HEADLINES

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Another Democrat's Shameful Racism

Democrats are generally high-minded--can't we all just get along?--until they are in danger of losing. Then the truth comes out. Loretta Sanchez is a liberal California Democrat who poses as a moderate. This year, she faces a strong challenge from Republican Van Tran. Sanchez's polling must be turning negative, because she has launched--in Spanish--a racist attack against Van Tran and his supporters.

Prepare to be disgusted as you see this liberal Democrat fire up her Spanish-speaking base by telling them that "the Vietnamese and the Republicans are trying to take away this seat."

It will be interesting to see whether a single prominent Democrat will denounce, or even distance himself from, Sanchez's racism. My guess is that the number of Democrats who do so will be zero. If that is the case, what can we conclude about the Democratic Party, historically the party of slavery and Jim Crow?

You can follow the link above to contribute to Van Tran's campaign.








Sent from my iPhone

Rep Sanchez: Blackball Insurance Companies that Don’t Implement ObamaCare



Sent from my iPhone

New Food Rules: A Guide to Your Government-Regulated Diet

As Glenn mentioned on his Fox show this evening, new government regulatory crackdowns on certain foods and beverages across the country are forcibly shaping new dietary habits for many Americans. To make things easier, we thought we'd consolidate and break down a number of the bureaucratic overreaches for you.

How is government working to limit your scrumptious individual liberties? Let us count some of the ways…

  • As we've reported, officials in Boston, Mass., are contemplating a ban on "sugary" beverages from the vending machines of all city municipal buildings in an attempt to whittle down public employees' waistlines.
  • Likewise, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom used his executive order power to ban sodas and other sugary beverages from public building vending machines, replacing them with diet drinks and soy milk products.
  • In a separate executive order, the San Francisco Mayor also single-handedly banned the use of city funds to purchase bottled water. "[Bottled water manufacturers] are making huge amounts of money selling God's natural resources. Sorry, we're not going to be part of it," he said.
  • The New York Times dubbed the state of California a "national trendsetter in all matters edible" when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill in July to ban trans fats from the state's 88,000 restaurants.  "Under the new law, trans fats, long linked to health problems, must be excised from restaurant products beginning in 2010, and from all retail baked goods by 2011."  Other places that have banned trans fats include New York City, Philadelphia, Stamford, Conn., and Montgomery County, Md. — a suburb of Washington, D.C.
  • In perhaps one of the most outrageous cases of regulations restricting small business, health officials in Oregon shut down 7-year-old Julie Murphy's roadside lemonade stand in August for failing to secure a $120 "temporary restaurant" license.
  • Kids may also be also be getting the shaft in San Francisco where officials are launching a campaign to ban "Happy Meals" or any other meals that come with a toy.  The so-called "Healthy Meals Incentive" would ban toys if the food contains too much fat, sugar or salt.  It wouldn't be the first time meal-time toys would be nixed in California; earlier this year, Santa Clara County approved an ordinance "to break the link between unhealthy food and prizes."
  • New York City has banned school bake sale as part of a new wellness policy that also limits options in vending machines and student-run stores.  Proceeds from the ventures generally used to help help finance school-related activities like pep rallies and proms.
  • Under state laws in Texas, a single piece of candy landed a 10-year-old Brazos Elementary School student in detention for a week in May.

  • In May, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent this letter to General Mills, warning that the company's claims about Cheerios helping to lower cholesterol represent "serious violations" of federal law.
  • And in the news today, the state of Florida may become the first in the country to ban chocolate milk from public school cafeterias.  The Florida Board of Education voted Tuesday to remove all sugary drinks in schools, including soda and flavored milk.  The board is considering allowing only three types of drinks for younger children—water, unsweetened juice and plain, low-fat milk.  High school students would be allowed diet sodas and other low-calorie drinks.

Are government regulations limiting your right to tasty foods and drinks?  Send me your stories by emailing mjessup@theblaze.com!








Sent from my iPhone

Terror Threat ‘Most Significant’ Since 9/11

"Groups affiliated with al Qaeda are now actively targeting the United States and looking to use Americans or Westerners who are able to remain undetected by heightened security measures," FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee today. "It appears domestic extremism and radicalization appears to have become more pronounced based on the number of disruptions and incidents.  Mueller appeared before the Senate committee along with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and National Counterterrorism Chief Michael Leiter.

With American success abroad, Secretary Napolitano warned that terrorist groups are working harder than ever to recruit "homegrown" extremists who can strike from within the United States.  "Homegrown terrorists represent a new and changing facet of the terrorist threat." Napolitano said, "To be clear, by homegrown, I mean terrorist operatives who are U.S. persons, and who were radicalized in the United States."

According to the experts, a number of recent events point to an increase in al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations' recruitment efforts.  Among the examples experts pointed out today were an uncovered plot to bomb the New York City subway system last September; the shooting attack at Ft. Hood by Army Maj. Nidal Hassan which killed 13; the attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Airlines flight 253; and the May 1 attempted bombing in Times Square.

These were not isolated incidents, the experts warned today.  Over the past two years alone, over 60 Americans have been arrested or convicted on terrorism charges.  In addition, the FBI believes the number of Americans willing to act on behalf of foreign terrorist groups is growing.  One of the most powerful recruiting tools is the Internet, Leiter said.

"During the past year our nation has dealt with the most significant developments in the terrorist threat to the Homeland since 9/11," Leiter told the committee. "The attack threats are now more complex, and the diverse array of threats tests our ability to respond, and makes it difficult to predict where the next attack may come."

