the fundraiser. Considering that Villere had been chased while other attendees were allowed to exit but with a torrent of profanity and verbal abuse, Berning’s opinion warrants investigation.
After the attack, New Orleans Police officers arrived and arranged for EMS personnel to attend to the couple. But the initial report on the case was filed as a “fight,” rather than the second-degree battery it obviously was. (As an aside, New Orleans Police have recently been caught employing a practice designed to artificially improve the city’s crime statistics.)
As a result, no investigation began on the case until Monday, April 12 — three days after the attack.
NOPD detective Nick Gernon, the detective assigned to the case, didn’t speak with Brown until April 12 and with Bautsch until April 15 — six days after the attack.
Gernon, a veteran detective with a solid reputation, is believed to be investigating the protesters. However, as Villere has said he believes the attackers were likely “professional agitators” brought in from outside New Orleans, it’s quite possible the delays in opening the investigation have left Gernon little to work with.
The local media and national media have avoided acknowledging the potential political nature of the assault all along, even after revelations of significant circumstantial evidence.
The Iron Rail Book Collective, whose website and blog are covered with revolutionary and anti-capitalist rhetoric, hosted two flyers advertising the demonstration, and also an eight-page brochure filled with intense verbiage. It repeatedly stated that SRLC attendees were not welcome in New Orleans four years after Republicans had “drowned” the city, and called for “direct action” and “active resistance” against the conferees.
Members of the Iron Rail encouraged the protesters to join them in adjourning to Brennan’s, both through another set of flyers they issued on site and by use of a public-address system to “invite” their comrade demonstrators to march on the restaurant. That a relatively tame — if profane and obnoxious — protest turned unruly and dangerous at the eatery could be the result of strategic planning.
Bautsch has identified photos of an auburn-haired, “dirty-looking” protester from both the Hilton and Brennan’s demonstrations as looking “exactly” like the assailant the couple described to police, though she admitted she can’t positively identify the protester.
On the Iron Rail-produced brochure of the protest is a map of five hotels at which SRLC attendees were principally lodged during the conference. Two members of the Iron Rail Gang — Joanna Dubinsky and Daniel Mauch — took down YouTube videos and Facebook pages identifying them and their compatriots as having participated in the event last week after scrutiny of the Iron Rail commenced. Dubinsky is pictured in photos and video at both the Hilton and Brennan’s, speaking into the PA system while wearing a red-and-black anarcho-communist flag (which is also pictured on the Iron Rail website). Neither has come forward to deny having knowledge regarding the perpetrators of the attack.
None of this information seems to have piqued the curiosity of the local New Orleans newspaper, the Times-Picayune. T-P reporting has focused on the NOPD’s initial police report, which is substantially incomplete. Local television and radio news outlets have shown a similarly incurious attitude toward the case. Outside of Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, to date no traditional national outlet has deigned to investigate what seems to be a pin in the balloon of the “right-wing violence” narrative.
Della Berning is caring for her injured and traumatized daughter on a long-distance basis (she currently lives in Florida), with diminishing hope that the assailants who shattered her leg and put a rising career on a three-month hiatus will ever be brought to justice.
Bautsch and Brown have to date received no expressions of sympathy or support — or even vows to catch the attackers — from either outgoing New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin or Mayor-elect Mitch Landrieu.
And the public is left to wonder whether the legacy media is at all concerned with finding the truth or investigating incidents of leftist violence.
Scott McKay is publisher of The Hayride.
The Hayride publisher finds vast circumstantial evidence of politically motivated mayhem, putting the MSM narrative on trial — if they ever dare talk about it.
April 20, 2010 - by Scott McKay
A brutal beating in New Orleans following the Southern Republican Leadership Conference — held in that city from April 8-11 — has challenged the myth regarding the preferred residence of political thuggery.
Circumstantial evidence is piling up that far-left anarchists viciously attacked a staffer to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, putting Allee Bautsch and her boyfriend Joe Brown in the hospital with broken bones. The story has been, unsurprisingly, ignored.
Bautsch, a rising star in Republican politics and just 25 years old, helped organize a $10,000-a-plate GOP fundraiser at the legendary Brennan’s Restaurant in New Orleans. Jindal attended the affair, as did Republican Governors Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Rick Perry of Texas.
The event drew a hostile protest from a group which had initially assembled to protest the SRLC at the Hilton Riverside Hotel, a half-mile away. That protest, which had purportedly focused on state budget cuts to higher education and health care, was organized by the Iron Rail Book Collective. The Iron Rail is a self-described anarchist commune, boasting of holding book-study groups on violent revolutionary literature and having vandalized French Quarter banks in recent months.
Iron Rail members engaged in rhetoric which, had it been used by conservative protesters, would have headlined that week’s coverage.
Video of their demonstration at Brennan’s shows a protest barely short of a riot. Attendees at the fundraiser were subjected to intense verbal abuse upon arriving and leaving the restaurant.
After Jindal, Barbour, and Perry had departed the restaurant from a rear entrance, an employee of Brennan’s announced to the demonstrators that the three were no longer present. The protesters refused to either leave or to cease the abusive chanting. Sometime either before or shortly after the New Orleans Police were called in a semi-successful effort to break up the protest, Louisiana GOP Chairman Roger Villere found himself blocked from exiting the restaurant’s front door. When Villere then tried to exit through the rear, he was chased by protesters. He made a narrow escape into a waiting taxi.
About an hour later, Bautsch and Brown exited through the front door into what appeared to be a dwindling demonstration. The duo were immediately “catcalled” by the remaining protesters, and were followed by a group of approximately five white males bearing a “counterculture” appearance. The pursuers made repeated insulting comments based largely in class-warfare rhetoric: “little blond bitch,” “you think you’re f***ing special.”
Brown told Bautsch to hurry towards their car. When they reached the 600 block of St. Louis Street, a block and a half from Brennan’s, Brown turned to gauge their progress.
At that time, the attack began.
Brown was immediately set upon by four of the assailants, thrown into a wrought-iron fence. Another assailant attacked Bautsch, knocking her to the ground and stomping on her leg. She suffered four breaks in the leg, requiring a steel rod during extensive surgery on April 10, and faces three months of recuperation.
Brown suffered a broken nose and jaw, and a concussion.
Both are deeply traumatized from the attack. And both have said that while they can’t prove the attack was an explicitly political one, they believe it was exactly that, and furthermore, was committed by the protesters.
Bautsch’s mother, Della Berning, believes that the attackers picked their target. Bautsch had ventured to the front door of the restaurant when Brennan’s employees announced to the crowd the governors had left, which may have given the protesters a good look at her — and the perception that she was an organizer or official for the fundraiser. Considering that Villere had been chased while other attendees were allowed to exit but with a torrent of profanity and verbal abuse, Berning’s opinion warrants investigation.
After the attack, New Orleans Police officers arrived and arranged for EMS personnel to attend to the couple. But the initial report on the case was filed as a “fight,” rather than the second-degree battery it obviously was. (As an aside, New Orleans Police have recently been caught employing a practice designed to artificially improve the city’s crime statistics.)
As a result, no investigation began on the case until Monday, April 12 — three days after the attack.
NOPD detective Nick Gernon, the detective assigned to the case, didn’t speak with Brown until April 12 and with Bautsch until April 15 — six days after the attack.
Gernon, a veteran detective with a solid reputation, is believed to be investigating the protesters. However, as Villere has said he believes the attackers were likely “professional agitators” brought in from outside New Orleans, it’s quite possible the delays in opening the investigation have left Gernon little to work with.
The local media and national media have avoided acknowledging the potential political nature of the assault all along, even after revelations of significant circumstantial evidence.
The Iron Rail Book Collective, whose website and blog are covered with revolutionary and anti-capitalist rhetoric, hosted two flyers advertising the demonstration, and also an eight-page brochure filled with intense verbiage. It repeatedly stated that SRLC attendees were not welcome in New Orleans four years after Republicans had “drowned” the city, and called for “direct action” and “active resistance” against the conferees.
Members of the Iron Rail encouraged the protesters to join them in adjourning to Brennan’s, both through another set of flyers they issued on site and by use of a public-address system to “invite” their comrade demonstrators to march on the restaurant. That a relatively tame — if profane and obnoxious — protest turned unruly and dangerous at the eatery could be the result of strategic planning.
Bautsch has identified photos of an auburn-haired, “dirty-looking” protester from both the Hilton and Brennan’s demonstrations as looking “exactly” like the assailant the couple described to police, though she admitted she can’t positively identify the protester.
On the Iron Rail-produced brochure of the protest is a map of five hotels at which SRLC attendees were principally lodged during the conference. Two members of the Iron Rail Gang — Joanna Dubinsky and Daniel Mauch — took down YouTube videos and Facebook pages identifying them and their compatriots as having participated in the event last week after scrutiny of the Iron Rail commenced. Dubinsky is pictured in photos and video at both the Hilton and Brennan’s, speaking into the PA system while wearing a red-and-black anarcho-communist flag (which is also pictured on the Iron Rail website). Neither has come forward to deny having knowledge regarding the perpetrators of the attack.
None of this information seems to have piqued the curiosity of the local New Orleans newspaper, the Times-Picayune. T-P reporting has focused on the NOPD’s initial police report, which is substantially incomplete. Local television and radio news outlets have shown a similarly incurious attitude toward the case. Outside of Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, to date no traditional national outlet has deigned to investigate what seems to be a pin in the balloon of the “right-wing violence” narrative.
Della Berning is caring for her injured and traumatized daughter on a long-distance basis (she currently lives in Florida), with diminishing hope that the assailants who shattered her leg and put a rising career on a three-month hiatus will ever be brought to justice.
Bautsch and Brown have to date received no expressions of sympathy or support — or even vows to catch the attackers — from either outgoing New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin or Mayor-elect Mitch Landrieu.
And the public is left to wonder whether the legacy media is at all concerned with finding the truth or investigating incidents of leftist violence.
Scott McKay is publisher of The Hayride.
Friday, April 23, 2010
CNN Report on New Amnesty Bill
I don't think even my liberal friends can make a case for this being "good law". And this isn't a right wing slanted report. It's Lou Dobbs of CNN.
I've blogged about illegal aliens before. Quick reminder, I have nothing whatsoever against anyone who came to this country legally. But illegal is illegal. But not for long WHEN this bill passes in Washington.
Listen to the short video and tell me you think this is a good law. Come on, I want to hear someone argue that the provisions of this bill are in the best interest of the USA or our legal citizens.
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/17260182/1610997888/name/ftc-vi26.wmv
I've blogged about illegal aliens before. Quick reminder, I have nothing whatsoever against anyone who came to this country legally. But illegal is illegal. But not for long WHEN this bill passes in Washington.
Listen to the short video and tell me you think this is a good law. Come on, I want to hear someone argue that the provisions of this bill are in the best interest of the USA or our legal citizens.
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/17260182/1610997888/name/ftc-vi26.wmv
Is This What We Tried to Tell Them???????
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – Fri Apr 23, 5:58 am ET
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.
Economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department concluded in a report issued Thursday that the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million to the coverage rolls.
But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.
It's a worrisome assessment for Democrats.
In particular, concerns about Medicare could become a major political liability in the midterm elections. The report projected that Medicare cuts could drive about 15 percent of hospitals and other institutional providers into the red, "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.
The report from Medicare's Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration. White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law's potential to achieve savings.
The report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill — Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings — could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020. But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade.
"During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage," wrote Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary. "Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare ... reductions is doubtful." Foster's office is responsible for long-range costs estimates.
Republicans said the findings validate their concerns about Obama's 10-year, nearly $1 trillion plan to remake the nation's health care system.
"A trillion dollars gets spent, and it's no surprise — health care costs are going to go up," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., a leading Republican on health care issues. Camp added that he's concerned the Medicare cuts will undermine care for seniors.
In a statement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to highlight some positive findings for seniors. For example, the report concluded that Medicare monthly premiums would be lower than otherwise expected, due to the spending reductions.
"The Affordable Care Act will improve the health care system for all Americans, and we will continue our work to quickly and carefully implement the new law," the statement said.
Passed by a divided Congress after a year of bitter partisan debate, the law would create new health insurance markets for individuals and small businesses. Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, while Medicaid would pick up more low-income people. Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.
The U.S. spends $2.5 trillion a year on health care, far more per person than any other developed nation, and for results that aren't clearly better when compared to more frugal countries. At the outset of the health care debate last year, Obama held out the hope that by bending the cost curve down, the U.S. could cover all its citizens for about what the nation would spend absent any changes.
The report found that the president's law missed the mark, although not by much. The overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent. To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.
Administration officials argue the increase is a bargain price for guaranteeing coverage to 95 percent of Americans. They also point out that the law will decrease the federal deficit by $143 billion over the 10-year period.
The report's most sober assessments concerned Medicare.
