Tactics Of Tyranny - Disarm The People

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

- Second Amendment

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

- James Madison

"Taking my gun away because I might shoot someone is like cutting my tongue out because I might yell `Fire!' in a crowded theater."

- Peter Venetoklis

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it."

- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Guns. It is estimated that over 70 million American citizens own one either for hunting, self defense, target shooting, exhibitionist shows and people who just enjoy collecting them. As noted in the Second Amendment, the people's right to own them is guaranteed and cannot be taken away.

Unfortunately, some states, such as California, New York and Washington D.C. get around this by making it extremely difficult to own one legally.

Why did the Founding Fathers put this brief sentence into the Constitution? Well, remember that they were fighting a war to free themselves from the tyrannical rule of King George and at that time, the citizen was the soldier and it was necessary that he had a musket in the home in the event he was called upon. The Founding Fathers could not have possibly known what society in America would be like over two hundred years later. In order to prevent something like this occurring again, the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights.

This is one reason why progressives wrongly assert that the Constitution is a "living" document. In their perverted world, they claim that the Second Amendment is no longer needed because we have a national guard system in each state under the direct control of that state's governor. Although this is correct to some extent, what they fail to understand is that a out of control government, that gains too much power and no longer has its checks and balances, may look to use one tactic to ensure its citizens can't fight back.

By taking their firearms.

A progressive will say that could never happen. However, when you look at the core tenets of the progressive movement and who they always look to for "philosophical" guidance, their claims that our government could never do something like that crumbles.

Then there is the self defense angle. Our country hosts over 300 million citizens and non citizens, people who are here illegally for one reason or another. Many of these illegal aliens are trafficking drugs, guns or both. Banning guns from  legal, law abiding American citizens, when they are easily obtained illegally, is akin to leading a sheep to slaughter. Their are numerous examples where a gun owner was able to fend off an assailant or someone breaking into their homes.

Lastly there are those Americans who hunt, or what many wildlife management agencies call harvesting. This is a two fold past time that puts food on the table and maintains wildlife to prevent a certain species from over populating and potentially destroying crops and removing other species in the food chain.

To take control of a populace, their ability to fight back must be controlled. By taking away firearms, the ability of the people to mount any sort of revolt, uprising or simply defending themselves is diminished greatly. Once this is accomplished, the rest is easy. This tactic is the first step to a tyrannical government and history has proven this again and again.

The video below is a graphical representation of what happens when firearms are taken from people and a cold blooded killer takes over and governs, not with the rule of law, but, the rule of power.

Note: This video is a combination of six clips. You will notice a transition when one completes and the next is loaded. After the credits there are interviews.

And please, leave a comment.

Warning. This video contains graphic images and may not be suitable for children. Parental discretion is advised.

LiveLeak.com - Innocents Betrayed - Gun Control History

More Fallout From The IPCC Chief

The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt. Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists. The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions. Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told The Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number.” Read the rest at TimesOnline

Modern Day Progressivism - My Point Of View

Merriam-Webster defines a progressive as, "one believing in moderate political change and especially social improvement by governmental action." This definition is wrong based on three words: "moderate political change". Modern progressives want nothing to do with moderation, they want radical political change and they want it now and although it's been around since about the mid to late 1800's, it didn't actually gain momentum until Herbert Croly came on the scene in 1909 with his book, The Promise of American Life.

Progressives do not believe in individual autonomy, they have no tolerance and respect for private property, responsibility and religion. They want to take from the haves and give to the have nots. According to the progressive, Michael Schwalbe, a professor of sociology at North Carolina State University, you might be a progressive if:

* You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

* You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

* You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

* You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

* You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

* You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

* You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

* You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

* You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

* You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

* You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

* You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

* You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

* You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

* You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

* You think it's crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

* You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

* You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

* You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

* You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

* You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

* You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

* You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

* You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

* You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.

It comes across as more Marxism than anything else. At any rate, looking down this list of progressive tenets you begin to see that progressives want no part of individuality, religious beliefs and responsibility.

One tactic they use to fundamentally transform this country, or any country for that matter, is to rewrite its history. This tactic was championed by Herbert Croly when he wrote, “To achieve a better future, Americans had to be emancipated from their past.” They achieve this by targeting the young in our schools and the ignorant Hollywood elite, such as Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, who recently embarked on a television project titled, The People Speak. If you have ever watched ten minutes of this show, you can definitely see ignorance at its worst, most of it being willful ignorance.

