Monday, November 1, 2010
Professor Exposes Federally Funded ‘Revisionist’ History Conference
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via The Blaze - Stories by Meredith Jessup on 11/1/10
Pearl Harbor, 1941
In July, the National Endowment for the Humanities sponsored a workshop on "History and Commemoration: The Legacies of the Pacific War in WWII" for college professors in Hawaii. Professor Penelope Blake, a veteran professor of Humanities at Rock Valley College in Rockford, Ill., was one of 25 American scholars chosen to attend the workshop, but was reportedly disheartened to find the conference "driven by an overt political bias and a blatant anti-American agenda."
Professor Blake is now reportedly calling on Congress to implement better oversight over the NEH. In a letter addressed directly to her Illinois congressman, Rep. Don Manzullo, Blake documents conference details and asks him to vote against NEH funding for future events. According to PowerLine, copies of the letter have also been delivered to members of the NEH council and NEH chair Jim Leach.
Full letter follows (emphases hers):
Dear Congressman Manzullo:
As one of twenty-five American scholars chosen to participate in the recent National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Workshop, "History and Commemoration: Legacies of the Pacific War in WWII," at the University of Hawaii, East-West Center, I am writing to ask you to vote against approval of 2011 funding for future workshops until the NEH can account for the violation of its stated objective to foster "a mutual respect for the diverse beliefs and values of all persons and groups" (NEH Budget Request, 2011).
In my thirty years as a professor in upper education, I have never witnessed nor participated in a more extremist, agenda-driven, revisionist conference, nearly devoid of rhetorical balance and historical context for the arguments presented.
In both the required preparatory readings for the conference, as well as the scholarly presentations, I found the overriding messages to include the following:
1. The U.S. military and its veterans constitute an imperialistic, oppressive force which has created and perpetuated its own mythology of liberation and heroism, insisting on a "pristine collective memory" of the war. The authors/presenters equate this to Japan's almost total amnesia and denial about its own war atrocities (Fujitani, White, Yoneyama, 9, 23). One presenter specifically wrote about turning down a job offer when he realized that his office would overlook a fleet of U.S. Naval warships, "the symbol of American power and the symbol of our [Hawaiians'] dispossession…I decided they could not pay me enough" (Osorio 5). Later he claimed that electric and oil companies were at the root of WWII, and that the U.S. developed a naval base at Pearl Harbor to ensure that its own coasts would not be attacked (9, 13).
2. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor should be seen from the perspective of Japan being a victim of western oppression (one speaker likened the attack to 9-11, saying that the U.S. could be seen as "both victim and aggressor" in both attacks); that American "imperial expansion" forced Japan's hand: "For the Japanese, it was a war to defend their unique culture against Western Imperialism" (Yoneyama 335-336); and the Pearl Harbor attack could be seen as a "pre-emptive strike." (No mention of the main reason for the Pearl Harbor attack: the U.S. had cut off Japan's oil supply in order to stop the wholesale slaughter of Chinese civilians at the hands of the Japanese military.) Another author argued that the Japanese attack was no more "infamous" or "sneaky" than American actions in Korea or Vietnam (Rosenberg 31-32).
3. War memorials, such as the Punchbowl National Memorial Cemetery (where many WWII dead are buried, including those executed by the Japanese on Wake Island and the beloved American journalist Ernie Pyle), are symbols of military aggression and brutality "that pacify death, sanitize war and enable future wars to be fought" (Ferguson and Turnbull, 1). One author stated that the memorials represent American propaganda, "the right to alter a story" (Camacho 201).
4. The U.S. military has repeatedly committed rapes and other violent crimes throughout its past through the present day. Cited here was the handful of cases of attacks by Marines in Okinawa (Fujitani, et al, 13ff). (What was not cited were the mass-murders, rapes, mutilations of hundreds of thousands of Chinese at the hands of the Japanese throughout the 1930s and 40s. This issue is a perfect example of the numerous instances of assertions made without balance or historical context.) Another author stated that the segregation in place within our military and our "occupation" of Germany after the war was comparable to Nazism ('we were as capable of as much evil as the Germans") even though the author admits, with some incredulity, that he "saw no genuine torture, despite all the [American] arrogance, xenophobia and insensitivity." He attributes American kindness towards conquered Germans to our "wealth and power" which allowed us to "forego the extreme kinds of barbarism" (Davis 586). Another author/presenter compared the temporary relocation camps erected by Americans during the war to Nazi extermination camps (Camacho 206). (This is perhaps the most outrageous, offensive and blatantly false statement I have ever read in a supposedly scholarly work).
