HIstory Repeats Itself (Obama Just Doesn't Get It)

Passing this along - great message:

RECENT VIRGINIA CHURC H SERVICE

STIMULUS SERMON Genesis 47:13-27 I would love to give the Pastor of this predominantly black church in Virginia a hug and a high five. This guy is obviously a leader Perhaps we should each decide who our real leader is....It is amazing to see that very little has changed in 4,000 years. ---------------------------------------------------Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pews crowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word. Turn with me in your Bibles, if you will to the 47th chapter of Genesis, we'll begin our reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27. Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us? ....(reading)... Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray... So we see that economic hard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government of Pharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grain harvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. So the people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, and gave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on until their money ran out, and they were hungry again. So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock -their cattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain, and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year.. But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they had nothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing left in the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh." So they surrendered their homes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and then sold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain. What can we learn from this, brothers and sisters? That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hard times only leads to slavery? Yes. That the only reason government wants to be our provider is to also become our master? Yes. But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settled in the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen .. And they gained possessions in it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for His people, just as He always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessions to government, no, it says they gained possessions! But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see the same thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth "once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants to take control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, and ration it back to us, and when government rations it, then government decides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along with it, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the people of Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and as slaves to our leaders. What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh's government did then, and it will end the same. And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn't the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"? Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh. Bow with me in prayer, if you will. Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone. We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly will be. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned the people of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day." And Lord, we acknowledge that day has come. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen for ourselves as a nation. Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray for revival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters. Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your people from the atrocities of Pharaoh's government. In God We Trust...

One Step Closer to the Governmental Apocalypse - No More Choice

Just another nail in the coffin holding Free Choice with the Senate vote 60-39 on Health Care - soon there will be nothing left, that will give future researchers any evidence that this was once a proud example of Capitalism & Free Choice - The Senate and House will pass this disgusting piece of legislation, which promised Health Care for All (and doesn't do any of that) - the thought police will run rampant, as more words will be twisted to fit the premise the Government is good and good and can only be achieved by Government, since it's good - love the circular argument, saddened by the demise of original thought, with this mandate that requires Americans buy insurance - please show me where in the Constitution this exists? - but don't let the Democrats allow you the rain on their parade - if planned carefully, this package will finally pass around Mayday (isn't that when the communist countries have their celebrations - no we are ONE - the first major step for the New World Order - I had always thought that was just conspiracy theory, but today - this adds to ample evidence that it is true) - We don't need Santa, government has just handed out gifts to special interests and political cowards, with all of us picking up the tab (luckily the debt ceiling has been raised to 12.9 trillion - while Obama announces that this will reduce the deficit).

From our friends at the Wall Street Journal Blog - a breakdown of the numbers in this political power grab:

"The Senate just passed its version of the health-care bill by a vote of 60-39. Over the next month or so, the Senate and House will try to work out the differences between the bills.
Here’s a quick overview of some of the key effects of the Senate bill, based on estimates from CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation for the years 2010-2019.
$395 billion in federal spending to expand the number of people covered by Medicaid and CHIP, insurance programs for the poor.
$436 billion in federal spending pay for health-insurance exchanges that would largely be used by people who don’t get health insurance through work. Most of that money would be in the form of subsidies for insurance premiums for people earning up to four times the poverty level.
$398 billion in new taxes. That includes the tax on high-value health-insurance plans, new fees on health insurers and drug and device makers, and higher payroll taxes for high earners.
$483 billion in cuts to projected spending for Medicare and other programs. This includes reductions in projected costs for privately administered Medicare Advantage programs and a new formula likely to lower annual increases in payments to hospitals.
31 million additional people would have health insurance by 2019 because of the bill.
23 million people in this country would still be uninsured."

So you know who to vote out in the next election - we've had historic votes in the past, but they were reached in a Bi-partisan manner - this was a disgusting power grab by the Democrats who see government as the solution, ultimately removing all options and choices, so that right or wrong, government is your only choice. The hypocrites, the supposed moderate Democrats who voted only after the gifts handed to them by the Democratic leadership - fortunately, we will remove many of them in 2010, but unfortunately, the damage has been done - and most of the American people will wake up far too late.

Sarah Palin: A True Libertarian!

I've always been a supporter of the Great Man: Ronald Reagan - his principles which he never wavered from, allowed America to stand tall in the world, through the emphasis on less government, less taxes and more liberty! I believe there is a new leader to take the mantle that is tragically left wanting ever since the Great Man passed away: Sarah Palin!

She has taken on the forces that have set out to destroy her, and our way of life, and they would have succeeded with any lesser person would have given up - but she marches forward - below is a message I sent to her facebook page, and I recommend you join her page as well - as a true libertarian with Reagan's values and Patriotic values:

"Congrats Sarah, keep fighting the good fight - with rumors swirling about possible political endeavors, I feel the Republican establishment has done everything it can, to muffle your voice, as demonstrated with the 2008 election - your voice speaks to the independents/those who don't identify as republicans and democrats - though many of the rank in file supported you - if you do consider a run - and we've all heard the independent/third party trial balloons being voiced in the media, please consider the Libertarian Party - when you were announced as a candidate for VP, my first thought was "finally, the libertarian on the ticket." God Bless, and best of luck, whatever you decide to do - you have my vote!"

Here's hoping the Sarah continues to blaze her own path, and I have to believe that the Great Man is looking down and smiling!

The End of Democracy!

This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long time. The sad thing about it, you can see it coming.

I have always heard about this democracy countdown. It is interesting to see it in print. God help us, not that we deserve it.

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'

' From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'

'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'

'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith;

2. from spiritual faith to great courage;

3. from courage to liberty;

4. from liberty to abundance;

5. from abundance to complacency;

6. from complacency to apathy;

7. from apathy to dependence;

8. from dependence back into bondage'

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:

Number of States won by:
Democrats: 19
Republicans: 29

Square miles of land won by:
Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by:
Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2
Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson believes the United States is somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

If you are in favor of this, then by all means, ignor this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE

Obama receives the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE!!!????

A rare picture of the Nobel committee gives us some insight as to why they choose Jimmy Carter in 2002, Al Gore a couple years back, and the "anointed one" this year!

How on earth can someone be chosen on potential as an incentive to make peace? It would be like giving someone who is thinking about making a movie the Oscar, since those who are in the movie business already don't need the incentive! Next he'll receive the Cy Young award since he has been to a ballpark and threw out the first pitch, badly as it bounced to the plate, but why not, it's an incentive to be better the next time. What did he receive it for? The beer summit? Because he isn't George Bush (and isn't that why each of these idiots received the award)? Read Atlas Shrugged, all the signs are there (there are some even trying to make the "revelation - ends of times - antichrist" argument, but I don't want to go there, nor believe it) and it's time for all of us to get the "Galt" out of here!

