912 Patriots of Lower Bucks - Your Daily Updates ALL in ONE Place!
January 4, 2012
Quote:
Paper is poverty,... it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself."
-Thomas Jefferson
Court: Obama must be 'constitutionally' eligible
For the first time in dozens of court cases challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to be president, a judge has ruled that Obama must, in order to be a candidate on the Georgia ballot for president in 2012, meet the constitutional demands for candidates for the office.
Just as famed Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is preparing to release results of his investigation of Barack Obama's eligibility for Arizona's 2012 ballot, a top-gun activist who led a successful campaign to recall a key Arpaio ally is now targeting the sheriff himself.
Several New Hampshire legislators declared at a news conference President Barack Obama is not a "natural-born citizen" of the United States and that New Hampshire voters were defrauded by Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.
If you see a story that you believe would be useful and important to our readers, simply respond to this email with a link and a brief description of why it is important. (Even if it may be obvious)
If you wish to unsubscribe (and we hope you don't) please click the "safe unsubscribe" link.
Southern NH 9.12 Project
& Temple University Students for Intellectual Freedom (TUSIF)
This is a really good chart with all the candidates positions on issues....note especially, please, those that support agenda 21
THERE WILL BE NO JANUARY Valley Forge Patriots Tea Party MEETING !!!
MEETINGS WILL RESUME IN FEBRUARY
3rd WITH A FORUM ON THE PA SENATE RACE TO UNSEAT BOB CASEY. SAM ROHRER,STEVE WELSH,AND MARK SCARINGI HAS CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE. MORE INFORMATION TO FOLLOW.
OUR BEST WISHES TO YOU ALL FOR A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY, HEALTHY NEW YEAR!!
The VFP steering committee,
Mark, Betty, Joe, Jeff & Tom
We are looking for a few good women and men for local committee seats
The Kitchen Table Patriots is looking to help the Bucks County Republican Committee fill some vacant local committee seats.
These seats will be filled in the spring primary. Below is a list of some known vacancies to be filled. There are probably others as well. If you are at all interested in running for any of these offices, please reply to this email and we will work with you to understand the office and get campaign support.
Warrington Township District 2 (Woman)
Warrington Township District 8 (Woman & Man)
Buckingham Middle 2 (Woman & Man)
Buckingham Upper 1 (Woman)
Buckingham Upper 3 (Woman)
Upper Southampton West 1 (Woman & Man)
Upper Southampton North 1 (Woman)
The committee positions are the root of the party, and who better to help out with this than the grassroots!
Mark Your Calendar!
The Kitchen Table Patriots along with The Loyal Opposition, The Thomas Jefferson Club and Citizens for Constitutional Government present the Pennsylvania Republican Candidates for the U.S. Senate Debate
1. David Codrea, unauthorized journalist who broke Fast & Furious, to speak in Montgomeryville Jan 7.
Please see the flier at bottom of email for our big event: David Codrea presents Fast & Furious. We need you to distribute this flier to everywhere/everyone you think will be interested, and we hope you can come yourselves. We need to fill the room which holds 400!
2. We need your 2012 election ideas
Please submit your ideas for things we can do as individuals or groups to win our region in 2012. Tea Party Patriots is taking all suggestions, and we coordinators will report up what our members (you guys) say. I would submit 2 lists: A) with no funding and B) with funding (your wishlist). For example with no $, we can pass out info door-to-door. But with $, we could put up a billboard. PLEASE DON'T TAKE THIS TO MEAN WE HAVE FUNDING; but there are ideas good enough to fundraise for. Please submit ideas by replying or go to our forum.
3.Tom Smith for Senate - any interest?
Is there any interest in hearing Tom Smith for Senate on Wednesday Dec 14 at the Rock from 7-9pm? Please reply before Tuesday at 4pm if you intend to come so we can decide if it's feasible. I'll let you know if we have a quorum. http://tomsmithforsenate.com/
4. Get onto our forum
Please get onto our FORUM if you'd like to communicate with other members, post items of interest, keep track of legislation, figure out rides to events, propose ideas, etc. It's accessible from the blue link, or our website, www.centralmontcoptpp.com
Thomas Jefferson: "Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers....a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy."
But what IS nullification? How does it happen and work? Since September 2010, the Tenth Amendment Center has been hosting a national tour to educate and activate people on this topic. People are learning the constitutional basis, when it's been used in history, and how it is happening around the country and how YOU can stop DC right in your own state.
THE INTERFAITH TASKFORCE FOR AMERICA AND ISRAEL (ITAI)
123 S. Broad Street, Suite 1832, Philadelphia, PA 19109
HOLD THE DATE
ITAI is pleased to invite you to attend our program titled "Christians in the Middle East: Endangered Species."
With Samir Asad (an Egyptian Coptic-Christian), Wafa Mikhail, and Joseph Puder, and Charles Kahn Jr.,
Our panel will discuss the current situation in Egypt, the Palestinian Authority and Gaza, and more...
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2012, 7:30PM
At
St. Bartholomew's Episcopal Church
1989 Rt. 70 East, Cherry Hill, NJ
Admission is free, tax-deductible contributions to ITAI are encouraged.
Please RSVP by 1/16/12.
LISTEN LIVE TO REPATRIOT RADIO
"BETTER THAN EVER"
(all times are eastern)
Monday 3-4pm "Bordering on Insanity" - Sue Payne and Frosty Wooldridge
Tuesday 3-4pm "American Freedom Watch" - Karen Schoen with contributors John Estabrooks and Dr. Ronald Myers
Wednesday 3-4pm "Patriots Watch" - Billy Baer and Dan Haggerty
Thursday 3-4pm "America's Black Shield" - Ted Hayes and Terrance Lang
Friday 10-11pm "Veterans' Weekly Forum" - Rich Davis and David Bellavia
Remember January 3rd, 2007 The Day The Democrats Took Over!
I wonder how many people know this?
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009 -- it was actually January 3rd 2007. The day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives & Senate, the start of the 110th Congress.
The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
"For those of you who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault," think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!
The Case Against Obamacare: Health Care Policy Series for the 112th Congress
A Health Care Policy Series for the 112th Congress
Building on decades of Heritage research, The Case Against Obamacare: A Health Care Policy Series for the 112th Congress examines 15 key provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Each report:
Cites specific sections of the 2,700-page health care law
Provides detailed analysis of specific Obamacare provisions
Identifies key principles for a better way to reform health care
The unmistakable conclusion of this series is that Obamacare must be fully repealed. Congress cannot build sound market-based health care reform on the flawed foundation of this health care law. Until it can be repealed, Congress must employ its full powers authorized by the Constitution to:
For Tea Parties, this can be used as basic ammunition for letters to the editor, columns for your local news outlet, handouts at public events, emailing the pdf to our elected reps as well as to members, friends and neighbors.
This appears to be an excellent resource; let's make use of it.
Lou Flanagan
The General Wayne Tea Party
The 2012 Presidential Voter Guide
The first contests in the race for the Republican nomination are just around the corner. To better inform you, we looked beyond the rhetoric to the candidates' actual records on the issues important to families.
This voter guide outlines candidate stances on issues that are important to the family. We researched the candidates' statements and votes on the ten issues that best give voters an understanding on if the candidates match your values. Please use this resource as you think about who you would like to see be the nominee to challenge President Barack Obama.
Download the free guide and be sure to share this resource with your friends and family before the 2012 primary season begins next month.
A values voter is an informed voter.
Sincerely,
Tony Perkins President
FRC Action: 801 G Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 P: 202/393-2100 or 877/372-2808
As you wake up this morning, Rick Santorum only lost to Mitt Romney by 8 votes. Santorum spent about a dollar per vote and Romney spent hundreds of dollars for his votes. Rick Santorum substantially over performed and while the Romney camp wants you to believe a win is a win, Romney got less votes in 2012 than he got in 2008. In addition, everything you heard last night from the professional class of political pundit was bull crap.