5. Those misguided members of the WWII generation on islands like Guam and Saipan who feel gratitude to the Americans for saving them from the Japanese are blinded by propaganda supporting "the image of a compassionate America" or by their own advanced age. One author/presenter questioned whether the Americans had saved anyone from anything (Camacho 177, 209), arguing that the Americans could be seen as easily and justifiably as "conquerors and invaders" (199).
6. It was "the practice" of the U.S. military in WWII to desecrate and disrespect the bodies of dead Japanese (Camacho 186). (Knowing this to be absolutely false, I challenged the speaker/author, who then admitted that this was not the "practice" of our military. Still, the word remains in his publication. As he obviously knew this to be false, I can only assume that his objective was not scholarship but anti-military propaganda.)
7. Conservatives and veterans in the U.S. have had an undue and corrupt influence on how WWII is remembered, for example, successfully lobbying to remove from the Smithsonian Enola Gay exhibit images of the destruction caused by the atom bomb and the revisionist portrayal of the Japanese as victims in the war (Yoneyama). (What the presenter and author, Ms. Yoneyama, failed to explain was why all representations of Japan's murderous rampages throughout China and the Philippines were removed from the exhibit as well…surely not at the request of American veterans or conservatives. When I challenged Ms. Yoneyama to explain this issue, a tense exchange ensued, but I finally established that Japanese influences had also played a role in "shaping" the exhibit. This never would have been mentioned had I not demanded the speaker address this distortion in her presentation. Ms. Yoneyama clearly intended to present a one-sided attack on those who wanted the exhibit to emphasize the many reasons why the atom bombs were necessary.) Ms. Yoneyama concluded her essay with a parting shot at the veterans, whom she mockingly labels "martyrs of their sacred war," and "conservative elites" who objected to the Smithsonian's revisionist history: "the Smithsonian debate ended in the defeat of those who sought critical rethinking, as well as the defeat of those who questioned the self-evident…, and the victory of those who felt threatened by obfuscation of the contours of conventional knowledge" (emphasis mine, 329,339). The author's elitist dismissal of those who questioned the Enola Gay exhibit is representative of the perspectives and tone of much of the conference, as illustrated by the following point.
8. Conservatives are reactionary nationalists (no distinction was made between nationalism and patriotism), pro-military "tea baggers" who are incapable of "critical thinking." Comments were made about "people who watch Fox News" not caring if the news "is accurate or not" (Yoneyama, Lecture). The end result of this deprecation within the conference room was to discourage debate and create an atmosphere of intolerance to opposing views, in direct violation of the stated objectives of the NEH. Several participants told me privately that they considered me "brave" for speaking up, thus begging the question: At a conference supposedly committed to openness and tolerance of all views, why should it take bravery to speak one's mind?
9. Relating to the above, even members of the NEH review board are not immune to "reactionary" pro-military views. One essay recounts how an earlier attempt to receive funding for a similar conference was denied because some NEH reviewers thought the "program lacked diversity and balance among points of view"….and that the organizers possessed "a very specific, 'politically correct' agenda," noting that "bias is dangerously threatening throughout." The authors of the essay dismissed and denigrated these NEH reviewers with the same elitist attitude they exhibited towards the "Fox News" viewers: "Clearly this reviewer was unable to comprehend our understanding" of the conference objectives (in other words, he/she is stupid), and "what he or she really desired was the inclusion of defenders of American nationalism and militarism" (Fujitani, et al, 24).
10. Veterans' memories of their own experiences in the war are suspect and influenced by media and their own self-delusion (Rosenberg, 18, 24). Therefore, it is the role of academics to "correct" their history. As one organizer commented, this will be more easily accomplished once the WWII generation has passed away. Another wrote, "America's nostalgic war memories are beginning to fray around the edges" (White, 267).