On 10/9, the Libertarian party issued the following press release about President Obama's Nobel Prize:
The Libertarian Party today suggested that, in the future, the announcement date every year for Nobel Prizes be moved to April 1.
"Unlike the gullible people who listened to The War of the Worlds radio broadcast in 1938 and thought Martians really were attacking the United States, when I heard this morning that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, I changed the channel in disbelief. But, the same thing was being said in multiple places," Libertarian National Committee Chairman William Redpath said.
"The gravity of the Nobel awards has not been augmented by some of their recent selections, including today's announcement, last year's award of the Economics prize to Paul Krugman, or the 2007 Peace Prize to Al Gore, whose global warming theories he will not defend in open debate. Maybe an early Springtime announcement date would be more appropriate."
Redpath continued, "I didn't know that it was the role of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to be handicapping the future performance of individuals and organizations. Nonetheless, we congratulate President Obama on his award and hope that three-and-a-quarter or seven-and-a-quarter years from now the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will be seen as prescient.
"President Obama will best fulfill the promise of peace that the Nobel Committee apparently sees in him by not trying to cure all the ills of the world, but by working to make the United States an example for the other nations of the world through implementation of a Libertarian foreign policy--military non-interventionism combined with free trade policies in fact, and not just in rhetoric. With those guiding principles, the world will be a freer, safer and more prosperous planet at the conclusion of the Obama Administration."

The Four Horsemen of the Free Market

It must have been "Bring a Despot to Tea" day at the United Nations (which must be disbanded - if this wasn't the last straw, I don't what is) as Gaddafi, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, and Obama spoke (North Korea's leader for life, and Castro as well, must have had other countries to overrun) - the only one who kept the seats warm was the "chosen one," as the others carried far too much baggage, that even the idiot in the UN couldn't put up with them, marching out en masse. You can look up each of these dictator's speeches, as the leftists have drooled over each in various stages of adolation, but it just demonstrates so many things that are wrong with the UN, and Obama's New World Order.

Tea Party Day - Thanks for the Coverage

Yesterday was a great day to let the government officials know what we really think - as it seems they've been living in a glass bubble, or some such nonsense. While their outrage over Representative Wilson's "You Lie" (God Bless you - finally someone in Washington with a pair - help this guy out http://joewilsonforcongress.com/) to the President (and for the record, he did lie - as abortion will be covered, and illegal immigrants will be covered - though the loophole has been changed since then) during his bulleted outline off his beloved teleprompter of all the things achieved in Utopia (located way to the left of the USA), since they definitely will not actually occur in the Health Care bill itself has sent them over the edge, at the same time feeding at the financial trough, paid for by those same people protesting in DC, and treated as "mobs," "nazis," "kkk," and astroturf," (and those are just the nice words) - the networks did their part, by not covering the event, except for Fox News.

Maybe it's time for us to consider some of the things that work in other countries, since the supporters of Health Care Reform love to bring up how great health care is in every country but ours (which obviously isn't true, but that's never stopped the leftinistas before). How about a parliamentary system which allows for more representation than the captive two party behemoths we currently have? How about true freedom of speech as heard in the parliament, such as in Britain, without the threat of censuring elected officials (and I recommend contributing early and often to Representative Wilson's campaign, the left has already handed his opponent over $1 million dollars - we need to help), and here's a crazy notion - how about listening to the people who elected you, as you as our leaders follow "lock-step" towards the destruction of our system?

We can have every camera trained on Washington DC if we have the Million man march (when 100,000 actually show up) or Greening protestors who claim that Global Warming is on the move (it actually is, as temperatures have been dropping over the years, and thousands of scientists have shown that the warming craze by these loons doesn't exist - hence the new name Climate Change, again with the same results, less change in your pocket), but when real patriots take over the Capital, not a peep - they're busy covering all the nasty people who aren't Democrats - while the vidiots like Olber-woman, Christine Matthews, and the only man on MSNBC, Rachel Maddows continue their worship of Dough-bama. We have entered the rabbit hole, in the looking glass.

You know, maybe Bill Maher is right, the American people are stupid - but only the ones who voted for Obama, and even worse, the number of them that are still supporting NO-bama! Can you honestly believe this? How about this - those who still believe in the CHOSEN ONE - you send your money - oh, you won't? It's much easier to send others money - that's what I thought (sidebar: did you notice that the little TARP monies that actually went out - around 20% around this writing has virtually all gone to the districts that voted Democrat - look it up. And another point, if so little went out, and yet the economy is starting to turn around - which it would have faster, if left alone - then where did that other money go? To the 40 CZARS and their staffs, and the rest to MOVEON and ACORN, or maybe other moron talking heads like the people that come on CNN like my new favorite idiot (use big words around him, he loves it): Sam Tanenhaus who wrote The Death of Conservatism, since that didn't consider Conservatives best Friend, Barak who's negatives have done more to bring the conservatives back, since Ronald Reagan's positives???)

I am reminded of one of the best lines from a movie - V for Vendetta - "The citizens should not fear the government, government should fear the citizens." And are you curious which movie represents what's happening in our government right now? Well, since Atlas Shrugged hasn't been made into a movie - many argue this is actually the dramatization of the book -I'd suggest Titanic - just watch out for ice bergs? (and that wasn't a shot at Barney Frank, though that would most likely look like Teddy Kennedy)

9/11 - Never Forget (the Liberals sure did!)

While the Obama cronies (which keep getting bigger with more looney czars added, while only one so far quit - he must have really screwed up - is that even possible in this administration - who knows, may be he's the only one who paid his taxes - that would look bad for the rest of the future crooks-in-waiting) attack everything that moves, and manage to have more lives, by hypnotizing the American public - don't look behind the curtain - while trying to recognize 9/11 without criticizing terrorists (which we can't say anymore) or offending anyone who attempted to blow us up - it's important for the intelligent people (unfortunately seems to be only those who didn't vote for the Messiah, though we are starting to see some cracks with the least amount of buyers remorse - though it seems like the "attacks" - basic pillow fights - are from those on the left, who can't believe we're not entirely Socialist by now - give it time, comrade!!!

9/11 - Never Forget!!!

Censorship Rears It's Ugly Head - Again, and Again, and...