In addition to flagging provider cuts as potentially unsustainable, the report projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular alternative. Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent. Seniors leaving the private plans would still have health insurance under traditional Medicare, but many might face higher out-of-pocket costs.
In another flashing yellow light, the report warned that a new voluntary long-term care insurance program created under the law faces "a very serious risk" of insolvency.
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.
Economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department concluded in a report issued Thursday that the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million to the coverage rolls.
But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.
It's a worrisome assessment for Democrats.
In particular, concerns about Medicare could become a major political liability in the midterm elections. The report projected that Medicare cuts could drive about 15 percent of hospitals and other institutional providers into the red, "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.
The report from Medicare's Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration. White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law's potential to achieve savings.
The report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill — Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings — could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020. But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade.
"During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage," wrote Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary. "Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare ... reductions is doubtful." Foster's office is responsible for long-range costs estimates.
Republicans said the findings validate their concerns about Obama's 10-year, nearly $1 trillion plan to remake the nation's health care system.
"A trillion dollars gets spent, and it's no surprise — health care costs are going to go up," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., a leading Republican on health care issues. Camp added that he's concerned the Medicare cuts will undermine care for seniors.
In a statement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to highlight some positive findings for seniors. For example, the report concluded that Medicare monthly premiums would be lower than otherwise expected, due to the spending reductions.
"The Affordable Care Act will improve the health care system for all Americans, and we will continue our work to quickly and carefully implement the new law," the statement said.
Passed by a divided Congress after a year of bitter partisan debate, the law would create new health insurance markets for individuals and small businesses. Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, while Medicaid would pick up more low-income people. Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.
The U.S. spends $2.5 trillion a year on health care, far more per person than any other developed nation, and for results that aren't clearly better when compared to more frugal countries. At the outset of the health care debate last year, Obama held out the hope that by bending the cost curve down, the U.S. could cover all its citizens for about what the nation would spend absent any changes.
The report found that the president's law missed the mark, although not by much. The overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent. To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.
Administration officials argue the increase is a bargain price for guaranteeing coverage to 95 percent of Americans. They also point out that the law will decrease the federal deficit by $143 billion over the 10-year period.
The report's most sober assessments concerned Medicare.
In addition to flagging provider cuts as potentially unsustainable, the report projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular alternative. Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent. Seniors leaving the private plans would still have health insurance under traditional Medicare, but many might face higher out-of-pocket costs.
In another flashing yellow light, the report warned that a new voluntary long-term care insurance program created under the law faces "a very serious risk" of insolvency.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
So, when did this stop being the Land of the Free?
AP – FILE - In this Sunday, May 24, 2009 file photo, Franklin Graham prepares to give the invocation before …
By DAN ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Dan Elliott, Associated Press Writer – Tue Apr 20, 9:30 pm ET
DENVER – A watchdog group objected Tuesday to an evangelist's invitation to speak at the Pentagon next month, saying his past description of Islam as "evil" offended Muslims who work for the Department of Defense and the appearance should be canceled.
Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, said inviting evangelist Franklin Graham to speak May 6, the National Day of Prayer, "would be like bringing someone in on national prayer day madly denigrating Christianity" or other religious groups.
It would also endanger American troops by stirring up Muslim extremists, Weinstein said.
Graham is the son of famed evangelist Billy Graham and president and CEO of both Samaritan's Purse, a Christian international relief organization in Boone, N.C., and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, in Charlotte, N.C.
He said through a spokesman that he will be a guest of the Pentagon and will speak only if he's still invited. A military spokeswoman said she was locating officials to respond to the criticism.
After the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Graham said Islam "is a very evil and wicked religion." In a later op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal, Graham wrote that he did not believe Muslims were evil because of their faith, but "as a minister .... I believe it is my responsibility to speak out against the terrible deeds that are committed as a result of Islamic teaching."
Graham hasn't changed his views on Islam, said his spokesman, Mark DeMoss.
DeMoss quoted Graham as saying, "As the father of a son serving in his fourth combat tour, I'd be glad to know someone was leading a prayer service at the National Day of Prayer, or any other day."
Weinstein, the foundation president, also criticized the Pentagon's working relationship with the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a Colorado group that organizes Christian events for the prayer day, designated by Congress.
Weinstein said that while he doesn't object to the day of prayer, the Pentagon chaplain's office has effectively endorsed the task force by using its materials and routinely inviting its honorary chairman to speak at the Pentagon. Weinstein said that amounts to preferential treatment in violation of Defense Department rules.
Graham is honorary chairman this year for the National Day of Prayer Task Force, based in Colorado Springs. A spokesman for the task force didn't immediately return a telephone message.
Weinstein said the task force is entitled to organize Christian-oriented events. But he said the Pentagon chaplain shouldn't be closely affiliated with the task force because it requires that all its events be conducted by Christians, although those with other beliefs are welcome to attend.
A federal judge in Wisconsin ruled last week that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional because it amounts to a call for religious action. The judge did not bar any observances until all appeals are exhausted.
By DAN ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Dan Elliott, Associated Press Writer – Tue Apr 20, 9:30 pm ET
DENVER – A watchdog group objected Tuesday to an evangelist's invitation to speak at the Pentagon next month, saying his past description of Islam as "evil" offended Muslims who work for the Department of Defense and the appearance should be canceled.
Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, said inviting evangelist Franklin Graham to speak May 6, the National Day of Prayer, "would be like bringing someone in on national prayer day madly denigrating Christianity" or other religious groups.
It would also endanger American troops by stirring up Muslim extremists, Weinstein said.
Graham is the son of famed evangelist Billy Graham and president and CEO of both Samaritan's Purse, a Christian international relief organization in Boone, N.C., and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, in Charlotte, N.C.
He said through a spokesman that he will be a guest of the Pentagon and will speak only if he's still invited. A military spokeswoman said she was locating officials to respond to the criticism.
After the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Graham said Islam "is a very evil and wicked religion." In a later op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal, Graham wrote that he did not believe Muslims were evil because of their faith, but "as a minister .... I believe it is my responsibility to speak out against the terrible deeds that are committed as a result of Islamic teaching."
Graham hasn't changed his views on Islam, said his spokesman, Mark DeMoss.
DeMoss quoted Graham as saying, "As the father of a son serving in his fourth combat tour, I'd be glad to know someone was leading a prayer service at the National Day of Prayer, or any other day."
Weinstein, the foundation president, also criticized the Pentagon's working relationship with the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a Colorado group that organizes Christian events for the prayer day, designated by Congress.
Weinstein said that while he doesn't object to the day of prayer, the Pentagon chaplain's office has effectively endorsed the task force by using its materials and routinely inviting its honorary chairman to speak at the Pentagon. Weinstein said that amounts to preferential treatment in violation of Defense Department rules.
Graham is honorary chairman this year for the National Day of Prayer Task Force, based in Colorado Springs. A spokesman for the task force didn't immediately return a telephone message.
Weinstein said the task force is entitled to organize Christian-oriented events. But he said the Pentagon chaplain shouldn't be closely affiliated with the task force because it requires that all its events be conducted by Christians, although those with other beliefs are welcome to attend.
A federal judge in Wisconsin ruled last week that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional because it amounts to a call for religious action. The judge did not bar any observances until all appeals are exhausted.
Monday, April 19, 2010
U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade
If you haven't read this story yet, check it out below and then leave some comments. Surely no one can be on the fence about this. YOu've got to have an opinion one way or another.
I've seen this bouncing around for several weeks now. Generally I've assumed that even if Obama tried such a tactic that the NRA and others would challenge the Constitutionality of such a treaty and would win. But, you have to ask, "Can we count on winning that challenge?" Considering how Washington totally ignored our wishes and instructions concerning the health care bill I feel we can no longer trust them even when when we have the law clearly on our side.
Frankly, it's time to put a stop to this administration forcing it's policies down our throat.
Here's the article:
U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade
Arshad Mohammed
WASHINGTON
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."
"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.
While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.
"The shift in position by the world's biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers," Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.
However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus "could fatally weaken a final deal."
"Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International's policy adviser Debbie Hillier.
The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.
Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.
The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals.
Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.
The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.
The U.S. lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.
A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012.
(Editing by Eric Beech)
I've seen this bouncing around for several weeks now. Generally I've assumed that even if Obama tried such a tactic that the NRA and others would challenge the Constitutionality of such a treaty and would win. But, you have to ask, "Can we count on winning that challenge?" Considering how Washington totally ignored our wishes and instructions concerning the health care bill I feel we can no longer trust them even when when we have the law clearly on our side.
Frankly, it's time to put a stop to this administration forcing it's policies down our throat.
Here's the article:
U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade
Arshad Mohammed
WASHINGTON
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."
"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.
While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.
"The shift in position by the world's biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers," Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.
However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus "could fatally weaken a final deal."
"Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International's policy adviser Debbie Hillier.
The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.
Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.
The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals.
Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.
The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.
The U.S. lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.
A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012.
(Editing by Eric Beech)
Saturday, April 17, 2010
We need more politicans who think like Jefferson
Sorry, I can't confirm that these are all quotes from President Jefferson. I've reprinted them in because even if he didn't say them I still find them noteworthy.
It has been said the greatest volume of sheer brainpower in one place occurred when Jefferson dined alone...."
John Kennedy
HOW DID JEFFERSON KNOW??????
Especially read the last quote from 1802.
And pass these on to your children and grandchildren!!
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.
Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
In 1802 Thomas Jefferson said:
'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered..'
'If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.' -Mark Twain
It has been said the greatest volume of sheer brainpower in one place occurred when Jefferson dined alone...."
John Kennedy
HOW DID JEFFERSON KNOW??????
Especially read the last quote from 1802.
And pass these on to your children and grandchildren!!
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.
Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
In 1802 Thomas Jefferson said:
'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered..'
'If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.' -Mark Twain
Friday, April 16, 2010
The Gun Is Civilization
Something I only recently began to understand is why so many people (read all liberals) fear law abiding citizens owning guns. The answer finally came to me during a trial I was observing when the defense attorney used his closing argument to characterize the complainant in the case as a "bully". Of course lately there has been a lot of news coverage about kids bullying other kids but if you think about it I bet you know and regularly deal with some adult bullies. And after you read the article below I think you will understand that such bullies are the way they are and get away with acting the way they do because the rest of us allow it because we are "too civilized" to do anything about it.
The next time some idiot is yelling at you over something they did, imagine for just a minute that you could just punch them right square in the nose - of course you can't really do it because that would be an assault, but imaging doing it. I bet it will make you feel a whole lot better. Then just imagine being in that same circumstance but being allowed to have a firearm strapped to your side and ask yourself, "would this jerk be treating me like this if I was armed"? I doubt it.
The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through
persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason
and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical
strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young,
the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several
ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal
force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a
bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works
solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
The next time some idiot is yelling at you over something they did, imagine for just a minute that you could just punch them right square in the nose - of course you can't really do it because that would be an assault, but imaging doing it. I bet it will make you feel a whole lot better. Then just imagine being in that same circumstance but being allowed to have a firearm strapped to your side and ask yourself, "would this jerk be treating me like this if I was armed"? I doubt it.
The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through
persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason
and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical
strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young,
the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several
ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal
force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a
bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works
solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
Thursday, April 15, 2010
How in the world did this guy get elected?
This idea makes way too much sense:
Taken from an email I received from Congressman Michael Burgess.
This year, like years past, American families and businesses spent billions of hours and billions of dollars complying with our nation’s complex Tax Code. When it was first created, the Tax Code was 400 pages - this year, it is 71,684 pages.
There are many reasons why we need to overhaul the tax code - the current income tax system is unfair, costly, and takes valuable time away from our daily lives. A faster, flatter, fairer tax structure would work, and it's pretty simple. Tax returns could be done on a single page – an optional one-page tax form, like the one below. Just enter your identification data and income, calculate your deductions for personal exemptions and taxable income, calculate the tax by multiplying by a flat rate, subtract taxes already withheld, and you're done.
American families and businesses these days have enough to worry about, and Tax Day shouldn’t be the most dreaded day of the year. I support simplifying the tax code through a user-friendly, pro-growth flat tax based on a fixed percentage of income, which is exactly what my bill, the Freedom Flat Tax Act, HR 1040, would do. The goal of the Freedom Flat Tax Act is to encourage people to make financial decisions based on common-sense economics, rather than on the 71,684 pages of our tax code.
I think it’s important that we simplify our complicated and time-consuming tax code. To learn more about my ideas, including an optional one-page tax form and the Freedom Flat Tax Act, please visit http://burgess.house.gov/flattax.
For more information on this and other topics, go directly to my web site - http://burgess.house.gov. To view floor speeches, interviews and other video messages from me, please visit my YouTube Channel - www.youtube.com/MichaelCBurgessMD. You can also follow me on Twitter - http://twitter.com/MichaelCBurgess. It is an honor to serve you in the United States House of Representatives.