11. War memorials like the Arizona Memorial should be recast as "peace memorials," sensitive to all viewers from all countries, especially the many visitors from Japan. The conference dedicated significant time to the discussion of whether or not a Japanese memorial in honor of victims of the atom bombs should be erected at the Arizona Memorial site, in order to pacify Japanese visitors who may be offended by the "racism" [anti-Japanese] of the Arizona Memorial. To this end, the conference organizers discussed a revised film (1992) shown to visitors to the Arizona Memorial which removed some of the earlier (1980) film's "Japan-bashing" and warnings about the need for the American military to remain prepared in the future. The new film, which emphasizes the reasons (justifications?) for the Japanese bombings of Pearl Harbor, includes fewer battle scenes and "transforms the triumphant feelings of victory with a more mournful reflection of losses inflicted by war" (White 285), thus sending a more pacifist, anti-war message and offering a perspective which makes people "less angry" after viewing the film (the author acknowledges that this has worked well, except for "older citizens" who are outraged by the "revisionist" sympathy towards the Japanese) (287). The new, more "inclusive" film features visual images of both American and Japanese dead, Japanese Buddhist monks visiting the memorial, and a culminating text which reads "Mourn the dead" as opposed to "Mourn American dead" or "Mourn our dead" so that "it represented the U.S. and Japanese" (emphasis mine, 288). The memorial's superintendent, Donald Magee, summed up the tone of the new film: "We don't take sides….here at Pearl Harbor we don't condemn the Japanese" (292). Based on the author's description, I refused to attend a viewing of the film, in protest of its appeasement of treachery and attempts to revise historical fact.
As overwhelming and pervasive as these politically-correct and revisionist messages were, the conference did feature a few presentations and articles which represented truly excellent examples of balanced, well-researched scholarship. One highpoint of the conference was a panel of WWII veterans who shared with us their personal experiences of the war. But, given the overall anti-military bias present at this conference, I could not help but shudder to think how these amazing men would feel if they knew the true focus of the conference. I honestly felt ashamed of my profession and my government for sponsoring this travesty.I am aware that my comments may well have been dismissed by the conference organizers in the same manner they dismissed other opposing voices as "nationalistic" or simplistic. So be it. But I am no blind patriot, Congressman Manzullo, nor am I ignorant of the complexities inherent in the telling and re-telling of history. I also acknowledge, research and teach the many mistakes this country has made, and I am as suspect of the extreme right as I am of the extreme left. But I am also a historian who knows that despite all of their mistakes, this nation and its military have defended, protected and freed more people in their comparatively brief existence than all of the nations in Europe and Asia combined. Allied efforts, however imperfect, defended the world against two of the greatest forms of evil the world has ever known, European Fascism and Japanese Imperialism. This perspective was never, not once, offered at this conference except as a concept that will be well-buried with the WWII generation. If nothing else, I have shown that any imminent celebration of the demise of these concepts may be premature.
As a daughter of two WWII veterans and the niece of a man who gave his life to help defend his country in WWII, I simply will not stand by and allow their history to be usurped and corrupted by a revisionist and iconoclastic political agenda within academe.
The NEH is requesting an operating budget of 161 million dollars for 2011, including over 71 million to support conferences like the one I have described. I ask that you do everything in your power to delay approval of this request until the NEH does the following:
1. Reviews all NEH conference and workshop proposals and supporting materials to eliminate any overt political agenda;
2. Illustrates to Congress and the American people an ability to create programs which support sound and objective scholarship and provide forums for debate in which all sides are recognized and encouraged;
3. Eliminates all intolerance and pejorative language towards any group or viewpoint;
4. Commits itself to a fair and balanced view of our nation's history and humanities, acknowledging its mistakes but also honoring its achievements.
To demonstrate the above, any group or institution requesting a grant from the NEH should be required to submit its entire schedule of presenters and a complete list of the literature which will be discussed at the conference to ensure that varied sides of any issue will be represented and respected.
Until these actions are taken, I sincerely doubt that the majority of Americans would approve of their tax dollars supporting this academic attack on American history and culture. I plan to do everything in my power to inform American voters of this issue, and I trust our elected officials will take heed of their constituents' reactions.