Recently heard about the removal of a column by Pat Buchanan from MSNBCs website which extend from his current book Churchill, Hitler, and the Unneccessary War, because of an uprising of condemnation from various organizations. As Michael Calderone states from Politico.com:

"Pat Buchanan has received a lot of criticism recently for his column marking the 70th anniversary of the Nazi invasion of Poland, where the conservative pundit questions whether Hitler has gotten a bum rap.
By extension, MSNBC, where Buchanan is a commentator, has taken heat for promoting the column on its website. In the revisionist piece -- "Did Hitler Want War?" -- Buchanan argues that other countries, such as Poland, should be held responsible for the invasion, and later escalation of World War II. Hitler, he claims, wanted peace and wasn't out for world conquest. David A. Harris, President of the National Jewish Democratic Council, condemned MSNBC's promotion of the "deplorable" column and urged that it be removed from MSNBC.com.
Well, now the network has pulled it. (Indeed, the old link is dead). Harris, in second statement, said that "MSNBC took the responsible action and removed Pat Buchanan's column," while adding that "no worthy news organization should employ and promote a commentator who engages in such vile fiction." An MSNBC spokesperson issued a statement to POLITICO: "An editorial decision was made to remove the column from msnbc.com. Pat is a contributor to MSNBC, his syndicated column does not speak for the network or represent the views of MSNBC"

While I've had an opportunity to read the column in question (it is available on Pat Buchanan's blog site, which is linked with the title, but who knows how long) - I thought there were interesting points and can see while Buchanan calls Hitler a beast, his questions have made many uncomfortable that they are even questions, and there were many areas that I had to disagree with, particularly the points that give you the impression that Hitler was "forced" to attack, and didn't want world domination at all, which I disagree with strongly, having read all the historical texts, and Mein Kampf itself. What I found most fascinating were the comments after the column - removing the absolutists who condemned Buchanan because he dare mention Hitler in any non-negative light, and those who found conspiracies other either the Germans or the Jews or (fill in the blank) to blame for all the world's ills, I recommend reading the more knowledgeable comments presenting info allowing us to debate and make our own decisions.

I personally feel Hitler was truly a madman of epic proportions, so vile in his attempt to create and preserve the master race, that all in his way must be destroyed, for him to truly feel success, and world domination was definitely on his mind, as he felt a german "motherland" including all of europe, including Russia, that no conquest would be unfathomnable - that having been said, I have a concern about censorship - any kind of censorship. Reading his article, allows us to read the comments and discussions after having read it, rather than the debate from hearing snippits or self-determined summaries of what may/may not have been said.

It's interesting, that we seem to come together when it comes to Government censorship (for the most part) but when it's a ideology, whether left or right, that is pushing for censorship, we turn the other way, ignoring the outcome. That's sad, because that is usually the most insidious of them all, and before you know it, we'll censor everything that may offend or question, or even (gasp) make someone think - and we wouldn't want to have that, would we???

My New Favorite Idiot: Melissa Lafsky

After all the lionizing of the "Liberal Lion," just when you thought every single angle has been covered, you read this from a couple of our favorite kitty litter sites, the Huffingtonpost.com and Opionistas.com, that basically states the Mary Jo Kepechne would have thought dying was worth it, for the elevation of Teddy Kennedy's career - are you kidding me? This from the person who is the new editor of Freakonomics blog with the New York Times (which used to be one of my favorite books). I am including this post entirely, as I have to believe that the aforementioned sites would have the decency to remove this column, but of course, what am I thinking, they are the Huffingtonpost.com and Opionistas.com - the more offensive, the better:

"The Footnote Speaks: What Would Mary Jo Kopechne Have Thought of Ted's Career?
Melissa Lafsky, August 27, 2009, Huffington Post

We're comfortable with moral relativism in this country -- or, at least, we love us a good "sinned and redeemed" narrative. And, for the most part, we realize that there are few lives on which we can slap a "Good" or "Evil" label and expect it to be accurate.
Which, let's face it, is one of the reasons the Ted Kennedy story is so fascinating. The huge achievements, weighed against the huge sins. Forty-six years of history-book accomplishments on everything from Civil Rights to the Americans with Disabilities Act to gender equality. Disabled? Poor? A member of any minority group? Then chances are your life is at least somewhat better because of Ted Kennedy. And for anyone who started to lose faith in the left's seeming impotence over the past decade (cough cough) he provided a pretty strong reason not to throw in the towel.
So now he's dead, and we do what we do when a Kennedy dies: read and write obsessively about him. Some of the obituaries are point-counterpoint parallels of sin with salvation. Then there are obsequious, grandiose bromides like:
He was a Rabelaisian figure in the Senate and in life, instantly recognizable by his shock of white hair, his florid, oversize face, his booming Boston brogue, his powerful but pained stride. He was a celebrity, sometimes a self-parody, a hearty friend, an implacable foe, a man of large faith and large flaws, a melancholy character who persevered, drank deeply and sang loudly. He was a Kennedy.
Good grief.
But in all the florid or scalpel-sharp prose, there's one constant: Peeking out from the center of the story is the matter of his playing a major part in the death of a 28-year-old woman.
Mary Jo wasn't a right-wing talking point or a negative campaign slogan. She was a dedicated civil rights activist and political talent with a bright future -- granted, whenever someone dies young, people sermonize about how he had a "bright future" ahead of him -- but she actually did. She wasn't afraid to defy convention (28 and unmarried, oh the horror!) or create her own career path based on her talents. She lived in Georgetown (where I grew up) and loved the Red Sox (we'll forgive her for that). Then she got in a car driven by a 36-year-old senator with an alcohol problem and a cauldron full of demons, and wound up a controversial footnote in a dynasty.
We don't know how much Kennedy was affected by her death, or what she'd have thought about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history. What we don't know, as always, could fill a Metrodome.
Still, ignorance doesn't preclude a right to wonder. So it doesn't automatically make someone (aka, me) a Limbaugh-loving, aerial-wolf-hunting NRA troll for asking what Mary Jo Kopechne would have had to say about Ted's death, and what she'd have thought of the life and career that are being (rightfully) heralded.
Who knows -- maybe she'd feel it was worth it.
This post originally appeared on Opinionistas.com."

Robert Gibbs: International Man of Mystery!?!

