Was Sarah Palin Right All Along?

It's alive! End-of-life counseling in health bill By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR The Medicare end-of-life planning provision that 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin said was tantamount to 'death panels' for seniors is staying in the latest Democratic health care bill unveiled Thursday. The provision allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling to help beneficiaries deal with the complex and painful decisions families face when a loved one is approaching death. For years, federal laws and policies have encouraged Americans to think ahead about end-of-life decisions, and make their wishes known in advance through living wills and similar legal documents. But when House Democrats proposed this summer to pay doctors for end-of-life counseling, it touched off a wave of suspicion and anger. Prominent Republicans singled it out as a glaring example of government overreach. Read the rest at Big Government

High Crimes And Misdemeanors

Coal group, grassroots firm knew of forged letters before climate vote By Jim Snyder Grassroots lobbying firm acknowledged Thursday it knew ahead of a climate vote that they sent opposing the legislation were fake. A grassroots lobbying firm knew several days ahead of a critical House climate change vote that letters it sent to members claiming local non-profit groups opposed the bill were fake. Working on behalf of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), the firm Bonner & Associates has acknowledged that it sent about a dozen forged letters to three House Democrats who were seen as critical swing votes. Read the rest at The Hill

Economic Victimization - A Fairy Tale

"By adjusting the top rates and reducing windfalls paid out to some of the wealthiest individuals in the nation, we can help restore a sense of equity and fairness that is critical to the success of our voluntary tax system."

- Charles Rangel, Chairman of the House ways and Means Committee

Equity and fairness. Life isn't fair, yet we are constantly bombarded with rhetoric that we can make it fair if we just spread the wealth around. In other words, if you are born into a rich and affluent family, then it stands to reason that you will go through life being rich and affluent. If you are born into a poor family, then logically you will be poor throughout your life.

And this message of economic victimization, that has been embedded into our daily lives, is a fairy tale; yet, those who trumpet this message, are the very people that think that government is the answer. Their message is one of gimme. You, who has become successful, doesn't deserve all of your money that you earned through determination, sweat and grit. No, you must give some of it to me, even though I am fully capable of working and has a fair shot of trying to run my own business, though I don't want to because I am lazy and would rather leech off of others.

This theme, that has been growing on a daily basis, basically says that everyone is to blame for their economic troubles, other than the man or woman in the mirror. The system is out to get them because they are either black, gay, female or some other minority and they are not given a fair shake, so why bother even trying.

If you are a liberal progressive and believe this tale, then ask yourself a serious question. If you say that many people in America can't achieve the American Dream, then how did the 400 wealthiest in 1982 drop to just 32, only to be replaced by 368 new wealthy people? Look it up on the Forbes 400 list for 1982 and follow it to today's list.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that every American is guaranteed success and happiness, it only guarantees that you can pursue them on a level playing field. The Constitution also doesn't guarantee any equal results if you attempt to start your own business or the outcome of a job. And no, the 'general welfare' statement in the preamble does not mean that the government is required to give you a job, that statement means limited government. James Madison explained the general welfare clause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grant of power. In other words, limited government. It is a mere “synonym” for the enumeration of particular powers, which are limited and wholly define its content.

Rather than stepping aside and allowing the free market to run its course, the government seems to be Hell bent on its destruction by making rich people poor and poor people rich. Taking over GM and the banks and bailing out every company that comes to them with hat in hand and with a sob story, we are witnessing an explosion of government expansion that FDR and his failed policies would be worthy of.

Our government leaders have gotten us into trouble by increasing our nation's debt to nearly $12 trillion, handed out $2 trillion to corporations and banks, which has ultimately done what? Put each of us in debt to the tune of $300,000 plus dollars which has placed generations of our unborn progeny in debt.

So, if you're one of those people that shouts accolades at the TV when a CEO of a big corporation gets the screws put to him, then let me ask you a question: "Has the demise of said CEO improved your livelihood? Has it increased your salary? Has it put more food on your table or more gas in your car?" If the answers to these questions are a resounding no, then I can only conclude that it makes you feel all warm inside when someone that is successful gets railroaded and ruined, whom, by the way, creates the very jobs that are desperately needed.

If you are one of those people that think America's wealthiest don't shoulder the burden of taxes then you would be wrong. Consider that in 2006, the richest one percent of American's paid 39.9% of taxes and the top ten percent paid 71%. It is also noteworthy to add that the bottom fifty percent paid less than 3% of income taxes. In other words, Americans in the top fifty percent paid 97% of this nation's income taxes.

Below is a tax table based on a 2005 CBO study

	Share of pre-tax income	Share of individual income taxes
Top 1%	18.1%	38.8%
Top 5%	31.1%	60.7%
Top 10%	40.9%	72.7%
Top 20%	55.1%	86.3%
Bottom 20%	4.0%	-2.9%

According to the 2005 effective tax rate on an American in the lowest income bracket was 4.3%, for someone in the middle class it was 14.2% and for the wealthiest .01% the effective tax rate was 31.5%. So, based on the 2005 study, the tax rates do not favor the wealthy and as a recent CBO report has stated, "High income households have a disproportionate share of comprehensive income and pay a disproportionate share of federal taxes."

And before you shout out that the payroll tax is what hits the poor the hardest, you need to consider that the Tax Policy Center (ran by the Brookings and Urban Institutes, two liberal think tanks) concluded that that the richest 1% still pay 27.5% of the total income tax burden in America, however, the bottom 20% pays only0.4%. I had to get someone to explain it to me, if you understand it, then click here.

One thing that liberal progressives seem to conveniently forget is the EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit). This credit reimburses an employee, who is in the low income bracket, with a portion of their payroll tax. What this means is that we are already refunding taxes to the hard working families who struggle day to day. Which, incidentally, ensures that the tax system a progressive one.

Continued...

Revisiting the beginning statements of this article, if you are of the belief that politicians are always thumbing the forehead of minorities and they shouldn't even bother trying, then you are a victim of your own willful ignorance or the public school system. For instance, did you know that the largest demographic to make an 80% gain in earnings between 1980 and 2007 were African-American women and the worst group to make said gains were white men? Don't believe me? Then look at the Census Bureau's data.