Sincerely,
Rep. Michael C. Burgess, M.D.
Taken from an email I received from Congressman Michael Burgess.
This year, like years past, American families and businesses spent billions of hours and billions of dollars complying with our nation’s complex Tax Code. When it was first created, the Tax Code was 400 pages - this year, it is 71,684 pages.
There are many reasons why we need to overhaul the tax code - the current income tax system is unfair, costly, and takes valuable time away from our daily lives. A faster, flatter, fairer tax structure would work, and it's pretty simple. Tax returns could be done on a single page – an optional one-page tax form, like the one below. Just enter your identification data and income, calculate your deductions for personal exemptions and taxable income, calculate the tax by multiplying by a flat rate, subtract taxes already withheld, and you're done.
American families and businesses these days have enough to worry about, and Tax Day shouldn’t be the most dreaded day of the year. I support simplifying the tax code through a user-friendly, pro-growth flat tax based on a fixed percentage of income, which is exactly what my bill, the Freedom Flat Tax Act, HR 1040, would do. The goal of the Freedom Flat Tax Act is to encourage people to make financial decisions based on common-sense economics, rather than on the 71,684 pages of our tax code.
I think it’s important that we simplify our complicated and time-consuming tax code. To learn more about my ideas, including an optional one-page tax form and the Freedom Flat Tax Act, please visit http://burgess.house.gov/flattax.
For more information on this and other topics, go directly to my web site - http://burgess.house.gov. To view floor speeches, interviews and other video messages from me, please visit my YouTube Channel - www.youtube.com/MichaelCBurgessMD. You can also follow me on Twitter - http://twitter.com/MichaelCBurgess. It is an honor to serve you in the United States House of Representatives.
Sincerely,
Rep. Michael C. Burgess, M.D.
The Marines Have Landed
Yes, I know that Marines do take care of their own but do you suppose that this white house may have just possibly put out word to have someone take care of this......hmmmmm
See the story about the Marine who didn't like Obama care at the link below (The associated press doesn't like their article reproduced so I didn't copy it here. Interesting, doesn't reproducing them just mean that more people get to read them?)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36560152/ns/technology_and_science-security/?gt1=43001
See the story about the Marine who didn't like Obama care at the link below (The associated press doesn't like their article reproduced so I didn't copy it here. Interesting, doesn't reproducing them just mean that more people get to read them?)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36560152/ns/technology_and_science-security/?gt1=43001
How is this recovery going for you?
Two stories - interesting contrast
Why the housing market is about to turn
Despite the bearish scare stories, many experts say the home market is about to improve. Here's why -- and the stocks and funds to buy now.
By Michael Brush
MSN Money
Now's the time to find a home for homebuilders in your portfolio again.
The economy is improving, and there are signs that jobs are coming back, which should make more people confident enough to buy homes. Lots of people are already itching to make the move while houses remain cheap and interest rates are low.
The best and worst housing markets
In fact, in many markets, home prices have been on the rise for eight straight months -- added incentive for potential buyers to jump into the market.
Sure, the bears are throwing around lots of negativity: that recent demand is driven by government incentives, that mortgage rates will go up, that a fresh round of foreclosures will kill the market. But their horror stories are all fairly easy to knock down.
Read the rest of this story at: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/why-the-housing-market-is-about-to-turn.aspx?GT1=33002
By Alex Veiga
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36547572/ns/business-mortgage_mess
LOS ANGELES - A record number of U.S. homes were lost to foreclosure in the first three months of this year, a sign banks are starting to wade through the backlog of troubled home loans at a faster pace, according to a new report.
RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday that the number of U.S. homes taken over by banks jumped 35 percent in the first quarter from a year ago. In addition, households facing foreclosure grew 16 percent in the same period and 7 percent from the last three months of 2009.
More homes were taken over by banks and scheduled for a foreclosure sale than in any quarter going back to at least January 2005, when RealtyTrac began reporting the data, the firm said.
"We're right now on pace to see more than 1 million bank repossessions this year," said Rick Sharga, a RealtyTrac senior vice president.
Foreclosures began to ease last year as banks came under pressure from the Obama administration to modify home loans for troubled borrowers. In addition, some states enacted foreclosure moratoriums in hopes of giving homeowners behind in payments time to catch up. And in many cases, banks have had trouble coping with how to handle the glut of problem loans.
Reversing trend
These factors have helped slow the pace of foreclosures, but now that trend appears to be reversing.
"We're finally seeing the banks start to process the inventory that has been in foreclosure, but delayed in processing," Sharga said. "We expect the pace to accelerate as the year goes on."
In all, more than 900,000 households, or one in every 138 homes, received a foreclosure-related notice, RealtyTrac said. The firm based in Irvine, Calif., tracks notices for defaults, scheduled home auctions and home repossessions.
Homeowners continue to fall behind on payments because they've lost their job or seen their mortgage payment rise due to an interest-rate reset. Many are unable to refinance because they now owe more on their loan than their home is worth.
The Obama administration's $75 billion foreclosure prevention program has only been able to help a small fraction of troubled homeowners.
About 231,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications as part of the Obama administration's flagship foreclosure prevention program through March. That's about 21 percent of the 1.2 million borrowers who began the program over the past year.
But another 158,000 homeowners who signed up have dropped out — either because they didn't make payments or failed to return the necessary documents. That's up from about 90,000 just a month earlier.
Last month, the administration expanded the program, launching a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. But the details of those programs are expected to take months to work out.
The big four
The states with the highest foreclosure rates in the first quarter were Nevada, Arizona, Florida and California, with Nevada leading the pack, RealtyTrac said.
Rising home prices and speculation fueled a wave of home construction there during the housing boom. But now the state, particularly around the Las Vegas metropolitan area, is saddled with a glut of unsold homes.
Still, the number of homes in Nevada that received a foreclosure filing dropped 16 percent from the first quarter last year.
All told, one in every 33 homes in Nevada was facing foreclosure, more than four times the national average, RealtyTrac said.
Foreclosure filings rose on an annual and quarterly basis in Arizona, however.
One in every 49 homes there received a foreclosure-related notice during the quarter.
Florida, meanwhile, posted the third-highest foreclosure rate with one out of every 57 properties receiving a foreclosure filing.
California accounted for the biggest slice overall of homes facing foreclosure — roughly 23 percent of the nation's total. One in every 62 properties received a foreclosure filing in the first quarter.
Why the housing market is about to turn
Despite the bearish scare stories, many experts say the home market is about to improve. Here's why -- and the stocks and funds to buy now.
By Michael Brush
MSN Money
Now's the time to find a home for homebuilders in your portfolio again.
The economy is improving, and there are signs that jobs are coming back, which should make more people confident enough to buy homes. Lots of people are already itching to make the move while houses remain cheap and interest rates are low.
The best and worst housing markets
In fact, in many markets, home prices have been on the rise for eight straight months -- added incentive for potential buyers to jump into the market.
Sure, the bears are throwing around lots of negativity: that recent demand is driven by government incentives, that mortgage rates will go up, that a fresh round of foreclosures will kill the market. But their horror stories are all fairly easy to knock down.
Read the rest of this story at: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/why-the-housing-market-is-about-to-turn.aspx?GT1=33002
By Alex Veiga
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36547572/ns/business-mortgage_mess
LOS ANGELES - A record number of U.S. homes were lost to foreclosure in the first three months of this year, a sign banks are starting to wade through the backlog of troubled home loans at a faster pace, according to a new report.
RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday that the number of U.S. homes taken over by banks jumped 35 percent in the first quarter from a year ago. In addition, households facing foreclosure grew 16 percent in the same period and 7 percent from the last three months of 2009.
More homes were taken over by banks and scheduled for a foreclosure sale than in any quarter going back to at least January 2005, when RealtyTrac began reporting the data, the firm said.
"We're right now on pace to see more than 1 million bank repossessions this year," said Rick Sharga, a RealtyTrac senior vice president.
Foreclosures began to ease last year as banks came under pressure from the Obama administration to modify home loans for troubled borrowers. In addition, some states enacted foreclosure moratoriums in hopes of giving homeowners behind in payments time to catch up. And in many cases, banks have had trouble coping with how to handle the glut of problem loans.
Reversing trend
These factors have helped slow the pace of foreclosures, but now that trend appears to be reversing.
"We're finally seeing the banks start to process the inventory that has been in foreclosure, but delayed in processing," Sharga said. "We expect the pace to accelerate as the year goes on."
In all, more than 900,000 households, or one in every 138 homes, received a foreclosure-related notice, RealtyTrac said. The firm based in Irvine, Calif., tracks notices for defaults, scheduled home auctions and home repossessions.
Homeowners continue to fall behind on payments because they've lost their job or seen their mortgage payment rise due to an interest-rate reset. Many are unable to refinance because they now owe more on their loan than their home is worth.
The Obama administration's $75 billion foreclosure prevention program has only been able to help a small fraction of troubled homeowners.
About 231,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications as part of the Obama administration's flagship foreclosure prevention program through March. That's about 21 percent of the 1.2 million borrowers who began the program over the past year.
But another 158,000 homeowners who signed up have dropped out — either because they didn't make payments or failed to return the necessary documents. That's up from about 90,000 just a month earlier.
Last month, the administration expanded the program, launching a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. But the details of those programs are expected to take months to work out.
The big four
The states with the highest foreclosure rates in the first quarter were Nevada, Arizona, Florida and California, with Nevada leading the pack, RealtyTrac said.
Rising home prices and speculation fueled a wave of home construction there during the housing boom. But now the state, particularly around the Las Vegas metropolitan area, is saddled with a glut of unsold homes.
Still, the number of homes in Nevada that received a foreclosure filing dropped 16 percent from the first quarter last year.
All told, one in every 33 homes in Nevada was facing foreclosure, more than four times the national average, RealtyTrac said.
Foreclosure filings rose on an annual and quarterly basis in Arizona, however.
One in every 49 homes there received a foreclosure-related notice during the quarter.
Florida, meanwhile, posted the third-highest foreclosure rate with one out of every 57 properties receiving a foreclosure filing.
California accounted for the biggest slice overall of homes facing foreclosure — roughly 23 percent of the nation's total. One in every 62 properties received a foreclosure filing in the first quarter.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Former N.Y. Gov. Pataki Announces Plan to Repeal Health Care Law
FOXNews.com
Former New York Gov. George Pataki announced Wednesday the creation of a national organization working to repeal the Democrats' health care overhaul, which he called a "horrific" and costly bungle.
FILE: Former New York Gov. George Pataki has joined efforts to repeal the health care overhaul signed into law by President Obama in March.
Former New York Gov. George Pataki announced Wednesday the creation of a national organization that will work to repeal the Democrats' health care overhaul, which he called a "horrific" and costly bungle.
Pataki said his nonprofit group, Revere America, will develop a grassroots network and highlight national opposition to the health care law, which he believes will impose a $500 billion burden on U.S. taxpayers and tighten government control of the health care system.
"I can't recall anything remotely like this in my lifetime," Pataki told FoxNews.com. He said the law was passed in the face of substantial opposition from the public and hastily rammed through Congress by its chief architects, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
"We can't just roll over and accept it as a fait accompi. That's what I think the president, Pelosi and Reid thought would happen," Pataki said. "We're going to fight, mobilize and get this repealed."
Pataki, who served three terms as New York's governor, from 1995 to 2007, said he hopes to raise $15-20 million this year to run Revere America, which is being organized as a tax-exempt lobbying group. He said the effort will target the online and social media communities, though some of the funding will also cover national ads targeting the law for repeal.
"We want to get at least 1 million signatures and e-mail addresses from people across the country who believe that Obamacare should be repealed," he said.
Tea Party leaders said Pataki's effort could bolster opposition to the new law and that they would have their eye on any efforts for a grassroots push against the overhaul.
"Everything we do would complement that effort," said Eric Odom, administrator for TaxDayTeaParty.com. "We would absolutely without question promote it, encourage our base to get involved."
But others say the push for repeal has little hope for success.
Congressional expert Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, called the effort to repeal the health care law a piece of political theater. "It's not even remotely feasible," he told the Wall Street Journal.
A Rasmussen poll released Monday found that 58 percent of Americans support repeal. But a far smaller number — 38 percent — believe it is likely that a repeal will be successful, according to the survey of 1,000 likely voters.
The bill passed Congress on a strict party line vote, though 34 Democrats in the House broke party ranks and voted against it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has already called for the law to be repealed and replaced, though many Republicans lawmakers remain wary of any such attempt.
Some political experts have argued a more realistic strategy would be to block funding for many of the measures within the mammoth 2,200-page health care law, which will be gradually rolled into effect through 2018.
But Pataki told FoxNews.com he was not looking for legislative fixes and half-steps to fix a law he believes is filled with "so many negatives and so many unknowns."
"No, I think you want to repeal it and replace it with true reforms," he said.