Our favorite punching bag from the Obama administration (since we can't get hold of the big O-man himself, who's either handing out bailouts to his friends, on vacation, or walking on water) - enjoy the videos of Sgt. Schultz, we mean Sgt. Gibbs - not doctored, actual presentations by Gibbs (or silly G as we like to call him)

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=robert+gibbs&search_type=&aq=f

And this is just classic Gibbs B.S. vs. Rick Santelli
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCQ9xb4CBeI

From politico.com:



"The United States is facing its biggest financial crisis in ages. North Korea is blowing up nukes. Dick Cheney warns us of the "dangers that have not gone away." And there are still wars raging in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But over in the White House press briefing room, it’s a veritable laugh riot.
Whenever there’s laughter in the James S. Brady Briefing Room — by either the briefer or the briefed — the official White House stenographer indicates as much by inserting “(Laughter.)” into the transcript.
And in Robert Gibbs’ first four months as President Barack Obama’s press secretary, there have been more than 600 instances of “(Laughter.)” during his regular press briefings — an average of more than 10 laughs per day.
It’s a gaudy statistic — and one that puts his predecessors to shame.
Dana Perino, George W. Bush’s last press secretary, got all of 57 laughs in her first four months. Scott McClellan, another Bush press secretary, got just 66 laughs in his first four months.
Gibbs even bests the late Tony Snow, whose jocular performances — dubbed “The Tony Snow Show” by some — drew a relatively paltry 217 laughs during his first four months on the job.
Tim Graham, who watches for liberal press bias at the Media Research Center, says all the high times may be a sign of reporters’ political affinity with the Obama administration.





Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/23015.html#ixzz0PmmDVxOs"





Obviously, most of this is unintentional, though who knows with the entire Obama administration demonstrating they're nothing but a joke, what else could it be? And did you catch that last sentence above "may be a sign of reporters' political affinity with the Obama administration." YOU THINK??? The media bias has been achieving catastrophic levels with warm fuzzies everytime Obama enters the room with his teleprompter, as this administration can do no wrong, from increase in bailouts, increase in deficits, socialized medicine, interrogation in the white house, possible defeat in Afghanistan, 33 CZARS and counting, creation of a National Service army, and overall government malfeasance - but hey, it's your ride - I just shouldn't have to pay for it!!!

Health Care: State Control Bad, Federal Control Good - My Union Tells Me So!!!

In the State of Michigan (or the State of Confusion, or when it comes to the Obama supporters - the State of Denial) according to some of the drivel presented by the MEA, and it's conduit, the TCEA (Union thugs to you and me), it's okay for the Federal Government to control your health care as Obama has the unions in his hip pocket, but when it comes to the state of Michigan, and proposed by someone who doesn't bend over for the union, then it's not so good. Read the message sent to me by one of the drones and worker bees:

"This is a “first look” analysis to Speaker Dillon’s Draft Bill creating the “ Michigan Health Benefits Program Act”. We will be doing a more extensive analysis of the bill over the weekend and into the first part of the week for more specific points on which we can base recommendations for reaction and activities. Also, keep in mind that the Bill currently is labeled Draft “A” which leads one to believe that it may be modified even before it goes before the committee.

The bill clearly creates a mandatory government-run state health plan for all public employees and retirees. Eliminates collective bargaining rights. Creates a public health plan option for individuals and private organizations. Puts state government between doctors and patients. Doesn't address what really matters -- the real drivers of health care costs. This is not a legislative process to do good public policy: it is a tightly scripted roll-out of a gubernatorial campaign.
The Speaker's legislation (Michigan Health Benefits Program Act):
creates a mandatory state government-run health plan housed in the Department of Management and Budget, governed by a state Health Benefits Board and administered by the Office of State Employer
mandates participation of all state, local, city, college, township, and county governments, agencies, school districts, public school academies, ISDs, community colleges, and public universities as well as all public retirement systems, obtain employee health plans from the state benefits plan Sec. 21(2), page 13
eliminates collective bargaining (public employers and employees would be limited in choosing from the menu of plans and plan designs approved by the Health Benefits Board) Sec. 7(a), Page 4 and Sec. 11(c), Page 6
mandates that all local governments participate in the state government-run health plan -- and requires that all local governments are also financially liable for any budget shortfalls in the state-run fund Sec. 20, Page 12
creates a state health benefits fund in the Department of Treasury Sec. 18(1), Page 10
creates a public health plan by allowing individuals and organizations in the private sector to purchase coverage from the state Health Benefits plan Sec. 7(h), Page 7
creates a new level of bureaucracy in state government within the Office of State Employer. Sec 10, Page 5
puts state government between doctors and their patients and gives government a major role in patient health care decisions by mandating "use of clinical advocates to review diagnoses and care for correct treatment." Sec. 12(e), Page 7
gives the Office of State Employer authority to create a new bureaucracy, and hire an executive director and staff to administer the program Sec. 13(c), Page 8
allows local governments to opt-out of the program if they pay for an actuarial study proving that the plan they offer is more than five percent less expensive than the state-run plan. Sec. 19(2), Page 11"

Now, my response:

"Make sure you read all the information, not just what is presented by one side:

From the Detroit Free Press - disputes several points in the post from the Union mouthpiece


Here's the copy of the actual bill - (and located at this website )which is not what the Union mouthpiece says - don't let anyone disseminate the information, you need to read it and make your own decision

I don't want to see breakdowns or bulleted talking points to make the decisions for us - we're smart - send us the bill itself, and let us make our own informed decisions without bias or pressure - if you like or dislike the plan voice your opinion, but don't let any group tell you what to do. I'll be honest, I haven't decided but I will research it myself, and I know I'm not going to let any group supposedly make my informed decisions for me."

So what have we learned today - trust no one, how can you tell a politician is lying - their lips move, and always check out the facts yourself without being pressured by those who are in the know (or in the tank, or in the pocket).

My New Favorite Idiot: Kurt Anderson!!!

Obama supporter - while trying not to show any bias on CNN Reliable Sources (and failing miserably), Kurt Anderson from NPR, New York Times and Time magazine - in partnership with CNN - a conflict of interest which wasn't reported in this piece - do I smell a Pulitzer? Maybe a Nobel Prize - Paul Krugman received one without any discernible talent or trait except that he's an unapologetic liberal who believes government is the only solution (of course no bias from any of those "reliable sources" - NPR, New York Times, or Time - throw in NBC/MSNBC, and you'd have the four horsemen of the political and economic apocalypse) - who tries to act like he knows more than everyone else and deigns to bloviate to us from on high, having finished written the latest rag, RESET (pointless drivel that only your cat, or his mom would love) explaining how our society will no longer be involved in a name calling process in just a couple years with our new administration, while he complained about the "nuttiness of idiots" (his words) like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh - amazing - with a straight face. Even the Moderator kept trying to give him some extra rope, which he kept creating a hangman's noose. [Sidenote - Later the moderator criticized Glenn Beck for not disclosing information about a person he was reporting on (Mark LLoyd the new FCC Diversity Czar from the Color of Change organization that started the boycott on Beck's show - these liberals are so tolerant, unless you disagree with them) - which Beck had, but we digress - while not disclosing this conflict of using a Time magazine-CNN reporter on his own program in Reliable Sources]

So we did a little research on this supposedly unbiased reporter - first from his twitter page -

"On Twitter: Kurt Andersen
@wodekszemberg Yes -- my word-loathing party already includes impact as a verb, and many, many more. It's a big-tent party. - 14 hours ago
I'm disappointed in Obama for the first time: in his EMK eulogy today he used the unnaceptable "penned" as a synonym for "wrote." - 16 hours ago
Just drove eldest kid back to Vassar. Surprised & oddly pleased to see Reagan portrait taped on a dorm room window facing out. Diversity! - 16 hours ago "

The first "tweet," reminds me of 1984 with the goal of removing as many "wasteful" words as possible, perhaps Anderson is auditioning for a job in the current administration?
The second "tweet," definitely shows no bias (and actually no honest reporting) in his bro-mance with Obama - good objective coverage - that's what we like to see!
The third "tweet," is actually stunning - a Reagan portrait at Vassar (public school education, this is not) - must be a result from one of their "diversity - get in touch with your feelings, since you've offended everyone" training seminars!