"A blend of al Qaeda inspiration, perceived victimization, and glorification of past plotting, has become increasingly accessible through the Internet, and English-language websites are tailored to address the unique concerns of US-based extremists."








Sent from my iPhone

And the Dems call the Tea-Party Racists and Bigots? What’s wrong with this picture, let me count th

I can understand the Republican comments but Vietnamese?  Is she even THINKING?  Does she have an IQ?

Click here to view the embedded video.

swenbwr







Sent from my iPhone

PJTV: DOJ BOMBSHELL: Former Voting Rights Chief to Testify in Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case



Sent from my iPhone

Why Bob Woodward’s New book is a stunner and why John Bolton went off (Video)

Wow, so Bob Woodward's new book is making a lot of headlines to today and why shouldn't it? It's an amazing view into the White House and well, frankly scared the bejeesus out of me just knowing that this joker is in charge of our country and military.

Where to begin?

It starts with the front page story from the Washington Post which talks about Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars. The book quite literally is a stark reality check for the American people on who their Commander-in-Chief is and how he thinks.

The first bombshell that people are talking about is this comment directly from Obama to Woodward:

"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."

Nice…but it gets worse…

Check this. This might explain why Director of Intel Blair was run out of his position. He told the truth and Rahm accused him of scapegoating the issue!

During a daily intelligence briefing in May 2009, Mr. Blair [former Director of Intelligence] warned the president that radicals with American and European passports were being trained in Pakistan to attack their homelands. Mr. Emanuel afterward chastised him, saying, "You're just trying to put this on us so it's not your fault." Mr. Blair also skirmished with Mr. Brennan about a report on the failed airliner terrorist attack on Dec. 25. Mr. Obama later forced Mr. Blair out.

Another interesting thing about the book is that it covers last summer/fall when Obama took FOREVER to figure out his Afghanistan strategy even though McChrystal's needs were clear as day. As it turns out, Obama could care less about the mission being a success and cared only about his exit strategy. Predictable of course. He is the man we always knew. IT's just amazing to read somebody who was actually there to tell the story. Woodward's book explains how the military commanders were pressured to carry out their strategic goals in what they called an "unrealisitic time frame" and without the proper number of troops that were requested to finish the job successfully.

According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.

And on the dismissal of the military's requests for troops?

The president concluded from the start that "I have two years with the public on this" and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. "I want an exit strategy," he implored at one meeting. Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, "I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."

Wait wha???

"I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."

And there you have it folks…The true intentions of our sitting President is not to be victorious in Afghanistan, not to protect the American people from another attack, not to do everything he can to make sure that this country is safe from future attacks, it's for one reason only. To shore up support for himself in his own party.

what a disgrace…

Now, there's already staunch reaction coming out, and I'll leave you with one of the best I've seen. It's John Bolton's appearance today on Foxnews. Here is the video:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

"If the book is accurate … it is some of the most cold-blooded, cynical, grotesquely political manipulation of national security that I think we've ever seen."

"The notion that a President would say that in that kind of callous and just utterly robotic way, I think is yet further indication that Obama is simply not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief," Bolton added.

"Obama is divorced from the American people, I think he is unemphatic, I think he is 'show that' and I think the American people have the wit to know what that means," Bolton concluded.

There is more great commentary from YidWithLid at Biggovernment.com








Sent from my iPhone

Do Kids Count? Insurers Stop Selling Child-Only Policies Ahead of ObamaCare Provisions

Six months after President Obama's signature health care bill passed, major insurance companies are dropping child-only policies just days before the new law requires them to cover sick children, enraging health care advocate who accuse the insurers of abandoning society's most vulnerable.









Sent from my iPhone

Chris Matthews Wanders Off the Reservation Again

This commonsense quote seems unremarkable enough — until you consider it was spoken by an MSNBC moonbat:

"Stop saying that giving people tax cuts is giving people money. It's their money!"

Here's Chris Matthews admirably laying into the Manchurian Moonbat's Marxist economic policies:

Despite the infamous thrill up his leg and his admission that his job is to make Imam Obama's farcical presidency work, Tweety is getting into the habit of wandering off NBC's Obamunist reservation.

Could it be he sees the ship going down? He's still got a lot of slavishly statist moonbattery to make up for if he's planning to send his resume to Fox News.

On a tip from nancz.








Sent from my iPhone

JammieWearingFool

http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2010/09/angry-teabaggers-heckle-obama-obama.html<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

The laughs just keep on coming every time Obama speaks at the UN.

The laughs just keep on coming every time Obama speaks at the UN.


The USA is now going to spend less money and really help other countries develop, says Obama to UN t
redwhitebluenews.com
-President Barack Obama is telling a U.N. conference that the United States is changing its approach to development to focus less on spending money and more on really helping countries develop.







Sent from my iPhone

House Republicans Release 2010 “Pledge to America” –Full Text Below

It will be formally unveiled tomorrow.  I haven't read through the whole thing yet. Hopefully it's good.

Via Taegan Goddard's  PoliticalWire.com

From the introduction: "The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated. With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America."

Here's some highlights via CBS News:

Jobs:

  • Stop job-killing tax hikes
  • Allow small businesses to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income
  • Require congressional approval for any new federal regulation that would add to the deficit
  • Repeal small business mandates in the new health care law.

Cutting Spending:

  • Repeal and Replace health care
  • Roll back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels before TARP and stimulus (will save $100 billion in first year alone)
  • Establish strict budget caps to limit federal spending going forward
  • Cancel all future TARP payments and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Reforming Congress:

  • Will require that every bill have a citation of constitutional authority
  • Give members at least 3 days to read bills before a vote

Defense:

  • Provide resources to troops
  • Fund missile defense
  • Enforce sanctions in Iran

GOP Pledge to America

More: (From Jim) Thanks John for posting this!