If you are an employee of a small business owner, you need to stop and think for a moment that your boss who hired you is in your sights when you shout out that the rich need to sacrifice more to spread the wealth around. You say that the government should ratchet up their taxes to 50%, yet you don't stop to think that your boss is part of 2/3 of small business owners that you are decrying, which is the backbone of this countries economy. Oh, by the way, you are getting a paycheck from said small business owner. So, if you run your boss out of town by forcing him or her to pay more taxes, guess what you don't get?

As I close this article, I would like to point out a few things. You may be one of those people that cries out social justice and wealth redistribution, but, if you are looking for a job in New York and can't seem to find one maybe it's because the rich are moving out and people are leaving in droves. Liberal progressive leadership in Detroit has done nothing but destroy its livelihood. In 1950 it was rated as the wealthiest city in America, now it's the poorest. Read the articles below:

Detroit: The Triumph of Progressive Public Policy

What Ruined Detroit

Boobs Who Ruined Michigan Called In To Advise Obama

After you read each one of these, ask yourself if it's where this country is headed with this administration. Ask yourself if this is where you want to live if we keep allowing our leaders to take us down this road. Ask yourself if this is the country you want to leave to your children.

A country is typically measured by how many of its people are trying to leave to seek a better life. I have yet to see anyone leave this country to do that, have you? I don't begrudge anyone who is wealthy or is seeking wealth, except when they cheat, steal and lie to do it. Our government is doing all three.

What are you going to do?

Harry Reid's Public Option Appears To Be DOA

By: David A. Patten Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman's announcement that he would back a GOP filibuster of Majority Leader Harry Reid's public-option insurance plan delivers a serious and potentially fatal blow to Democratic plans to squeeze a major healthcare bill through the Senate. Lieberman indicated on Tuesday that Senate approval of a public-option plan would be fiscally irresponsible because it "creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line." He was steadily joined throughout the day by a number of moderate Democrats and the lone Republican, Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, who had tentatively supported a major healthcare overhaul. Read the rest at Newsmax

Kill Yourself To Save The Planet?

Fewer British babies would mean a fairer planetIt's not the growing number of people in poverty who are causing climate change, it's the rich The worst thing that you or I can do for the planet is to have children. If they behave as the average person in the rich world does now, they will emit some 11 tonnes of CO² every year of their lives. In their turn, they are likely to have more carbon-emitting children who will make an even bigger mess. If Britain is to meet the government's target of an 80% reduction in our emissions by 2050, we need to start reversing our rising rate of population growth immediately. And if that makes sense, why not start cutting population everywhere? Are condoms not the greenest technology of all? Read the rest at the Guardian

Singled Out - Arpaio Only Law Enforcement Agency Stripped Of Authority

(CNSNews.com) – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) told CNSNews.com that after reviewing the Memorandum of Agreements between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and state and local law enforcement agencies in 23 states, the only agency to lose its authority under the 287(g) program to operate task forces that can enforce federal immigration laws is the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. Read the rest at CNSNews

When The Truth Hurts

Joe Klein's piece at Real Clear Politics just goes to show that when the truth hurts, you sling ad hominems and vitriolic claptrap at the source. Let me be precise here: Fox News peddles a fair amount of hateful crap. Some of it borders on sedition. Much of it is flat out untrue. Yet, nowhere does he point to any examples or instances. Though, I can point out several from the likes of Contessa Brewer, Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews, et al. Since when does asking questions or forming an opinion rate as "hateful crap" or sedition? CNN, MSNBC, NBC peddle it on a daily basis, or does this pass as news for Mr. Klein? When I see a news organization fact check an SNL skit, I have to wonder why FoxNews hammers them in the ratings on a daily basis. But I don't understand why the White House would give such poisonous helium balloons as Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity the opportunity for still greater spasms of self-inflation by declaring war on Fox. I wouldn't expect him to when he is just as much in the tank for Obama as the fringe media is. So, I'll explain it for him. Obama has thin skin and can't take criticism and he is deflecting people away from the real issues to slide something under the rug. "Nuff said. If the problem is that stories bloated far beyond their actual importance--ACORN's corruption, Van Jones's radical past--are in danger of leaching out of the Fox hothouse into the general media, then perhaps the Administration should be a bit more diligent about whom it hires and whom it funds. And this is precisely why the MSM is now referred to as the fringe and state run media. When someone, like Joe Klein, considers topics like ACORN and Van Jones's radical past as bloated stories, then I have to question what makes an issue important enough to "bloat". But, he does make one valid point in that Obama's administration should be more diligent about whom they hire. That, however, is not likely to happen when Obama is trying to fundamentally transform this country; you can't do that without radical, Marxist revolutionaries. If the problem is broader--that Fox News spreads seditious lies to its demographic sliver of an audience--the Administration should probably be stoic: the wingnuts will always be with us. The best antidote to their garbage is elegant, intelligent governance. The next-best antidote is occasional engagement: I thought Obama came away from his O'Reilly and Chris Wallace interviews much the better for it. (Though you don't want to sit down with a thug like Hannity or a weirdo like Beck.) And here is where Joe Klein pulls back the curtains. This hate filled paragraph speaks volumes about where the hate and lies come from; maybe Mr. Klein should look at the man in the mirror. The problem with war is that it diverts attention from the actual news. Hey, maybe Mr. Klein does get it! The Administration has tried to pursue a sophisticated, difficult domestic and foreign policy. It doesn't offer the quick-fix irresponsibility of a tax cut or an invasion. It needs space, time and patience to explain. This is an enervating, midstream moment. Whoops. Spoke too soon. Maybe Obama has absolutely no experience, whatsoever, about decision making. Considering that he was in a legislative body before he was anointed, he didn't have to make decisions that has the propensity to affect an entire world. The "I inherited it" rhetoric has been regurgitated ad nauseum and it's no longer working. He didn't inherit anything, rather, he wanted it and exacerbated it by accelerating Bush's idiotic spending. If he hadn't suspended his campaign to sign on to the first ridiculous "stimulus", I may have given Obama a bit more leeway. It's not certain that the President's efforts from health care to Afghanistan will succeed. We'll know a lot more in a month, but I really hope the White House hasn't launched this attack to fill the public space while the other issues are being sorted out. The long-term costs of stooping to Fox's level are not just bad posture; they are a diminution of the office and its primary occupant. Nothing is certain about this administration, other than it's Hell bent on this countries destruction. The long term costs, Mr. Klein, is going to be Obama's demise if he continues down the path he is going. Have you ever heard of the saying that you should never pick a fight with someone who has A LOT of ink?