The political press and pundits have gotten so used to standard narratives that they cannot deviate from the mean even when it becomes grossly dislocated from reality.
First, the reason the GOP is having such a chaotic primary fight has nothing to do with the tea party. Frankly, it has nothing to do with the bulk of the GOP not wanting Romney.
The reason this Republican primary season is so chaotic is because George W. Bush failed to have a successor. Had President Bush had a Vice President to run for President, Bush would have undoubtedly made different policy decisions, but even aside from that there would have been an ascertainable front runner coming from the Bush administration to win or lose.
Because there was not such a thing and because the GOP likes orderly processes, we had to go back to 2000 and dredge up John McCain.
The Republican field was unable to reboot because we had no logical successor coming out of the White House to either win or lose. We went back to McCain and have had to work our way back through unresolved issues from 2000. And now, when the field should be rebooted, we're having to deal with Mitt Romney who should have been displaced by an heir in 2008 and instead, because the 2008 season did not reboot the crop of candidates, is now the guy three quarters of the GOP does not want who is about to be the nominee.
Our process is chaotic because Bush left us no heir to win or to be rejected through a cathartic process of locking in gains or moving on from Bush. Yes, this one is Bush's fault. On the bright side, the Democrats will have the same problem in 2016 unless Obama ditches Biden now for Hillary.
But that's not the only issue the media has failed to pay attention to. There was some serious bull crap coming out of reporters' mouths last night that is flat out false.
For starters, the media would have you believe that the 123,000 people who turned out for the Hawkeye Caucii was a record. This is simply not true except superficially. If you take out the non-Republicans who came into the caucuses last night for Ron Paul, the Republican turn out was less than 2008 - even considering the ration of independents to Republicans who turned out in 2008.
At its best, this turn out does not signal core enthusiasm with the field as it is presently constituted and perhaps signals that an alternative could still jump in. Considering "winner takes all" races do not come until April, someone coming out now could campaign and build momentum to the winner takes all states.
Additionally, anyone who says "this was a victory for retail politics" should be beaten with an Iowan cattle prod. Rick Santorum's "victory" - and it was a victory in every sense but those 8 votes - was because he has run one of the most God awful disastrous retail campaign operations of any candidate with enough popularity to get on the debate stage.
Santorum visited all 99 Iowan counties, some of them repeatedly. His "successful" campaign never, ever caught on with Iowa voters despite all that retail time in Iowa. It only became successful when ever single other candidate had been vetted and imploded and there was absolutely no other person familiar to the voters who could stand as the non-Romney candidate.
Had Santorum run a successful retail campaign and caught fire on his own accord, he'd have been vetted by now and probably also succumbed to the Romney machine. His campaign was not successful, it's just all the others sucked so bad.
And now that leads me to Bachmann and Perry. Bachmann, the Iowa native, won not a single county. Even Rick Perry won two counties. Bachmann must drop out. Frankly, it makes sense for Perry to do so as well except for one issue.
If Rick Perry drops out of the race it will be the ultimate failure of the tea party movement to see the race come down to two or three big government conservatives. Romney and Santorum both hide behind compassionate conservatism to expand the state to suit their purposes. Only Rick Perry has run a campaign to make Washington "as inconsequential to our lives as possible."
If I were Perry, I'd wake up tomorrow, say I refuse to surrender the Republican Party into the hands of big government conservatives after all the gains the tea party has made, and then announce I'm firing all my political staffers and communications staffers and ask South Carolina to help me reboot to victory. Make it an Alamo stand and, if like at the Alamo Perry goes does, perhaps there'll at least be a rallying cry for small government conservatism left over.
That's just me. Perry's policy people have been phenomenal. The comms staff and political staff so badly bungled this that Rick Perry just suffered the first political loss of his career.
Don't count on it happening though.
As you wake up this morning, the tea party has failed because it has surrendered itself into the hands of Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich - all of whom would use government to suit allegedly conservative ends, which is not conservative in and of itself. But by God Mitt Romney may now get the political beating everyone has been expecting him to get. Newt Gingrich has nothing left to lose. He can go Newtlear against the guy he sees as having destroyed him. Newt Gingrich can unleash unmitigated hell against MItt Romney and just like the attacks on Newt were true, they'll all be true about MItt Romney too.
Voters in Iowa will caucus today to select their choice for the 2012 presidential nominees. As the rest of the nation watches, Iowa's choice could help frame the debate for this election year.
And as the voters speak, others are weighing in on what they believe is the best direction for America's government and policy in 2012 and beyond. Over the weekend, The New York Times editorial page was one of those voices, yet again carrying the torch of the liberal, progressive movement. The Times revealed its dismal view of America and a call for more of the same policies that have left the country in an economic quagmire. "The way to revive sustainable growth is with more government aid to help create jobs, support demand and prevent foreclosures," the Times writes. "As things stand now, however, Washington will provide less help, not more, in 2012."
What the "Old Gray Lady" is referring to, of course, is push back from conservatives who do not see "more government" as the ultimate solution to America's problems. Instead, conservatives see the years of liberal big government policies, increased spending, growing deficits, and sprawling regulations as the root of America's problems-and a contributing cause to continually high unemployment and economic stagnation. And when you ask voters what they think the government should do to solve the nation's economic problems, they overwhelmingly fall in the "less is more" camp.
If it's cold outside, deploy Global Warming Fun -- NO. 1.
Say to every liberal you meet, at every opportunity: "Brrr, it's cold. Makes you think we could do with a bit more global warming." Dig them hard in the ribs to emphasize how funny your joke is. Otherwise, there's a danger they might not get it. They're weird that way, liberals.
The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is little known but affects us all. It controls the propaganda of Climate Change, and misleads people and governments with its "science."
Media stories highlighting the deviant behaviors of marginal social forces in Israel tend to be simplistic and misleading, and serve identifiable political forces. The truth is very different.
The administration employs an anti-Semite who approves of terror attacks against U.S. soldiers and against Israeli civilians and thinks homosexuals should be killed. Hypocrisy, perhaps?
The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is little known but affects us all. It controls the propaganda of Climate Change, and misleads people and governments with its "science."
By Frontpagemag.com Russian scientist and leading "reluctant" dissident Igor Melcuk deciphers the crises and threats on the horizon in the year ahead. Read more »
Bang for your buck: that's what the Freedom Center provides. Ammunition for the culture war against the Left: that's what your contribution buys. So please act now and help us in the fight we are waging on many fronts for America's future. America is under assault from within and without. There is no time to lose.
It was recently observed that Ron Paul was to the left of Obama on national security and the best evidence for that statement can be found when one year ago Ron Paul joined forces with Barney Frank on a proposal to gut national defense via a panel of experts, quite a few of whom were tied to George Soros.
In July 2010, Barney Frank and Ron Paul co-authored a Huffington Post article rolling out their Sustainable Defense Task Force. The Task Force "consisting of experts on military expenditures that span the ideological spectrum" would recommend a trillion dollars in defense cuts. The experts however didn't quite "span the ideological spectrum", more like float under it.
The panel of experts who would decide how to best gut national defense featured such independent thinkers as William D Hartung of the New America Foundation. Hartung's main expertise was appearing in "Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire".
Then there was Lawrence J. Korb of the Center for American Progress and Miriam Pemberton of the Institute for Policy Studies. If you want to know what the Center, the Foundation and the Institute all have in common, it's Hungarian and smells like stale cabbage and the death of nations.