Citations for the sources I have used are attached to this letter. Should you wish any further documentation on the issues I have raised or have any questions, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Penelope A. Blake, Ph.D.
The NEH has in the past been accused of political operations, most notably including a recorded conference call in which artists were asked to design art projects in support of the Obama administration's agenda.
For more info, PowerLine invites readers to contact them to request a copy of the sources Professor Blake uses in her letter.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to The Blaze - Stories using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Poll: Union Members Angry About Money Leadership Wasting on Election
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via YID With LID by Jeff Dunetz on 11/1/10
Conducted for the National Right to Work foundation, the poll found that 60 percent of union members oppose their union bosses' political spending in the 2010 midterm elections, viewing it a wasteful use of union dues and treasuries to protect incumbent Democrat politicians in Washington, D.C.
Recently the Wall Street Journal reported that Unions were among the top political spenders during this political cycle.
Despite Big Labor's 2010 political spending blitz nearly 60 percent of union members believe that a mostly even balance of power between Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill is best for America and the same number would rather that money be spent working with employers to create new and better jobs. A majority of union members even believe that union political spending should be used to to get rid of incumbents, especially Nancy Pelosi.
The rank and file is so angered by their leadership's political spending that 59 percent of union membership would vote to replace their own union leadership if given a secret ballot election to do so.
Half of union members view President Obama and the Democratic Congress's healthcare reform bill as a failure, while only 37 percent view it as a success. Majorities also view the 2009 stimulus bill and the 2008 corporate bailouts as failures. Overwhelming majorities oppose future government spending and debt to rejuvenate the economy; and two-thirds of union members instead trust entrepreneurs, small businesses, and employers to lead America to better job growth.The attitudes of union membership is not much different than the opinions of the general public. It is their leadership, like the progressive candidates who they support who are out of touch.
In regards to their own union representation, a plurality of union members disapprove of the job America's "labor leaders" are doing and view their union hierarchies as less honest and principled than 50 years ago. A whopping 72 percent of union members think union bosses should be held more accountable to workers and 63 percent think union officials are overpaid. Sixty-six percent think union officers mostly look out for themselves instead of "the little guy."
Eighty percent supported the Right to Work principle that union membership and dues payment should be voluntary and not required as a condition of employment. Nearly 90 percent of union employees surveyed favored more union hierarchy disclosure and accountability.
"As top union officials are pouring an estimated one billion dollars into re-electing Democrats into Congress, a large majority of union members actually oppose the union bosses' political agenda" said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. "That's why it comes to no surprise that union members would like to replace their own union leadership, and overwhelmingly support the Right to Work principle for all of America's workers."
Read the entire poll below:
Luntz_NRTW_Union_Member_Survey_Oct2010
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
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to YID With LID using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Justice Department to Send Election Observers to Arizona as Concern Rises About Illegal Voters
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/29/justice-dept-send-election-observers-arizona-group-seeks-crack-illegal-voters/
Justice Department to Send Election Observers to Arizona as Concern Rises About Illegal Voters
Published October 30, 2010
| FoxNews.com
- Comments (1971)
- Text Size
Attorney General Eric Holder speaks during a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington, Monday, Oct. 4, 2010. (AP)
The
Justice Department is sending a small pack of election observers to
Arizona as Hispanic groups sound the alarm over an anti-illegal
immigration group's mass e-mail seeking to recruit Election Day
volunteers to help block illegal immigrants from voting.
Hispanic voting rights groups say the e-mail is just an attempt to intimidate minority voters.
But election fraud monitors say that there are hundreds of examples of
duplicate registrations, wrong information and past unregistered voters
getting ballots.
Voter fraud allegations have emerged just
days before the midterm in many crucial battleground states across the
country, including Nevada, Pennsylvania and Florida.
The Justice Department announced Friday it
would deploy more than 400 federal observers to 30 jurisdictions in 18
states ahead of Tuesday's election. But Arizona officials say the department had already committed to sending observers to their state.
Justice Department officials had notified Maricopa County that they would send a "handful" of election observers, even before the e-mail was sent, Matthew Benson, a spokesman for Arizona's secretary of state, told FoxNews.com.