If there ever was a reason to home school your kids, or start a new school charter, then look no further.
Continued...
When the Constitution was ratified, it became the envy of the world. It was a legal document that set forth the limited role of the federal government and its power was given to it by the states, not the other way around. The Constitution, among other things, steps out of the way and allows its citizens to succeed or fail on their own merits. It also leaves room for citizens to pick themselves up and try it again until they get it right and succeed.

Progressives would have you believe that the Constitution is a "living document', meaning that it's supposed to change as society changes, when it's nothing of the sort. For instance, progressives believe that the government is supposed to provide universal health care based on a single payer system. Yet, nowhere in the Constitution can it be found where the federal government is supposed to take on that role. Oh, they'll try to point out the General Welfare clause in the preamble even though that's not what it means. Issues, like universal health care, are left to the individual states; all you have to do is look to Massachusetts and its dismal failure.

So, why isn't universal health care pushed by these progressives in each state? Because they know that the majority of its citizens would reject it, so they push it on a federal scale when the majority of politicians are on their side.

Progressives also believe that the Constitution is flawed because it sets forth a negative Bill of Rights. This is patently preposterous and absurd when you consider, just for a moment, that the Bill of Rights protects citizen's rights and limits the federal government's involvement in individuals states. What progressives are actually saying is that it's negative based on its lack of individual "rights" of owning a home, a car, a job...

Remember that FDR tried to institute a "Second Bill of Rights" that would have done just that. Yet, people don't realize that they do have a right to own a home, but, they must be qualified, they have a right to own a car, but, it's a privilege to drive it, they have a right to a job, but, they must be qualified for that job. These rights are up to the individual states to deal with, not the federal government, but, again, progressives know that attacking these issues on the federal level is much easier.

When it comes to religion, progressives hatred for it is much like the Christian persecutions during the 3rd century that forced them underground in catacombs, progressives have a feral hate of any sort of religion that look upon a divine entity for comfort. In their perverted minds, religion breeds contempt and hate towards others who don't share their beliefs. Yes, it is true that many a war was started in the name of religion, such as the Crusades, but what religion hasn't done this? What they fail to see, or just don't want to, is that people instigated campaigns of destruction by misusing religion. In short, the ends justified the means.

Yet, progressives do what they can to erase the fact that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs that started on the Mayflower.

In Defense of Eupraxophy, written by a disgruntled and sallow man by the name of Paul Kurtz, he states that, "Marx was no doubt the greatest humanist thinker of the nineteenth century..." and then bemoans that it was unfortunate that the Soviet Union couldn't erase the belief of God after 70 years. Why? Because tyrannical leaders, when they gain power, take firearms and religion away from the people. They first take the weapons from the people, so they don't have a means to fight back and then they take religion to extinguish hope. History always shows this to be true.

Do progressives have a religion? That depends. I have met some that worship the planet, or what is known as the Gaia religion and I have met others that are devout atheists, even though, by definition, atheism is a religion unto itself because it's based on a core set of principles.

Another characteristic of progressivism is its elitist attitude. They are of the belief that only the educated and erudite should be in any position of political power, because you, the lowly wage earner and commoner are too stupid. The Constitution lays out the prerequisites of who can become a senator, representative and to become president. Nowhere is it stated that the requirement of obtaining any of these political positions require a Harvard degree or being wealthy.

This is a tenet of the philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "It is the best and most natural arrangement that the wisest should govern the many, when it is assured that they will govern for its profit, and not for their own. There is no need to multiply instruments, or get twenty thousand men to do what a hundred picked men can do even better."

A vast majority of these upper/middle class spoiled brats never had a job or never owned a business, but, think they are intelligent enough to tell you what's good for you and what's not. These so-called erudites stopped teaching Constitutional law and started teaching case law in the early 20th century, thus, the progressive movement began to infiltrate deeper into politics and started to change it from the inside like a cancerous tumor. Recall what Woodrow Wilson said about the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble of the Constitution.