The rather creepy Institute for Policy Studies issued a paper proposing that Obama act as king and rule through executive orders. The New American Foundation is not only backed by Soros but has his son on its leadership council. The Center for American Progress is run by the co-chair of Obama's transition team and is all for intents and purposes the think tank of the White House. All three are Soros funded.
But it doesn't end there. Also on the panel was Christopher Hellman of the National Priorities Project. If you are wondering what the NPP is. It's a think tank whose objective is to "influence national spending priorities". And if you're in the mood for a double, Miriam Pemberton is also on the board of the NPP. The man behind the curtain at NPP? None other than our favorite Hungarian James Bond villain.
TEHRAN, Iran - Iranian scientists have produced the nation's first nuclear fuel rod, a feat of engineering the West has doubted Tehran capable of, the country's nuclear agency said Sunday.
The announcement marks another step in Tehran's efforts to achieve proficiency in the entire nuclear fuel cycle - from exploring uranium ore to producing nuclear fuel - despite U.N. sanctions and measures by the United States and others to get it to halt aspects of its atomic work that could provide a possible pathway to weapons production.
Tehran has long said it is forced to seek a way to manufacture the fuel rods on its own, since the sanctions ban it from buying them on foreign markets. Nuclear fuel rods are tubes containing pellets of enriched uranium that provide fuel for nuclear reactors.
Warning Sounded Iran May Kill Condemned Christian Pastor in Secret
Monday, 02 Jan 2012
By Mike Tighe
An Iranian pastor facing death a death sentence for refusing to renounce his Christian faith and embrace Islam is expected to spend another year in jail, awaiting an appeal on his death sentence, while government authorities try to force him to convert to Islam.
However, the delay could be a ruse and the Iranian government could kill him in secret, warns the founder of Present Truth Ministries, which was the first to report on Pastor Yosef Nadarkhani's arrest in October 2009.
That's the most recent development in Nadarkhani's religious and political nightmare of more than two years, according to The Christian Post.
The Air Force has notified Hawker Beechcraft Corp. that its Beechcraft AT-6 has been excluded from competition to build a light attack aircraft, a contract worth nearly $1 billion, the company said.
The company had been working with the Air Force for two years and spent over $100 million to ensure compliance with the requirements for the plane and says the craft (Beechcraft AT-6) met all requirements as shown through a demonstration actually led by the Air National Guard.
"We have followed the Air Force's guidance close, and based on what we have seen, we continue to believe that we submitted the most capable, affordable and sustainable light attack aircraft," the company said.
Keep in mind, this doesn't appear to be a question of being outbid or outclassed. In fact, this seems to be a classic example of a contract being awarded without any bidding process at all, something you may remember infuriated the left when the recipient of the contract was American company Haliburton
Historically, before the Arabs fabricated the Palestinian people as an exclusively Arab phenomenon, no such group existed.
Countless official British Mandate-vintage documents speak of 'the Jews' and 'the Arabs' of Palestine - not 'Jews and Palestinians.' Ironically, before local Jews began calling themselves Israelis in 1948 (the name 'Israel' was chosen for the newly-established Jewish state), the term 'Palestine' applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before Israel's independence.
Some examples include:
* The Jerusalem Post, founded in 1932, was called the Palestine Post until 1948.
* Bank Leumi L'Israel was called the "Anglo-Palestine Bank, a Jewish Company."
* The Jewish Agency - an arm of the Zionist movement engaged in Jewish settlement since 1929 - was called the Jewish Agency for Palestine.
* Today's Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, founded in 1936 by German Jewish refugees who fled Nazi Germany, was called the "Palestine Symphony Orchestra," composed of some 70 Palestinian Jews.
* The United Jewish Appeal (UJA) was established in 1939 as a merger of the United Palestine Appeal and the fundraising arm of the Joint Distribution Committee.
Encouraged by their success at historical revisionism and brainwashing the world with the 'Big Lie' of a Palestinian people, Palestinian Arabs have more recently begun to claim that they are the descendants of the Philistines, and even the Stone Age Canaanites. Archeologists explain that the Philistines were a Mediterranean people who settled along the coast of Canaan in 1100 BCE. They have no connection to the Arab nation, a desert people who emerged from the Arabian Peninsula.
As if that myth were not enough, Arafat claimed that "Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the Jebusites" displaced when King David conquered Jerusalem. He also argued that "Abraham was an Iraqi." One Christmas Eve, Arafat declared that "Jesus was a Palestinian." Here, he was correct, but left out a very important part - Jesus was a Palestinian Jew!
Contradictions abound, Palestinian leaders claim to be descended from the Canaanites, the Philistines, the Jebusites and the first Christians. They also co-opt Jesus and ignore his Jewishness, at the same time claiming the Jews never were a people and never built the Holy Temples in Jerusalem.
The problem is that a stateless Palestinian people is a fabrication. The word Palestine is not even Arabic.
Mark Steyn recently accused the Jewish establishment in Canada of the same thing namely that it continues to view skinheads rather than "rag heads" as the greatest threat. Ted Belman
Dr. Charles Jacobs is a longtime anti-slavery and pro-Israel activist, one of the founders of CAMERA and the American Anti-Slavery Group (AASG). He has also been a persistent critic of the ADL, arguing that it concentrates way too much on 'old-fashioned' neo-Nazi antisemitis m and not enough on threats from Islamists and the extreme Left. What I found interesting in a recent exchange was this:
Shifting the focus away from skinheads, neo-Nazis, and Christian bigots and onto radical leftists and Muslim Jew-hatred would be extraordinarily difficult. It would require a massive and unpopular effort: leading the Jews to think difficult thoughts about their new situation, thoughts that put them at odds with their comforting universalist theology of Political Correctness. ...
h/t to Yamit for bring this letter to my attention. It has long been the contention legal analysts that Res 181 does not prevent Israel from claiming Judea and Samaria because the Arabs rejected it. Dore Gold goes even farther on behalf of Israel, in claiming that the whole resolution is now null and void. Thus, no internationalization of Jerusalem and no corridor between Gaza and Judea and Samaria and no to anything else in that resolution, which, in any event, was a recommendation. Ted Belman
"Professor Stone wrote about this 'novelty of resurrection' in 1981 when he analyzed a similar attempt by pro-Palestinian 'experts' at the UN to rewrite the history of the conflict (their writings were termed "Studies"). Stone called it "revival of the dead"
"To attempt to show ... that Resolution 181(II) 'remains' in force in 1981 is thus an undertaking even more miraculous than would be the revival of the dead. It is an attempt to...
Iran's army chief on Tuesday warned an American aircraft carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf in Tehran's latest tough rhetoric over the strategic waterway.
Gen. Ataollah Salehi spoke as a 10-day Iranian naval exercise ended near the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Gulf. The drill was a show of strength at a time when Iranian officials have warned they could try to shut down the vital oil passage if the United States enacts tough new sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.
"We recommend to the American warship that passed through the Strait of Hormuz and went to Gulf of Oman not to return to the Persian Gulf," Salehi was quoted as saying by the state news agency IRNA.
Two weeks ago, an Austrian appellate court upheld the conviction of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff on charges of "denigrating religious beliefs" (see story below).
Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff is one of ACT! for America's international chapter leaders.
ACT! for America has contributed to Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff's legal defense fund and encourages concerned citizens to do the same. Log on here if you would like to make a contribution to her legal defense fund. We know Elisabeth's situation-she needs a lot of help if she is to continue fighting this on appeal. She is, indeed, fighting for the rights of all of us.
This back-door imposition of sharia law will not end in Austria. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), representing all 56 Muslim countries, has won the support of top officials in our State Department in its efforts to criminalize "defamation" of religion. (It is a violation of sharia law to "defame" Islam, Allah or Mohammed.)