"We don't know why (the observers are)
coming," he said. "But we do not believe it's in response to the
e-mails making the rounds."
But William Gheen, executive director of Americans for Legal Immigration, said he knows why they're coming.
"They're sending them out because the Obama administration
is doing everything it can to make sure as many illegal aliens vote in
2010 although that is a violation of federal law," he told FoxNews.com.
Benson noted that the Justice Department
sends election observers to at least one Arizona county every election.
In 2006, the department sent around 30 election observers to Maricopa
County, he said.
Benson said the plan had nothing to do with the firestorm elicited by Ban Amnesty Now, or B.A.N., the group that sent an e-mail entitled "6 Days to STOP Illegals from Stealing the Election!"
The e-mail said "open-border criminals" in
the unions, the White House and Hispanic groups are "determined to
undermine" the election.
The e-mail originally included the
signature of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, an immigration
enforcement proponent and B.A.N. honorary co-chairman, but Arpaio's
name was later removed after Sean McCaffrey, the president of B.A.N.,
said he didn't mean to send out the e-mail
attributed to the sheriff.
That didn't deter one voting rights group,
Mi Familia Vota, from sending a letter to Justice Department officials
Thursday asking them to send election observers.
"We are very concerned when you have
Sheriff Joe Arpaio putting out this type of call to the community with
the fear and concern that illegals are going to take over the
election," said Ben Monterroso, president of the group. "It's not that
we're not concerned that the elections are secure, but the way that
it's been written – anyone who has the appearance of a foreign person,
i.e. being a Latino – then that can create intimidation and violate
their rights to vote."
McCaffrey said Friday that, despite the
erroneous attribution to Arpaio, he is looking for volunteers to
provide information to his group about voter fraud, "especially stories
concerning activities involving illegal aliens."
"We hope that by forwarding interested volunteers to state elections officials we may contribute to smooth, fair and legal elections
in all 50 U.S. states," he wrote in a blog on the group's website.
"Furthermore, we hope that those who seem so shocked and outraged that
Americans are concerned about stopping voter fraud will own up to their
actions and stop committing vote fraud."
McCaffrey told FoxNews.com in an interview that nearly 500 people have volunteered so far -- about 100 of them in Arizona.
Part of the concern for voter fraud
monitors is a result of a ruling this week by a federal appeals court
that stripped the state of its ability to request proof of citizenship
when residents register to vote.
State officials say the ruling could increase the likelihood of voter
fraud but not in next week's midterms because the deadline for
registration passed before the decision.
At Arizona polls, voters must show one
piece of identification that includes their name, address and
photograph, such as a driver's license. They also can provide two forms
of ID with their names and address, such as a utility bill or bank
statement. Voters can also provide one form a acceptable photo ID with
another form of non-photo ID that includes their name and address, such
as a passport and a utility bill.
Arpaio declined to comment, but McCaffrey
told FoxNews.com that he apologized to the sheriff Thursday for using
his name without his permission. Arpaio, he said, stepped down as
honorary co-chairman.
"He'll continue to support us but he didn't
want an official title with the group while he was being investigated
by everyone with a badge at the White House," he said, alluding to the
Justice Department's investigation into whether Arpaio's office was
discriminating against Hispanics with its crackdown on illegal
immigrants.
Monterroso said he's happy the Justice Department is sending poll watchers, even if it's not in response to his group's letter.
"I think it's the right thing to do," he
said. "It's better to be safe than sorry. If they have people out
there, we want to make sure people vote without fear of intimidation or
harassment by anyone else."
Typical: Deleware TV station "FORGETS" to air paid-for 30-minute Christine O...
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via theblogprof by The blogprof on 11/1/10
But don't worry folks. The liberal media and their minions continue to tell us that there is no real liberal media bias. From the WaPo via HotAir headlines: O'Donnell has trouble airing 30-minute TV ad in Delaware. Here's the ad that never aired:We the People of the First State from Friends of Christine O'Donnell on Vimeo.
From the article:
Christine O'Donnell is taking a page from the playbook of Barack Obama. The Republican Senate candidate has produced a 30-minute television advertisement in the form of a documentary chronicling her connection with the people of Delaware.