New York political watchers speculated the launch of Revere America could be how Pataki tests the waters for a 2012 presidential run.
"George Pataki is an expert in figuring out where the political wind blows and he's made the judgment that this is the litmus test — this is where you have to go if you have any desire to be the national voice or be a national candidate," said Douglas Muzzio, professor of political science at Baruch College in New York. "He needs a way to establish his bona fides and make himself a player" on a national level, Muzzio said. "This is the issue of the moment."
Pataki had been eyed as a possible opponent for New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who was appointed by Gov. David Paterson to fill the seat vacated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and is up for election in November. A Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday showed Pataki leading Gillbrand 45-40 percent among likely voters in New York — certainly in striking distance of making the former governor an anchor for the GOP's struggle to reclaim Congress, in which the Democrats hold a large majority in both houses.
Pataki admitted any attempt to repeal the law would require a Republican surge in Congress, but defended his decision to steer clear of the Senate race.
"I think that we need to have grassroots operations across the country," he said. "We can't just count on a race in a state to turn the tide here."
Former New York Gov. George Pataki announced Wednesday the creation of a national organization working to repeal the Democrats' health care overhaul, which he called a "horrific" and costly bungle.
FILE: Former New York Gov. George Pataki has joined efforts to repeal the health care overhaul signed into law by President Obama in March.
Former New York Gov. George Pataki announced Wednesday the creation of a national organization that will work to repeal the Democrats' health care overhaul, which he called a "horrific" and costly bungle.
Pataki said his nonprofit group, Revere America, will develop a grassroots network and highlight national opposition to the health care law, which he believes will impose a $500 billion burden on U.S. taxpayers and tighten government control of the health care system.
"I can't recall anything remotely like this in my lifetime," Pataki told FoxNews.com. He said the law was passed in the face of substantial opposition from the public and hastily rammed through Congress by its chief architects, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
"We can't just roll over and accept it as a fait accompi. That's what I think the president, Pelosi and Reid thought would happen," Pataki said. "We're going to fight, mobilize and get this repealed."
Pataki, who served three terms as New York's governor, from 1995 to 2007, said he hopes to raise $15-20 million this year to run Revere America, which is being organized as a tax-exempt lobbying group. He said the effort will target the online and social media communities, though some of the funding will also cover national ads targeting the law for repeal.
"We want to get at least 1 million signatures and e-mail addresses from people across the country who believe that Obamacare should be repealed," he said.
Tea Party leaders said Pataki's effort could bolster opposition to the new law and that they would have their eye on any efforts for a grassroots push against the overhaul.
"Everything we do would complement that effort," said Eric Odom, administrator for TaxDayTeaParty.com. "We would absolutely without question promote it, encourage our base to get involved."
But others say the push for repeal has little hope for success.
Congressional expert Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, called the effort to repeal the health care law a piece of political theater. "It's not even remotely feasible," he told the Wall Street Journal.
A Rasmussen poll released Monday found that 58 percent of Americans support repeal. But a far smaller number — 38 percent — believe it is likely that a repeal will be successful, according to the survey of 1,000 likely voters.
The bill passed Congress on a strict party line vote, though 34 Democrats in the House broke party ranks and voted against it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has already called for the law to be repealed and replaced, though many Republicans lawmakers remain wary of any such attempt.
Some political experts have argued a more realistic strategy would be to block funding for many of the measures within the mammoth 2,200-page health care law, which will be gradually rolled into effect through 2018.
But Pataki told FoxNews.com he was not looking for legislative fixes and half-steps to fix a law he believes is filled with "so many negatives and so many unknowns."
"No, I think you want to repeal it and replace it with true reforms," he said.
New York political watchers speculated the launch of Revere America could be how Pataki tests the waters for a 2012 presidential run.
"George Pataki is an expert in figuring out where the political wind blows and he's made the judgment that this is the litmus test — this is where you have to go if you have any desire to be the national voice or be a national candidate," said Douglas Muzzio, professor of political science at Baruch College in New York. "He needs a way to establish his bona fides and make himself a player" on a national level, Muzzio said. "This is the issue of the moment."
Pataki had been eyed as a possible opponent for New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who was appointed by Gov. David Paterson to fill the seat vacated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and is up for election in November. A Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday showed Pataki leading Gillbrand 45-40 percent among likely voters in New York — certainly in striking distance of making the former governor an anchor for the GOP's struggle to reclaim Congress, in which the Democrats hold a large majority in both houses.
Pataki admitted any attempt to repeal the law would require a Republican surge in Congress, but defended his decision to steer clear of the Senate race.
"I think that we need to have grassroots operations across the country," he said. "We can't just count on a race in a state to turn the tide here."
Time for TEA
Hey, if you haven't already planned to, find where you local Tea Party will be setting up on April 15th and join in. You'll meet lots of good people and help send a message to the politicians who think your money is their's to spend.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The 9:12 Project - Get on Board
The 912 Project http://www.the912project.us/
The Nine Principles
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
The Twelve Values
1-Honesty
2-Reverence
3-Hope
4-Thrift
5-Humility
6-Charity
7-Sincerity
8-Moderation
9-Hard Work
10-Courage
11-Personal Responsibility
12-Gratitude
The Nine Principles
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
The Twelve Values
1-Honesty
2-Reverence
3-Hope
4-Thrift
5-Humility
6-Charity
7-Sincerity
8-Moderation
9-Hard Work
10-Courage
11-Personal Responsibility
12-Gratitude
Oklahoma Leads the Way
Okla. tea parties and lawmakers envision militia
Associated Press Writers Sean Murphy And Tim Talley, Associated Press Writers – Mon Apr 12, 7:09 pm ET
OKLAHOMA CITY – Frustrated by recent political setbacks, tea party leaders and some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature say they would like to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty.
Tea party movement leaders say they've discussed the idea with several supportive lawmakers and hope to get legislation next year to recognize a new volunteer force. They say the unit would not resemble militia groups that have been raided for allegedly plotting attacks on law enforcement officers.
"Is it scary? It sure is," said tea party leader Al Gerhart of Oklahoma City, who heads an umbrella group of tea party factions called the Oklahoma Constitutional Alliance. "But when do the states stop rolling over for the federal government?"
Thus far, the discussions have been exploratory. Even the proponents say they don't know how an armed force would be organized nor how a state-based militia could block federal mandates. Critics also asserted that the force could inflame extremism, and that the National Guard already provides for the state's military needs.
"Have they heard of the Oklahoma City bombing?" said Joseph Thai, a constitutional law professor at the University of Oklahoma. The state observes the 15th anniversary of the anti-government attack on Monday. Such actions could "throw fuel in the fire of radicals," he said.
But the militia talks reflect the frustration of some grass roots groups seeking new ways of fighting recent federal initiatives, such as the health reform plan, which requires all citizens to have health insurance. Over the last year, tea party groups across the country have staged rallies and pressured politicians to protest big government and demand reduced public spending.
In strongly conservative states like Oklahoma, some legislators have also discussed further action to fight federal policies, such as state legislation and lawsuits.
State Sen. Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, a Republican candidate for governor who has appealed for tea party support, said supporters of a state militia have talked to him, and that he believes the citizen unit would be authorized under the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
The founding fathers "were not referring to a turkey shoot or a quail hunt. They really weren't even talking about us having the ability to protect ourselves against each other," Brogdon said. "The Second Amendment deals directly with the right of an individual to keep and bear arms to protect themselves from an overreaching federal government."
Another lawmaker, state Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City, said he believes there's a good chance of introducing legislation for a state-authorized militia next year.
Tea party leader J.W. Berry of the Tulsa-based OKforTea began soliciting interest in a state militia through his newsletter under the subject "Buy more guns, more bullets."
"It's not a far-right crazy plan or anything like that," Berry said. "This would be done with the full cooperation of the state Legislature."
State militias clearly are constitutionally authorized, but have not been used in recent times, said Glenn Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee and an expert on the Second Amendment. "Whether someone should get a militia to go toe-to-toe with the federal government ... now, that strikes me as kind of silly," he said.
Some conservative legislators in Oklahoma say talk of a militia, which would be privately recruited, armed and trained, goes too far.
"If the intent is to create a militia for disaster relief, we have the National Guard," said Sen. Steve Russell, R-Oklahoma City, a retired Army lieutenant colonel. "Anything beyond that purpose should be viewed with great concern and caution."
Democratic Gov. Brad Henry's communications director Paul Sund also discounted the militia discussion, saying the National Guard handles state emergencies and security.
Federal authorities say that radical militia groups have not emerged in Oklahoma, unlike many other states, in part because of the legacy of the Oklahoma City bombing. On April 19, 1995, an anti-government conspiracy led by Army veteran Tim McVeigh exploded a truckbomb outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, killing 168 people.
Last month, FBI agents conducted a raid on the Hutaree militia group in southern Michigan and accused members of plotting to kill law enforcement officers.
Associated Press Writers Sean Murphy And Tim Talley, Associated Press Writers – Mon Apr 12, 7:09 pm ET
OKLAHOMA CITY – Frustrated by recent political setbacks, tea party leaders and some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature say they would like to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty.
Tea party movement leaders say they've discussed the idea with several supportive lawmakers and hope to get legislation next year to recognize a new volunteer force. They say the unit would not resemble militia groups that have been raided for allegedly plotting attacks on law enforcement officers.
"Is it scary? It sure is," said tea party leader Al Gerhart of Oklahoma City, who heads an umbrella group of tea party factions called the Oklahoma Constitutional Alliance. "But when do the states stop rolling over for the federal government?"
Thus far, the discussions have been exploratory. Even the proponents say they don't know how an armed force would be organized nor how a state-based militia could block federal mandates. Critics also asserted that the force could inflame extremism, and that the National Guard already provides for the state's military needs.
"Have they heard of the Oklahoma City bombing?" said Joseph Thai, a constitutional law professor at the University of Oklahoma. The state observes the 15th anniversary of the anti-government attack on Monday. Such actions could "throw fuel in the fire of radicals," he said.
But the militia talks reflect the frustration of some grass roots groups seeking new ways of fighting recent federal initiatives, such as the health reform plan, which requires all citizens to have health insurance. Over the last year, tea party groups across the country have staged rallies and pressured politicians to protest big government and demand reduced public spending.
In strongly conservative states like Oklahoma, some legislators have also discussed further action to fight federal policies, such as state legislation and lawsuits.
State Sen. Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, a Republican candidate for governor who has appealed for tea party support, said supporters of a state militia have talked to him, and that he believes the citizen unit would be authorized under the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
The founding fathers "were not referring to a turkey shoot or a quail hunt. They really weren't even talking about us having the ability to protect ourselves against each other," Brogdon said. "The Second Amendment deals directly with the right of an individual to keep and bear arms to protect themselves from an overreaching federal government."
Another lawmaker, state Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City, said he believes there's a good chance of introducing legislation for a state-authorized militia next year.
Tea party leader J.W. Berry of the Tulsa-based OKforTea began soliciting interest in a state militia through his newsletter under the subject "Buy more guns, more bullets."
"It's not a far-right crazy plan or anything like that," Berry said. "This would be done with the full cooperation of the state Legislature."
State militias clearly are constitutionally authorized, but have not been used in recent times, said Glenn Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee and an expert on the Second Amendment. "Whether someone should get a militia to go toe-to-toe with the federal government ... now, that strikes me as kind of silly," he said.
Some conservative legislators in Oklahoma say talk of a militia, which would be privately recruited, armed and trained, goes too far.
"If the intent is to create a militia for disaster relief, we have the National Guard," said Sen. Steve Russell, R-Oklahoma City, a retired Army lieutenant colonel. "Anything beyond that purpose should be viewed with great concern and caution."
Democratic Gov. Brad Henry's communications director Paul Sund also discounted the militia discussion, saying the National Guard handles state emergencies and security.
Federal authorities say that radical militia groups have not emerged in Oklahoma, unlike many other states, in part because of the legacy of the Oklahoma City bombing. On April 19, 1995, an anti-government conspiracy led by Army veteran Tim McVeigh exploded a truckbomb outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, killing 168 people.
Last month, FBI agents conducted a raid on the Hutaree militia group in southern Michigan and accused members of plotting to kill law enforcement officers.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
The Cow and the Ice Cream
I can't vouch that this really happened so I post it only for it's value as a parable.
ONE OF THE BEST EXPLANATIONS OF WHY OBAMA WON THE ELECTION
From a teacher in the Nashville area
"We are worried about 'the cow' when it is all about the 'Ice Cream.'
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year...
The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest.
I decided we would have an election for a class president.
We would choose our nominees.. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.
To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members.
We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have.
We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.
The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids.
I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support.
I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches.
Jamie went first.
He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better
place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded and he sat down.
Now is was Olivia's turn to speak.
Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down.
The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream."
She surely would say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure.
Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it... She didn't know.
The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream..