In a move clearly designed to intimidate those who oppose the OIC's effort, Hillary Clinton's security personnel detained Andrea Lafferty, president of the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC), at the closing event of a recent conference aimed at promoting this draconian effort. Lafferty was told she had been identified as a "security threat" to the Secretary of State. (See the TVC story here.)
For four years we have been warning America that our freedom of speech is under assault from radical Islam and its politically correct enablers and apologists. As you can see, we don't cry wolf.
"A Black Day for Austria" by Soeren Kern December 26, 2011 at 5:00 am
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2702/sabaditsch-wolff-appeal An Austrian appellate court has upheld the conviction of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, a Viennese housewife and anti-Jihad activist, for "denigrating religious beliefs" after giving a series of seminars about the dangers of radical Islam.
The December 20 ruling shows that while Judaism and Christianity can be disparaged with impunity in postmodern multicultural Austria, speaking the truth about Islam is subject to swift and hefty legal penalties.
Although the case has major implications for freedom of speech in Austria, as well as in Europe as a whole, it has received virtually no press coverage in the American mainstream media. Read more:
January 03, 2012 MEET AMERICA'S DEADLIEST SNIPERChris Kyle is not a household name, not yet. Mr. Kyle is a Navy SEAL who is often called "the legend" by his fellow SEALs. Read why this sharpshooter is referred to as "the deadliest sniper in U. S. history" and get a sample of his new biography HERE.
DID ROMNEY GUARANTEE A WIN IN IOWA?Although he is denying it now, on Sunday Mitt Romney made a bold prediction about today's Iowa Caucuses. When asked about the statement by MSNBC, Romney denied it. Watch both clips HERE.
BACHMANN CONFRONTS CNN HOSTCongresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann faced off with CNN's Soledad O'Brien this morning. The awkward moments happened after the CNN anchor questioned Bachmann about a 2004 comment she made on homosexuality. See the video HERE.
RADIO HOST SLAMS THE WAY RICK SANTORUM MOURNED HIS BABY'S DEATHAlan Colmes was taken to task by National Review editor Rich Lowery during a recent segment on Fox News. Colmes' comments about Rick Santorum and his wife's actions following the death of their newborn infant son in 1996 have drawn much criticism. Watch the entire exchange HERE.
INDOCTRINATION? WATCH THIRD GRADERS SING A PRO-OCCUPY WALL ST SONG School officials in Virginia are defending the performance of a highly politicized song that supports concepts so often heard from the Occupy Wall Street movement. Read the lyrics and see the kids singing HERE. IT'S 'CAUCUS DAY' IN IOWA: WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT IOWA AND IOWANS?MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell raised some hackles in the Hawkeye State last week when she said that Iowa was "too white, too evangelical and too rural." A group of Iowans, not pleased with how the mainstream media is depicting them, has responded. Watch their short film called "Iowa Nice" HERE.
The Coming War inside America By Doug Hagmann CanadaFreePress.com
As the attention of most Americans was captivated by the shiny object in Times Square this weekend like infants fixated on car keys dangled in front of them, Barack Hussein Obama signed into law H.R. 1540, better known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Regardless of any concurrent executive signing statements that are mere window dressing and not legally binding, Obama and every member of congress who crafted and voted for this act has essentially declared war on American citizens on U.S. soil.
The Breitbart 'Ambiguous Entity of the Year': The Tent of the Unknown Rapist By Andrew Breitbart Breitbart/BigGovernment.com
I am pleased to announce the winner of the First Annual Breitbart "Ambiguous Entity of the Year" award. Our choice was inspired by the most under-reported story of the year: the dark side of the Occupy Wall Street movement, which the media attempted to hide.
Abortion Practitioners Charged With Murder Face Extradition By Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com
Two abortion practitioners who have been charged with murder in the deaths of viable unborn children in a two-state operation aimed at avoiding late-term abortion laws will face extradition hearings on Tuesday.
Obama's Role In The One World Government Agenda Are major developments such as the Arab Spring, the absolute chaos in the European Union with the bankruptcy of Greece, Italy, Portugal and the emergence of the Vatican backing Germany as the one country that the European Union is dependant on for its survival totally unrelated?
Open Thread: The Radical Lawyers Behind OWS By NB Staff NewsBusters.org
Following their eviction from Zuccotti Park early Tuesday morning, Occupy Wall Street protesters were already pushing to return to their newly cleaned campgrounds. Lawyers lined up to file a temporary restraining order, and a judge granted protesters the right to return to the park between the time of eviction and the time of Tuesday afternoon's full hearing. The judge who granted the order, Justice Lucy Billings, has a number of liberal credentials: she is a 1973 Berkeley Law School graduate and spent a quarter century working for the ACLU. Read the Full Story
Global warming orthodoxy gets challenged in a first-of-its-kind hearing.
by Tom Harris
January 2, 2011
On December 15, four leading scientists appeared before the Canadian Senate Standing Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources to challenge global warming advocacy. The hearing was the first of its kind in Canada. (Video of the hearing can be found here.)
Guelph University Professor of Economics Dr. Ross McKitrick led off the hearing, explaining that the foundation of the climate scare - the science as promulgated by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - cannot be trusted:
The so-called Climategate emails confirmed the reality of bias and cronyism in the IPCC process. ... IPCC Assessments are guaranteed merely to repeat and reinforce a set of foregone conclusions that make up the party line.
McKitrick explained how his research showed that much of the warming seen in the IPCC surface temperature record is almost certainly a result of urbanization, agriculture, and other land use changes, not greenhouse gases (GHG). He also found that the 50-year record of temperatures measured by balloons does not show the warming trend forecast by climate models.
My law professor friend is an ardent leftist and Obama supporter. We have exchanged ideas and barbs for over two years. His latest post www.mealsfromthemarketplace.com included in part:
"... the Occupy Wall Street movement might save America from the march toward plutocracy that it has been on for the last thirty years. Properly understood, the Occupy movement is aimed at reining in the excesses of rampant greed in a corporate-dominated capitalist system that has lost its bearings."
He liked my comments about capitalism but thought I was obsessing too much on the lack of propriety of the OWS crowd vs. TEA Party gatherings... that we must concentrate on substance. It's just hard to do when one side is screaming epithets and throwing dung.
Cleanliness does make profound impressions. I have several profound memories that give credence to my view (as I sit among piles of paper around my ... Continue Reading:OWS and TEA Party seeing two ends of an Elephant.
Had the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in February of 1995 acted upon an its expressed determination to arrest a German national who had overstayed his visa, the Oklahoma City bombing might not have taken place.
While the show trial of Oklahoma City bomber Tim McVeigh was being conducted at Denver, Colorado in April of 1997, another federal proceeding was taking place in Tulsa, Oklahoma. But no one seemed particularly interested in this case-the federal prosecution of former beauty queen and Oklahoma debutante Carol Howe for making bomb threats against the government of the United States.
No one, that is, but the Department of Justice itself. And attorneys representing the Department were interested enough to exhibit virtual desperation when privately begging Judge Michael Burrage to seal the case and all appertaining information lest it be acquired by McVeigh attorneys in Denver!
Media Ignore Obama Hawaii Golfing Buddy Who Was Arrested in Prostitution Sting
By Tim Graham | December 31, 2011
Mediaite's Nando Di Fino reports President Obama has played at least two rounds of golf in Hawaii with a high school buddy, Robert "Bobby" Titcomb, was arrested as part of a prostitution sting, after he allegedly approached an undercover police officer for sex in downtown Hawaii.
"What seems particularly interesting ("refreshing"?) here isn't that President Obama would still hang out with a friend who had been arrested; it's how many media outlets have either made no reference to Titcomb's arrest, or simply stated it in passing," he wrote. "Both The New York Times and The Washington Post briefly made a note of Titcomb's past in reporting the vacation stories. In this day and age of 'gotcha!' controversy-driven political coverage, is it surprising not to see more of a big deal being made?"