These comments from one medium, demonstrating no bias (?) or a person above it all (?) or even super rich (?), needs to be compared to his own comments (written? penned? how about drawn with crayons, or scratched on a cave wall - I like those ones) from his RESET blog on Time.com:



"In ">Reset, I range pretty widely over politics, economics, pop culture and more. And as I finish my blogging for Time.com this week (thanks, Time.com!), I'm struck by the hopeful reset signs I continue to see all over the place.
In the book, I write about Hollywood's imminent reality check, how $20-million-a-picture movie stars' dull autopilot films may be about to be a thing of the past. Well, sure enough, here's today's New York Times, with a front–page story about how the summer's movie-star-fronted ">movies bombed.
Also in today's Times is a long piece confirming my central, hopeful Reset argument that that the quarter-century party's finally, really over for the super-rich. Meanwhile, the Fed chairman today “offered his most hopeful assessment in more than a year,” declaring that “the prospects for a return to growth in the near term ">appear good.”
And in the current New Yorker, Rick Hertzberg explains how California's profound political dysfunction may be about to reset radically, producing a state constitutional convention whose re-founders would be chosen randomly. Awesome.
It's the end of the world as we've known it. Sanity and common sense are returning. The new age is dawning."



Now, to be fair, I'm sure he was the kid who was always picked last in any event, and probably got tired of being stuffed in lockers in school (must have had plenty of time to write about his utopia, but maybe the airholes weren't big enough) - though those flashbacks must be tough, with the kinds of "oppressed people" (don't believe me, just ask them) who hang out at NPR (another public assistance program), though they can all feel empathy for one another, since they've all faced the shame - and with a face for radio, he has risen high in the ranks on the backs of the downtrodden - I'm surprised the whole crew at NPR hasn't pushed for the banning of lockers, though we do see the push for free and reduced lunches (probably because they all got tired of having their lunch money taken), but don't worry, Obama still has 1200 days of America's occupation to do so.

Humor for the Humorless (Coming to a Socialized Country near You)

"An old guy's wife tells him to go to the butcher shop and get some meat. He goes to the butcher shop and stands in line for hours. Finally the butcher says, "We're out of meat." The old guy blows his top. He yells, "I am a worker! I am a proletarian! I am a veteran of the Great Patriotic War! I have fought for socialism all my life, and now you tell me you're out of meat! What kind of a system is this?! You are fools! You are thieves! . . . " A big man in a trench coat comes up to the old guy and says, "Comrade, Comrade, not so loud. In the old days you know what they would do if you said such things." The big man in the trench coat makes a pistol motion with his hand. He says to the old guy, "Calm down and go home." The old guy shrugs and leaves. He comes back empty-handed, and his wife says, "What's the matter, are they out of meat?" "Worse than that," says the old guy, "they're out of bullets."

An old Russian joke, as told by the one and only PJ O'Rourke.

Post-American World?

I see our President is preparing for a post-American world - the only way this would be possible is with the current-Obama world with constant government intervention keeping us from growing to our fullest potential - I guess his nightstand is too full of Alinsky, Marx, Ayers, Wright, and Zakaria to read Lewis, Orwell, Rand, and Paul which he should, since they are written about him and what this government is doing to us! You think the bailouts and health care plans are something - wait until you see the Cyber Security bill S. 773 coming up next that will give control of the internet to the President when he declares a state of emergency (which could be anytime someone disagrees with him - so be prepared). The complete bill is listed with our friends from opencongress.org

Ron Paul: We Need Sunlight to Disinfect the Legislative Process!

Excellent post from Dr. Paul from the Campaign for Liberty site - we need to contact our congressmen and women and get them to pass H.Res. 216 - the Sunlight Rule today:

We Need Sunlight to Disinfect the Legislative Process!
By Ron Paul
Published 08/25/09

During August recess, many legislators have heard an unexpected amount of discontent from their constituents about what is happening on Capitol Hill, particularly regarding healthcare. Some people are justifiably terrified at what the government could do to healthcare, should it get its claws even further into it. Others demand a public option for health insurance and are adamant that healthcare be treated as yet another absolute entitlement. One thing everyone agrees on is that the final bill needs to be read and understood by all legislators before a vote is taken. To any American, this is common sense. In Washington, that is unlikely to happen. There is much confusion and debate over what is and is not in the reform plan being considered. Are there or are there not so-called death panels? What are the end-of-life consultations really for? How will private insurance be affected? Can you keep your current plan or will you eventually be forced into a government plan? Will it pay for elective abortions or not? What are the implications for medical privacy? The truth is no one knows what will be in the final bill until it is on the House floor, and provisions could be added in and taken out in the wee hours of the morning before. In February, the House was forced to vote on an over 1,000 page "stimulus" bill that had first been posted on the internet just after midnight the morning of the vote. It passed. Then in June, House leaders rushed a vote on the cap-and-trade bill, even though an over 300 page "manager’s amendment" making substantive changes to the bill, was introduced shortly after 3:00 a.m. the morning of the vote. Washington thrives on crisis. If enough people can be convinced that we are in an emergency, they will more likely tolerate rushing legislation to the floor like this. Last minute changes will be slipped in, benefitting who knows what special interests and at what expense to the taxpayer. But the mantra is repeated over and over: We are in a crisis. We must act immediately. It should be unconscionable for legislators to vote in favor of legislation they have not had the opportunity to read. This is why I have re-introduced the Sunlight Rule, H.Res 216. The Sunlight Rule prohibits any piece of legislation from being brought before the House of Representatives unless it has been available to read for at least 10 days. The Sunlight Rule allows citizens to move for censure of any House Member who votes for a bill in violation of this act. Because the Sunlight Rule could never be waived, any Member could raise a point of order requiring any bill in violation to be immediately pulled from the House calendar until it can be brought to the floor in a manner consistent with this rule. This rule does not require that Members read the bills. It merely guarantees the opportunity to do so. It has 4 cosponsors. Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." The Sunlight Rule would do much towards negating the cycle of pseudo-crises and cleaning up the legislative process here in Washington. I sincerely hope this is the year Congress remembers its deliberative duties and passes it.