Progressives are somewhat like drug addicts and Karl Marx is their drug, or their opiate. They engorge themselves by taking from others, like a parasite does to its host. It doesn't matter if they have an R or a D attached to their name, it doesn't discriminate.

To combat this parasitic infestation called progressivism, you MUST remember who you are and this countries history. How it all started with occupants of the Mayflower and ended after the blood spilled by our ancestors, which allowed our Founding Fathers during the Revolution to give birth to a country envied for its Constitutional freedoms and a limited government.

I end this missive with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press."

Do you want this taken from you? At this moment our country is being transformed and if you don't wake up...it will be.

Times Online - Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data

The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny. The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach. Read the rest at TimesOnline

Massachusetts Upset Not A GOP Victory

The Massachusetts upset, or I what I refer to as the second shot heard around the world, was indeed a victory. However, it was not a victory for the GOP. During the 2008 campaigns, President Obama talked a centrist game and independent voters said, "Ok. You convinced us and we will give you a chance." and pushed Obama over the edge. Once in office, it didn't take long to realize that Obama wasn't going to "walk the walk" and went hard left, it was bad enough that Bush was spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave, that Obama decided to accelerate the spending and cause even a bigger economic mess to the tune of 10% unemployment (17% if you count those that just gave up and not counted in the pool). Of course, many of the more experienced voters knew what was coming. All you had to do was be truthful to yourself and then you would have realized that the people he surrounded himself with for years were some pretty unsavory characters; after all, how can one claim to be in the greatest country in the world and then claim that it needs to be fundamentally transformed? Independents, Republicans and some democrats in Massachusetts cast their vote for change, the change they got between 2009 and 2010 wasn't the change that Obama campaigned for. But, it was the indies that played the music for the Obama administration and the democrat majority in Congress to the tune of St. Vitus' dance. Polls taken after the upset indicate that both local and national issues were the driving force behind Scott Brown's win. So, for those of you who are of the opinion that health care being pushed through Congress, behind closed doors and bribery of senators and state representatives wasn't part of the reason, then you are deluding yourself. Then there is Obama himself. He went to Virginia and New Jersey for the gubernatorial races and failed to pull it off, then he went to Massachusetts and failed there as well. If you were paying even a modicum of attention during the Massachusetts election, then you would have noticed that the young voters that made up a large chunk of his voters in 2008 were AWOL. Oh. A message to Sean Hannity, "Shut up. Scott Brown's win is not a win for the GOP."

Pelosi-Reid Health Care End Run?

Dick Morris: Pelosi and Reid Plot Secret Plan for Obamacare By: Dick Morris and Eileen McGann Highly informed sources on Capitol Hill have revealed to me details of the Democratic plan to sneak Obamacare through Congress, despite collapsing public approval for healthcare "reform" and disintegrating congressional support in the wake of Republican Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts. President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid all have agreed to the basic framework of the plan. Their plan is clever but can be stopped if opponents of radical healthcare reform act quickly and focus on a core group of 23 Democratic Congressman. If just a few of these 23 Democrats are "flipped" and decide to oppose the bill, the whole Obama-Pelosi-Reid stratagem falls apart. Here's what I learned top Democrats are planning to implement. Senate Democrats will go to the House with a two-part deal. Read the rest at Newsmax

You See, The Free Market Does Work

Air America shuts down.

No need for the Fairness Doctrine, the free market works just fine. Of course, they'll blame everything else around them, except what's staring at them in the mirror, the fact is that their content just wasn't what people weren't wanting to hear. So, they practiced free market principles and tuned them out of their radios.

“Our company cannot escape the laws of economics."

Really? How about, "Our company was putting garbage on the air waves..." That would have been more accurate. Of course, the real reason why liberals and progressives want to shut down Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, among others, is because they are thriving in the free market. They have content that causes the listener to use objective reasoning and independent thought, unlike Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Randy Rhodes, et al, who had the propensity to always want to treat their listeners like children and idiots if they didn't agree with them.

In short, they had no tolerance for opposing points of view. Even though they always championed themselves as the group of tolerance, only if you agreed with their mantra.

Well, good riddance to bad rubbish. They'll always be a legend in their own mind.

What Popular Part Of The Bill?