Sent from my iPhone

Video: Top Socialist Sound Bites From Obama and Friends

Via moonbattery, this is one scary video of those that currently populate the ruling class:
Remember that socialism and communism are different only in how they are foisted upon the population. Communism is imposed by brute force, socialism by vote, but both lead to the same deterioration of civilization by stealing liberty and freedom - those qualities which all humans desire.







Sent from my iPhone

Interesting story found at Newsy.com

"Woodward Exposes Obama's 'Inside Wars'" http://www.newsy.com/videos/woodward-exposes-obama-s-inside-wars

Health insurers drop coverage for children before new rules take effect; “Big” business running scar

RWB News: This isn't going to help the children. "Big" business is running scared in every private sector out there and it shows.

As reported by The Hill

Health plans in at least four states have announced they're dropping children's coverage just days ahead of new rules created by the healthcare reform law, according to the liberal grassroots group Health Care for America Now (HCAN).

The new healthcare law forbids insurers from turning down children with pre-existing conditions starting Thursday, one of several reforms Democrats are eager to highlight this week as they try to build support for the law ahead of the mid-term elections. But news of insurers dropping their plans as a result of the new law has thrown a damper on that strategy and prompted fierce push-back from the administration's allies at HCAN.

The announcement could lead to higher costs for some parents who are buying separate coverage for themselves and their children at lower cost than the family coverage that's available to them.

"We're just days away from a new era when insurance companies must stop denying coverage to kids just because they are sick, and now some of the biggest changed their minds and decided to refuse to sell child-only coverage," HCAN Executive Director Ethan Rome said in a statement. "The latest announcement by the insurance companies that they won't cover kids is immoral, and to blame their appalling behavior on the new law is patently dishonest.

"Instead, they should reverse their actions immediately and simply follow the law. If the insurance companies can casually turn their backs on sick children now, who will they abandon next? This offensive behavior by the insurance companies is yet another reminder of why the new law is so important and why the Republicans' call for repeal is so misguided."

Health plans and state insurance commissioners in July raised concerns that the new rules could lead some insurers to stop children-only coverage because families could wait until their children get sick to buy coverage.

Days later, the Obama administration issued regulations clarifying that insurers would still be able to establish enrollment periods in accordance with state law.

"To address concerns over adverse selection, issuers in the individual market may restrict enrollment of children under 19, whether in family or individual coverage, to specific open enrollment periods if allowed under state law," the Department of Health and Human Services clarified.

The issue had largely dropped out of sight since then, but insurers including WellPoint and CoventryOne have announced in recent days that they're dropping children's coverage in California, Colorado, Ohio and Missouri, according to HCAN.

Original Article:  http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/119823-insurers-drop-childrens-insurance-plans-ahead-of-new-rules?sms_ss=facebook

swenbwr







Sent from my iPhone

The USA is now going to spend less money and really help other countries develop, says Obama to UN t

RWBNews:  We aren't going to focus on spending money here but we'll spend it everywhere else instead.  We'll be asking the countries to be accountable for our monies.  Yeah, that should REALLY help the economy A LOT!  

By Ben Feller for AP at boston.com

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/09/22/obama_announces_new_us_approach_on_development/?rss_id=Boston.com+–+Latest+news

UNITED NATIONS –President Barack Obama is telling a U.N. conference that the United States is changing its approach to development to focus less on spending money and more on really helping countries develop.

That means using diplomacy, trade, investment policies and other resources to help them prosper.

The changed approach is spelled out in the administration's new global development policy, which Obama is announcing in a speech Wednesday at the United Nations in New York.

Obama says the administration will demand accountability from the U.S. and the countries it is trying to help. But, he says, make no mistake, the U.S. will remain a world leader in providing assistance.

He says the U.S. will not abandon countries that need lifesaving help.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Consumed by concerns at home, President Barack Obama is turning back to the world stage, hoping to remind anyone listening of his efforts to reshape the image and diplomacy of the United States.

Obama's three-day trip to the United Nations in New York, which begins Wednesday afternoon, does not offer the sense of anticipation that came with his first presidential address to the General Assembly last September. That event was about defining his new brand of U.S. engagement upon succeeding George W. Bush; this one is more about defending it.

The timing comes as domestic matters still dominate, with a jobs shortage and midterm elections sucking up attention.

On Wednesday, in his only official first-day business at the U.N., Obama will offer his vision of U.S. aid to impoverished parts of the world, speaking at an anti-poverty conference.

In his centerpiece speech to world leaders Thursday, Obama is expected to describe what he sees as clear progress since he took office — a "cover the waterfront" reminder, as one aide put it, of how the U.S. has ditched unilateral leadership and worked with the world over the last 20 months.

The president is less likely to unveil anything significantly new as he is to recount the U.S.-backed international efforts to keep Iran in line, slow the spread of nuclear weapons and revive plodding economies. On his final day, Obama will devote time to the African nation of Sudan, a political tinderbox, and to his relationship with leaders in Asia.

More broadly, this is Obama's best chance in quite some time to grab the world's attention and pull together all the episodic pieces of his international agenda.

"It's a natural moment to have a stocktaking," said Stewart Patrick, a senior fellow and expert on global governance at the Council on Foreign Relations.