Why Things Need To Change In 2010

When CNS News asked Senator Patrick Leahy where in the Constitution does it say that Congress can force Americans to have health care, he couldn't answer it.

Sen. Leahy: "We have plenty of authority. Are you saying there is no authority?"

Read the rest of Leahy's response here.

The fact is that the Constitution does not give Congress any authority to force Americans to have health care and I defy anyone to point it out to me if I missed it. And don't tell me that's what the Constitution refers to with the "General welfare" statement, because that's not what that statement means.

Reading the back and forth between CNS News and Senator Leahy just lends more credence as to why things need to change in 2010. This is nothing more than government out of control and a complete disregard for our Constitution, particularly when a sitting senator, as arrogant as Leahy, claims that they have the authority to do what ever they want.

Sen. Leahy: "Why would you say there is no authority? I mean, there’s no question there’s authority. Nobody questions that."

Yes, we do question it. Why he would think otherwise shows that he, as well as other politicians are out of touch with middle America. Just read how he compares this mystical authority to interstate highways and ask yourself if this senator speaks for most of us Americans.

James Madison explained the general welfare clause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grant of power. In other words, limited government. It is a mere "synonym" for the enumeration of particular powers, which are limited and wholly define its content.

People, you need to wake up! If politicians, like Leahy, doesn't make your head want to explode, I don't know what will. He is basically telling us that we need to sit down and shut up, we know what's best for you.

The Attempt To Steal An Election

Brian Suozzo voted with an absentee ballot in the Working Families Party primary on Sept. 15 because, as his application stated, he was "at home recovering from medical procedure."Jessica Boomhower's application said she would be attending a "work conference in Boston." Michael Ward couldn't vote in person because he was "taking care of elderly parent." Kimberlee Truell was on a "Bus trip to casino," as was Miguel Vazques. The only problem with these absentee ballot records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y., is that they're phony, voters and investigators say -- and they've prompted what's being called an unprecedented investigation of suspected voter fraud. Read the rest at FoxNews

Huckabee Leads In The Polls

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Republican voters nationwide say former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is their pick to represent the GOP in the 2012 Presidential campaign. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 24% prefer former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney while 18% would cast their vote for former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Read the rest at Rasmussen Reports

Troop Funding Diverted to Pet Projects

By Shaun Waterman THE WASHINGTON TIMES Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis. Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat. Read the rest at The Washington Times

FoxNews Misses Three Critical Points

While perusing FoxNews' website, I ran across this article: Scientist: Arctic Ocean to Be Ice-Free in Summer. While reading further, the article mentions the group that conducted this "survey" was the Catlin Arctic Survey. However, the article misses three critical points:

1 - The Catlin Arctic Survey was the group that fought for their survival when a group from the environmentalist organization attempted an expedition to  the North Pole.

2 - The Catlin Arctic Survey was funded by the notorious World Wildlife Fund.

3 - The timing.

The World Wildlife Fund was the organization that aired a misleading commercial that linked global warming to the decline of the polar bear population about a year ago, among other false "reports." As of today the commercial is no longer on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMLJD-mantE).

As to the timing aspect of this "survey", FoxNews failed to elaborate a bit more that this "report" is hot on the heels of the upcoming Copenhagen Conference. The article also fails to mention that WWF is turning up the heat by stirring the hysteria pot.

From their site:

Fresh Arctic evidence for climate summit

Posted by Dominic Hilton

Wednesday, 12 Aug 2009

Scientists are busy analysing data from the Catlin Arctic Survey. The data will provide important new evidence for the crucial climate negotiations in Copenhagen this December.

The Catlin Arctic Survey team returned this May with unique new measurements of the thickness and extent of sea ice in the Arctic. The University of Cambridge’s Polar Oceans Physics Group is currently analysing the data, with initial results already suggesting that the sea ice is newer and thinner (and therefore more liable to melt) than expected. The results will help climate scientists around the world to understand how quickly the dwindling summer sea ice will melt and to predict more accurately the effect this will have on the global climate.

WWF are providing funding to help the research team speed up their analysis. It’s crucial that the results are available in time for the UN climate change summit in Copenhagen, as they will strengthen WWF’s calls for a strong global climate deal. Governments must take action urgently to keep global temperature rise below 2°C, the threshold beyond which most scientists predict climate change could become catastrophic.

“Climate change is happening now and nowhere is it more evident than in the Arctic,” said WWF’s head of climate change, Keith Allott.

“Sea ice is a critical part of Earth’s climate system and the loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean is happening decades ahead of most predictions. We cannot predict all of the effects of this ice loss, but scientists foresee severe disruption to the natural world on both a local and a global scale.”

Is this what someone, with a rational mind, would call science?

Author's note: I checked the page where the above statement was made at 10:40 AM PST and the page could not be located. I had to dig into my archives from August of this year to quote the statement above. If someone manages to locate it on their website, please contact me with the details.

Mystery Halo in Moscow Sky

THIS glowing halo in clouds over Moscow looks like an Independence Day style alien attack. The astonishing ring was spotted over the city and captured on video by stunned locals. It has been described as a "true mystery" by a UFO expert. Scores of supernatural enthusiasts have been gripped by the astonishing footage and speculated it could be an ALIEN MOTHERSHIP.The sighting in the clouds is reminiscent of scenes from the 1996 Hollywood blockbuster Independence Day.Read more: The Sun

AoD - The Real Problem With ACORN

By William Tucker of The American Spectator

Excerpt:

I found myself glued to the television last week as Fox broadcast its special investigation of ACORN. It was a terrific piece of journalism -- something worthy of 60 Minutes in its heyday.

But the real fascination for me was personal. Wade Rathke, the 61-year-old founder of ACORN, is exactly my age and vintage (he went to Williams, I went to Amherst). He even looks like me. Moreover, he started the organization after going South to work in the Welfare Rights Movement in 1970. I was working for Welfare Rights in Clark County, Alabama in 1970. (I remember noticing there were a lot of redheads in the movement at the time.)