Battered Health Plan Enters Critical Care Though reeling from a political body blow, House Democrats rejected the quickest fix to their health care dilemma and signaled that any agreement on President Barack Obama's signature issue will come slowly, if at all. Democrats weighed a handful of difficult options as they continued to absorb Republican Scott Brown's election to the Massachusetts Senate seat long held by Edward M. Kennedy. Several said Obama must forcefully help them find a way to avoid the humiliation of enacting no bill, and they urged him to do so quickly, to put the painful process behind them. House leaders said they could not pass a Senate-approved bill, standing by itself, because of objections from liberals and moderates alike. Such a move could have settled the matter, because it would not have required further Senate action. Brown's stunning victory restored the GOP's power to block bills with Senate filibusters. Read the rest at Newsmax

Not Enough Votes To Push It Through

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday she does not have the votes to pass the Senate's version of a health insurance bill that is now in severe jeopardy of being scrapped. WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday she does not have the votes to pass the Senate's version of a health insurance bill that is now in severe jeopardy of being scrapped. Just days ago, that was the most viable option for keeping alive President Obama's top domestic priority, but with the election of Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, the fragile coalition of Democrats has broken apart as lawmakers bicker over which portions of the $900 billion, 10-year Senate bill they will and won't accept. Read the rest at FoxNews

Whatever Will I Do?

After a stunning upset in Massachusetts, what's next for President Obama? A vast majority said it was unthinkable and wouldn't happen, but the people spoke and the indies pulled it off turning politics on its head. However, what caused the massive turnout to vote a Republican into the Senate seat that has been held for nearly half a century by Democrats is not a reflection of one singular thing. But, if you think that it has nothing to do with this administrations efforts to shut Americans out and shove through unpopular legislation, you are delusional. During the Virginia governor race, Obama blazed a trail to help the incumbent and failed. He flew to New Jersey to do the same and failed. Air Force One landed in Massachusetts to campaign for Martha Coakley and he failed. And let's not forget that Bill Clinton made an attempt as well. Here's a clue, Mr. President. Why don't you stop your minions from making sleazy backroom deals and stop the political bribery to shove something through Congress that you well know is not popular at all. Start listening to the American people when they tell you that they don't want something, but, if you don't, then listen closely to the person who will be delivering the Republican response to your State of the Union Address.

The Roots Of Progressivism Didn't Start With Woodrow Wilson

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

- Sun Tzu

Meet Herbert Croly, or as his detractors called him "Crolier than thou." If you really want to know where modern day progressivism gets its roots, then look no further. In 1909, he published a book that was practically required reading in many colleges and universities during the 1960's titled The Promise of American Life. This book, as well as his 1915 book, Progressive Democracy, is to modern day liberal progressivism as the Constitution is to liberty of this country.

In Promise, Croly argues that America can achieve progressivism if it couples "Hamiltonian" means with "Jeffersonion" ends; Hamilton believed in a strong, central government and Jefferson believed in individual freedom. Once you think about that for a moment, you soon begin to realize that these two beliefs can't quite coexist once put into practice.

He stated that, "To achieve a better future, Americans had to be emancipated from their past." Essentially, this means to free ones self from the history of our country and of the blood and sacrifice of our Founding Fathers who created America, in other words to rewrite American history. His mantra was to refound this country and it's Judeo-Christian roots into a French type democracy, based on the Comtean philosophy of worshiping society through Rousseuauean means, which is the belief that those of enlightenment should rule.

I guess one could put the full blame on bad parenting that caused this man to have such perverse and despicable beliefs. Born to successful journalists, David and Jane Cunningham, each had strong beliefs on the nuclear family and society. David Croly was a sexual reformer who held the belief that sexual repression was the cause of social disorder and Jane, "Jennie June" Cunningham was a staunch critic of marriage and a feminist through and through.

Croly had nothing but contempt for English liberalism and preferred the German version. He felt that America's inequality in regards to the economy was caused by capitalist individualism, who's only concern was the bottom line and needed to be fixed by nothing short of state intervention.

Why his detractors referred to him as "Crolier than thou" was due to having a God like attitude that he could lead America into this Utopian society. By giving all manner of trust to the enlightened and educated class he stated, " Democracy must stand or fall on a platform of possible human perfectibility." These are the words of a Marxist radical.