To the public eye, this has been an inwardly focused year for Obama. He has made only three quick trips abroad after taking 10 foreign trips in his first year in office, many of them lengthy. He twice canceled a trip to Indonesia and Australia this year to deal with domestic priorities — first his health care legislation, then an oil spill disaster.

As always, the world's troubles will be on display at the U.N. gathering, and that includes setbacks in the Mideast peace process Obama has championed.

Just three weeks after Obama restarted direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians, the effort appears stalled over familiar disputes. The quest for peace will surely be a central Obama message in his speech and his sideline meetings, but he has no talks scheduled in New York with the key players.

Obama heads to New York as the attention of a frustrated American electorate is stuck on the economy. Millions remain unemployed while he labors to explain that an economic recovery is happening but will take time, given the toll of the recession. He got his latest reminder of American pain at a town hall just this week: One person asked if the American dream was dead for him, and another said she was tired of defending him to her friends.

And the White House has announced that Obama's top economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, was leaving at year's end.

Even Obama's first U.N. day is a sign of his juggling act.

He promoted the six-month mark of his health care law before leaving Washington and planned to cap his first night in New York by raising money for Democratic congressional candidates ahead of difficult midterm elections.

"The interest in the U.N. waxes and wanes, and it's going to be waning now, given the economic crisis and the election coming up," said Mark Quarterman, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies who served for 12 years at the U.N. in a variety of roles. "People are rather preoccupied."

Still, Obama's moment at the General Assembly lectern can help, with international peers seated before him and audiences watching around the world. He used the occasion last year to declare a new era in which the U.S. does not seek to go it alone and should not be expected to solve all the world's problems.

Obama is expected this time to talk more about results, including tougher international pressure on Iran and North Korea over their nuclear pursuits. Obama has reached a new nuclear treaty with Russia, pending Senate ratification, and ended the United States' major combat role in Iraq. Since he last addressed the U.N. body, he won the Nobel Peace Prize and significantly increased U.S. forces in Afghanistan, trying to regain control of the troubled war in that country.

While in New York, Obama will hold individual meetings with leaders of China, Japan, Colombia, Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan.

The president will also host Southeast Asian leaders. And he will put his weight behind an U.N. effort to secure two safe referendums in January 2011 about the future of Sudan. One of those votes in Sudan, Africa's largest country, will determine if it splits in two by giving the south independence. The circumstances surrounding the north-south vote have grown so perilous that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has called the matter a "ticking time bomb.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/09/22/obama_announces_new_us_approach_on_development/?rss_id=Boston.com+–+Latest+news

swenbwr







Sent from my iPhone

Corporate CEOs unhappy with Obama - MSN Money

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/why-CEOs-cannot-stand-obama.aspx<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

"Pledge to America" Unveiled by Republicans (Full Text) - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017335-503544.html<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

Democrats are finding it easier to compare Obama to Carter

RWB News:  Republicans have been making comparisons between Obama and Carter for quite awhile; now it's the Dems turn.

As reported by:  WSJ

By JOHN FUND

Comparisons between the Obama White House and the failed presidency of Jimmy Carter are increasingly being made—and by Democrats.

Walter Mondale, Mr. Carter's vice president, told The New Yorker this week that anxious and angry voters in the late 1970s "just turned against us—same as with Obama." As the polls turned against his administration, Mr. Mondale recalled that Mr. Carter "began to lose confidence in his ability to move the public." Democrats on Capitol Hill are now saying this is happening to Mr. Obama.

Mr. Mondale says it's time for the president "to get rid of those teleprompters and connect" with voters. Another of Mr. Obama's clear errors has been to turn over the drafting of key legislation to the Democratic Congress: "That doesn't work even when you own Congress," he said. "You have to ride 'em."

Mr. Carter himself is heightening comparisons with his own presidency by publishing his White House diaries this week. "I overburdened Congress with an array of controversial and politically costly requests," he said on Monday. The parallels to Mr. Obama's experience are clear.

Comparisons between the two men were made frequently during the 2008 campaign, but in a favorable way. Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz, for instance, told Fox News in August 2008 that Mr. Obama's "rhetoric is more like Jimmy Carter's than any other Democratic president in recent memory." Syndicated columnist Jonah Goldberg noted more recently that Mr. Obama, like Mr. Carter in his 1976 campaign, "promised a transformational presidency, a new accommodation with religion, a new centrism, a changed tone."

But within a few months, liberals were already finding fault with his rhetoric. "He's the great earnest bore at the dinner party," wrote Michael Wolff, a contributor to Vanity Fair. "He's cold; he's prickly; he's uncomfortable; he's not funny; and he's getting awfully tedious. He thinks it's all about him." That sounds like a critique of Mr. Carter.

Foreign policy experts are also picking up on similarities. Walter Russell Mead, then a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Economist magazine earlier this year that Mr. Obama is "avoiding the worst mistakes that plagued Carter." But he warns that presidents like Mr. Obama who emphasize "human rights" can fall prey to the temptation of picking on weak countries while ignoring more dire human rights issues in powerful countries (Russia, China, Iran). Over time that can "hollow out an administration's credibility and make a president look weak." Mr. Mead warned that Mr. Obama's foreign policy "to some degree makes him dependent on people who wish neither him nor America well. This doesn't have to end badly and I hope that it doesn't—but it's not an ideal position after one's first year in power."

Liberals increasingly can't avoid making connections between Mr. Carter's political troubles and those of Mr. Obama. In July, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked his guests if Democrats up for re-election will "run away from President O'Carter." After much laughter, John Heileman of New York Magazine quipped "Calling Dr. Freud." To which Mr. Matthews, a former Carter speechwriter, sighed "I know."