But that's where the similarity ends. I ended up feeling a little ambivalent about "The Movement" and came back and started a newspaper career. Rathke says he liked community organizing so much he started his own group in Little Rock after Welfare Rights ran out of steam. He built the organization into an incredible, multi-million-dollar octopus with tentacles almost everywhere. He finally had to resign when it was discovered he covered up his brother's million-dollar embezzlement from the organization. The interview with Fox was the first he has ever granted.

Read the rest of his article at The American Spectator

ACORN Fires Beth Butler

Controversial activist group ACORN has fired the longtime companion of founder Wade Rathke over apparent concerns about a lack of "accountability" in her work leading the Louisiana chapter in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.Beth Butler was the director of that chapter and close to Rathke, whose brother Dale was accused of embezzling about $1 million from the group a decade ago. A statement by ACORN chief executive officer Bertha Lewis did not specify why she fired Butler. Read the rest at FoxNews

Associated Press Wants To Take Your Right To Free Speech

Read this post written by Steven R. Hurst from the Associated Press.

Now, let's pick it apart and point out the lies and half-truths that he is forgetting.

Vitriol and invective stain American political history, but falsehoods, half-truths and innuendo now spread with the speed of light across partisan airwaves and the Internet — the din drowning out the country’s moderate political center.

It sure does, but who else is vomiting these falsehoods, half-truths and innuendo? Well, here are some examples:

• Owned by Arianna Huffington, who's oil tycoon husband, Michael Huffington is a friend of the Bush's, posted an outright lie on March 14, 2009.

• MoveOn claimed that General Petraeus presented cherry-picked facts and misleading data to sell the idea that the surge is working.

• The two 30-second MoveOn TV ads "Dumping Billions" and "Red-Handed Defense", which was proven to be lies by FactCheck.org.

• What about Dan Rather's airing of fake documents in regards to George W. Bush's military service?

• How about the disgusting, doctored photo of Bush and Lieberman originally posted at the DailyKos? You'll have to scroll down a bit to see it.

Countless Internet blogs have taken on the administration of the first African-American president, claiming — falsely — that Barack Obama isn’t an American citizen, is a secret Muslim, is a socialist, wants to establish death panels to decide when elderly Americans would no longer receive medical care and be allowed to die. The list is long.

He is a socialist, to wit:

Socialist - One who advocates socialism

Socialism - A system of society or group living in which there is no private property and a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Can you say GM, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Sounds like socialism to me. And then there is the old race card. Yes, there are many bloggers, such as myself, who have taken on Barack Obama, as well as many other politicians on the left and the right. However, those bloggers that have decided to question his citizenship are in a group unto themselves; I certainly don't align myself with these people. As to death panels, maybe they should read HR 1, an article I wrote and Betsy McCaughey's article and maybe they might see that, indeed, there are death panels.

Most recently, a partisan furor blew up when Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Republican national chairman Michael Steele set the tone, declaring that giving the prize to the U.S. commander in chief showed "how meaningless a once honorable and respected award has become."

Well, gee, maybe the "furor" has something to do with the fact that he was awarded the prize when he was two weeks into the presidency. Isn't it supposed to be awarded to those who have already made accomplishments or in the hopes that they do? Are you going to shout out that SNL should be shut down because they are of the same opinion? Of course, we all know what happens when your base turns on you.

Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, was not immune, nor was former President Bill Clinton. But today the volume of screeching partisanship is cleaving the American electorate, perhaps as deeply as at any time since the Civil War a century and a half ago.

To say that George W. Bush wasn't immune is an understatement. As for Bill Clinton, well, what do you expect? He did it to himself and it depends what is is.

"The environment is much more extreme today because of the level of public involvement, the level of incivility among both the political elite and the public," said Chris Dolan, a political scientist at Lebanon Valley College in Annville, Pa.

How so? Because people are finally standing up to their representatives at town hall meetings? Or the tens of thousands of pissed off Americans marching on Washington, where ZERO arrests were made. Or, is Chris Dolan referring to the riots at the recent G20 meeting, where many people were arrested and hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage was done? Which group is he referring to in regards to incivility?

At Meredith College in Raleigh, N.C., Clyde Frazier said, "It is nasty and getting nastier." While he believes American history is littered with dirtier political periods and nastier claims among politicians, Frazier, also a political scientist, sees today’s climate partly the result of the "media culture. Vitriol seems to sell. If you are telling people the end of the world is at hand, they watch."

It sure is getting nastier, particularly when the left wing, fringe media has pumped millions into getting Obama elected and people, like Contessa Brewer, blatantly misuses video. Not to mention that the fringe media seems to be complicit in hiding, by not reporting, on issues that puts Obama in a negative light.

From the lectern at the White House briefing room, press secretary Robert Gibbs routinely bemoans what he sees as the negative slant on coverage of Obama by the conservative Fox News cable television outlet.

What does Baghdad Bob Gibbs expect when nobody can get real news from, what has turned into, state run media? A recent Pew research poll shows that FoxNews carried the most balanced news coverage of all others during the campaigns. As to a negative slant, he is referring to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. Yet, Baghdad Bob glosses over and omits other commentators on FoxNews that rarely mention the White House, such as Shepherd Smith.

While Americans once sought news from media outlets that aimed for objectivity, many are now turning to sources that reinforce their political viewpoints, including the conservative Fox News and the liberal MSNBC on cable television and the exploding blogosphere that ranges across the political spectrum.

I can't really argue this point. However, FoxNews being the only cable news outlet that reports both good and bad on the current administration, it's no wonder that they repeatedly beat the other news channels combined in the ratings. As the for the blogosphere, fear not because Net Neutrality is on its way.

The heated partisan atmosphere produced a staggering break with decorum last month when a member of the House of Representatives shouted out "You lie!" as Obama spoke to a joint session of Congress, extolling his efforts to overhaul the American health care system.

Which, as we now know, was correct. 'Nuff said.

Not long afterward Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., took the House floor to attack minority Republicans on health care, declaring, "The Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick." A Republican congressman quickly drafted a call for Grayson’s reprimand, but the matter was later dropped.