Obama's New World Order

From the Tribune Media Services, this is the speech given by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, January 20th, 2009, with my highlights - draw you're own conclusions - I'll be taking the main points in future posts, and showing many examples as to how this is coming about through this administration (Glen Beck may be right, as he states that the current government seems to be creating a shadow government that will shed it's parts, showing it's exoskeleton with it's Czars and government power grabs, and free market destruction - welcome to the machine):

"As the new US administration prepares to take office amid grave financial and international crises, it may seem counterintuitive to argue that the very unsettled nature of the international system generates a unique opportunity for creative diplomacy.
That opportunity involves a seeming contradiction. On one level, the financial collapse represents a major blow to the standing of the United States. While American political judgments have often proved controversial, the American prescription for a world financial order has generally been unchallenged. Now disillusionment with the United States' management of it is widespread.

At the same time, the magnitude of the debacle makes it impossible for the rest of the world to shelter any longer behind American predominance or American failings. Every country will have to reassess its own contribution to the prevailing crisis. Each will seek to make itself independent, to the greatest possible degree, of the conditions that produced the collapse; at the same time, each will be obliged to face the reality that its dilemmas can be mastered only by common action.

Even the most affluent countries will confront shrinking resources. Each will have to redefine its national priorities. An international order will emerge if a system of compatible priorities comes into being. It will fragment disastrously if the various priorities cannot be reconciled.

The nadir of the international financial system coincides with simultaneous political crises around the globe. Never have so many transformations occurred at the same time in so many different parts of the world and been made accessible via instantaneous communication. The alternative to a new international order is chaos.

The financial and political crises are, in fact, closely related partly because, during the period of economic exuberance, a gap had opened up between the economic and the political organisation of the world. The economic world has been globalised. Its institutions have a global reach and have operated by maxims that assumed a self-regulating global market. The financial collapse exposed the mirage. It made evident the absence of global institutions to cushion the shock and to reverse the trend. Inevitably, when the affected publics turned to their political institutions, these were driven principally by domestic politics, not considerations of world order. Every major country has attempted to solve its immediate problems essentially on its own and to defer common action to a later, less crisis-driven point.

So-called rescue packages have emerged on a piecemeal national basis, generally by substituting seemingly unlimited governmental credit for the domestic credit that produced the debacle in the first place, so far without achieving more than stemming incipient panic. International order will not come about either in the political or economic field until there emerge general rules toward which countries can orient themselves.

In the end, the political and economic systems can be harmonised in only one of two ways: by creating an international political regulatory system with the same reach as that of the economic world; or by shrinking the economic units to a size manageable by existing political structures, which is likely to lead to a new mercantilism, perhaps of regional units. A new Bretton Woods kind of global agreement is by far the preferable outcome.

America's role in this enterprise will be decisive. Paradoxically, American influence will be great in proportion to the modesty in our conduct; we need to modify the righteousness that has characterised too many American attitudes, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union. That event and the subsequent period of nearly uninterrupted global growth induced too many to equate world order with the acceptance of American designs, including our domestic preferences. The result was a certain inherent unilateralism – the standard complaint of European critics – or else an insistent kind of consultation by which nations were invited to prove their fitness to enter the international system by conforming to American prescriptions.

Not since the inauguration of president John F Kennedy half a century ago has a new administration come into office with such a reservoir of expectations. It is unprecedented that all the principal actors on the world stage are avowing their desire to undertake the transformations imposed on them by the world crisis in collaboration with the United States.

The extraordinary impact of the President-elect on the imagination of humanity is an important element in shaping a new world order. But it defines an opportunity, not a policy. The ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries and all major ones regarding the economic crisis, together with a common fear of jihadist terrorism, into a strategy reinforced by the realisation that the new issues like proliferation, energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution.

The new administration could make no worse mistake than to rest on its initial popularity. The role of China in a new world order is crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system. China made possible the American consumption splurge by buying American debt; America helped the modernisation of the Chinese economy by opening its markets to Chinese goods.

Each side of the Pacific needs the cooperation of the other in addressing the consequences of the financial crisis. Now that the global financial collapse has devastated Chinese export markets, China is emphasising infrastructure development and domestic consumption. It will not be easy to shift gears rapidly, and the Chinese growth rate may fall temporarily below the 7.5 per cent that Chinese experts define as the line that challenges political stability.

What kind of global economic order arises will depend importantly on how China and America deal with each other over the next few years. A frustrated China may take another look at an exclusive regional Asian structure, for which the nucleus already exists in the ASEAN-plus-three concept. At the same time, if protectionism grows in America or if China comes to be seen as a long-term adversary, a self-fulfilling prophecy may blight the prospects of global order. Such a return to mercantilism and 19th-century diplomacy would divide the world into competing regional units with dangerous long-term consequences.

The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations in the postwar period – except that the challenges now are more political and economic than military.

The complexity of the emerging world requires from America a more historical approach than the insistence that every problem has a final solution expressible in programmes with specific time limits not infrequently geared to our political process. We must learn to operate within the attainable and be prepared to pursue ultimate ends by the accumulation of nuance. An international order can be permanent only if its participants have a share not only in building but also in securing it. In this manner, America and its potential partners have a unique opportunity to transform a moment of crisis into a vision of hope.

The author was National Security Adviser, 1969-75 and US Secretary of State, 1973-77. "

- Distributed by Tribune Media Services, Inc.

CZAR Wars - Truly biCZAR - Where is the Outrage?

Just another example of why this may be one of the most dangerous times of our, and our country's, lives - as government is in the middle of the one of the greatest power grabs in U.S. (and possibly the World's) history - did even the Obama supporters really believe they voted for THIS????:

First, as Obama the candidate promised so much, with so much transparency, Obama the President is not delivering (truly an understatement) - from the Concord Monitor:

“The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States.”
- Sen. Barack Obama, March 31, 2008

To say President Obama failed to follow through on this promise is an understatement. By appointing a virtual army of “czars” - each wholly unaccountable to Congress yet tasked with spearheading major policy efforts for the White House - the president has made an end-run around the legislative branch of historic proportions…. Vesting such broad authority in the hands of people not subjected to Senate confirmation and congressional oversight poses a grave threat to our system of checks and balances."