Pat Caddell, who was Mr. Carter's pollster while he was in the White House, thinks some comparisons between the two men are overblown. But he notes that any White House that is sinking in the polls takes on a "bunker mentality" that leads the president to become isolated and consult with fewer and fewer people from the outside. Mr. Caddell told me that his Democratic friends think that's happening to Mr. Obama—and that the president's ability to pull himself out of a political tailspin is hampered by his resistance to seek out fresh thinking.

The Obama White House is clearly cognizant of the comparisons being made between the two presidents. This month, environmental activist Bill McKibben met with White House aides to convince them to reinstall a set of solar panels that Mr. Carter had placed on the White House roof. They were taken down in 1986 following roof repairs. Mr. McKibben said it was time to bring them back to demonstrate Mr. Obama's support for alternative energy.

But Mr. McKibben told reporters that the White House "refused to take the Carter-era panel that we brought with us" and only said that they would continue to ponder "what is appropriate" for the White House's energy needs. Britain's Guardian newspaper reported that the Obama aides were "twitchy perhaps about inviting any comparison (to Mr. Carter) in the run-up to the very difficult mid-term elections." Democrats need no reminding that Mr. Carter wound up costing them dearly in 1978 and 1980 as Republicans made major gains in Congress.

Original article:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505822147816104.html

swenbwr







Sent from my iPhone

Outrage--Obama claims citizens have no privacy - National conservative | Examiner.com

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/outrage-obama-claims-citizens-have-no-privacy<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

Like father like son: Jesse Jackson Jr admits extramarital affair

Jesse Jackson SR's history includes paying his mistress non-profit money from his Rainbow Push Coalition to travel with him on a perpetual booty call while his wife and family were left home. The apple, as they say, often doesn't fall far from the tree. From NBC: Jesse's Girl?
Jesse Jackson Jr. doesn't deny involvement with a Washington D.C. based restaurant hostess who was named this morning in a Sun-Times story about his alleged attempt to buy an appointment to President Obama's former Senate seat.
Before the above sentence was entered into the computer, Stacy McCain posted pics of Giovana Huidobro (via Instapundit): As If I Actually Needed an Excuse to Post This Picture of a Blonde in a Bikini
Of course, Jr took a page from Sr in the 'explanation:'
"The reference to a social acquaintance is a personal and private matter between me and my wife that was handled some time ago." Jackson Jr. said in a statement. "I ask that you respect our privacy."
If memory serves, Sr also included God in the list. But there's more. Other than having an affair, he also really did pay to get Obama's Senate seat, something that he denied. It's the Chicago way. From the Sun Times:
...the congressman vowed to stay in office in the wake of a Chicago Sun-Times report that a major political fund-raiser has told federal authorities that Jackson directed him to offer former Gov. Rod Blagojevich millions of dollars in campaign cash in return for an appointment for Jackson to the U.S. Senate, to succeed President Obama.

The allegation by Oak Brook businessman Raghuveer Nayak regarding fund-raising runs counter to public statements Jackson has made as recently as last week that he never authorized any deal to attempt to trade campaign cash for the Senate appointment, which ultimately went not to Jackson but to Sen. Roland Burris.

"The allegations about fund-raising and the Senate seat are not new," Jackson said in a written statement. "I've already talked with the authorities about these claims, told them they were false, and no charges have been brought against me.

...The Sun-Times reported on Tuesday that sources said Nayak told authorities that on Oct. 8, 2008, Jackson directed him to offer Blagojevich $6 million in exchange for the Senate appointment.
A chip off the old block that Jr.







Sent from my iPhone

Obama Aunt in New Vid: Despite Living Off Gov‘t She Doesn’t Owe U.S. Anything

In an new video released by WBZ-TV in Boston, Obama's aunt Zeituni Onyango praises America for being a country where one "can do whatever you want when you live here," yet believes she doesn't owe the country anything despite living here illegally for years.

As reporter Jonathan Elias writes:

Despite what's she's been given, Zeituni Onyango said flatly that she owes this country nothing in return. "But, it's given you so much?" Elias asked. "So? It's a free country under God," was her terse response.

Elias then asked about her being a burden to the taxpayers:

When asked why the taxpayers should be burdened with her needs, the feisty Zeituni said, "This country is owned by almighty God. You people who preach Jesus Christ almighty God and the rest of it, you are here to help people, help the poor, help other countries and help women.  That's what the United States is supposed to do? And you have to give me my right [like any other] person's right."

Toward the end of the interview she said she doesn't understand why people are upset: "That's God's miracles," she said. "Don't you believe in miracles?"








Sent from my iPhone

Obama Asks Religious Leaders to Preach the Gospel of HC Reform

President Obama called on religious leaders Tuesday to help him sell health care reform. (File Photo: AP)

With approval ratings plummeting and support for the new health care law waning, the president is scrambling for ways to sell his health care overhaul. Possibly looking for a miracle, he's turning to church leaders who preach about such events to deliver one.

"Obama, alongside other top administration officials, beseeched thousands of faith-based and community organizations to preach the gospel on new insurance reforms, chiefly the Patients' Bill of Rights." That's how Politico describes a conference call that featured the president on Tuesday.

"Get out there and spread the word," the president encouraged religious leaders on the call. Politico reports that Obama also advised those listening to treat the new law as settled fact and use their perches of power to convey that message to congregants and friends.

"The debate in Washington is over," he said, and called on the leaders to be "important validators and trusted resources," regarding the law.