And maybe even more surprising, there doesn't seem to be a purely political divide within the media. FoxNews.com, for example, in a story about Obama's golfing on Christmas Eve, didn't even mention Titcomb's arrest when reporting on his participation.
In fact, it seems it was a British paper, The Daily Mail, that made the biggest deal out of Titcomb's inclusion, blasting it across its headline: A five-course meal at Honolulu's priciest restaurant after golf with his hooker-loving buddy... Obama faces another tough day in Hawaii
When the government passed the ADA, the Americans with Disabilities Act, in 1990, most people thought the new laws would protect people with physical disabilities from employment discrimination. The good intentions of some have gone bad.
Disability is defined by the ADA as "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity." The determination of whether any particular condition is considered a disability is made on a case by case basis. Certain specific conditions are excluded as disabilities, such as current substance abuse and visual impairment which is correctable by prescription lenses.
Ronald Reagan was trapped by similar language when he signed California's law outlawing abortion in 1968. It included exceptions based on "health." He was assured that the "health exceptions" were physical exceptions like the endangerment of the mother during childbirth which almost never happens. This exception created a hole in the law big enough to drive a truck through. As a 1976 presidential candidate, Reagan said of his signing the California abortion bill, "I wouldn't make the same mistake again" and added that he did "more soul searching and studying on the subject than anything else in my eight years" as governor.
The "original intent" of the the ADA was to create civil rights protections for people with permanent disabilities. Critics of the ADA believed the law was made purposefully vague so that it could be expanded at will. Of course, this is true of all laws. On signing the measure, calm the fears of critics, Pres. George H. W. Bush said:
I know there may have been concerns that the ADA may be too vague or too costly, or may lead endlessly to litigation. But I want to reassure you right now that my administration and the United States Congress have carefully crafted this Act. We've all been determined to ensure that it gives flexibility, particularly in terms of the timetable of implementation; and we've been committed to containing the costs that may be incurred.... Let the shameful wall of exclusion finally come tumbling down.
Now we learn that the definition of "disability" has expanded beyond what its original framers ever could have imagined. The EEOC, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is attempting to expand the meaning of "mental impairment" based on the provision found in the ADA legislation.
So today's it's the Iowa Caucus Bowl, matching up the three strongest teams from the last coaches' poll of the BCS series. . . wait, no, that was yesterday. I'm still working off my football hangover, and marveling that yet again Stanford proves itself to be the biggest gridiron head case since Wrong Way Riegels, as I suppose befits a brainiac university.
The GOP field has seemingly featured nothing but a cast of Wrong Way Riegels, with the exception of Jon Huntsman, who is the only person in the field who has not yet enjoyed even a momentary boomlet and crash. (Ron Paul may seem the exception, but he should be regarded as the Romney of libertarians: he has a solid floor but also a low ceiling. Get over it.)
Tom Donlan writes in this weeks' Barron's (subscription required unfortunately) that "Almost any political veteran will tell you that the Iowa caucuses are a huge waste of everyone's time." Quite right. (If you'd like some reasons to ignore Iowa, here's ten from Craig Crawford.) The only time Iowa mattered was the first time it mattered, in 1976, when Jimmy Carter figured out that this sleepy affair could be used to catapult a long-shot into the top ranks of the field by generating some out of nowhere media attention. But once the secret was out, it lost its ability to do this. It didn't derail Reagan in 1980 when he lost to George H.W. Bush, nor did it derail Bush in 1988 when he lost to Pat Robertson, or McCain last time around when he didn't even contest Iowa. Iowa can't make a candidate any more, and it can't really break one, unless you start howling at the moon like Howard Dean in 2004.
So might this year prove to be an exception if Rick Santorum wins and emerges as the new Not-Romney candidate? Perhaps, but he has the same problems the other candidates have-he doesn't have the money or organization to go the distance in the ground game of the week-to-week primary schedule. (He's not on the Virginia ballot, for example.) In this respect this year's GOP race has always seemed like the Republican analogue to the Democrat's 1984 campaign, when Gary Hart emerged as the challenger for the better funded and better organized but terminally flawed Walter Mondale. But for all of Hart's excitement, Mondale still won the nomination.
If Santorum contrives to win tonight, and suddenly rocket to a win in New Hampshire next week, I can only imagine how much Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, John Thune, Sarah Palin, and even Jeb Bush will be kicking themselves for not getting in the race. Above all Tim Pawlenty should never have got out; he would surely be in the hunt right now if he'd stayed in. And one other name comes to mind: Mike Huckabee, the 2008 winner in Iowa, might well be the front-runner right now if he'd got in. (And maybe Huntsman will break out next week in New Hampshire? This year it seems anything is possible.)
All of this shows how much the GOP primary electorate doesn't like Romney, despite John's endorsement. But keep in mind that Romney was the conservative alternative to McCain in 2008; his early endorsement by National Review was uncontroversial, quite unlike this year, when all hell broke loose. What has changed between 2008 and 2012 to make Romney so unacceptable to conservatives? The conventional wisdom is that it was the individual mandate of Romneycare, which has exploded in importance in the aftermath of Obamacare, along with the rightward shift in the GOP brought on by the Tea Party.
These explanations are correct, but don't go deep enough. The real problem, as I size it up, is that Romney doesn't perceive-and doesn't match up to-our present constitutional moment, in which basic questions about the size and nature of government are salient in ways they haven't been for decades. Romney's stubborn defense of the individual mandate "for Massachusetts" suggests he doesn't get it. I had a conversation a year ago with a very prominent person close to Romney (who shall go unnamed since it was a private conversation) who said to me that she didn't understand why conservatives were so opposed to the individual mandate. I allowed as how I understood the policy logic of it, but thought that it was simply unconstitutional-an abuse of the proper limits of government power. This produced only a dumbfounded look from my Romneyite interlocutor. My suggested path for Romney to back away from the individual mandate without doing himself flip-flopping damage was met with further puzzlement.
Maybe there is a chance for a brokered convention, but I doubt it. (For one thing, who would do the brokering? George Will is right: there is no such thing as an authoritative "party establishment" any more.) I will happily pull the lever for Romney in November knowing that he is far better than Obama. I disagree with the folks like Red State's Erick Erickson who say a Romney nomination would be the "end of conservatism." This is overwrought. My fear is simpler: he is not equal to the moment. I briefly thought Newt might be-that's why I wrote the NRO piece baiting him about a possible Churchill parallel-but he has proven unable to focus in the way required of a truly momentous candidate, let alone a president.
In contemplating Romney I recalled a letter from Whittaker Chambers to William F. Buckley from March 1960 (one of his last), where he discussed his doubtful impressions from a recent lunch with Richard Nixon, then about to gear up for his run against JFK. It captures my feelings about Romney:
If he were a great, vital man, bursting with energy, ideas (however malapropos), sweeping grasp of the crisis, and (even) intolerant convictions, I think I should have felt: Yes, he must have it, he must enact his fate, and ours. I did not have this feeling. . . So I came away with unhappiness for him, for all. Of course, no such man as I have suggested now exists? Apparently not. Mr. Nixon may do wonders; he may astonish us (and himself), a new stupor mundi. Then I shall have proved the man who, privileged to see the future up close, was purblind. I hope so. . . In short: I believe he is the best there is; I am not sure that is enough, the odds being so great.