Jamie was forgotten.. Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and52 percent of the people reacted like nine year olds.
They want ice cream.
The other 48 percent know they're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess."
Remember, the government cannot give anything to anyone --
that they have not first taken away from someone else.
ONE OF THE BEST EXPLANATIONS OF WHY OBAMA WON THE ELECTION
From a teacher in the Nashville area
"We are worried about 'the cow' when it is all about the 'Ice Cream.'
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year...
The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest.
I decided we would have an election for a class president.
We would choose our nominees.. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.
To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members.
We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have.
We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.
The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids.
I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support.
I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches.
Jamie went first.
He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better
place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded and he sat down.
Now is was Olivia's turn to speak.
Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down.
The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream."
She surely would say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure.
Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it... She didn't know.
The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream..
Jamie was forgotten.. Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and52 percent of the people reacted like nine year olds.
They want ice cream.
The other 48 percent know they're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess."
Remember, the government cannot give anything to anyone --
that they have not first taken away from someone else.
Obama's narcissism
In case you haven't figured this out yet, I'm using this blog less to write my own poor expressions of what I think and more as a depository for the writings of others that I feel people should be made aware of. This post is a prize example of that. Earlier today I received an email with the title "Obama's Narcissism" which peaked my interest. However, when I check it on the web site "Snopes.com" I found that it was incorrectly attributed. So, first, I'm publishing here to help with correcting that missunderstanding. Second, the article, albeit very, very long, does contain what I believe is some valuable insight. So here it is and in compliance with the author's wishes, I'll post the link where the original is posted: http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html
Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer
By Ali Sina
2008/09/22
This article has been published in more than 1000 sites, erroneously attributing it to Dr. Vaknin. One person even wrote to me accusing me of plagiarism (double whammy?). Those sites are in error. If you find this article attributed to anyone else but me please write to them and correct them. You are welcome to reproduce this article, or any of my articles on Obama, listed at the buttom, in part or in their entirety, but you must provide a link to the source in this site. Thank you.
I was not impressed by Sen. Barack Obama after the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident – a wholesome presidential package. It is so instinctive for most people to want to see blacks succeed. It is as if all humanity is carrying a collective guilt for what the ancestors of blacks endured. However, despite my initial interest in him, I was soon put off, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words.
It is surreal to see the level of hysteria in his admirers. This phenomenon is unprecedented in American politics. Women scream and swoon during his speeches. They yell and shout to Obama, “I love you.” Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It’s only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar.
When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader. Often, people, tired of the status quo, do not have the patience to examine the nature of the proposed change. All they want is change. During 1979, when the Iranians were tired of the dictatorial regime of the late Shah, they embraced Khomeini, not because they wanted Islam, but because he promised them change. The word in the street was, “anything is better than the Shah.” They found their error when it was too late.
Khomeini promised there would be separation between religion and state. He lied and they did not care to look into his past to see whether he actually meant what he said. Had they done that they would have seen that he always believed in caliphate and the rule of Islam. People gobbled everything he told them uncritically. They wanted to believe and therefore closed their eyes so they did not see what they did not want to see. Eyes welled when he spoke. Masses poured into the streets by the millions, screamed and shouted to greet him. People kissed his pictures. Some saw his portrait reflected on the Moon.
Listening to Obama ... it harkens back to when I was younger and I used to watch Khomeini, how he would excite the crowd and they'd come to their feet and scream and yell.
I was amused to hear a listener calling Fox News Radio's Tom Sullivan Show, (Feb 11) and saying: "Listening to Obama ... it harkens back to when I was younger and I used to watch those deals with Hitler, how he would excite the crowd and they'd come to their feet and scream and yell." ( Videos of Hitler’s speeches are available on Youtube. They are worth a look.)
Equating anyone to Hitler by highlighting the similarities between the two is a logical fallacy. This fallacy, known as reductio ad Hitlerum is a variety of both questionable cause and association fallacy. I believe it is wrong to trivialize the holocaust and the horrors of Nazism by comparing our opponents to Hitler.
However, Hitler, prior to coming to power had not killed anyone. He was insane, but few could see that. Far from it, he was seen as a gifted man and hailed as the savior of Germany. He was admired throughout the world. He appealed to the masses of people – the working class and particularly to women, and did not just inspire them, he “elevated” them. Thousands rallied to listen to his passionate speeches. They shed tears when he spoke. Women fainted during his speeches. To Germans, he was not a politician, but a demigod, a messiah. They envisioned him as truly a magical figure of majestic wisdom and glory. They worshiped him. They surrendered their wills to him. He restored their national pride. He projected himself as their savior. He ran on the platform of change and hope. Change he delivered all right, but hopes he shattered.
I think it is fair to say that the Illinois senator puts the same passion in his speeches that Hitler used to put in his, and he evokes similar raw emotions in his audience. This much we can agree. Okay, we can also agree that both Hitler and Charlie Chaplin wore square moustaches. So what?
The Cult of Personality
There are other disturbing similarities. Like Hitler and Khomeini, Obama also likes to create a cult of personality around himself. As stated above, when a large number of a population is discontent, a charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and present himself as the agent of change. He can create a cult of Personality by associating himself with the idea of change. He convinces everyone that things are terrible and a drastic change is needed. He then casts himself as the only person who can deliver this revolutionary transformation that everyone is waiting for. He portrays himself as a benevolent guide; the only one who cares about people and their needs and can pull them out of their alleged misery. In reality, they have no clue about how to address the problem - have no experience, no track record. But they are convincing because they are self assured.
These revolutionary leaders need foes. They exaggerate the problems. They make everything look gloomy. They lie, cheat and slander their opponents while casting themselves as the saviors of the nation. Hitler chose the Jews to blame for everything that was wrong in Germany. Khomeini made the Shah and his westernization plans his scapegoats. Obama has chosen President George W. Bush to smear. He can rally people around himself, as long as he can instill in them the dislike of Bush and equate his rival, McCain to him. Sigmund Freud wrote, "It is always possible to bind together a considerable number of people in love, so long as there are other people left over to receive the manifestations of their aggressiveness" (Civilization and Its Discontents).
A cult of personality is excessive adulation, admiration and exaltation of a charismatic leader, often with unproven merits or achievements. It is similar to hero worship except that it is created specifically for political leaders.
An unequivocal expression of delusional grandiosity
Let us read a few of the comments Obama’s fans have made about him. Their unbounded adulation of this totally unknown figure is proof of my claim.
Jon Robin Baitz is the creator of the ABC series "Brothers & Sisters." He writes:
Today we saw and heard a preview of our brightest possible American future in Senator Barack Obama's glorious speech. This, then, is what it means to be presidential. To be moral. To have a real center. To speak honestly, from the heart, for the benefit of all. If there was any doubt about what we have missed in the anti-intellectual, ruthlessly incurious Bush years, and even the slippery Clinton ones, those doubts were laid to rest by Barack Obama's magisterial speech today. A speech in which he distanced himself from a flawed father figure, Reverend Wright, and did so with almost Shakespearian dignity and honor.
For twenty years Obama was part of Jeremiah Wright’s racist church and listened to all the hate which that man spewed against the Jews and the “rich White America.” Obama did not object to any of those hateful comments and even donated $20,000 dollars to his Trinity United Church of Christ. Baitz is willing to overlook all that and, mesmerized by Obama’s speeches, he embraces a man who up until yesterday supported the racist views of his spiritual mentor. He calls Obama’s speech "glorious," and concludes he is honest and moral. How did he come to that hasty conclusion? There is no evidence of that except his "gut feeling." That observation is subjective. We have not seen any evidence of Obama's honesty yet. On the contrary, he has been caught with a litany of lies.
Clearly Sen. Obama has a charming effect on his audience, who after listening to him are so moved that they willingly give up their reason and follow their hearts. Let’s see how Baitz adulates Obama to the point of worship.
Barack Obama's speech, perhaps one of the most important in modern political history pushed us as a people to move beyond race and gender, beyond Democrat and Republican, beyond politics and into reviving the spirit of the nation itself. To talk, to talk at home, at work, at the dinner table. To really finally talk. What a great day, and where else in the world but in the United States? Today I am very proud to be an American.
Remembering the reaction of Iranians to Khomeini’s speeches, this is all deja vu for me.
There is an old adage that says, “Tell me who your friends are and I will tell who you are.” Don’t the quality of Obama’s friends and associates tell us about the man? Shouldn't we look at the history of this man to ascertain his truthfulness? One characteristic of cult of personality is that people become ready to close their eyes. They find excuses and rationalize the sins of their leader.
Another Obama worshipper is Ezra Klein. He is an associate editor at The American Prospect. Klein wrote:
Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I've heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.
Obama is not seen by his admirers as a politician but as something holy. Klein says “He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh.” The truth is that Obama is nothing but words! What is scary is that so many smart people are willing to fall for his empty words. Interestingly the same Ezra Klein had earlier said:
Obama is a cipher, an easy repository for the hopes and dreams of liberals everywhere...But if Obama avoided being battle-tested in 2004 by the grace of God, it's his own timidity that has kept his name clean since. Given his national profile and formidable political talents, he could have been a potent spokesman for Democratic causes in the Senate. Instead, he has refused to expend his political or personal capital on a single controversial issue, preferring to offer anodyne pieces of legislation and sign on to the popular efforts of others...Indeed, Obama is that oddest of all creatures: a leader who's never led. There are no courageous, lonely crusades to his name, or supremely unlikely electoral battles beneath his belt. He won election running basically unopposed, and then refused to open himself to attack by making a controversial but correct issue his own."
Quite a shift I would say. What did exactly Obama do, for Klein to change his views so drastically? Nothing! Obama has won this man’s heart only by the power of his mesmerizing words. he is making his conquests, through the sheer power of his oratory. That is how Hitler won the hearts of the Germans. As Obama’s life story shows, his words don’t have any bearing on reality. Words are powerful, but when they are not backed by any substance they are empty rhetoric.
Todd Gitlin, is professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University. He is another worshipper of Obama. This is what he says about his leader.
This speech was a triumph on so many levels, does one dare hope it will turn the trick for hordes of parsing skeptics and listeners whose eyes did not water? First, Obama took the high road, which is also the long and demanding road. He refused to "move on" with a cursory acknowledgment that "mistakes were made." He did not acknowledge. He preached and he reasoned.”
Let us pause here and examine what this professor of journalism and sociology says. Obama was a close friend of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and listened to his racist sermons for twenty years. Wright is a man who has intense hatred for the Jews, for whites and for America. This clip shows some of his remarks made from the pulpit. Here is a gleaning from his sermons:
- We [The White controlled America] have supported state terrorism against Palestinians and Black South Africans … Because of the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back to our own home front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.
- No, no, no! Not God bless America. God damn America. That is in the Bible, for killing innocent people. God damn America.
- Government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew that Japanese are going to attack.
- They [Government] purposely infected African-American men with syphilis!
- What is going on in White America, U.S. of KKK?
- Black men turning on Black men? That is fighting the wrong enemy. You both are primary targets in an oppressive society that sees both of you as a dangerous threat.
- What we [America] is doing is the same thing Al Qaida is doing, under a different flag.
- Oh I am so glad, that I got a God who knows what it is to be a poor Black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by and run by rich White people.
- Yes, 911 happened to us, and so did slavery happen to us. Yes the World Trade Center happened to us, and so did White supremacy happen to us.
- “Barack knows what it means to be a Black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich White people.”
When all these came to light, at first the Illinois senator denied having heard them. That excuse was not believable. Wright was Obama's spiritual mentor and the most influential man in his life. And yet he expects us to believe he listened to his sermons for 20 years but did not pay attention to what he was saying? So he changed his position and admitted to having heard them, but he categorically condemned them. Obama went one step further. He did not just condemn the racist remarks of his Pastor, but he preached and he sermonized how bad are they are. Now, this requires some audacity that only a narcissist can muster. Instead of apologizing and recognizing his error, Obama turned the table and preached to others.
How can we understand this? The man himself is the sinner but instead of acknowledging his sins, he preaches to others about the vices of those sins. The answer can be found in the description of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists will never admit being wrong. They are always one step ahead of you.
Those who remember Rev. Jimmy Swaggart know that he was one of the most popular and successful televangelists of all times. During the 1980s, he had millions of fans all over the world. He mesmerized his audience. He was more than a rock star, he was a phenomenon. Swaggart was a preacher of "morality." He was so against promiscuity and unlawful sex that he went after two other televangelist magnates, Marvin Gorman and Jimmy Baker, exposed their adultery and brought their empires down.
However, what narcissists preach and what they do are two different things. Soon after exposing Gorman’s adultery, Swaggart himself was photographed with a prostitute in a motel room. He was banned from giving sermons for three months. But he could not stay away from the church that provided him with adulation and the people who fed his narcissistic need. He said, "If I do not return to the pulpit this weekend, millions of people will go to hell." So he returned to the pulpit and after shedding a few crocodile tears of repentance, he went right on preaching morality, chastising adultery and sermoning to others, how THEY should live a chaste life.