Croly extolled the virtues of the educated and artisan class and was hostile to those Americans who didn't share his view. He also believed that the collective power should be laid at the feet of these enlightened and erudite people in order to reshape the country, because they were the only class of Americans that could do it; the common man was too stupid to lead themselves.

In his other book, Progressive Democracy, which was so intertwined with The Promise he said he should have wrote them collectively, he set his sights on the Constitution. In this book, he believed that the Constitution and those who lived by it, had spawned the "monarchy of the Word." Because of the way in which the Founding Fathers framed the Constitution, it limited government's role in American's day to day lives and was designed to set the conditions and environment to allow citizens to fail or succeed on their own merits.

And Herbert Croly argued that it stymied his version of Democracy, which he felt should be more positive to the industrial workers of the world or what is referred to as syndicalism, or better known as "Workers of the world unite..." Croly's vision of America was to dissolve the federal government and give authority to the individual states, then to organize them into classes from educated elite at the top to the lowly wage earner at the bottom. If you think about it for a moment, California could be one example of this idea when you look at their financial problems. Environmentalist zealots, racial interest groups, illegal aliens and unions have caused that states economic strife.

Liberal progressivism is a mental attitude that takes away individual freedoms and liberty and gives them to the elite class. Time and time again, history has proven that it doesn't work, yet these people continue to push this country in that direction.

Patrick Henry said, "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."

Although not a Founding Father, he knew all too well that the value placed on liberty should be cause enough to use force, if necessary, to preserve it and over two hundred years later another man knew it as well, when he said,

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."

References cited -

The Promise of American Life


Progressive Democracy

Can It Be Pulled Off?

Martha Coakley commanded a 30 point spread in the beginning stages of the senate race in Massachusetts, then out of nowhere Scott Brown closed that gap only to pull ahead in the polls and sending the Democrat party into a tizzy. With the fear of losing a critical seat in the Senate, President Obama campaigned for Attorney General Martha Coakley to drum up support for the embattled candidate.

But, was it enough?

If Coakley loses, then this will mark the third time that Obama has campaigned for a democrat contender and lost. First was the governor races in Virginia and New Jersey, now it may be in Massachusetts and it may well leave no doubt that these losses are a reflection of his policies.

Polling data indicates that Obama's health care plan and backroom dealings with union bosses has caused his approval ratings to drop significantly in his first full year in office.

If Scott Brown wins, could this be an indication of things to come? Who knows.

IPCC To Retract False Claims On Himalayan Glacial Melting

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it. Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035. In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report. Read the rest at the Times Online

Michael Mann Of The Hockey Stick Chart Received Stimulus Money

Washington, DC - In the face of rising unemployment and record-breaking deficits, policy experts at the National Center for Public Policy Research are criticizing the Obama Administration for awarding a half million dollar grant from the economic stimulus package to Penn State Professor Michael Mann, a key figure in the Climategate controversy. "It's outrageous that economic stimulus money is being used to support research conducted by Michael Mann at the very time he’s under investigation by Penn State and is one of the key figures in the international Climategate scandal.  Penn State should immediately return these funds to the U.S. Treasury," said Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project. Read the rest at Planet Gore

Scott Ritter Caught In Internet Sex Sting

Former chief United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter was arrested in a Pennsylvania sex sting in November on a litany of charges involving a lewd Internet conversation with a person he thought was a 15-year-old girl. Ritter, 48, allegedly masturbated in front of a Web camera while he was engaged in conversation in an Internet chat room with an undercover cop posing as the teenage girl. He declined to discuss the charges Thursday when reporters visited his New York residence. "I said there would be no comment," Ritter said, according to the Albany Times Union. "Why don't you guys just go away?" Read the rest at FoxNews

One Of The Architects Of The Housing Crash Cuts And Runs

Sen. Chris Dodd announced Wednesday that he will not run for re-election in November, as two other prominent Democrats ditched plans to run again. "This is my moment to step aside," the Connecticut Democrat said at his home, citing in part the uphill political road he faced in his state. With the 2010 election year barely under way, the decisions were the latest signs of trouble for President Obama's party. Read the rest at FoxNews

CSPAN Calls On Obama To Make Good On His Promise

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves. The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves. C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network. Read the rest at FoxNews