What's fair is fair. Rep. Joe Wilson apologized repeatedly and Obama accepted, yet Queen Speaker dragged it out of him publicly and was reprimanded. What consequences did Grayson face?

Partisan political pundits took both events and ran with them, conservative Republicans praising Wilson’s courage as liberals voiced shock over his lack of respect. Grayson took praise and heat from opposite ends of the political spectrum.

That's what they do. It's called free speech, at least for now. If you don't like what you are hearing, tune into another station.

"Political animosity has become professionalized," said Frazier, specifically mentioning talk radio’s ultraconservative Rush Limbaugh, who openly calls for the failure of the Obama presidency. Fox News’ Glenn Beck says Obama is a racist.

That's because if any of Obama's policies get passed, this country will not be the great nation we are now. As it is, he is taking us down the path of economic suicide, started by democrats, continued by Bush and accelerated by Obama. As for Glenn beck calling Obama a racist, that's his opinion. What about those who called Bush a racist after hurricane Katrina?

The revival of bitter partisanship has built quickly and steadily since the nation united behind Bush in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. It was quickly discovered that his rationale for going to war in Iraq — claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction — was untrue and the temporary unity dissolved.

Yet, nowhere does it mention that other nation's intelligence departments came to the same conclusion about WMDs in Iraq. Nor is it mentioned that MI-6 may have misled everyone into believing that Hussein had them. Why doesn't anyone care to give Bush props for standing up to the worthless United Nations and take action against a country, who's leader violated 17 sanctions? Now we know that Saddam Hussein lied about WMDs to keep Iran in check.

"It’s a hard thing to stop and it is escalating" each time Republicans or Democrats cede power in the capital, said Jack Holmes, political science professor at Hope College in Holland, Mich.

Did he ever stop to think that Americans are pissed off at our politicians and have decided to stand up to them? Did he forget that our politicians work for us, not the other way around?

Is there away out?

"At a certain point the public well demand an end, say ‘we want this to stop,’" said Holmes. "The public has to demand it and will start judging political leaders accordingly."

A signal moment arose when Obama came under attack from opponents when he planned an Internet address at the start of the school year to encourage students to work hard and stay in school. He was accused, before the very moderate and apolitical address, of wanting to indoctrinate pupils and students with his alleged "socialist" ideals. He left the doomsayers with red faces…

There sure is a way out and they are demanding it now. When our government officials, that we elect, call us Nazis, uncivil and astroturf, we have a problem. When our politicians start to see someone else take there place, then they'll get the message. Obama's original speech was in question and parents have a legitimate right to be concerned. What would have happened if George W. Bush had done something like that?

Pelosi Key To GOP Victory During Mid-Terms?

WASHINGTON -- Republicans are stepping up attacks on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, deciding that a major part of their 2010 electoral strategy will be linking Democratic candidates to her.The approach emerged last week when the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, issued a statement saying it hopes Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, puts Pelosi "in her place" on Afghan policy. The statement accused Pelosi, a California Democrat, of putting party politics ahead of national security in her cautious statements on expanding the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. Read the rest at FoxNews

Meet Bill Bigelow

If you ever decide to peruse any of the history books your kid brings home from school or ask your child what they learned about Christopher Columbus, you may be in for a bit of a shock. Kids today are being taught that Columbus was one bad dude and caused many an indigenous culture to disappear by systematic genocide or assimilation. But, it goes further than that. Like a thief in the night, people in our nation's school system is attempting to rewrite our history and indoctrinate our children.

Many say that each generation of our country picks up a cause to champion, such as the war on poverty, AIDS and social justice among others. These people are of the opinion that social causes are exclusive to the Democrat party and Republicans always turn their noses up when anyone mentions taking up a social cause; yet these people never mention that former president, George W. Bush pumped more money into Africa than any president in US history. Nor do they do some simple research to discover that the Republican party shoved through civil rights legislation in 1964, when Democrats made every attempt to stymie it. On a final note, these people for social justice always blow right past the origins of racism in the first place.

So, what happened? Who is behind the curtain trying to rewrite American history or much worse, trying to expunge much of it?

Well, there are many. But, one person I want you to meet is a friend of William Ayers and a contributor to Barack Obama's campaign and his name is Bill Bigelow. This guy is a real peach and is one of the big proponents of social justice, who encourages his students to walk in the shoes of the oppressed. He admits that it's "a subversive act in some respects because it is not always encouraged by the curriculum." Well, at least he admits it.

His curriculum exploits past mistakes made by America and glosses over and omits any accomplishments. By doing so, he is indoctrinating young minds in the hopes that they will fundamentally change the foundation of America's history in the future.

And they are very patient.

David Horowitz of the California based Freedom Center states this about social justice:

"'social justice' teaching is shorthand for opposition to American traditions of individual justice and free-market economics...it also teaches that American society is an inherently 'oppressive' society that is 'systemically' racist, 'sexist,' and 'classist' and thus discriminates institutionally against women, nonwhites, working Americans, and the poor."

Bill Bigelow's website, Rethinking Schools advocates that teachers take a hard left approach to teaching, particularly when dealing with such topics as the Iraq war and the war on terrorism. He also encourages math teachers to show Michael Moore's propaganda film Fahrenheit 9/11, when discussing it.

Another person, by the name of Howard Zinn advocates social justice by urging teachers to prioritize social justice over political neutrality:

"The first thing teachers have to do is make a decision for themselves that they will not be obedient in staying within the boundaries that are usually set by the principals, school administrators, and parent-teacher associations. The teacher has to make a decision right from the start that 'I am not here just to prepare these students to pass tests so they can move ahead and become successful and take their dutiful place in society.'"

Now you know who is behind the indoctrination of our children and how they are taught to hate America and rewrite its history.

Nobel Peace Prize is Meaningless

President Obama woke up to a bit of a surprise; he was told that he was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. Now, only the third American president to receive the award, does it really mean anything or does it merely show that it has no credibility?

How can the Nobel Prize for peace have any credibility if the board members in Norway decided that President Obama was going to get it, when he was only two weeks into the presidency? Is the prize supposed to be awarded for accomplishments already done or is awarded for what is hoped will be done?

Ask yourself how any award that is given to persons that advocate peace has any credibility when one of its nominees was considered by many to be the anti-Christ? Now, ask yourself if this award is only given to people of the left leaning political persuasion, while you consider what Ronald Reagan had done in terms of the Cold War and his success at bringing down the Iron Curtain.