We've faithfully followed the pronouncements of the Obama administration's National Endowment for the Humanities Chairman Jim Leach in our Quotations From Chairman Jim series. We have found the sayings of Chairman Jim to be lengthy, verbose, opaque, and pseudoliterate. Nevertheless, it is clear that civility of a certain kind - civility, Obama style, as Andrew Ferguson has called it - has been the theme of Leach's speeches. Now, however, Thomas Lindsay observes that the proverbial cat has got Leach's tongue:
"Blood was all over." It "was heaviest where police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell suffered mortal wounds to his neck, eyes, face, and brain." So reported officer Jim Pera, first at the scene on that February day in 1970 when a bomb shredded San Francisco's Park Police Station, killing McDonnell, a 45-five-year-old father of two, and wounding eight others.
The bomb was filled with barbed-wire-fencepost staples, an ingredient used when the intent is to kill or maim as many as possible. The perpetrators have yet to face justice.
But, in a 2009 statement, the San Francisco Police Association asserted, "There are irrefutable and compelling reasons to believe that Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn ... are largely responsible for the bombing of Park Police Station."
In 1974, testifying under oath before a U.S. Senate subcommittee, an FBI informant stated, "Bill started off telling us about the need ... for stronger leadership inside the ... Weatherman organization. ... And he cited as one of the real problems was that someone like Bernardine Dohrn had to plan, develop and carry out the bombing of the police station in San Francisco, and he specifically named her as the person that committed that act."
Dohrn would go on to spend time on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List. In 1969, members of the Manson Family perpetrated the savage Tate-LaBianca murders. Dohrn, commenting on the slaying of the pregnant Sharon Tate and her friends, declared, "Dig it! Manson killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they shoved a fork into a [pregnant] victim's stomach."
Dig Dohrn's and Ayers' dinner plans for 2012. Over the course of the 42 years since the McDonnell children lost their father, Ayers and Dohrn have remained free as birds.
Evidence that might have been used against them was ruled inadmissible. Since then, they have established themselves among fellow leftist academics in Chicago. They have even become sought-after dinner companions. The Illinois Humanities Council recently auctioned off a meal with the two as the prize for a hefty donation.
In addition to what it takes in from such fundraising efforts, the IHC also receives support each year from the National Endowment for the Humanities. NEH Chairman Jim Leach was appointed by President Obama in 2009.
On taking office, Leach announced that he would travel to all 50 states to speak on the importance of civility in democratic discourse. In January of 2011, Leach took his case for civility one step further, by stressing the threat posed to "public safety" by what he labels "polarizing attitudes."
Shortly after the Tucson shootings, an NEH press release said that "civility concerns had grown with the acidity of the Congressional debate on health care reform. But the topic took on a grim added significance" with the shooting of "Representative Gabrielle Giffords and a number of her constituents."
One may not agree with Leach's linking of hostility to the health care bill with a murder spree. No matter, Leach's heightened sensitivity cannot but also require him to condemn the IHC's feting of Ayers and Dohrn.
Yet, in a written response to press questions, the NEH refused to do so. It is possible that Leach's understanding of civility is nuanced in such a manner as to cover opponents of the health care bill but not the Ayers-Dohrn-IHC collaboration.
If so, Leach may want to explain the nuances to the children of Brian McDonnell.
Mr. Lindsay was deputy chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities during President George W. Bush's second term.
I am not a Jon Huntsman fan-although, to be fair, there is something to be said for his daughters. But over the weekend, he made a contribution to the 2012 campaign in the form of a TV commercial that reminds Iowa caucus-goers of Ron Paul's frequently bizarre past. Paul is right about most things, and can be an eloquent spokesman for some-but by no means all-conservative ideals. Unfortunately, when he is wrong, he isn't just wrong, he is in the twilight zone:
. . . but happier for taxpayers. The Wall Street Journalnoted the other day that the last-minute train wreck of a budget deal that passed right before the holidays contained one bit of good news for taxpayers-the end of ethanol subsidies:
Congress adjourned this month without extending the $6 billion annual tax subsidy for blending corn ethanol into gasoline and the steep import tariffs on the industry's foreign competitors. Both turn into a pumpkin at the stroke of the New Year.
About damn time.
I was startled to hear recently that we're making so much ethanol now that we're exporting the stuff. Ethanol production soared 719 percent over the last decade-see Figure 1-and since ethanol receives a 45 cents per gallon tax credit, you can see how the tax subsidies have soared to about $6 billion a year. But why are we exporting the stuff, and more to the point, if we're exporting the stuff, why should there by a 54 cents a gallon import tariff to protect this supposedly "infant" industry?
Figure 1: Total Ethanol Production
Guess who our top export market is? Brazil. Brazil, the very country whose cheaper-to-make sugar cane-based ethanol is the supposed reason we have the tariff. So far through September of 2011 (the most recent data available), the U.S. exported 7.2 percent of its total ethanol production to Brazil, which incredibly is our highest export market for ethanol. Overall, the U.S. exported 8.2 percent of its total ethanol production so far this year, up from 3 percent in 2010. (See Figure 2.) No wonder the ethanol lobby is pushing the government to mandate that gasoline-ethanol blends go from 10 percent ethanol to 15 percent ethanol, even though 15 percent ethanol may damage many existing engines.
Figure 2: U.S. Ethanol Exports, 2010-2011
Again, about damn time taxpayers stopped subsidizing what amounts to another export sector for agribusiness. Let's hope Congress doesn't bring it back when the budget comes up again in a few months.
UPDATE: Several commenters below suggest other stupid subsidies ought to go next. The Washington Post editorial page agrees about electric car subsidies.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
To: Friends & Supporters
From: Gary L. Bauer
COUNTDOWN TO VICTORY: 308 DAYS TO THE 2012 ELECTIONS
All Eyes On Iowa
Tonight Americans from Maine to Maui will be focused on the Hawkeye State as 100,000 to 150,000 Iowans gather to kick off the 2012 presidential primary contest. The last poll by the Des Moines Register found Romney leading with 24%, followed by Ron Paul (22%) and Rick Santorum (15%).
The Register's poll is reliable as any other -- which is to say not very. In 2010 it predicted that Iowans would support gay marriage. But they voted three liberal justices out of office. It predicted Governor Terry Branstad would win his primary in a 20-point rout, yet he won by single digits.
There are a lot of variables at play, and it is hard to predict where undecided caucus-goers will eventually settle. Some of us will wake up tomorrow elated. But many likely will not. Having said that, I believe any of the candidates -- with the exception of Ron Paul (see next item) -- would be head and shoulders above the disaster we have in the Oval Office now.
It is my hope going forward that none of the candidates and their supporters would say or do anything that would make it harder to unite and win 308 days from now.
Anybody But Paul
I devoted my Human Events column this week to exposing Ron Paul's radicalism. Because of the tremendous importance of this election, I'd like to share my column with you in its entirety.
Some of the most indelible images from September 11, 2001, are of video footage of cheering Muslim crowds in the streets of Ramallah and East Jerusalem as news of the attacks swept across the Middle East.
Is there any doubt that if Ron Paul is elected President, his inauguration will elicit similar jubilation in the cities of America's worst enemies?
Words such as "noninterventionist" and "isolationist" have been used to describe Paul's foreign policy views. A more apt word is "dangerous."
I like the Texas congressman's opposition to Big Government. But his foreign policy and national security views are so dangerous that they should disqualify him for the presidency.
It is tempting to compare Paul's foreign policy views to those of President Obama. Both seem to enjoy stressing America's sins, real and imagined, and both naively believe a little diplomacy is all that's needed to appease rogue regimes such as Iran.
Like Obama, Paul wants terrorists caught in the U.S. to be treated not as enemy combatants but as common criminals. Also like Obama, Paul supported the building of a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City, insisting that opposition to its construction was "all about hate and Islamophobia."