From our friends at American Daughter (they seem to have the most complete list of CZARs - which will keep multiplying as we speak - I will update from time to time)



"Bypassing the authority of Congress, Barack Obama rules through czars — the beginnings of dictatorship.

Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar, Richard Holbrooke
AIDS czar, Jeffrey Crowley [openly gay white man]
Auto recovery czar, Ed Montgomery
Behavioral science czar, position not yet filled
Bailout czar, Herbert Allison Jr., [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]
Border czar, Alan Bersin
Car czar, Ron Bloom [Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury , under Senate oversight]
Climate change czar, Todd Stern
Copyright czar, not appointed yet
Counterterrorism czar, John Brennan
Cybersecurity czar, position will be vacant on August 21st [upon the departure of Melissa Hathaway]
Disinformation czar, Linda Douglass [This is a new media buzz since our earlier list, a response by pundits to the White House request for informants: see Glenn Beck and Lew Rockwell]
Domestic violence czar, Lynn Rosenthal
Drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske
Economic czar, Larry Summers
Economic czar number two, Paul Volcker
Education czar, Arne Duncan
Energy czar, Carol Browner
Food czar, Michael Taylor [a former Monsanto executive, or, the fox in charge of the henhouse]
Government performance czar, Jeffrey Zients
Great Lakes czar, Cameron Davis
Green jobs czar, Van Jones [who has a communist background]
Guantanamo closure czar, Daniel Fried
Health czar, Nancy-Ann DeParle
Infotech czar, Vivek Kundra [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source). His last day in DC government was March 4 but on March 12 the FBI raided his office and arrested two staffers.]
Intelligence czar, Dennis Blair [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position. He is a retired United States Navy four-star admiral]
Latin-American czar, Arturo Valenzuela (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominatied to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation. Voting on his confirmation was delayed to clarify his position on Honduras. Watch WaPo’s Head Count to track status of confirmation.]
Mideast peace czar, George Mitchell
Mideast policy czar, Dennis Ross
Pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg
Regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein
Religion czar, aka God czar Joshua DuBois
Safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings [appointed to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, a newly created post (that does not require Senate confirmation); openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]
Science czar, John Holdren
Stimulus oversight czar, Earl Devaney
Sudan czar, J. Scott Gration
TARP czar, Elizabeth Warren [chair of the [Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is frequently called the TARP czar]
Technology czar, Aneesh Chopra
Trade czar, Ron Kirk
Urban affairs czar, Adolfo Carrion
War czar, Douglas Lute [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]
Water czar, David J. Hayes [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]
Weapons czar, Ashton Carter [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]
Weapons of mass destruction czar, Gary Samore
Diversity czar: Mark Lloyd



Positions being planned:
Income redistribution czar
Land-use czar
Mortgage czar, formally “consumer financial protection czar” (source)
Radio-internet fairness czar
Student loan czar, to oversee a program of mandatory service in return for college money (source)
Voter list czar
Zoning czar


Obama has moved swiftly to concentrate power in the White House, bypassing the review of our elected representatives in Congress in most of the posts listed above. Even though cabinet positions are part of the executive branch, the cabinet secretaries must be approved by Congress, they are funded by Congress, and they can be called before Congress to testify. Most of these czars, on the other hand, are appointed by Obama at his sole discretion, and are answerable only to him. If subpoenaed by Congress, they can claim executive privilege.
On July 15, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) introduced H.R.3226, the Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009, with 34 co-sponsors. There is some comfort in knowing that there are still a few folk in the House of Representatives who are fighting for constitutional government.

This new list is alphabetized by the czar positions, to facilitate comparison with the excellent research on the duties of each office done by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton at Noisy Room. "



Each Czar has avoided congressional oversight, receives $179,000 annual salary, and a staff of 10 people - and no outrage???

Ted Kennedy RIP

"Everyone will come, everyone will come, to my funeral to make sure that I stay dead" - Four Rusted Horses, Marilyn Manson

The "liberal lion" passed away (who truly believed that there exists no problem that couldn't be solved by government intervention and lots of money thrown at it), and while conservative passings like Jack Kemp and Strom Thurmond received only passing glances from the media, the Kennedy passing and service will be treated like a royal procession, complete with obligatory sainthood considerations. The real facts about the Honorable(?) Senator, that will never be mentioned in the mainstream media, from our friends at NNDB:

"Ted Kennedy held his Senate seat for more than four decades. He authored or argued for legislation that ensured a variety of civil rights, increased the minimum wage in 1981, made access to health care easier for the indigent, and funded Meals on Wheels for fixed-income seniors. His other successes include reducing the voting age from 21 to 18, and Title IX, which gave women's athletics much better funding. Widely held as the "standard-bearer for liberalism", his legacy is that his era has been dominated by conservatives (Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush) and moderates (Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton).
Kennedy earned C grades at the private Milton Academy, but was admitted to Harvard as a "legacy" -- his father and older brothers had attended there, so the younger and dimmer Kennedy's admission was virtually assured. While attending, he was expelled twice, once for cheating on a test, and once for paying a classmate to cheat for him. While expelled, Kennedy enlisted in the Army, but mistakenly signed up for four years instead of two. His father, Joseph P. Kennedy, former U.S. Ambassador to England, pulled the necessary strings to have his enlistment shortened to two years, and to ensure that he served in Europe, not Korea, where a war was raging. Kennedy was assigned to Paris, never advanced beyond the rank of Private, and returned to Harvard upon being discharged.
While attending law school at the University of Virginia, he was cited for reckless driving four times, including once when he was clocked driving 90 miles per hour in a residential neighborhood with his headlights off after dark. Yet his Virginia driver's license was never revoked. He passed the bar exam in 1959, and two years later was appointed an Assistant to the District Attorney in Massachusetts' Suffolk County.
In 1962, at age 30 (constitutionally, the minimum age to hold a Senate seat) he ran for the Senate. His timing was perfect -- his brother John had given up the seat to become President, and Kennedy easily won the office. He was re-elected eight times to the office.
In 1964, he was seriously injured in a plane crash, and hospitalized for several months. His sister Kathleen and nephew "John John" were killed in separate plane crashes.
On 19 July 1969, Kennedy attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island in Massachusetts. At about 11:00 PM, he borrowed his chauffeur's keys to his Oldsmobile limousine, and offered to give a ride home to Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign worker. Leaving the island via an unlit bridge with no guard rail, Kennedy steered the car off the bridge, flipped, and into Poucha Pond. He swam to shore and walked back to the party -- passing several houses and a fire station -- and two friends returned with him to the scene of the accident. According to their later testimony, they told him what he already knew, that he was required by law to immediately report the accident to the authorities. Instead Kennedy made his way to his hotel, called his lawyer, and went to sleep.
Kennedy called the police the next morning. By then the wreck had already been discovered. Before dying, Kopechne had scratched at the upholstered floor above her head in the upside-down car. The Kennedy family began pulling strings, ensuring that any inquiry would be contained. Her corpse was whisked out-of-state to her family, before an autopsy could be conducted. Further details are uncertain, but after the accident Kennedy says he repeatedly dove under the water trying to rescue Kopechne, and he didn't call police because he was in a state of shock. In versions not so kind, it is widely assumed Kennedy was drunk, that he was having an affair with Kopechne, and/or that he held off calling police in hopes that his family could fix the problem overnight.
Since the accident, Kennedy's political enemies have referred to him as the distinguished Senator from Chappaquiddick, or worse. He pled guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, and was given a suspended sentence of two months. Kopechne's family received a small payout from the Kennedy's insurance policy, and never sued. There was later an effort to have her body exhumed and autopsied, but her family successfully fought against this in court, and Kennedy's family paid their attorney's bills.
In 1973, at the height of Nixon's Watergate scandal, Kennedy thundered from the Senate floor, "Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?"
In 1980, Kennedy challenged Carter, his own party's sitting President, for the Democratic nomination. Kennedy's bid was hampered by questions of Chappaquiddick and by an interview with CBS Newsman Roger Mudd, who asked the straightforward question, "Why do you want to be President?" Kennedy couldn't come up with a straightforward answer. Carter was nominated for re-election, but the party's divisions contributed to the victory won by Reagan.
In a late-1980s media profile, Kennedy was succinctly described as someone who "grew to manhood without learning to be an adult". He is rumored to have had several affairs while married to his first wife, and had often been seen in public while thoroughly tanked and/or behaving obnoxiously. In 1987 he was caught in flagrante delicto with an unidentified woman on the floor of a restaurant. His public image since the early 1990s and during his second marriage has been more conservative and restrained.
In 2001, Kennedy worked with President Bush to enact the No Child Left Behind Act. He later complained publicly that he had been hoodwinked, because the legislation did not include funding to pay for its requirements.
Kennedy voted against the Iraq war, and in 2003, Kennedy said of it: "There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud." - NNDB