No. This award that was bestowed on President Obama was nothing more than a blatant swipe at George W. Bush and those that supported him; in other words, it was a anti-Bush award. Consider for a moment, that Bush started a war in two countries and took us down the path of economic suicide, but Obama has continued those wars and has accelerated our countries economic chaos and he has yet to accomplish anything he had promised to his supporters, much less the American people.

The question that needs to be answered by Obama supporters is, "What did he accomplish in the two weeks he was in the White House that merits the award?" And no, his Beer Summit was well after his first two weeks into the Oval Office.


Not even into his first year, he has done nothing but pay lip service to his supporters and showed his true self to everyone else.


And no, I'm not a teabagging, redneck racist...straight up.

It's Marxism, Stupid

These people just ain't gettin' it. Robert McChesney is a self avowed Marxist who supports the likes of Hugo Chavez and anyone who is in a position, of any sort, that is involved in government policy making that has this position and who is a proponent of Marxism, shouldn't be anywhere near the policy makers that can affect this country.

I have not seen one argument in this article that refutes Glenn Beck's assertions.

Ellen opines:

Beck began his attack, with his sincere, earnest persona, talking about the importance of free speech. “If we cannot speak freely to each other, we lose the essence of who we are. Remember that.” Probably, what Beck meant was that he needed to speak freely so that he could smear and attack without repercussions. Because everyone else seems to be subject to Beck’s hammy hate mongering.

Hate mongering? Since when is reporting facts considered hate mongering? I think she means that anyone with a differing opinion and those who disagree are hate mongers. If Glenn Beck was wrong in any way, then why doesn't Mark Lloyd and Robert McChesney sue him for slander or defamation?

She goes on by using the ad hominem:

Maybe Beck was just feeling sorry for himself for losing 19 more advertisers. Whatever the reason, no sooner had he lauded the value of free speech than he began attacking others’. First, Beck lit into Obama’s “FCC divserity czar,” Mark Lloyd for saying that there was an “incredible revolution” in Venezuela and saying that “You have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power.” As usual, Beck offered only inflammatory soundbites, used in a monologue of attacks, rather than any dialogue that Beck had claimed to endorse moments earlier. “Boy, that sounds positively un-American,” Beck said, topping off the attack with a smear.

And the issue is? Beck has said numerous times that he doesn't care about the financial aspects of his shows. If it were an issue with him, I am sure that he would be saying something about it, as well as the advertisers if it were an issue. Inflammatory soundbites? I would say that they were rather revealing and yes, those soundbites from self avowed Marxists is un-American. I have yet to hear anyone of those people that Glenn Beck "smeared" refute any of it. Come to think of it, the FCC won't allow Mark Lloyd to be interviewed. Now, why is that?

Ellen goes on:

Then, Beck moved on to “introduce” us to “a friend of” Mark Lloyd who also happens to be “a friend of” Van Jones (one of Beck’s previous targets). That was Robert McChesney. McChesney has a long and distinguished record of accomplishments. But Beck ignored almost all of it in order to cherry pick what he could use to attack McChesney – and, of course, spice up his own monologue. Noting that McChesney is the cofounder of the media reform organization Free Press (disclaimer: this blog has been a supporter of Free Press and many of our bloggers have attended their conferences), Beck said, “They are looking for anything but free press.”

Although Beck never said that they were friends, I will say it's what he was alluding to. However, since Mark Lloyd, van Jones and Robert McChesney are either self avowed Marxists and Communists to one degree or another. Well, birds of a feather flock together, Ellen. As to McChesney's long list of "accomplishments", I get the feeling of nausea when someone says the incredible filth that he has about overthrowing our Republic and in the same breath claims that Venezuela is a Republic that allows freedom of speech and the press. Yet, Ellen seems to conveniently forget what Chavez done in regards to the "free" press in his country.

Beck skipped right over discussing anything Free Press actually does or supports (media reform, not Marxism) in favor of going straight for an attack on McChesney. “He is the former editor of Monthly Review which he, himself, has described as one of the most important Marxist publications in the world… He is a backer of Hugo Chavez… and even suggested that an owner of a TV station that was critical of Chavez should be arrested for treason. Wow, that sounds like Mark Lloyd. I wonder if they know each other… (McChesney) has said, quote about the U.S. ‘Any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself.’

He "skipped" over it because Free Press's "reform" espouses Marxism by taking over the media through a revolution, McChesney's words not mine, "There is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles." Sounds like a revolution to overthrow our current form of government to me. Of course, former president Bush felt the same way when he said he had to abandon free market principles to save a free market society.

Try as you might, Ellen, but, McChesney is what he is and Glenn Beck exposed this reprobate to the American people.

Moving on, Ellen further bemones:

Next target, FCC head Julius Genachowski who chose Free Press’ Jen Howard to be his press secretary. “The Marxist group? The most important Marxist group?” Beck mugged, forgetting apparently, that he had just misrepresented his own smear. According to Beck, McChesney had called Monthly Review “one of the most important Marxist publications,” not Free Press.

And, of course, Ellen is completely missing the point. So, I'll reiterate: Anyone that is a self avowed Marxist, Communist, et al should not be anywhere near policy makers that has the ability to alter our way of life. 'Nuff said.

Continuing on:

“Free Press also co-authored The Structural Imbalance of Talk Radio,” Beck continued. Aha! Now we know that Beck has a financial incentive to attack these folks. That report, which is actually titled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” (Beck conveniently left out the word “political”), is about the disparity between conservative and liberal views on talk radio and the ways to make the political discourse more representative. Not surprisingly, Beck didn’t tell his viewers that, either. Instead, he distorted the report by saying that it sought to “remedy the ‘problem’ of conservative voices on talk radio by, among other things, forcing commercial owners who fail to abide by their rules to pay a fee that would subsidize public broadcasting.” Beck made it sound as though a station would be fined if it didn’t follow “the rules” of having more liberal voices and shutting down conservatives. But the report’s recommendations are actually more about restoring caps on the number of stations a corporation can own and ensuring greater local accountability of radio licensing.