No such problems of networks "forgetting" to aire the Obama infomercial. It just so figures...But unlike Obama's ad at the end of the 2008 race, the tea party insurgent's campaign has run into obstacles getting it in front of voters before Election Day. The campaign did not purchase advance time on networks in the Philadelphia or Delaware markets, said a source close to the O'Donnell campaign, and the networks did not have time available to air the ad on such short notice.
So O'Donnell turned to a public access television station, Delaware Channel 28. She told supporters at a Tea Party Express rally on Sunday in Wilmington to watch that night at 11:30. "Tell everyone to tune in," she said at the rally.
"1 minute until the premiere of our 30 minute feature. Tune in to meet all the heart warming people I've met on the campaign trail. Ch. 28," O'Donnell tweeted Sunday night.But the ad never aired.
A few minutes later, O'Donnell tweeted: "Okay... this is NOT our show! Must be a programming mix up. We will get back to you..."
The source, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive campaign operations, said the station "forgot to air it."
Then on Monday morning, O'Donnell's campaign issued a press release saying the ad would air on Channel 28 at 10 a.m. The candidate tweeted: "The Inspiring TV show about Delawareans will air at 10 aam and 3 pm today on Channel 28. Please watch this before you vote."And again, it did not air.
"This isn't our show either! We are told channel 28 'forgot' to air it...both times... even though we paid for the time slot last week," O'Donnell tweeted shortly after 10 a.m.
Officials at the station could not immediately be reached for comment.
O'Donnell spokesman Doug Sachtleben said he was not sure why the ad did not air Sunday night. "I don't know if it was something on the cable channel's side," he said in an interview.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to theblogprof using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Despite 40-year sentence, Khadr likely to go home in a year | McClatchy
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/31/102932/jury-sentences-child-soldier-to.html<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a
Shocker. Democrats Defend Socialism Outside Obama Rally (Video)
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft on 11/1/10
Americans for Prosperity was interviewing Obama supporters outside his Virginia rally on Friday night.
They said, "Socialism was cool."
President Obama visited Charlottesville on Friday October 29, 2010 to campaign for liberal Congressman Tom Perriello. We decided to hand out our free "Socialism isn't Cool" bumper stickers to the crowd. What we found about Perriello and Obama supporters was shocking.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Gateway Pundit using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Shocker. Democrats Defend Socialism Outside Obama Rally (Video)
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft on 11/1/10
Americans for Prosperity was interviewing Obama supporters outside his Virginia rally on Friday night.
They said, "Socialism was cool."
President Obama visited Charlottesville on Friday October 29, 2010 to campaign for liberal Congressman Tom Perriello. We decided to hand out our free "Socialism isn't Cool" bumper stickers to the crowd. What we found about Perriello and Obama supporters was shocking.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Gateway Pundit using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
More Hope & Change… Employment Offices to Hire Armed Security Guards
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft on 11/1/10
The democrats doubled the unemployment rate from where it was when they took over Congress in 2007.
(Source: US Misery Index)
48 of 50 states have lost jobs since they rammed through their Trillion dollar stimulus bill. The Obama-Pelosi economic plan resulted in a cumulative 7.5 million jobs deficit. In fact, Barack Obama is the worst jobs president since the Great Depression.
Things are so bad that employment agencies are hiring armed security guards.
The Indy Channel reported:
Armed security guards will be on hand at 36 unemployment offices around Indiana in what state officials said is a step to improve safety and make branch security more consistent.
No specific incidents prompted the action, Department of Workforce Development spokesman Marc Lotter told 6News' Norman Cox.
Lotter said the agency is merely being cautious with the approach of an early-December deadline when thousands of Indiana residents could see their unemployment benefits end after exhausting the maximum 99 weeks provided through multiple federal extension periods.
How's that for hope-n-change?
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Gateway Pundit using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Delaware TV Station “Forgets” to Run O’Donnell Paid TV Program
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Gateway Pundit by Jim Hoft on 11/1/10
What is going on here?
A station in Delaware did not run the Christine O'Donnell program this morning even though the 30 minute program was paid for.
They said they "forgot" to air it.