This requires audacity. How one who has been caught with a prostitute, literally with his pants down, could have the cheek to preach to others about the very thing he is guilty of? NPD provides the answer to both Swaggart and Obama’s responses, when caught red handed. The narcissist will not apologize for his own sins; he will go on preaching to you about the evilness of those sins. If Professor Gitlin had read a book or two on narcissism, he would have not been hoodwinked by Obama’s preaching about racial harmony after being caught with his proverbial pants down in his racist church. Giltin is not alone; millions of Americans have fallen for this narcissist’s mind games.
Prof. Gitlin continues:
“The Reverend Jeremiah Wright,” he [Obama]said, “had spoken in an ‘incendiary’ manner,” but Obama offered himself as the man who rises from flames and invites you to rise from your own. He took a grievous embarrassment and moved his lesson to the plane of prophecy. Talk about hope; talk about audacity. Tears came to my eyes. I don't think I'm especially hard-hearted, but I cannot think of another time when the speech of a presidential candidate watered me up.
It is amazing to see to what extent people are willing to go to eulogize another human being. It is this excess that constitutes the cult of personality. The difference between admiration and cult of personality is in the degree of adulation. Is it not fair to say that Obama has the same effect on his fans that Hitler, Khomeini or other famous demagogues such as Joseph Stalin or Mao Ze Dong had? I am not equating Obama to those mass murderers. Obama has not killed anyone (at least not yet). I am only comparing their effects on their audience, particularly prior to their rise to power.
Obama’s speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such a quasi “religious” impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming.
Obama’s speeches are grandiose. They are other worldly. He may talk about the war in Iraq, taxes or social security. It does not matter how mundane is the subject, he makes them sound transcendental and his audience is moved to tears. His worshippers do not go to listen to his plans. He has yet to offer any that is workable and different. They go to bask in his glory, to get high. Obama presents himself as someone with a unique vision and grasp of the entire problems affecting, not just the nation but the world, a pretense that is incomensurate with his track record. When in a meeting with House Democrats waxing lyrical about his trip to Europe, he concluded, “this is the moment, as Nancy [Pelosi] noted, that the world is waiting for.” The world is waiting for Obama, according to Obama. In one of his rallies he reiterated this delusion of grandiosity and said, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for." This sentence is logically absurd. What actually Obama wanted to say, which he masked with fake modesty is “I am the one the world has been waiting for.”
When you fall for someone to the extent that Obama’s followers have fallen for him, you surrender your reason and individuality to him willingly. When millions of people surrender their hearts and their minds to one person the result can be catastrophic. This is what happened in Germany with Hitler, in China with Mao, in the Soviet Union with Stalin, in Cuba with Castro, in Iran with Khomeini, and so on and so forth. Today, we think these men were monsters, but that was not what millions of their worshipers thought. Those people loved them. Dictators can’t dictate, unless peole are willing to be dictated.
Here is what Wikipedia says about Cult of Personality:
"A cult of personality or personality cult arises when a country's leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships but can be found in some democracies.
"A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship except that it is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be applied by analogy to refer to adulation of non-political leaders."
Who is Obama?
Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is quite ignorant on most important subjects. Barack Obama is a narcissist. Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love, also believes, “Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist.”
Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama’s language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).
Vaknin explains: “Narcissistic leaders are nefarious and their effects pernicious. They are subtle, refined, socially-adept, manipulative, possessed of thespian skills, and convincing. Both types [cerebral and somatic] equally lack empathy and are ruthless and relentless or driven.” These were the very traits that distinguished Hitler and Khomeini. Many of these traits can be seen in Obama. As for his ruthlessness, perhaps his support of legislation to let babies die if they survive abortion, gives a glimps into his soul, that he may lacks empathy, does not value life, and if in the position of power can be ruthless. Narcissists need power to show their ruthlessness. Considering the fact that Obama neglected his own half brother, George Hussein Obama, who lives on one dollar per month in Kenya, we can’t vouch for Obama’s empathy or say he is a caring person.
What is Narcissism?
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) describes narcissism as a personality disorder that “revolve around a pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and sense of entitlement. Often individuals feel overly important and will exaggerate achievements and will accept, and often demand, praise and admiration despite worthy achievements.”
The third and fourth editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of 1980 and 1994 and the European ICD-10 describe NPD in similar language:
An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria must be met:
- Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
- Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion
- Is firmly convinced that he is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special, unique, or high-status people (or institutions)
- Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation, or failing that, wishes to be feared and notorious (narcissistic supply)
- Feels entitled. Expects unreasonable or special and favorable priority treatment. Demands automatic and full compliance with his expectations
- Is “interpersonally exploitative” i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends
- Is devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge the feelings and needs of others
- Is constantly envious of others or believes that they feel the same about him or her
- Is arrogant, has haughty behaviors or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted
Obama inebriated with the fantasy of unlimited success.
Pathological narcissism, is not akin to typical narcissism—someone with a hedonistic or self-centered sense of self —but rather someone with a very weak sense of self. Obama’s narcissism is pathological.
Narcissists seek power. That is the whole purpose of their existence. Power for them is the elixir of life. Those who know about NPD can’t help but notice it in Obama’s posture, the tone of his voice, his demeanor and particularly his grandiose claims and unscripted adlibs.
Narcissim has degrees. When it is extreme it shows in the posture and the way the narcissist walks and talks. Obama's posture, exudes haughtiness. He is all puffery. Compare his posture to those of Hitler, Stalin and Saddam.
According to Vaknin, Obama displays the following behaviors, which are among the hallmarks of pathological narcissism:
- Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and "ideals" (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause him overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, refuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.
- Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image. This has to do with magical thinking. Obama already sees himself as president because he is firmly convinced that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes affect reality. Additionally, he denies the gap between his fantasies and his modest or limited real-life achievements (for instance, in 12 years of academic career, he didn't publish a single scholarly paper or book).
- Feels that he is above the law.
- Talks about himself in the 3rd person singluar or uses the regal "we" and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation
- Has a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his "mission".
- Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)
- Displays false modesty and unctuous "folksiness" but is unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.
- Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.
- Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).
Can Obama be trusted as the leader of the free world?
Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People’s Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers’ souls, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it it too late.
One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse. “Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations,” says Vaknin. “Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then, his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia: a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995.”
In Vaknin’s words, “Pathological narcissism is a reaction to prolonged abuse and trauma in early childhood or early adolescence. The source of the abuse or trauma is immaterial: the perpetrators could be dysfunctional or absent parents, teachers, other adults, or peers.”
The pathological narcissist has a very weak sense of self. He compensates his devalued and injured self with pomposity and by projecting a false image of majesty and authority. He retreats into a bubble universe of fantasy, in which he is loved, respected and omnipotent. All children create such a world. Narcissists simply don’t leave it. They carry this world of pretence into their adulthood. With the passage of time, this world becomes to them as real as the real world, to the point that they can’t tell the difference. When Obama acts presidential, he is simply acting out his childhood fantasy of omnipotence and grandeur. Emotionally, he is still a little hurt boy, neglected and unloved in the body and mind of a grown up man. Such people can be dangerous. Narcissists have the emotional maturity of a child, or even an animal, but the intellect of a man. They feel like a beast, but think like a human.
If we look into the childhood of all narcissists, we can see that invariably they were abused. Saddam was born to a widow who after losing her husband and her 12 year old son was so distressed that she attempted suicide. Before his birth, she would pull out clumps of her hair and pummel her pregnant abdomen with her fists. Saddam Hussein in his own official biography recounts his unhappy childhood. Hitler was the son of a very abusive man who would beat him regularly. From Saddam to Osama, to Hitler, to Stalin, to Khomeini, to Mao and to Kim Jong Ill, it is wounded childhood that causes NPD. Obama’s chaotic childhood and his continuous struggle to find his identity make him a prime candidate for NPD.
Hitler was confused about his identity. His father was an illegitimate son of a Jew. He chose to be in denial of that part of himself and his response was the genocide of the Jews. Obama’s search for his identity led him to a racist church that preached “Black Power.” He changed his given name Barry to Barack, in an atempt to rid himself of the only vestige he had with his white heritage.
Narcissists have only one issue. They want power and will do and say anything to get it. Their words mean nothing to them. They do not intend to keep them. They look into your eyes and swear on a stack of Bibles that they are not going to do something when that is exactly what they intend to do. They break their promises when it suits them and annul their treaties when they can get away with it. They lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie.
Narcissists are pathological liars. They lie even to themselves. Ironically, they are the first to believe their own lies. When normal people lie, they show signs of distress. Narcissists don’t. They can pass any polygraph test with flying colors. It is this conviction that fools people around them making them believe in their truthfulness and sincerity. In a twisted way they are sincere because, although they are conscience that they are not truthful, they believe in their own lies. This is difficult to understand and even more difficult to explain, but for a narcissist fantasy and reality are intertwined. The narcissist’s delusional thoughts of grandiosity are real to him.
Obama absorbed in reveries of omnipotence
Narcissistic Society
Germans are not particularly an evil race. They are no better or worse than any other nation. And yet, despite their advanced culture and civility they committed the most hideous crime in modern history. They murdered up to ten million people, because those unfortunate souls did not meet their "Master Race standards of ethnic purity.” Hitler did not kill anyone; the Germans did.
So the question is: What made these smart and highly civilized people commit such horrendous acts of savagery?
According to Vaknin, “The narcissistic or psychopathic leader is the culmination and reification of his period, culture, and civilization. He is likely to rise to prominence in narcissistic societies.”
Is America a narcissistic society? Vaknin believes “Pathological narcissism is a ubiquitous phenomenon because every human being - regardless of the nature of his society and culture - develops healthy self esteem early in life [which he calls healthy narcissism]. Healthy narcissism is rendered pathological by abuse - and abuse, alas, is a universal human behavior. By 'abuse, we mean any refusal to acknowledge the emerging boundaries of the individual - smothering, doting, and excessive expectations - are as abusive as beating and incest.”
The emergence of so many cults in America is proof that America is not an exception to the norm. If demagogue narcissists, like Jim Jones, David Koresh or Jimmy Swaggart can find a fertile ground in America, why not one with a political message?
The Power of Manipulation
Narcissists are manipulative and extremely resourceful. They know how to the play their game, and how to get what they want, by using others. Obama is the least experienced senator among the Democrats. His political views are the most foolish of them all. He opposed the surge in Iraq saying it will make the situation worse and he was wrong. He thinks the solution to terrorism is to sit with terrorist states without precondition and negotiate with them. When Russia invaded Georgia, all this genius did was to urge both sides to "exert restraint". Everything this man has said so far reveals his ignorance in economical, political and military matters. Despite that, this junior senator has managed to rally the seasoned senators of the Democratic Party around himself and, not withstanding his ineptitude, he has emerged as the leader de facto of his party and their presidential candidate.
This is a remarkable feat. One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents.
Anyone can be fooled by narcissists. Just as experienced and smart senators of the Democratic Party have surrendered to the charisma of Obama, a man who is inferior to them all in every sense; many members of the media also have fallen for his charm hook, line and sinker. The American media is soft on Obama, but extremely harsh and deceitfully unfair on Governor Palin. The “rich White Americans,” the very people he despised for twenty years are swooning for him. The Jews whom he opposed all his life are backing him. They are opening their wallets and supporting his campaign in an unprecedented way. He has managed to charm even the Kennedys. Ted Kennedy, the lion in Winter, passed the Kennedy mantle unto Obama. That was hugely symbolic. As for the great Clintons, he made them submissive, and for whatever reason, incomprehensible to me, they are playing his game. Think about it. Obama is a cipher. In reality, he is nobody. And yet, thanks to his overbearing display of authority, the very mask that he is wearing to hide his devalued and injured self, he has overwhelmed all the giants of the Democratic party. Cults are full of smart people who have been hoodwinked by mentally sick needy people.
Could all this phenomenal support and unbounded adulation erupt into violence? All the abuses and killings in Nazi Germany were done by the Germans, ordinary people who loved Hitler and believed in the glorious tomorrow that he was promising them. Hitler was insane, but those who did his bidding were not. Despite being smart, they did not hesitate to fulfill their fuehrer’s wishes and commit the most heinous crimes. The same thing happened in Iran. Ordinary people, once under the spell of Khomeini, acted like beasts. This is what happens when sane people follow insane people.