Mindless claptrap. That report was nothing short of hammering broadcasters if they don't play nice by airing more liberal talk shows. Ellen fails to mention that radio talk shows are in a free market system and liberal talk shows fail, because people are sick and tired of listening to people, like Ed Shultz, talk without substance. It's the listeners, or the lack thereof, that decides if a product is successful or not. And talk radio is a product.

The First Amendment is about freedom of speech. It does not say anything about free speech only if one is in agreement. Robert McChesney, Mark Lloyd, van Jones, Cass Sunstein and the rest of Obama's ilk are disgusting reprobates that do not belong in this America. If they desire to live in a country that oppresses and supresses its people, then they can practice one American right and leave.

And I'll remind Ellen that vomiting her bile is covered under the First Amendment, just like mine is.

Note: If you want to read the full transcript of the discussion between Glenn Beck and Seton Motley, click here.

Illegals To Get A Hotel Room?

By Penny Starr (CNSNews.com) – Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday that she is pursuing plans to remove some captured illegal aliens from “prison-like or jail-like circumstances” and put them in converted hotels and nursing homes. “To better manage detention operations, ICE will develop a risk assessment and custody classification, which will enable detainees to be placed in an appropriate facility,” DHS said in a statement. “ICE will pursue detention strategies based on assessed risk and reduce costs by exploring the use of converted hotels, nursing homes and other residential facilities.” Read the rest at CNSNews

Clearly No News Throws A Hissy Fit Over SNL Skit

I've said it before, when your base starts making fun of you, then you're through. So, when SNL done a skit mocking Obama and his apparent do nothing administration, CNN has a hissy fit like a four year old does in a sandbox when he or she doesn't get their way.

CNN went so far as to conduct a "fact check" on the skit, which was even more hilarious. Where was this "fact checking" when Bush was president or is this a rhetorical question? Wolf Blitzer has done nothing more than prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that CNN is clearly in the tank for the Teleprompter-in-Chief.

Get a dose of laughter by watching the "fact-checking" panel:

How Dare You Enforce Our laws! DHS Strips Arpaio's Authority

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has stripped Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio of his authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants based solely on their immigration status.But Arpaio said Tuesday he plans to continue his controversial “crime suppression operations,” despite DHS’s decision to not renew an agreement that would allow the sheriff to continue immigration enforcement on the streets. Read the rest at the East Valley Tribune

Want An Interview With Mark Lloyd? The FCC Says NO!

By Matt Cover(CNSNews.com) –The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) won't allow its Chief Diversity Officer Mark Lloyd to be interviewed by the news media about his views and past statements on federal communications policy. Lloyd, who cites the radical author Saul Alinsky as an inspiration, has argued that public broadcasting outlets in the United States should be funded on a level equal to the funding of private broadcasting companies--with the money coming from licensing fees levied on private broadcasters by the government. Read the rest at CNS News

Big Brother Wants To Control the Internet

First it was the banks, then it was the auto industry, now they are trying to take over health care and energy. If you thought that the Internet was immune, then you would be dead wrong.

Nope, the Internet is locked in the cross hairs to be targeted for control by our government.

Spearheading the assault on cyberspace is the Special Assistant for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, Susan Crawford. She is the creator of OneWebDay, which was modeled on EarthDay who in turn gave it the momentum to move forward. The mission of this insidious project? In the Wall Street Journal, she is quoted as saying:

"We should do a better job as a nation of making sure fast, affordable broadband is as ubiquitous as electricity, water, snail mail, or any other public utility."

In the political lexicon of double speak, that means transforming Internet access into a government entitlement program, which means government intrusion and total control to ensure everyone gets it for free. If you do some simple poking around on the web, you'll notice that one group that is participating in this next government take over is Free Press, which is the biggest organization pushing for sweeping changes in regulating the Internet and broadcasting.

Why should you be concerned about Free Press? Well, it was founded by Robert McChesney, who is a self avowed Marxist. He is a leading proponent of Net Neutrality, which means in a nutshell, that everyone, no matter how big or small, gets the same amount of bandwidth allotted to their websites.

On a website that advocates a socialist revolution, he stated:

"Instead of waiting for the revolution to happen, we learned that unless you make significant changes in the media, it will be vastly more difficult to have a revolution."

Both Crawford and Robert McChesney have the complete support of the Obama administration and FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski has stated what the agenda is to take over the Internet. If you think that Obama doesn't know anything about it, think again. Remember this statement during the campaigns last year:

"I will take a back seat to no one in my commitment to net Neutrality."

What will net neutrality do to industries that uses the Internet for their enormous bulk of sales? Why, it will cause a collapse of private investments in the Internet infrastructure. After all, who would want to invest in a business who's traffic is no different from the lone blogger sitting in his home, while pounding Doritos in his mouth and slugging back a half rack of Red Bull and waiting for his next welfare check?

Advocates of net neutrality have always used the tactic that the Internet companies, like Comcast will block websites and throttle back bandwidth. The last I checked, we don't have the Great Firewall of China and they have been whining about it since 1999-2000. Yet, we haven't seen it happen yet.

However, when the government takes it over, and you try to visit one of your favorite hangouts on the web, you may just see a message that says:

THIS SITE HAS BEEN BLOCKED...

IG Report Finds Paulsen, Bernanke Misled Public on Bank Rescues

WASHINGTON -- The credibility of the government's $700 billion financial rescue program was damaged by claims a year ago that all of the initial banks receiving support were healthy, a new report contends.Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky generally found that the government had acted properly in October 2008 as it scrambled to implement the Troubled Asset Relief Program to avert the collapse of the U.S. financial system. Read the rest at FoxNews

AoD - The Obamas Violated First Three Rules of Selling

C. Edmund Wright gives a one - two punch on why the Obama's failed to win the 2016 bid for the Olympics for Chicago.

Excerpt:

Of course Barack and Michelle Obama failed in Copenhagen.  Their strategy could not possibly succeed.  In their academic arrogance, they thought they could sell a product they clearly do not believe in (the United States) and moreover, they could do so by stressing the benefits to the seller (Chicago) and not the buyer (the IOC).  And to top it off, they committed the faux pas of talking too much about the sales force (themselves) and not about the product or the buyer.

Not believing in the product? You mean America? Say it ain't so?