Despite reports and news that the new health care law is not fulfilling some of the promises Obama made regarding it, and that those within the president's own party are distancing themselves from it, he still sees the law as a monumental piece of legislation that is good for the country:

This is something that we'll be able to look back on, just like we do on Medicare and Social Security, as a cornerstone that improves the security of millions of Americans, at the same time lowers costs and gets control of costs, both at the government level, but also for families and businesses.

That's a sentiment that is not shared by all those in the president's own party. For example, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) who voted for the health care bill is now encouraging his state to seek ways to bypass some of its requirement.

Tuesday's conference call was organized by Health and Human Services Center for Faith-Based and Community Partnerships.

Recognizing the large task in front of the group, Joshua DuBois, director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Partnerships, outlined the task: "We've got work to do."








Sent from my iPhone

Why is the DOJ protecting the Black Panthers? New information raises more questions

RWB News: As November elections approach, new information has surfaced about the voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers (set aside by the DOJ). Included is testimony by a man who was beaten by King Samir, possibly with the same baton Samir was shown wielding in the youtube video. This court record of violence wasn't deemed important by Eric Holder & company–so as November approaches, the question America voters should be screaming from the rooftops is 'WHY?— Ann-Marie M from CA


As reported by Big Government.com

New Information Raises More Questions About DOJ and the Black Panthers

by Mike Roman

New information about the violent criminal history of the Philadelphia Black Panthers once again calls into question the Department of Justice handling of this racist hate group.

Records obtained from the Philadelphia Courts document arrests for assault, robbery, domestic violence, and drug dealing by King Samir and Jerry Jackson.

According to one of his victims, King Samir does more than intimidate voters with his baton.  He beat the man in the head with the same type weapon he was seen brandishing outside of a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.

The beating, in 1995, was so severe the man was hospitalized and appeared in court with staples still in his head.

From the court transcript:

Q: Tell the court what if anything the defendant did

A: He hit me with a cane.

Q: What did it have on it?

A: Two D batteries

Q: Where were the batteries?

A: Wrapped around on top of the cane

Q: Is that the part he hit you with?

A: Yes.

Q: To what part of your body?

A: The back of the head, and I got hit in the jaw with a bottle.

Q: I notice you have three staples in your head, is this from getting hit in the head with the cane?

A: Yes

Samir (whose real name is Maruse Heath) plead guilty to simple assault and was sentenced to 2 years probation.

How could DOJ overlook this when they dismissed the charges against the Black Panthers? The Department's trial team surely would have introduced evidence of the fact that Samir had beaten people senseless with the same type of weapon he used at the polls in 2008.  Surely this was evidence that he was a true intimidating force.

In 1998, Samir broke into the home of his ex-girlfriend and beat and terrorized her.  From her graphicstatement to the Police:

I said I am calling the police and I dialed 911. I was giving the operator my information, that's when he punched me in the face and told me to put the f*cking phone down. I dropped the phone. I picked up a paint pole to protect myself. He knocked the pole away from me. He grabbed my hair and dragged me to the stairs. He put me in a chin lock to stop me from screaming. I bit his fingers…  He told Vera "I am going to kill this b*tch." He grabbed my hair and pulled it out when I tried to get away. I ran to the front door and the cops were there.

Samir was charged with Burglary, Aggravated Assault, and Terroristic Threats.  The charges were dismissed because his victim failed to appear at the trial.

Jerry Jackson's first encounter with Police was in 1978 when he and another man stabbed and robbed a victim in Philadelphia. Jackson was convicted and sentenced for Robbery and Criminal Conspiracy, both first-degree felonies.  Jackson has also been arrested and served time for dealing drugs in the same neighborhood where he serves as a Democratic Precinct Committeeman.

Since becoming infamous for intimidating voters, Jackson and Samir have taken to posting photos of themselves posing with handguns. See hereherehere, and here.   A felony firearm charge can be brought against a convicted felon who is found in possession of a firearm, regardless of the intended or actual use of the weapon. Certainly DOJ must be aware of these photos.  Why haven't they pursued charges under 18 U.S.C. 922 against Jerry Jackson?  Is he getting a pass on gun charges too?

This scandal is far from over.

Original Article:  http://biggovernment.com/mroman/2010/09/22/new-information-raises-more-questions-about-doj-and-the-black-panthers/

swenbwr







Sent from my iPhone

Gateway Pundit

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/09/it-begins-top-dem-official-calls-tea-party-fckers-video/<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a href=

Why Bob Woodward's New Book Should Scare the Hell Out of All Americans


Last night I read the front-page Washington Post story on Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars. Frankly the article gave me nightmares. The revelations about  Obama's naive views on terrorism and his lack of commitment to the Afghan war confirmed many of the worst fears about our President and the War on Terror. But his desire to place politics before victory was surprising.

