Monthly Archives: July 2010

Frontline Club – Events: FULLY BOOKED Special event: Wikileaks founder Julian Assange at the Frontline Club

Vodpod videos no longer available.

To provide for the common defense

To provide for the common defense.

Obama is, for all intends and purposes, shutting down our nuclear missles and our space program. How can this government possibly be doing its constitutional mandate to provide for our defense while closing down those things that are tantamount to protect us?

This guy,  Assange, in Norway or Iceland or where ever he is, is spewing out documents that harm our soldiers and informants and is now threatening to leak more in the days to come. He says that his site has “inspired” more people with security clearances to come forward and provide him with more information.  And our government seems to be impotent to stop this.

To provide for the common defense.

Ohama’s regime is not doing that.  It is not preparing for the future and Hugo Chavez will be the first in line to procure wmd’s from his alliance of  fellow evil dictators when the day comes that they are available to him. We are not prepared for another 9/11 and by scaling down our military and space options, we will be struggling to catch up once this guy is out of the White House – provided we aren’t attacked again before then.

Recycling, because I want to

Several years ago, I was posting at a bulletin board that is full of anti-Americans and anti-America Americans. You know, they are leftists – they believe that Americans are to blame for everything. You’d think they were all Catholics for the amount of guilt that they burden themselves with, for cryin’ out loud. Americans do nothing right or good and never have, according to these people and you could never make them acknowledge one thing America ever did positive without a “but” added to their statements. And my God – if you’re a Catholic/Christian, it’s the double whammy from them.

Needless to say, you can imagine why I left that little corner of the web.

But one day, while I was still posting there, this moron was talking about how we all must start recycling and conserving more and this should be “enforced” on those who won’t do it. Enforced. Okay. I asked him how will this be enforced? Are we going to start a brigade of trash police? These guys who will go door to door, garage to garage and fine people who aren’t putting newspapers in the paper bin and their diet Coke cans in the right box? How did he purpose to enforce this? And then how do you expect to pay for it?

He got pissed off and called me names and that ended that discussion. Typical liberal tactics. They never think through their proposals, they just mandate them. And if you don’t go along and you have a valid argument opposing them, they resort to name-calling.

But be that as it may, I do recycle and have for a long time.  And I do it voluntarily. My daughter’s school collects cans and plastic bottles. I also look for ways to reuse stuff rather than toss it and I routinely drop by St. Vincent DePaul (around 3:00am) and leave offerings.

My sister-in-law recycles and reuses also, by her own choice. You might have seen Dena’s comments here occasionally.

One of her grown sons jokes about this  because he can’t imagine a conservative who is also even a little green.  Which of course, is part of the left’s propaganda machine: conservatives don’t recycle, we just consume and waste stuff. Of course, her son knows better and that’s probably why he thinks it’s so funny, to begin with.

What the left doesn’t understand or want to admit is that conservatives believe in personal responsibility; not forced or enforced regulations. We aren’t stupid or disrespectful about our environment. And in fact, because we are right – and on the right – we take it as seriously, if not more so than anyone else does.

Quote of the Day

Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness. Mary Frances Berry

Obama the adoration junkie

From Travers and Brian Braker

Unlike most guests who come to ABC’s “The View,” President Obama does not have a new movie, album or reality show to promote.

Instead, he’s promoting himself and his agenda, sitting in the hot seat of the daytime talk show in an effort, once again, to go beyond the traditional media filter and speak directly to the American people, especially women.

Already, off the block this article is full of holes. True enough, at this point in time, Obama is not promoting a book. What he is promoting is his crap-n-tax agenda, his entire socialist check list to screw the American people.  But make no mistake that this is not a “hot seat” for him, either.  He couldn’t find a more favorable, fawning, slobbering audience and hostesses anywhere in American.

After all, during his first visit to The View in 2008 (with Walters present), Walters called him the sexiest man on earth:

(Did you notice, he only shook hands with the conservative lady but hugged all the rest of the ‘hostesses’?)

He’s going “beyond the traditional media filter.”