Buying the product from Chicago? You mean the most corrupt city in the US? You mean the city that has equated the phrase, "Trust me..." to "Screw you."?

Trying to sell the Obama name, instead of apologizing to the world?

Nah! That couldn't be the reason why Chicago got knocked out of the first round.

Read the rest at American Thinker

That's fine. Give it to me! Okay Mr. President, It's Yours

It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. “Reality control,” they called it: in Newspeak, “doublethink.” - George Orwell (1984)

The stupidest quote of the century: "I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system."

I would probably have a bit more respect for our current president if he would have voted against Bush's stimulus package, instead he, like McCain, suspended their campaigns and decided to throw capitalism overboard and as far as I'm concerned, Obama is just as guilty for our current economic strife.

Now we get a new phrase in the lexicon of politics, "I inherited it..."

Now, I don't know about you, but if I were hired to clean up the mess that my predecessor created, how long could I use that excuse before my inaction and a series of blunders caused skeptical eyebrows to raise? Particularly if I were ten months into the job. By that time, if I hadn't shown any improvement of fixing the mess, I would probably get the Donald Trump treatment.

Yet, in ten months of "inheriting it", what evidence is there that Obama has improved the Bush economic mess? Before we answer that question, we should, in all fairness, look at what Bush left on the table.

• Unemployment was hovering between 5-6%

• When he left office the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08

• The federal deficit was about $1,2,000,000,000,000 *

So what has Obama done since then to fix this mess he inherited? Let's see:

• He has accelerated the Bush bailouts

• Bush spent 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. Obama increased it by 20%

• Bush owned a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. President Obama’s budget has added $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016

• Unemployment is now 9.8%

• The national debt is just under $12,000,000,000,000 and rising

Remember this quote, "I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, 'Well, this is Obama's economy', That's fine. Give it to me!"

Well, Bush gave it to you, now look what you've done with it. Using the infamous words of Donald Trump, "YOU'RE FIRED!"

*This number may be wrong. Doing some simple research, I was getting conflicting numbers. So, I chose that number because it came up the most frequently, however, the number may have been $2.5 trillion.

Obama to Iran: Stop Or I'll Say Stop Again

"Talk is no substitute for action, our patience is not unlimited."

And what, pray tell, are you going to do when/if "our" patience runs out? He goes on to say, "Going forward, we expect to see swift action," this makes it the umpteenth time he has requested Iran to take "concrete steps," to follow through on their promises.

In other words, stop or I'll say stop again.

Obama's rhetoric has no teeth. The mullahs have no intention on curbing their desire to have a nuclear weapon and nothing short of direct action will get a message across that we won't allow them to posses any. Here's a novel thought. How about blockading the Persian gulf? Or, let Israel deal with them. Recalling the 1981 textbook air strike they conducted in Iraq, I'd say they are more than capable of dealing with Iran.

But, we already know the support this administration has for Israel, to quote Rahm Emmanuel, “The task of forming an international coalition to thwart Iran’s nuclear program will be made easier if progress is made in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.“

In other words, when Israel kowtows to the Palestinians and makes concessions, we'll consider ratcheting up the heat on Iran and possibly threaten some sort of direct action, though whatever that may be is anyone's guess.

Not even one year into his first term, we are seeing that Joe Biden's "ominous" foretelling that Obama would be tested. Well, it appears that he's being tested now and all we hear is barking. So much for the "backbone of steel."

Maybe they should hire Team America.

Related articles


France warns US on deal with Iran

Rough Road Ahead to Agreement With Iran

How's That Hope and Change Working For Ya?

Wasting taxpayer's money and emitting tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (how do those bus tires feel, Al?), our dear leader has failed to charm the IOC into playing the 2016 Olympics in Chicago.

Ouch Mayor Daley and his millionaire slum lord bff, Valerie Jarrett. But, I guess, it's better to waste our money by making the fruitless trip than to put us on the hook for what could have been worse if Chicago would have won the bid to host the Olympics.

First it was Chicagoans that would NOT be on the hook if they won at the IOC, nope, just other Americans. Then later they would somewhat be on the hook. Then Chicagoans would be...well, you know the rest.

But all was for not. Never mind that the countries economy is in tatters and his top general was waiting for a response to an August 30 memo requesting more troops, those issues can be put on the back burner. No, dear leader felt it was a priority to use two jets to fly over the pond and play pitchman to the IOC only to be knocked out of the running in the first round.

Now both jets need to fly back. Hey, Al! You can come out of the corner when dear leader gets back. Valerie, you can find another excuse to demolish your slums at Grove Parc to make more millions. And Mayor Daley? You can just go pound sand.

How's that hope and change workin' out for ya, America?

Rio de Janeiro wins 2016 Olympic Games in landslide over Madrid

COPENHAGEN — Rio de Janeiro rode a wave of International Olympic Committee sentiment to award the Olympics to South America for the first time, winning the right to host the 2016 Summer Games on Friday in a victory over surprising finalist Madrid.

The result of the final ballot was Rio: 66, Madrid: 32.

"I honestly believe it is Brazil's time," Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told the IOC voters. "For the others it will be just one more Games. For us it will be an unparalleled opportunity."

This is how you waste tax payer's money to fill the coffers of Mayor Daley and Valerie Jarrett. I suppose that Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and FoxNews minions will be blamed.

Read the rest at USAToday

Jobless Rate Climbs to 9.8 Percent in September

If laid-off workers who have settled for part-time work or have given up looking for new jobs are included, the unemployment rate rose to 17 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994. The unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent in September as employers cut far more jobs than expected, evidence that the longest recession since the 1930s is still inflicting widespread pain. The official jobless rate stopped short of topping 10 percent only because the Labor Department doesn't count people who have given up looking for work or settled for part-time jobs. Read the rest at FoxNews

Jesus Banned At The Capitol

The U.S. Forest Service has banned the name of Jesus from decorations being assembled by children in Arizona for a blue spruce from the state that will become the Capitol Christmas Tree this year, and a legal firm is challenging the censorship."Banning Christmas from the Capitol Christmas tree is just absurd. Christian students shouldn't be discriminated against for expressing their religious beliefs," said Jonathan Scruggs, litigation staff counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. Read the rest at World Net Daily