The book details how Obama is not trying to win the war as much as he was desperately trying to placate his progressive base, regardless of the safety of American citizens. At one point the POTUS tells Woodward directly
 Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said: "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."
Holy Cow!! Tell that to the families of the terrorist attack's victims.
During a daily intelligence briefing in May 2009, Mr. Blair [former Director of Intelligence] warned the president that radicals with American and European passports were being trained in Pakistan to attack their homelands. Mr. Emanuel afterward chastised him, saying, "You're just trying to put this on us so it's not your fault." Mr. Blair also skirmished with Mr. Brennan about a report on the failed airliner terrorist attack on Dec. 25. Mr. Obama later forced Mr. Blair out.
Obama's Wars,  covers last fall's agonizingly slow Afghanistan strategy review last fall, Obama was more interested in mapping out an exit plan than winning the war. The book makes it clear that the U.S. military has been asked to achieve its goals in Afghanistan without the level of troops they requested and in an unrealistic time frame.
According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
The book reports that the recommendations of the Military were dismissed. 
 Along with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan at the time, they kept pushing for their 40,000-troop option as part of a broad counterinsurgency plan along the lines of what Petraeus had developed for Iraq. The president is quoted as telling Mullen, Petraeus and Gates: "In 2010, we will not be having a conversation about how to do more. I will not want to hear, 'We're doing fine, Mr. President, but we'd be better if we just do more.' We're not going to be having a conversation about how to change [the mission] . . . unless we're talking about how to draw down faster than anticipated in 2011.
The New York Times story on the book gives the reason for the President's desire not to commit to the war, and how the President asked the SCHMOTUS to argue against the Military's plan.
The president concluded from the start that "I have two years with the public on this" and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. "I want an exit strategy," he implored at one meeting. Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, "I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."
Forget everything else you may read about this book, about the infighting and name-calling going on in the administration, that happens in every administration, you need to remember just one thing.  Instead of caring how to win the war in Afghanistan, and how to protect the homeland, the first priority of this President was to appease his party. That is not how you protect people.

The same President who was (and still is) willing to spend much of the last year and half going around the country to sell a health care bill to the public, much of whom will  hurt rather than helped from the legislation, is not willing to spend any time trying to sell the public on an Afghanistan plan that will protect them at home.

By ignoring the needs of the Military Obama is sacrificing crucial U.S. national security interests and leaving the American people more vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. An early exit from Afghanistan would shore up al-Qaeda and like-minded terrorists and once again provide them with a safe-haven from which to conduct their deadly attacks against the U.S. and other nations. But none of that is the priority of this President, only support from is party is important.  And that is a frightening situation.
Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com







Sent from my iPhone

What You Need to Know About Tomorrow’s New Health Regulations

Tomorrow, the six month anniversary of the new health care law, a litany of mandated health insurance changes go into effect. Thanks to CNNMoney.com, here's what you need to know:

If you get insurance through your boss: Many people who are insured through work won't notice immediate changes to their health plans until their health plans renew, which is tied to companies' open enrollment periods. Health plans offered through large employers usually get renewed on January 1.

But the mandates could kick in sooner for health plans sold to new entities or individuals after September 23.

Here are some key changes coming into effect:

  • Coverage expansion for adult dependents until age 26. Employers will have to provide coverage for dependents of workers who don't have access to other employer-based health care coverage 'till age 26. Some states already mandate this coverage until age 28 or 29.
  • Children no longer denied coverage for pre-existing conditions: Insurance plans can't deny coverage due to a pre-existing condition to children under age 19. For adults, the same provision goes into effect in 2014.
  • Prohibit insurers from rescinding coverage: It's illegal for insurers to drop a customer when they become sick or search for an error on a customer's insurance application and then deny payment for service when the person gets sick.
  • Free Preventive Care: All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. If individuals keep their existing plans or if a group plan doesn't make major changes, the provisions won't kick in until the plans get changed.
  • No lifetime limits on coverage: Insurers no longer can impose lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays or expensive treatments.
  • Unrestricted doctor choice: Plans must allow pediatricians and obstetrician/gynecologists to get primary care physician status. This eliminates the requirement for patients to get prior-authorization from their insurer or a doctor's referral to see a pediatrician or OB/GYN.
  • Level charges for emergency services: Insurers must remove prior authorizations for ER services. Also, insurers can't charge higher co-payments or co-insurance for out-of-network ER providers.
  • Patient-friendly appeals process: Insurers will have to establish new internal and external appeals processes for claims. This means that while a claim is under appeal, your insurer has to continue to pay your claims, and continue paying for subsequent treatment, until the matter is resolved.

Small business impact: The changes that kick in on Sept. 23 also apply to small businesses with 50 employees or more that already offered insurance coverage prior to reform.

Companies that didn't offer coverage pre-reform and have no more than 25 workers will be given incentives such as tax credits and grants to encourage them to offer insurance coverage, said Dorothy Miraglia, director of benefits with AlphaStaff, a firm that manages employee benefits programs for small businesses.

If you buy insurance yourself: For consumers who buy health insurance directly from insurers, some of the same key changes go into effect this month.

Most importantly, insurers can't drop you when you get sick or because you made a mistake on your coverage application. Insurers also can't set annual or lifetime limits.

If you have children under age 26, you can insure them if your policy allows for dependent coverage. Individual plans can't deny or exclude coverage to any child under age 19 for pre-existing conditions.

If you're a senior citizen: If you have Medicare prescription drug coverage and are affected by the donut hole, this year you will get a one-time tax-free $250 rebate to help pay for prescriptions.

The prescription drug coverage gap that develops when Medicare stops paying for drug coverage and patients can't afford to pay for drugs out-of-pocket is called the "donut hole."

In 2011, if high prescription drug costs put you in the donut hole, you'll get a 50% discount on covered brand-name drugs while you're in the donut hole.

Also in 2011, Medicare will cover certain preventive services without charging you Medicare Part B (coverage for doctors' services, outpatient care, home health services) coinsurance or deductible.








Sent from my iPhone

Two Men Charged in Violent Racist Beating of White Teen (Video)

The two men robbed the teen, burnt him, beat him, pi$$ed on him and whipped him with this own belt for four hours.

Photo shows Shane McClellan after the assault. (KOMO News)
The attackers screamed while they beat the white boy, "This is for enslaving our people."