Media filter? What media filter exists in this country today? He is, once more, side stepping the press and the possibility – as remote as that really is in this day of JournoList ‘reporters’ – of probing questions by going “beyond the traditional media filter” to “speak directly to the American people, especially women.”  The press doesn’t seem to be bothered that he’s only held 2 press conferences in his first 18 months and the last conference was forced on him by bad publicity. They don’t care that he has walked around them and refused to answer questions and signed orders and bills without press being present.


In an exclusive preview clip that aired on “World News” tonight, Barbara Walters asked the president what the recent high and low points of his time in office had been.

“In the last month what has been the rose and what has been the thorn?” she asked, referring to an Obama family tradition of taking stock of their lives.

Call me a cynic, but I find this whole “Obama tradition of roses and thorns” to be totally contrived. It reminds me of the all-time goofiest question, hands down in a press conference. Who was that guy who asked Obama what he found to be the most enchanting part of being president? (insert rolley eyed emoticon here, please.) Now that’s a media filter we all want TheOne to avoid. But I digress. Regarding Walters question, talk about softball crap!


So why sit down with “The View’s” feisty and opinionated five hosts in the first place?

“I was trying to find a show that Michelle actually watched, and so I thought this is it, right here,” he said. “All those new shows, she’s like, eh, let me get the clicker.”

Part of me is hoping that Michelle is actually watching daytime television, although I’m sure she’s not. She’d be much less dangerous to our culture is she were.

On Tuesday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the decision was made to put the president on “The View” because it provides an opportunity “to talk to people where they are.”


“People have busy lives and it’s best to go where they are,” Gibbs said.

Again, it is best to go where the housewives are and where the press isn’t. But who is he talking to? An audience that is overwhelmingly supportive of him and an agenda that most of them have no idea about. Dare I say it? Most women who watch The View, really aren’t deep thinkers or book readers, unless they are reading Danielle Steele or Oprah’s book of the month. That’s not a bad thing, mind you. Reading anything is better than reading nothing, but let’s don’t mistake the demographics of The View with those who tune in to, say, Glenn Beck.


As Obama’s overall approval ratings have dropped, he also has lost support from women, from a high of 72 percent support in February 2009 when he was still glowing from the presidential campaign and inauguration to an approval of 51 percent today.

But now I come to my favorite part of this article:


Jessica Coen, editor of, a popular website aimed at women, sees “The View” appearance as a prime opportunity for Obama to show some personality and “lay on the charm,” which she feels has been in short supply given recent challenges.

“You go on ‘The View’ and you sit Obama down with these women and some of them may fawn on him; some may not. But either way he’s going to be charming,” said Coen. “The target audience for ‘The View’ is going to appreciate and be reminded of Barack Obama’s personality when he goes out here.”

And that’s why they voted for him: his personality, his charm, his coolness. How much more condescending can a writer get than this? The audience (those housewives) will be reminded once again of his charm, lest they have forgotten why they supported him in the first place. It was all shallowness and no substance that attracted women to Obama. I tend to agree  with Jessica Coen, but it’s still a patronizing statement. The only current events this demographics get is from women on The View or Oprah and they get no contextual American history, at all.


Coen cautioned that while Obama excels in off-the-cuff situations, he might approach the appearance too casually at his own peril.


“Yes, it’s daytime television, but that doesn’t mean it’s light and fluffy,” Coen said. “Obama’s an intelligent man. He’s not going in there thinking he’s sitting down with the knitting circle. He knows what he’s getting into. But the risk would be if he plays it a little too casually, takes it a little too lightly.”

It’s not possible for him to be too casual and too cool. It’s his trademark and what attracted a great many of this audience to swoon over him. I think there’s no question that  he’s in real safe territory on this show.


The Obama White House clearly believes that the president’s message is best conveyed straight from the source and has made it a goal to reach as wide an audience as possible when the president wants to address key agenda items.

That generally has meant shunning traditional White House press conferences and photo opportunities in favor of one-on-one interviews aimed at specific audiences.

Yep, yep and yep, yet again. By pass the press and any questions that might be uncomfortable.