Could the same happen in America? Why not? Look how millions of people literally worship Obama. With some people I cannot even talk about Obama. They cannot tolerate any criticism of him. They get angry and, not only they want to end the conversation but threaten to end the friendship. I am familiar with this kind of religious devotion to a person. The reaction that I get from Obama worshippers is similar to that of Muslims when their prophet is criticized. They are even prone to insult you. See how they overlook Obama's blatant lies and are willing to forgive his major sins such as racism. Note how the mainstream media bends the rules, twists the facts, exaggerates Obama’s little virtues, absolves his sins, and even lies to sell him to the public. Compare the royal treatment that the liberal press has given to Obama to how unfairly they treat Governor Palin; how they smear her character and belittle her experience and achievement. ABC’s Charlie Gibson’s interview with Governor Palin was a stain on journalistic integrity. Is it more important that Palin has not traveled the world and has not shaken hands with heads of states, or the fact that Obama has lied so many times? Under what pretext should an ordinary citizen visit heads of foreign states? The question itself is preposterous.
While not shaking hands with foreign heads of states does not disqualify one to run for any office, The Logan Act (est. 1799) makes it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.
That is exactly what Obama did during his trip to Iraq, a charge that Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi confirmed, while trying to deny it. She said, “In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a ‘Strategic Framework Agreement’ governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office.”
This is high treason. Ordinary citizens have no right to enter into negotiations with foreign countries and make deals against the interest of their Government. Obama tells the Iraqis not to let the American soldiers go, so he can call them in January, supposedly when he is the president and claim victory for himself. Will Mr. Gibson or anyone in the liberal media question Obama for this crime?
Gibson’s questions were tricky. He asked the Governor, “what do you think of Bush’s doctrine,” and then, instead of explaining himself, he insisted that his interviewee define what he meant. After letting the Governor look puzzled, Gibson explained what he understands of "Bush Doctrine," which according to him is preemptive strike.
Assuming this is a “Bush doctrine,” is it his only doctrine? Isn’t being pro life also a Bush doctrine? Isn’t Christianity or creationism a Bush doctrine? Bush believes in a multitude of things and they change as his thinking evolves over time. How can one know what Gibson has in mind? Do you see the trickery?.
Many members of the media have been hoodwinked by the charm of the rising fuehrer. They have become his extensions, act deceitfully and dishonestly to make their beloved leader’s rise to power a reality.
How can smart people let themselves be manipulated by a psychopath to such an extent that they become quasi zombies? Recall what the smart Germans did under the spell of Hitler. Bear in mind what the Soviets did under the influence of Stalin. Consider what the Japanese did during WWII when they believed in the divinity of their emperor. Evoke how the Chinese Red Guard massacred millions of their own countrymen when they were blinded by their love for Mao and his faux notion of equality. Look at the Islamic terrorists. Can’t we say the same about them? Isn’t Islamic savagery the result of Muslims’ uncritical devotion to a long deceased narcissist? If you don't know what I am talking about, I invite you to read my book, Understanding Muhammad. When sane people fall for the lies of an insane man, they act insanely.
No one is born a terrorist. Terrorists are ordinary people who do the bidding of a pathological narcissist whom they love and worship as their liberator. They are so enamored with him that they stop thinking and act like automatons. To prove their love and devotion they can commit murder and even suicide. They can kill their own children, as the followers of Jim Jones did in Guyana. The narcissist encourages all of this behavior because it validates his delusion of omnipotence. It reassures him that he is loved, respected, counted, taken seriously. Did you hear the song played during the Democratic convention? It said, “This is the church.” And who do you think is the head of that church? Americans are as fallible and as gullible as everyone else. It is foolhardy to say "it won't happen to us." Just as today, Obama’s supporters happily engage in intellectual dishonesty, deceitful reporting, and even hooliganism, I predict they will soon, merrily commit the same crimes other nations committed under the spell of their narcissistic leaders.
His majesty condescendingly looks down at his scullions
The Sick Symbiosis
Narcissists need their narcissistic supply to fuel their narcissism. They get it through adulation from people around them. These people are often also needy people. They are known as co-dependants. The narcissist and his co-dependent therefore, form a sick symbiosis in which both benefit. Let me give you one example to explain this mechanism.
David Sirota is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist. In December 2006, in an article entitled “The Ridiculousness & Danger That Is Obama '08” Sirota lambasted the Democrats who wanted Obama, an incognito junior senator, to run for presidency.
Sometimes, you really just have to sit back and laugh at the ridiculousness of the celebrity-obsessed political culture we now live in.” wrote Sirota in his column. “Take this Chicago Sun-Times article by Lynn Sweet in which she predicts Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (D) will run for president. She goes through what he has to do to prepare for his run, and this is the one that just makes you chuckle: “Develop signature legislative initiatives: Once the Democrats control Congress come January, there's a chance to pass legislation. Watch for Obama to focus on alternative energy measures, health care and ethics reform legislation that stalled earlier this year."
Think about it. The national media is swooning over Obama, begging him to run for president. Yet, at the same time, they are implicitly acknowledging that he has actually not "developed significant legislative initiatives." In other words, we are to simply accept that the Obama for President wave has absolutely nothing to do with anything that the man HAS DONE and further, that whenever he does decide to use his enormous political capital to do something, it is all in pursuit of the White House - not any actual sense of DOING SOMETHING for the people who elected him to the Senate.
I don't blame Obama for not having accomplished much - he's been in the Senate for two years. As I wrote in the Nation, the main concern about him is that he doesn't actually seem to ASPIRE to anything outside of the Washington power structure (other than maybe running for another higher office), and doesn't seem to be interested in challenging the status quo in any fundamental way. Using his senate career as a guide, it suggests that any presidential run by him is about him, his speaking ability and his fawned over talent for "connecting" (whatever the hell that means).” (Read the rest of Sirota’s comment in his own blog.)
I could not say it better. Sirota understood the problem with Obama. He realized that not only this man has zero experience; he is actually a power hungry charlatan that aspires to nothing other than running for another higher office. He then expressed his outrage at the fellow Democrats who tried to make a leader out of this quack.
These Democrats laid all their hopes on Obama. They were captivated by his charm. They could not see that this man is wearing a mask of authority to cover his inner feeling of insecurity; that he is a fraud, a narcissist. When approached, Obama at first confessed to his inexperience, but the sycophants in the Democratic Party, were so desperate to find a charismatic leader that they could not let go of their prize. It does not take much to persuade a narcissist that he can do anything. He is already convinced that he is smarter and better than everyone else. So, despite his own confession of lack of experience, Obama could not resist the temptation.
To nurture his narcissism, the narcissist needs narcissistic supply. It is always people around him who provide that supply and encourage him in his psychosis. If it were not for Khadijah who reassured her husband that his hallucinations were not demonic, as he had thought, but divine revelations, Muhammad may never have started his prophetic career. It was she who encouraged him to launch a new religion, instead of calling an exorcist.
This is called co-dependency. The co-dependent, who also suffers from low self esteem, seeks his or her grandeur and narcissistic supply in the greatness of a narcissist of whom she seeks to become a part.
According to Wikipedia, “a ‘codependent’ is loosely defined as someone who exhibits too much, and often inappropriate, caring for persons who depend on him or her. A ‘codependent’ is one side of a relationship between mutually needy people. The dependent, or obviously needy party(s) may have al, physical, financial difficulties, or addictions they seemingly are unable to surmount. The "codependent" party exhibits behavior which controls, makes excuses for, pities, and takes other actions to perpetuate the obviously needy party's condition, because of their desire to be needed and fear of doing anything that would change the relationship.”
The Democrats were desperately in need of a charismatic leader. They saw their hope in a needy man, a narcissist who portrayed himself as self assured, eloquent and authoritative and had sex appeal. It was love at first sight and they set on to polish him as their candidate. In this relationship the Democratic Party became the co-dependant of the narcissist Obama. They needed someone to shine so they can bask in his splendor. And Obama needed them to fulfill his delusions of grandiosity. This is how codependency works. It is a sick symbiosis of two needy parties. Behind every successful narcissist, there is always a co-dependent.
When the co-dependent and the narcissist team-up the result can be catastrophic. Now we have folie à deux. The delusional belief of the narcissist about himself is transmitted and shared by another needy, but ostensibly smart person. The codependent validates and encourages the narcissist's delusion. As the result, the narcissist becomes bolder, more assertive, more authoritative and more confident. The partnership of the narcissist and the codependent dons their delusion with the mantle of credibility. The codependent will then do everything to persuade others as well. The narcissist's cause is himself. The codependent will champion that cause. By recruiting others, they find validation for their own belief about the narcissist. Soon the folie à deux becomes folie à trois, then folie à quatre, and when you are a presidential candidate and are followed by a hoard of journalists and cameramen, before you blink there will be folie à plusieurs (madness of many). Recent psychiatric classifications refer to the syndrome as shared psychotic disorder.
The masses of people have no first hand knowledge of the narcissist, but they jump on the bandwagon thanks to a very human trait, misnomered as “herd mentality.” They reason, how can so many people be wrong and satisfied by this fallacy blindly join the cult of personality worship.
Like gasoline being poured on a fire, the sycophants around the narcissist provide him with an abundance of narcissistic fuel to feed upon. The unbounded adulations poured at his feet further reinforce and escalate the unique and divine self-image of the narcissist. The larger the narcissistic fuel supply becomes, the more inflated becomes his ego, and the more firmly set in his own mind becomes the conviction of his own invincibility and superiority. The narcissist reaches a stage that he will claim to be a revolutionary leader, an agent of change, a renascence man, the hand of God, even a messenger or prophet of God. Just as a fire can grow infinitely large as long as it receives its fuel, there is no limit to the delusional belief of a narcissist. When millions of people yell and scream and shout “I love you,” an ordinary narcissist is prone to believe that he is God. If the narcissist happens to be a person with power and authority, in a position of high leadership commanding armies and weapons of mass destruction, the result too often leads to the horrific slaughter of millions of innocent souls in the gulag, gas chambers, or killing fields.
Unbounded adulation reconfirms the narcissist that he is right and that anyone who disagrees with him is evil and therefore it is just to punish him. Narcissists do not understand the concept of the Golden Rule. Right is what benefits them and wrong is what harms them. They fight for their own interest and are convinced that this is justice. Human rights and human lives are important only to the extent that they meet their narcissistic needs. They are worthless, and can be disposed of, if they don’t.
Ayatollah Montazeri, the man who was originally chosen to succeed Khomeini, recalled when Khomeini ordered the execution of 3000 youths who were captured during a demonstration against him. Montazeri protested and Khomeini angrily told him, “I will respond for my actions in the Day of Judgment.” Khomeini was a man of God. However, as a narcissist, he was convinced that because he was a superior being and a chosen one, a delusional belief that was reconfirmed by millions of people when they cheered for him, anyone who opposed him was opposing God and therefore by killing them he was doing the maker of the universe a favor.
There is no cure for narcissism. However, deprived of adulation, the disorder will remain dormant. The narcissist, without the narcissistic supply, may become grumpy and complain that the world does not understand them or appreciate their importance. They will continue to cheat and lie when they can get away with it, but the damage that they can cause is not earth shattering. However, when a narcissist becomes the focus of unlimited narcissistic supply, where millions of people scream at his feet, he goes insane.
As narcissism maturates, the narcissist becomes more demanding for respect and compliance and more intolerant of criticism. He becomes paranoid, and divides the world into “us” vs. “them”. He casts himself and his minions as victims and instills in them the distrust of the “others”.
When criticized, Obama's soul can be seen in his eyes.
The narcissist’s anger and intolerance is projected on his servile followers who also become angry and intolerant of criticism of their leader. Remember the sick symbiosis between the narcissist and his codependents? The followers get their narcissistic supply by elevating the status of their leader. The greater he looks, the better they feel. They see their glory is his glory. Conversely, when the narcissist is criticized, his followers become offended. They take those criticisms personally and their instinct of self defense is triggered. They will become vigilantes and will silence their critics through intimidation, bullying, mocking, threats and violence (like calling those who disagree with Obama, racists).
This paragraph is a later addition. About a week after I wrote the above, Missouri sheriffs and top prosecutors formed Obama "Truth Squads" and threatened libel charges against Obama critics. I am no prophet, but see how my predictions are coming to pass. This is only the beginning. Narcissists are intolerant of criticism and create a reign of terror to silence their critics.
Sirota was no fool. He saw what is wrong with Obama and was right on the money when he described him. But, as I have repeated many times, narcissists are gifted manipulators. Sirota is an influential man. Obama needed his support and called him.
It's not every day that God calls your cell phone,” wrote Sirota, sarcastically speaking of Obama, ‘This is Barack Obama.’ Thinking it was a good friend playing a joke, I said I didn't believe him. But no, the voice insisted with a laugh, it was Illinois Senator Barack Obama, otherwise known in cult-of-personality political circles as a deity, a rising Democratic star or, as George W. Bush recently called him, "the pope."
Narcissists are relentless and very convincing. They tell you exactly what you want to hear. They are full of promises. Their talent to manipulate is phenomenal. Well, not this time! Sirota apparently was not ready to sell his conscience (at least not yet) and endorse a man who according to him did not “aspire to anything outside of the Washington power structure (other than maybe running for another higher office.)” This is the kind of patriot America needs more of – citizens of integrity and conscience.