They were reminded to run the show this morning.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Gateway Pundit using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Flashback: Houston New Black Panther Party Protests with Machine Guns
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Big Government by Mike Roman on 11/1/10
The Houston chapter of the New Black Panther Party has announced that it will be sending members to the polls in Harris County on Tuesday, November 2nd. The mobilization has caused some concern for members of the King Street Patriots, a group of citizens who have been monitoring polls in Harris County. The group claims they have been the victims of harassment from County election workers and members of the Democrat Party. They believe the Black Panthers have one goal: intimidate their members.
The paramilitary organization came under fire in 2008 after Election Journal broke the videoof King Samir Shabaz and Jerry Jackson intimidating voters with a nightstick outside of a poll in Philadelphia. But that may pale in comparison to the Houston chapter, which appears to have an arsenal of assault weapons. In the video below, shot in June 2000, the Houston Black Panthers marched on the Texas Republican convention with "machine guns."
Further raising tensions, several months ago Shabaz, now the National Field Director of the group, surfaced in a video calling for members to "kill crackers and their babies." It is unknown if Shabaz plans to be in Houston.
Citizens in Houston are encouraged to contact us with any reports of intimidation at the polls on election day. If you have an iPhone, you can download our free voter fraud reporting app in the App Store (Note: Texas law does not allow video or photos to be taken within 100′ of the polls)
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Big Government using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Flashback: Houston New Black Panther Party Protests with Machine Guns
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Big Government by Mike Roman on 11/1/10
The Houston chapter of the New Black Panther Party has announced that it will be sending members to the polls in Harris County on Tuesday, November 2nd. The mobilization has caused some concern for members of the King Street Patriots, a group of citizens who have been monitoring polls in Harris County. The group claims they have been the victims of harassment from County election workers and members of the Democrat Party. They believe the Black Panthers have one goal: intimidate their members.
The paramilitary organization came under fire in 2008 after Election Journal broke the videoof King Samir Shabaz and Jerry Jackson intimidating voters with a nightstick outside of a poll in Philadelphia. But that may pale in comparison to the Houston chapter, which appears to have an arsenal of assault weapons. In the video below, shot in June 2000, the Houston Black Panthers marched on the Texas Republican convention with "machine guns."
Further raising tensions, several months ago Shabaz, now the National Field Director of the group, surfaced in a video calling for members to "kill crackers and their babies." It is unknown if Shabaz plans to be in Houston.
Citizens in Houston are encouraged to contact us with any reports of intimidation at the polls on election day. If you have an iPhone, you can download our free voter fraud reporting app in the App Store (Note: Texas law does not allow video or photos to be taken within 100′ of the polls)
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Big Government using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
EXPOSED! America’s Democracy Traded Away for a Slice of Pizza!
Sent to you by Jay via Google Reader:
via Big Government by LaborUnionReport on 11/1/10
It is hard to believe that, when America's founding fathers established our democratic republic, they could have envisioned it could be so easily manipulated and corrupted so cheaply. However, to Democrats and their union handlers, the ends apparently do justify the means when it comes to transforming America.
America's democratic system for electing our representatives is supposed to be a model for the rest of the world. Yet, unions and union-funded shadowy groups, along with their Democrat cronies, seem to have come up with a clever way of corrupting America's democracy using Latinos and…pizza.
Last month, we wrote about how unions or their allies could be stealing the mid-term elections even before November 2nd. What you're about to read and see for yourself is one of those events where Hispanic voters were lured to an early voting rally just two weeks ago and fed pizza for their votes…all the while under the watchful gaze of one of Arizona's highest officials.
Early Voting & Absentee Voting.
In California, the SEIU and the California Teachers Association are targeting Latino voters to create new permanent absentee voters.
In Arizona, SEIU-connected Mi Familia Vota has rounded up 20,000 voter registrations from Latinos to establish a "permanent early voting list." According to the Yuma Sun:
"They are going by precinct and talking to folks," said Francisco Heredia, Arizona state director for Mi Familia Vota and spokesman for One Arizona, the organizations behind the effort.
"It has been mainly Latino voters that we are trying to make sure sign up on the permanent early voter list because we feel that by them being on this list they have ample time to make an informed decision on the candidates and propositions that are going to be on the ballot."
In just two months, the seven canvassers have gotten more than 3,000 local Hispanics to sign up for the early ballot.