“I’m not sure at this point if hearing more Barack Obama is going to be an asset or a liability,” Thompson said. “We kind of know what his response is to this oil spill, we kind of know what he wants to tell us about extending [unemployment] benefits and about medical care — all the things that he is talking about. I’m not sure if he’s in a place right now where he needs to reiterate a message but needing to do things that people will consider moving things along.”

What he really needs to do is shut up and stay off television. I, for one, am sick of hearing his voice and  his droning on and on about stuff while saying absolutely nothing.  But this guy is a adoration junkie. He can’t get enough of the swooning and the tears, the fainting hysterical women at every one of his appearances.

This is not Obama’s first time in the hot seat: He was a guest in March 2008 when he was running for the Democratic presidential nomination.

At the time, he faced questions about the controversy surrounding his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Oh yes, and they were tough questions, too:


This time, Obama will face all five co-hosts, who come from a wide range of political views and backgrounds.

Oh paleeeeze. Enough already. (insert glassy eyed emoticon here, please.)

Updated: Wish me luck

I have a job interview today.

I got the job!

Two websites that you should see

Check them out

here and here .

Patriot Post – Founders Quote of the day

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” –James Madison, Federalist No. 45

In case anyone misunderstands, the Founders did not believe in centralized government. The more centralized and expansive government becomes, the less involvement is allowed by “the people.” The bigger government becomes, the farther away from “the people” it gets.

The Founders believed in local governments, run by the citizens of those locales; that includes education.

The Founders would be appalled by the formation of the Department of Education. Education is, and was to them, a local responsibility. Every community, every county and every state should be and must be responsible for the education of those who live there. That includes not only what they are taught and how, but how it’s paid for.

This goes back to what Mark Levin in Liberty and Tyranny called the “harmonious diversity” of America, which is what the Founders invisioned. If Idaho has an education system that is more compatible with how one person believes, or is more afforable, for instance, he can leave the state he lives in and move to Idaho. This also goes to Reagan’s belief that Americans are free to vote with their feet. They are not stuck in one state with no recourse but can move to another that might have policies that are more appealing. Levin’s example in his book was the death penalty – Texas has an fairly active policy while New Jersey has no death penalty. But anything from abortion to education could be used as an example.

Our mobility has not yet been halted by Ray LaHood and we are still free to move where we choose to. However, that has potential to change if he has his way to “coerce us of our cars” and restrict our movement.

But I digress and I think I made my point.

Education should be and must be a state’s rights issue and there is no question that the Founders intended it to be that way. Every state should have it’s own department of education, funded entirely by the state’s citizens and managed with curriculum established by those same citizens.

That’s the long and the short of it.

Thank goodness my daughter is not a member of the teacher’s union.

An absolute must see! H/t to 1dragon

Outstanding post by an outstanding patriot and blogger – 1dragon –  something you must see .

Charles Sherrod- another race baiter

You have 26mins to view this? It’s pretty enlightening. And this reverenced by Mark Levin today,  is a must read at Riehl World View.

He’s a reverend. Did you know that?

These black activits are bound and determined that we return to the days when black men are beaten and hanged by “the white man.” There can be no other reason for this continued dialogue about racism and KKK atrocities. There is little discussion on how far black Americans have come, like for instance to the oval office, from these men of power. There seems to be little celebration for the philanthropy of black women like Oprah Winfrey.

No. They are spending their time drudging up an admittedly horrific past while the future is passing them by. Men like Sharpton and Sherrod don’t even realize they have become relics. While the rest of America tries to move into the future and leave this history behind, they continue to force this into our faces. How many times do white Americans need to acknowledge that yes, there is a horrible history and it’s shameful to this nation what happened to blacks in America.

But when does the day finally come for these black ministers and activists to set this behind and join the rest of  us? That day will never come. Because if that day comes, they will no longer have a cause. As Bill Ayers lamented when the Viet Nam war ended, what will happen now? We no longer have a issue to rail against.

The answer is that they will never let racism go because it will mean their ideological death.