Where does David Sirota stand today? Errr!... Amm!… Why do you want to know? Emm!... How can I put it? Mr. Sirota…, Errr!…, Ah! Yes! Mr. Sirota has had an epiphany - a Pauline sort of experience. As he neared Damas... I mean Denver, on his journey to the Democratic Convention, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice on his cell phone say to him, "David, David, why do you persecute me?" "Who are you, Lord?" David asked. "I am Barack, whom you are persecuting," he replied. "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." That is how David Sirota became a believer of Obama. He stopped blaspheming his Lord by calling him inept and opportunist. Guess what? He has even defended Jeremiah Wright. Hallelujah! Surely “God” (the emerging one) can transform the hearts of his enemies.
Narcissists have an almost surreal power to manipulate others. They can literally charm their adversaries and turn them into cheerful scullion, who will even thank them for giving them the privilege to slave for them.
You see! The narcissist and the codependent need each other. Many members of the Democratic Party may know what Sirota knows, but they need Obama. They have to keep up appearances (think Hillary, who once said "shame on you, Barack Obama" because of his flip flopping and lies and now supports him).
Narcissists are amoral. They consider themselves to be above the law. Once in power, they will try to strengthen their hold by surrounding themselves with equally amoral people. A good example of what we should expect in Obama’s administration is the infamous NAFTA gate scandal. This is what happened:
A senior member of the Obama campaign called the Canadian government to say that “when Sen. Obama talks about opting out of the free trade deal, the Canadian government shouldn’t be worried; that it is just campaign rhetoric and shouldn’t be taken seriously.”
Isn't it amazing? Obama tells the Ohio voters, who are unhappy with NAFTA that he is going to kill it, when actually he does not mean to do any such thing. For a narcissist, ends justify means. He feels warranted to lie and deceive in order to accomplish what he has to accomplish.
This story was denied by Obama, but confirmed twice by sources at the highest level of the Canadian government. This is how a narcissist operates. Obama will lie to Americans and he will surround himself with equally unethical people. With a Congress and Senate controlled by Democrats, and his ability as president to replace retiring Supreme Court judges, nothing will stop him from abusing his power.
The Cause of the Narcissist
The cause of the narcissist is himself. Everything else is a tool, a stepping stone for the narcissist to ascend to power. Narcissists don’t have any ideology. They champion the cause that has a better chance of making their ascent to power easier.
Vaknin writes: “Narcissists use anything they can lay their hands on in the pursuit of narcissistic supply. If God, creed, church, faith, and institutionalized religion can provide them with narcissistic supply, they will become devout. They will abandon religion if it can't.”
Therefore, the question whether Obama is a Muslim or a Christian, whether he is pro Palestine, as he has been all his life or whether he is pro Israel, whether he is a black supremacist or an agent of racial harmony, are moot. Obama is anything you want him to be and situation dictates. He takes the side that is more expedient to his cause. To communists he is a comrade, to Islamists he is their man, to Palestinian fighters he is their hope and to the Jews he is a staunch Zionist. The narcissist’s creed is himself. Everything else is negotiable.
The best description of Obama comes from himself. “I serve as a blank screen,” he wrote in The Audacity of Hope, “on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” This is the key to Obama’s personality. He will do and say anything as long as it suits him. He will embrace any cause, will align himself with anyone, and will shift his position wherever the wind blows. Narcissists are chameleons.
Obama will do and say anything as long as it suits him. He will embrace any cause, will align himself with anyone, and will shift his position wherever the wind blows. Narcissists are chameleons.
Obama voted “present” in the Senate most of the time, (130 times to be precise) not because they were too difficult decisions, as Rudy Giuliani said at the GOP convention, but because those issues were not relevant to his cause.
Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and do not deserve their attention. If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The “present” vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Why should he implicate himself in issues that may become controversial when they don’t help him personally? Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him.
Obama’s election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him with a fellowship and an office to work on his book. The book took him a lot longer than expected and at the end it devolved into…, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which, he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father .
Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself?
Narcissists are magical thinkers. They live in a world of fantasy; fantasies of grandiosity and unlimited power. But they are convinced that those fantasies will become reality because they are special and destined for greatness. That is why Obama already sees himself as president and acts presidential. The very fact that he travelled abroad and visited with several heads of states is another sign of this man's delusions of grandiosity. He is not representing the government. Under what pretext he visited those heads of states and entered into negotiations with them?
Vaknin explains, “Bragging and false autobiography – The narcissist brags incessantly. His speech is peppered with ‘I’, ‘my’, ‘myself’, and ‘mine’. He describes himself as intelligent, or rich, or modest, or intuitive, or creative – but always excessively, implausibly, and extraordinarily so.”
Narcissists Are Dangerous.
Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama’s lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself.
Compare this to what the McCains did. They brought a child from Bangladesh with facial deformities - a little girl with no chance for a normal life – and with plastic surgery restored her beauty and adopted her as their daughter. Millions of ordinary people, who are not even wealthy, have fostered children of total strangers in third world countries and give about a dollar a day for their education and upbringing.
Narcissists can be very generous, but never without an ulterior motive. They are generous when their display of generosity is noticed and elevates them in the eyes of others. Obama donated $20,000 to his racist and anti-Semitic church, but neglected his brother who could get some education and live a lot better if only he had one dollar per day.
Narcissism is all about image. Vaknin says, “The narcissist is shallow, a pond pretending to be an ocean. He likes to think of himself as a Renaissance man, a Jack of all trades. The narcissist never admits to ignorance in any field – yet, typically, he is ignorant of them all. It is surprisingly easy to penetrate the gloss and the veneer of the narcissist's self-proclaimed omniscience.”
Obama’s gaffes in history and world affairs are proof of that. This man does not even know the number of states in the USA, or that Canada does not have a president. That is why Vaknin says a narcissist is a shallow pond that pretends to be an ocean. Obama's ignorance about what should be common knowledge is mind boggling.
Narcissists have a profound sense of call, as they believe they have a “special purpose” or a “high calling.” In his autobiography Hitler wrote, “I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.” Politics and religion offer irresistible lure for the narcissist.
And this is what Obama said about his “calling:” "Kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side of Chicago, I felt I heard God's spirit beckoning me," he said of his walk down the aisle of the Trinity United Church of Christ. "I submitted myself to his will and dedicated myself to discovering his truth."
At least one mental health professional believes that about 6% of Americans are pathological narcissists. The percentage in countries where child abuse is more prevalent is a lot higher. Although all narcissists are cunning, and bereft of conscience, not all of them have the wits to rise to power. A narcissist with smarts can be dangerous.
Hitler was smart, and so is Obama. Hitler would not have become the monster he became had he not risen to power and had he not received so much narcissistic fodder to feed on. One man who saw Khomeini prior to rising to power recalled he would gently push flies out of his window, but would not kill them. The same man massacred tens of thousands of Iranians. It is power that brings madness out of the narcissist.
America is at a crucial moment in its history. I cannot think of any disaster greater than putting a pathological narcissist in control of the world’s most powerful military machine.
Narcissists are empty in substance but full on promises. Obama has not proposed a single concrete workable plan, but he has raised the hopes and expectations of millions of people with his promises. The glorious tomorrow that he offers is no more real than the Styrofoam Greek columns that adorned his image during his acceptance speech.
Vaknin says, “The narcissistic leader prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments, His reign is all smoke and mirrors, devoid of substances, consisting of mere appearances and mass delusions. In the aftermath of his regime - the narcissistic leader having died, been deposed, or voted out of office - it all unravels. The tireless and constant prestidigitation ceases and the entire edifice crumbles. What looked like an economic miracle turns out to have been a fraud-laced bubble. Loosely-held empires disintegrate. Laboriously assembled business conglomerates go to pieces. "earth shattering" and "revolutionary" scientific discoveries and theories are discredited. Social experiments end in mayhem.”
The narcissist who regards himself as the benefactor of the poor, a member of the common folk, the representative of the disenfranchised, the champion of the dispossessed against the corrupt elite - is highly unlikely to use violence at first.”
The pacific mask crumbles when the narcissist has become convinced that the very people he purported to speak for, his constituency, his grassroots fans, the prime sources of his narcissistic supply - have turned against him. At first, in a desperate effort to maintain the fiction underlying his chaotic personality, the narcissist strives to explain away the sudden reversal of sentiment. "The people are being duped by (the media, big industry, the military, the elite, etc.)", "they don't really know what they are doing", "following a rude awakening, they will revert to form", etc.
When these flimsy attempts to patch a tattered personal mythology fail - the narcissist is injured. Narcissistic injury inevitably leads to narcissistic rage and to a terrifying display of unbridled aggression. The pent-up frustration and hurt translate into devaluation. That which was previously idealized - is now discarded with contempt and hatred.
This election is like no other in the history of America. The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world?
I hate to sound alarmist, but one must be a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others. They are simply self serving and selfish. Obama evinces symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton, for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them trecherous.
Vaknin says, “When the narcissist reveals his true colors, it is usually far too late. His victims are unable to separate from him. They are frustrated by this acquired helplessness and angry at themselves for having failed to see through the narcissist earlier on.”
Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. Brendan Farrington, reported, evidence indicates that some black Republicans are switching parties to vote for Obama. He wrote, “Florida has 81,512 more black Democrats compared to a loss of 784 black Republicans; Louisiana has 34,325 more black Democrats, while the number of black Republicans dropped by 907; North Carolina has 92,356 more black Democrats and 2,850 fewer black Republicans. The only three states that track voting registration by party and race show black Republican registration dropping slightly since the beginning of the year."
Let us call a spade a spade. This is racism, pure and simple. The truth is that while everyone carries a misconceived collective guilt towards the blacks for wrongs done centuries ago by a bygone people to a bygone people, the blacks carry a collective rancor, enmity or vendetta towards non-blacks and to this day want to "stand up" to the Whiteman. They seem to be stuck in 19th century.
Geraldine A. Ferraro was right when she said that Senator Barack Obama had received preferential treatment because he is a black man. I can testify to that myself. Despite not favoring the Democrats political views, my very first inclination was to like Senator Obama. At that moment I had no knowledge of this man’s political views or his character. All I could see was the color of his skin and that gave me enough emotional incentive to favor him. I got over that kneejerk reaction soon, after discovering that Obama is nothing but an empty suit full of hubris. A good indication that ex-vice presidential candidate is right is the fact that when in 1979, Ahmadinejad and his fellow Islamist militants took the American embassy workers as hostage, they released the blacks and the women, but kept the white men for 444 days.
The majority of people base the most important decisions on emotions, rather than on rationality. The first impression is often the lasting one. First impressions can be wrong. When I prove to Obama devotees that all their arguments to support him are logical fallacies, they tell me that they know Obama is the right man, because that is what their intuition tells them and they trust their intuition. That is yet another fallacy. If a belief is not backed by logic, it is not intuition but blind faith. The followers of Jim Jones cheerfully committed suicide because they relied on their blind faith that they mistook as intuition.
The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites. The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. They are in a state of trance. They truly believe Obama is their messiah. He is the fruition of their long quest for black power. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites. The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. It is unlikely that Whites would ever devolve to racism, but all it takes is a substantial number of disaffected people to fuel the flames of racial tension. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions in America will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960s. Obama will set the clock back decades. Despite his campaign rhetoric he has been a racist all his life. He will interpret any dissent as a rejection of his racial identity. As resentment towards him increases, so will his paranoia. He will grow distrustful of the whites and will surround himself with the blacks and other yesmen with whom he identifies himself. America’s near future is bleak.
America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America, and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations. It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castroists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.
Psychiatric Test
When a narcissist is running for the highest office in the world, the stakes cannot be higher. Did it matter what were Hitler’s views on abortion, economy, environment, education, old age pension, gay rights, social security, jobs or housing? With Hitler, the only thing that really mattered was his mental sanity.
I urge all Americans to make this a pivotal issue in this electoral campaign. Time is running out. Please spread the word. Talk about it with your coworkers, friends and relatives. Invite everyone in your address book to sign this petition. Publish it in your blog. Write about it. This is the most vital issue. If a presidential candidate is mentally unfit, nothing else matters. If you are an Obama fan, please sign too, so you can vote with confidence that the man you are putting in the White House is not going to be your nightmare.
I have started the petition, below linked to this article. I ask everyone to demand that all presidential and vice-presidential candidates in this election submit to mental health examinations prior to Election Day. Please sign the petition and ask others to do the same.
Please Sign the Petition
Ali Sina is the author of Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography of Allah’s Prophet and the founder of Faith Freedom International, the movement of ex-Muslims created to eliminate hate through knowledge and foster amity among all mankind.
Related Articles:
Obama and the Birth of Mobocracy in America
What Will the Future Bring under Obama?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)