"Our goal was above 3,000 and we've met that goal," Heredia said.
The group is nonpartisan, and Heredia said it is not their intention to tell voters who to vote for.
Statewide, Mi Familia Vota and One Vote Arizona have registered 20,000 new voters in four months.
"What is more impressive is we have registered over 43,000 on the permanent early voting list," Heredia said, adding that many Hispanics don't vote regularly.
Remember, it is "not their intention to tell voters who to vote for."
Last week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Arizona's Proposition 200, which asks people to show proof of citizenship in order to register to vote, violates the National Voter Registration Act. In addition, amid internet rumors of voter fraud, Arizona's Secretary of State issued a statement indicating that his office has been unable to verify or substantiate any of the rumors.
Pizza Politics
In Las Vegas, allegations that Democrat Harry Reid's campaign and union backers are buying votes with free food and Starbucks cards have been shrugged off by Nevada's Secretary of State, SEIU and George Soros-backed Ross Miller. Now that a significant election complaint has been filed in the state of Nevada, we'll wait to see whether Miller actually does his job or continues dodging the issue.
A Pizza Party to Remember.
Last month, you read about the early voting rally planned for October 16th in Phoenix which was organized by Latino groups, including One Arizona, with ties to the SEIU.
The event did, in fact, take place on October 16th. While the number of attendees was far fewer than the thousands event organizers had hoped for, there were some surprises.
What you are about to see is pictures of the event—posted on line by event goers, as well as video taken at the event by eyewitnesses*. You will note that the much of the video was taken outside the well-guarded, barb-wire topped, chain link fence, which means there is no audio. The reason for this is, according to witnesses, non-hispanics were not allowed into the event unless they worked for a campaign.
While it is unknown whether any actual election laws were violated, both the video, as well as the pictures reveal how utterly corrupted the election process has become.
According to the eyewitnesses, the event was heavily guarded by men wearing orange CDB shirts (CBD stands for Committees for the Defense of the Barrio). Entrants were allowed in through the fences and onto the property by the orange-shirted "security" guards. The event was held on a parking lot that is apparently owned by long-time Arizona Democrat politician Mary Rose Wilcox and her husband.
Entrants were given a ticket, ushered to a tent where voting took place, then given pizza and drinks.
According to the eyewitnesses, two Hispanics entered but came without their ballots and were told to come back with them. They left without pizza, but with a list of Democrats to vote for (at right). Those who had early ballots completed them handed them over then were given pizza. The two Hispanics who left who had no ballots with them were asked if they were offered pizza they said no and were pressured to bring back their early ballots to the event to get help to fill them out. They did not want to and said they wanted to make their own choices who to vote for and left angry thinking this was a fun event they could participate in as advertised.
A Surprise "Guest" Hangs Out at The Pizza Party.
As noted above, non-Hispanics were not allowed in unless they were part of with a politician's campaign. One of the politicians who was present for over an hour at the event was Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry Goddard. The anti-SB1070 Goddard also happens to be the highest law enforcement officer in Arizona Attorney General of the State.
Goddard spent approximately an hour at the event, chatting up voters. As he was leaving, he was confronted by the citizens who were not allowed into the event that was advertised as a "public event."
The following is video footage of the event, compiled by the brilliant Ben Howe.
Following the cast-your-vote-for-a-slice-of-pizza, voters placed their ballots in a "ballot box." As you can see, the "ballot box" was a large 'tupperware'-like bin. And, standing behind the table is an unidentified person wearing a Goddard Got Art T-Shirt. [Goddard Got Art is a political committee.]
One final note:
As stated above, it is unknown whether any laws were violated. However, when an event that is advertised as a "public event" turns into a Democrat voting event for Hispanics only, then is attended by Democrat politicians—one of them being the highest law enforcement officer in the state—there is something drastically wrong. If it is not illegal, it is surely a sign that the Democrats have manipulated the voting process to the point that the sanctity of the process is now suspect.
*Eyewitnesses to the event wish to remain anonymous due to a fear of retaliation as Arizona's highest law enforcement official, Attorney General Terry Goddard was at the event to campaign for governor.
__________________
"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Big Government using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)