If you want to know what Ted Kennedy was really like, in a nutshell, look at the comments he made during the Robert Bork (who could run legal circles around any of the members of the Senate) Supreme Court hearing:

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is -- and is often the only -- protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy...." ....
"President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of American. No justice would be better than this injustice". Absolutely disgusting - this from a man who's supposedly a people's champion, denegrating a defender of the Constitution - unreal!

And finally, when endorsing Barack Obama with the entire liberal political machine in Mass., Barack still lost to Hillary Clinton in the primaries. And more recently, he tried to have the rules changed for succession of office of Senator, so a democrat could be appointed immediately, after being one of the leaders to set up the first change (during Senator Kerry's run for President), so a governor Mitt Romney could not choose a republican, if Kerry had won the Presidency and vacated the Senate post. And of course, now the other Senators and Representatives are trying to rally around him "Do it for Ted," as they try to ram the health care plan down our throats - not even a moment out of respect for the deceased, he's used politically in the same breadth - though that makes sense, since everything he did had a political calculation - almost makes you wonder if this was timed, while he was receiving every possible treatment, that wouldn't be afforded to anyone else in this country, while the plan looked like it was on it's last legs.

Truly, he carries the title of "Liberal Lion," (never seeing a law he couldn't change to his, and his party's benefit) to the very end.

Dumb and Dumber

This just in - Obama is not letting the rats jump ship off the U.S. Titanic, as he's re-appointed Bernanke to another term - during his long-deserved vacation (after all, he's been in office a whole seven months - lots of heavy lifting, spending Trillions placed on the backs of our children and grandchildren). If Greenspan and Bernanke aren't two excellent examples as to why we need to end the Federal Reserve now!

Playing God in Washington

Thomas Sowell is one of my favorite thinkers and writers, so I give my post to his latest article from www.realclearpolitics.com :

"August 24, 2009
A New Push to Play God from WashingtonBy Thomas Sowell

The serious, and sometimes chilling, provisions of the medical care legislation that President Obama has been trying to rush through Congress are important enough for all of us to stop and think, even though his political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us from having time to stop and think about it.
What we also should stop to think about is the mindset behind this legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is bailing out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing "czars" to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and cannot do.
The idea that government officials can play God from Washington is not a new idea, but it is an idea that is being pushed with new audacity.
What they are trying to do is to create an America very unlike the America that has existed for centuries-- the America that people have been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, the America that many generations of Americans have fought and died for.
This is the America for which Michelle Obama expressed her resentment before it became politically expedient to keep quiet.
It is the America that Reverend Jeremiah Wright denounced in his sermons during the 20 years when Barack Obama was a parishioner, before political expediency required Obama to withdraw and distance himself.
The thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different country to suit Obama's vision of the country and of himself. But do not expect a savvy politician like Barack Obama to express what he is doing in terms of limiting our freedom.
He may not even think of it in those terms. He may think of it in terms of promoting "social justice" or making better decisions than ordinary people are capable of making for themselves, whether about medical care or housing or many other things. Throughout history, egalitarians have been among the most arrogant people.
Obama has surrounded himself with people who also think it is their job to make other people's decisions for them. Not just Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, his health care advisor who complains of Americans' "over-utilization" of medical care, but also Professor Cass Sunstein, who has written a whole book on how third parties should use government power to "nudge" people into making better decisions in general.
Then there are a whole array of Obama administration officials who take it as their job to pick winners and losers in the economy and tell companies how much they can and cannot pay their executives.
Just as magicians know that the secret of some of their tricks is to distract the audience, so politicians know that the secret of many political tricks is to distract the public with scapegoats.
No one is more of a political magician than Barack Obama. At the beginning of 2008, no one expected a shrewd and experienced politician like Hillary Clinton to be beaten for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States by someone completely new to the national political scene. But Obama worked his political magic, with the help of the media, which he still has.
Barack Obama's escapes from his own past words, deeds and associations have been escapes worthy of Houdini.
Like other magicians, Obama has chosen his distractions well. The insurance industry is currently his favorite distraction as scapegoats, after he has tried to demonize doctors without much success.
Saints are no more common in the insurance industry than in politics or even among paragons of virtue like economists. So there will always be horror stories, even if these are less numerous or less horrible than what is likely to happen if Obamacare gets passed into law.
Obama even gets away with saying things like having a system to "keep insurance companies honest"-- and many people may not see the painful irony in politicians trying to keep other people honest. Certainly most of the media are unlikely to point out this irony.
Copyright 2009, Creators Syndicate Inc.