White Boy Beaten Because of Slavery

The Seattle Times reported:

Two men who were questioned and released by Seattle police after a West Seattle teen was beaten in a racially charged attack have been charged in connection with the May 25 assault. One of the men was arrested Tuesday evening.

DNA recently linked Ahmed Mohamed and Jonathan Baquiring to the attack in which a 16-year-old boy was robbed, taunted with racial insults, burned with a lit cigarette and punched repeatedly. Mohamed, 22, and Baquiring, 21, each were charged Monday with first-degree robbery and malicious harassment, the state's hate-crime statute.

Baquiring was booked into the Seattle Correctional Facility just after 6 p.m. Tuesday, according to the King County Jail Booking Register. His bail is set at $500,000.

Seattle police are still searching for Mohamed.

King County Deputy Prosecutor Samantha Kanner will also seek to have Mohamed held on $500,000 bail once he is arrested, according to charging papers.

The victim, Shane McClellan, said he was walking home around 2 a.m. when two men, whom he described as black and Filipino, asked him for a light.

He said the two men then robbed him and beat him for four hours, whipping him with his own belt while saying things like, "How do you like it, white boy?" and "This is for enslaving our people," according to the police report.

McClellan, who is white, said the two men also poured Four Loko energy beer on him, burned him with a cigarette and urinated on him, police said.

Don't expect this story to make the nightly news. It doesn't fit their narrative.








Sent from my iPhone

theblogprof: Student of history Obama FAIL: "Mexicans" Were Here "Long Before the United States Was an Idea"

http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2010/09/student-of-history-obama-fail-mexicans.html<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

Biased AP headline of the day: "Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban"

The repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" went down in flames yesterday, falling 4 votes of the 60 required in the Senate to advance the measure to a vote. Same with the DREAM act that has become known as "amnesty lite." Here's the thing though, the vote for cloture only garnered 56 votes. Democrats control 59 seats. So how does the AP claim it was Republicans that blocked the measure? They did just that, even though 3 Democrats voted with Republicans: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban
Senate Republicans have blocked an effort to repeal the law banning gays from serving openly in the military.

The partisan vote was a defeat for gay rights groups who saw the provision in a defense authorization bill as their last chance any time soon to overturn the law known as "don't ask, don't tell."
The only thing partisan was that all the yea votes were Democrats. The opposition to the repeal of DADT and the DREAM act was in fact Bipartisan with Blanch Lincoln, Mark Pryor and Harry Reid voting nea with all the Republicans. The nea votes of the 3 Democrats are totally missing from the AP piece written by Anne Flaherty. How is this just Republicans blocking the measure again?

UPDATE: Bob on DADT:







Sent from my iPhone

Obama: "We can absorb a terrorist attack," wants to surrender Afghanistan war

Obama's complete quote in the headline is "
"We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."
That's one heck of a bombshell quote, but is consistent with the left's insistence that America overreacted to 911. It's just another indicator of what most of us already know - Obama and leftists in general don't care about protecting this country from terrorists attacks. As twisted as it may sound at first, they truly do believe that McDonalds is a bigger danger than terrorists. Recall that leftist hero Michael Moore specifically pointed out on air that the McDonalds at Ground Zero killed more people than the 911 hijackers:
They would rather wage a war on cupcakes than a war on terror.  The quote in the headline came from The Washington Post: Bob Woodward book details Obama battles with advisers over exit plan for Afghan war. And as the saying goes, that's just the tip of the iceberg. Excerpts from Woodwards book paint Obama as what most of us know him to be - a big, sloppy, wet vagina (More proof that Obama is the first female President). The man literally is dictating the waving of the white flag in Afghanistan and refuses to even mention the word 'victory.' Check out how the WaPo piece begins:
President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.

Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page "terms sheet" that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in "Obama's Wars," to be released on Monday.

According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
Well of course! That's what weenies do! Run away, run away! And check this Obama quote out:
"Everything we're doing has to be focused on how we're going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It's in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room."
In other words, WE are the problem, not the terrorists. In Obama's point of view, and that of leftists in general, our fighting the war is creating or saving terrorists. Which - you know - is why they preemptively attacked us on 911, and the US Cole, and the first WTC attack, knowing that we would at some future date go to war in places that they set up their terror training camps. Further in the WaPo article, it is revealed that National security adviser James L. Jones refers to Obama's political aides as "the Mafia," that General Petraeus felt shut out by the regime and calls David Axelrod "a complete spin doctor" (uh - which he IS, so nothing new there), the damning quote in my headline, and this quote again in reference to Afghanistan:
The president is quoted as telling Mullen, Petraeus and Gates: "In 2010, we will not be having a conversation about how to do more. I will not want to hear, 'We're doing fine, Mr. President, but we'd be better if we just do more.' We're not going to be having a conversation about how to change [the mission] . . . unless we're talking about how to draw down faster than anticipated in 2011."
The mission, in Obama's mind, is fleeing the country in surrender, not victory. God help us...

UPDATE: More from memeorandum







Sent from my iPhone

Gateway Pundit

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/09/obama-says-u-s-can-absorb-terror-attacks/<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a href="http://itunes.apple.com/app/mobilerss-pro-google-rss-news/id325594202?mt=8" style="text-decoration:underline;color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">MobileRSS for iPhone</a></div>


Sent from my iPhone

Heritage Foundation

DrudgeFeed.com - Drudge Report RSS feed

RedState

Right Wing News

RenewAmerica

Hot Air » Top Picks

Conservative Outpost

Conservative Examiner

Michelle Malkin

Big Government

Big Journalism

Big Hollywood

Pajamas Media