But Paul's foreign policy views are much more radical than Obama's. Paul disapproves of Obama's drone strikes on terrorists, and would shutter U.S. military bases abroad. Paul says he would not have ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden. You'd be hard-pressed to find one in a million Americans who would agree with that.
Paul's foreign policy views would stand out even in a field of the most liberal Democrats. In fact, Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, perhaps the most left-wing presidential candidate ever, has said he and Paul "agree tremendously on international policy." Paul says he'd consider naming Kucinich to his Cabinet -- perhaps as head of a newly formed "Department of Peace."
But Paul's views of America and its place in the world go beyond the liberal appeasement of Obama or Kucinich. In fact, in their sheer conspiratorial lunacy, they align more closely with Obama's former pastor and mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Consider both Wright's and Paul's reaction to 9/11. Wright described the attacks as "America's chickens coming home to roost," and said of America's government, "We're the same as al-Qaeda."
Paul has said that America's foreign policy was a "major contributing factor" to the attacks, and he allegedly wanted to vote against authorizing war in Afghanistan. Both Wright and Paul are conspiracy theorists. According to a former longtime aide, Paul suggested that the attacks may have been coordinated by the CIA or that the Bush administration knew about the attacks ahead of time. Paul has claimed that 9/11 caused "glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq." He has also suggested that Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, was responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Wright has claimed that the U.S. government manufactured the AIDS virus to kill black people. And Paul has allegedly written that the government is "lying" about the threat of AIDS.
Both Wright and Paul are radically anti-Israel. Wright has called the state of Israel "illegal" and "genocidal." He gave a lifetime achievement award to radical Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, an anti-Semite who Wright said "truly epitomized greatness."
According to his former aide, Paul "wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all." The ex-adviser said Paul "sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs."
Paul has also said he would not have intervened in World War II if Japan hadn't attacked the U.S., even against Hitler's Germany to prevent the Holocaust. This, he insists, somehow fits into a foreign policy based on the Golden Rule.
Paul rarely criticizes President Obama, but has a disturbing tendency to slander his country and fellow Republicans. He has charged that America has declared "war on 1.2 billion Muslims," and accused Michele Bachmann of hating Muslims and Rick Santorum of hating gays. This extremist does the conservative cause an injustice by playing into the Left's worst false stereotypes of Republicans. No wonder Paul derives much of his support from the fringe Left.
Many Paulites say they support him for his economic policy views, while dismissing his foreign policy extremism. But they should realize that in the highly improbable case that Paul becomes President, he would, as Commander-in-chief, have much power to enact his national security agenda and much less influence over economic policy.
By regularly casting America as the world's villain and by advocating the abandonment of our alliances and the abdication of our duties around the world, a Ron Paul presidency would cheer our enemies, demoralize our friends and guarantee a decline in our national security.
What do the Ron Paul newsletters say about his leadership skills?
Congressman Ron Paul is the latest GOP candidate to take a leading role in a controversy this election season. Newsletters released throughout the 90's included racist comments, anti-Israel comments, among other controversial statements. Before delving into the topic, Glenn jokingly pointed that "usually that causes real problems if you want to point out somebody might be racist. So let's not even go there."
The real question we should be asking after a decade of newsletters Ron Paul ran that had many racist and anti-Israel comments is how has he responded?
Glenn: "So ten years of this kind of stuff in this and his defense is now, "I'm a bad editor. I'm just a bad managing editor. I didn't know that stuff was all in there. It shouldn't have been in there," et cetera, et cetera. Forget about whether he believes it or not. Let's take him at face value. If you can't run a newsletter, you shouldn't be given the keys to the United States of America. I run a network, I run a radio show, run a publishing division, a newsletter. What others? Stage shows, we do all the things. Believe me, if one of those divisions is racist or putting racist things in for a decade, if I don't catch it - I shouldn't be allowed to run a shoe store.
Glenn later pointed out, "I got news for ya. If somebody writes something and prints it under my name, even if I am paying them to do it and they write that 95 to 97 or more are semi or entirely criminal? I think I try to explain that to the American people that whole ghostwriting idea."
While Glenn still agrees with Ron Paul on the Fed, and think's "he's the only one who believes it's about the destruction of the currency, he's the only one who believes in, shut it all down," the stance Paul takes on Israel, 9/11, and the his self-accountability should be a warning sign to undecided voters.
In the last hour of today's radio show, Glenn played an audio clip of Ron Paul answering a question from a 9/11 truther.
"Why don't you come out about the truth about 9/11? "
Paul responded, "Because I can't handle the controversy." After hearing the clip, Pat asked a question every voter on the fence with Ron Paul should ask. "Now, if you don't believe any of it, if you don't believe the 9/11 truther stuff, is that how you answer that question: I can't handle the controversy?"
Mark Levin Challenges Ron, Rand Paul on Third Party
By Jeffrey Lord on 1.3.12
So. Mark Levin has returned from vacation, and in his characteristic low-key style has immediately announced he would not ignore the elephant in the room that everyone else seems to be so desperately trying to ignore.
The elephant in the room?
That would be?
That would be Congressman Ron Paul's refusal to rule out a third party run for president if he loses the Republican presidential nomination. And the not so coincidental relationship Levin sees with Senator Rand Paul's future career.
Considering that Congressman Paul has already once left the GOP -- with much fanfare in 1987 -- and then shown up as the Libertarian Party candidate for president in 1988, he has already amply demonstrated his willingness play hardball politics and throw the GOP under the bus if he doesn't get his way. In the December 16th debate with other GOP candidates Paul was asked the question directly and refused to rule it out. Wrote Boston Globe reporter Michael Levenson of Paul's debate refusal to rule out a third party run:
Tonight on GBTV! Glenn unveils the new GBTV studios in Dallas, Texas and what he's dubbed the 'Mercury Dream Labs.' Why he's calling it that and what's in store for 2012 tonight on GBTV!
Glenn is back! Interviews contenders on Caucus Day
Glenn is back and begins 2012 broadcasting live from Dallas, Texas interviewing 3 of the top candidates seeking the Presidential nomination for the GOP. He started right out of the shoot with Texas Governor Rick Perry, who after a series of tough mishaps is still in there and still battling. Glenn catches up with the Governor and talks with him about the race and one incident where Perry just schools a reporter trying a gotchya question. Check out Glenn's interview with Perry HERE.
Glenn interviews Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
Congresswoman Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll but has been struggling to keep up with the pack in recent weeks. Will she be able to pull off a high finish or even a win? Sarah Palin doesn't think so and said 'it's not her time' recently. Bachmann responded to those comments from Palin on radio today with Glenn, and the pair talked about much more including her view on the latest with the race HERE.
Glenn interviews Santorum
It's been an exciting few days for former Senator Rick Santorum as he made a late surge in the polls just before the Iowa Caucus taking place today. How'd he do it? Does he think he has a chance to pull it off? Glenn also asks Santorum about Gov. Perry's charge on earmarks and other complaints from conservatives such as why did Santorum support Arlen Specter? Check out the full interview HERE.
Alan Colmes takes "cheap shot" at Rick Santorum
Alan Colmes hit Rick Santorum with a pretty low blow recently as he questioned his handling of the death of his infant baby, calling his decision to let his other young children see the baby 'weird' among other things. Some things are just out of bounds, and knocking someone over how they mourned the loss of a child is about as low as they come. Get the full story at The Blaze.
Ron Paul has some splainin' to do...
He's sick of answering the question about his racist newsletters from the 80s and 90s but the fact of the matter is the issue will not be going away anytime soon. The reason: Paul's inconsistent and inexplicable responses to the controversy over the years. When it first came to light in 1996 he actually defended many of the racist statements, but later in 2001 said he didn't write them and had never read them. Ron Paul supporters may be giving their candidate a pass, but shouldn't they be giving him a closer look after some pretty controversial statements were made in his own newsletter? As Glenn pointed out on radio - If you can't run a newsletter, you shouldn't be given the keys to the United States of America. Glenn analyzes the controversy and questions Paul's managerial skills HERE.
Choices: Glenn helps caller discern between Bachmann, Santorum & Paul
For starters, which of these candidates did NOT propose a panel to slash the military by $1 trillion that was comprised mostly of bought and paid for George Soros globalist henchmen? The answer may surprise you, but needless to say the revelation that this candidate would either be this ignorant or this wrong was quite a shocker. Glenn gave the answer on radio today - DETAILS.
Obama use extra power granted in NDAA? Nooooooooo
Fellow Americans - no need to worry! Barack Obama promises that he's not going to abuse the provisions in the new National Defense Authorization Act that allow him to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial. Obama never breaks a promise (unless it's about being the most transparent administration in history) but there's no reason to believe that a lack of transparency and the ability to detain US citizens without trial could possibly be related to one another. Right? WATCH
Our Innocents Abroad? By Patrick J. Buchanan Neocons and democratists believe the U.S. has some inherent right to intervene in nations that fail to share our views and values. But where did we acquire this right?
I Love Greed By Walter E. Williams In a free market system, in order for one to get more for himself, he must serve his fellow man.
Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.
by Michael Espersen
December 16, 2011
In 2009, when President Barack Obama began his pitch to sell an overhaul of the nation's health care system to the American public, conservatives of good conscience rallied together in opposition. We don't need government to provide people with health care because it would raise costs, lower efficiency, and put unnecessary obstacles in between patients and their doctors, conservatives rightly said.
Conservatives understand the limitations of government, and that a proxy takeover of a private industry can only result in a disservice to the consumer. Conservatives know that government has no place in making demands of patients, their doctors, or their insurance providers. But why would government ever have a place in making demands of children? For decades, government has drastically increased its influence in the education of children in the K-12 setting, and for what? SAT scores are hitting all-time lows. The reality is that every single weekday in the United States, tens of millions of children sit in classrooms they don't want to be in simply because the law demands it of them, and conservatives ought to begin the conversation of what is to be done about it.
ICE Quietly Changes Detention Policies before New Year
Last Thursday, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced important changes to its detention policies. At the heart of the announcement were two key policy shifts: (1) the creation of a new "hotline" that detainees may call "if they believe they may be U.S. citizens or victims of a crime;" and (2) the alteration of the detainer so that it may only become effective upon an alien's conviction of a crime.
A week before 2011 came to a close, a federal judge enjoined major portions of South Carolina's new immigration enforcement law, Act 69. South Carolina passed Act 69 last June in an attempt to fight illegal immigration within the state. In October, the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued South Carolina to strike down the major provisions of the law set to go into effect January 1, 2012 claiming they are preempted by federal law.
Pew Study Reveals Hispanics Place Immigration Low on Priority List
This week, the Pew Hispanic Center released a new poll conducted of Hispanics that showed Hispanics place a relatively low importance on immigration in terms of national priorities. According to the Pew poll, when Hispanic registered voters were asked which issue was "extremely important" to them, 50 percent responded jobs, 49 percent responded education, 45 percent responded health care, 34 percent responded taxes, 34 percent responded reducing the deficit, and 33 percent responded immigration.
Let's be honest: We all know you're not really gonna quit smoking, start exercising, and eat more kale as of today. As Emerson wryly remarked: "All promise outruns performance."
The key to keeping your New Year's resolutions is to make them more realistic. Rather than drastically changing the way you live, why not start with the more modest goal of changing the way you speak? And what better place to start for conservatives than with America's Founding principles?
As conservatives continue to rediscover the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, it is important to use words and embrace ideas that are consistent with our Founding principles.
If you're fond of the term "states' rights," have a soft spot for nullification, are tempted by isolationism, or are wary of equality, here are four simple resolutions to begin getting right with America's principles. Once you have these down, you can start correcting your friends and move on to other core concepts.
1. Speak of Federalism, not "States' Rights"
States don't have rights. People do.
States have powers. Nowhere in the Constitution are states said to possess rights. Congress has certain powers, clearly enumerated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and the conservative-favorite Tenth Amendment makes clear that all the other powers are reserved to the states. Not only is it incorrect to speak of states' rights, but the expression has more baggage than Samsonite and Louis Vuitton combined. In case you didn't know, "states' rights" was the rallying cry of segregationists. Since no right-thinking conservative will keep company with such people, let's just drop the term states' rights once and for all.
If you're concerned about federal encroachments on state sovereignty or the erosion of federalism-as you should be-then speak of federal encroachments on state sovereignty or the erosion of federalism. Or of the need to restore limited constitutional government, reinvigorate local self-government, decentralize power or check the growth of out-of-control government. With so many great formulations to choose from, why weaken the case for liberty by relying on "states'" rights?
Good. Now encourage the repeal of the law or wait and see what mood Justice Anthony Kennedy will be in next June when the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of Obamacare.
But please don't start talking about nullification as the magical silver bullet that other conservatives somehow overlooked in their efforts to repeal Obamacare (or any other unconstitutional law, for that matter).
Nullification is blatantly unconstitutional. As James Madison pointed out in 1798, 1800, and again during the Nullification Crisis of 1832, individual states do not have the power to unilaterally declare federal legislation unconstitutional. They have the power-in fact, the duty-to challenge laws they deem objectionable, but this must be done within the existing constitutional framework. Let us behold a republican remedy, as Madison would say, to this federal overreach.
3. Isolationism is un-American
Unless you're describing the Tokugawa Shogunate in Japan or the hermit kingdom of North Korea, "isolationism" should be eliminated from conservative foreign policy discussions.
As a nation dedicated to the universal truth of human equality, America simply cannot withdraw from the world and be indifferent to the fate of liberty. American exceptionalism is fundamentally incompatible with isolationism. More so than any other country, we have a duty to stand for liberty.
And no, the Founders were not isolationists. The Heritage Foundation's Marion Smith has written the definitive refutation of this bogus argument in "The Myth of Isolationism."
So if we're not isolationists, does that mean we're interventionists who want to make the world "safe for democracy"? Of course not. There is a middle ground between naive isolationism and crusading interventionism: a distinctively American foreign policy, anchored in the principles of the Founding, that secures our interests all the while upholding our commitment to liberty-a commitment which need not necessarily translate into military interventions.4. Equality is not a four-letter word
Seeing how the Left blathers on incessantly about inequality and dreams of a Harrison Bergersonesque America, some conservatives are wary of equality. Yet no word is more central to the American tradition which we uphold than equality.
Equality is the first self-evident truth proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and ours is a country "dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." By this, of course, we mean equal natural rights and the equal opportunities afforded by free markets and the rule of law.
The real tragedy of inequality in America is not that some earn more than others-class envy is something that afflicts Europeans, not Americans. Rather, it is that big government breeds what Paul Ryan calls "a class of bureaucrats and connected crony capitalists trying to rise above the rest of us, call the shots, rig the rules, and preserve their place atop society."Let us therefore reclaim the mantle of equality from those who've perverted it in the pursuit of equal outcomes.
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.
~ If you come across an issue or story that you think would be of interest to the group, forward it to this email address so we can include it in the daily newsletter. Please include any links to the associated story with your email so that we can source it for the newsletter. J
You have received this mailing because you subscribed to our mailing list or signed up at a meeting. If you have any problems with this mailing, please reply to this posting. Thank you for your support.
March 31, 2012. 10a-6p
And maybe even more surprising, there doesn't seem to be a purely political divide within the media. FoxNews.com, for example, in a story 
On Today's Program
