75% of BP Oil Spill Remains in Gulf of Mexico---Mainstream Media, White House Silent Over Worst Environmental Disaster in U.S. History

British News Service Takes the Lead in “Potential Cover-up”

Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent from the Guardian reported yesterday that three quarters of the oil in the Gulf of Mexico is still present. Quoting testimony from a senior scientist at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), it appears the U.S. Government’s report two weeks ago was “slightly exaggerated”:

Bill Lehr, a senior scientist at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) departed from an official report from two weeks ago which suggested the majority of the oil had been captured or broken down.

“I would say most of that is still in the environment,” Lehr, the lead author of the report, told the house energy and commerce committee. link

The House Energy and Commerce Committee consisted of Congressman Ed Markey who was visibly perplexed while questioning Mr. Lehr and Monica Lawrence at BNO News suggested there’s some serious spinning going on :

“His statement seems to all but confirm suspicions within the scientific community that the White House was trying to spin and hide scientific data regarding the damage of the oil spill. The only member of Congress who turned up at the hearing was Ed Markey, the committee chair.”

Markey was visibly upset and critical of Lehr, saying that the released report by NOAA gave the public a false sense of confidence. “You shouldn’t have released it until you knew it was right,” he said.

“People want to believe that everything is OK and I think this report and the way it is being discussed is giving many people a false sense of confidence regarding the state of the Gulf.” link

Hiding scientific data? (where have we heard this before?) Why not use words like distortion, fabrication, or collaboration? Also a “blip” in the mainstream media’s news cycle was the reporting of massive plumes of oil still present. Blogger Alexander Higgins calls the White House “overly optimistic” in their assessments. Higgins also follows the report of huge plumes of oil “discovered” beneath the gulf’s surface:

“The growing evidence that the White House painted an overly optimistic picture when officials claimed two weeks ago the remaining oil in the Gulf was rapidly breaking down fueled a sense of outrage in the scientific community that government agencies are hiding data and spinning the science of the oil spill.”

Meanwhile, in the Science article, experts from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute mapped a 22-mile plume of oil droplets from BP’s well, providing the strongest evidence so far over the fate of the crude.

“These results indicate that efforts to book-keep where the oil went must now include this plume,” said Christopher Reddy, one of the Woods Hole team. The report also said the plume was very slow to break down by natural forces.

“Many people speculated that subsurface oil droplets were being easily degraded,” said Richard Camilli, the lead author of the paper. “Well, we didn’t find that. We found it was still there.” link

So, there you have it. The largest oil spill in U.S. history may still be present in the Gulf with the probable quantities around 75% NOT CAPTURED, and your government, along with its complicit media are completely ignoring the disaster. Even with the scientific community disputing our government’s assessments, you would think our Nobel-Prize winning environmentalist Al Gore would speak up---right?

Perhaps Crickets can’t chirp when lubricated.

NRSC to Democrats: Who are you calling “extreme”?

Hat Tip--Sister Toldja



Powerful video of the "extreme" left liberals.

Bob Hope, Zombies, and Democrats



One has to wonder what Mr. Hope would think of today's Democrats

Crybabies: Anouncers or Players?



You decide...........

Document Dump---Work in Progress

The moral decay began with Bill Clinton. And while Republicans were soiled with the likes of Mark Foley and California’s Duke Cunningham, the power structure change in 2006 brought in a slew of corrupt Democrats who thought they were invincible. Rod Blagojevich’s shaking down a Children’s Hospital for 25 thousand was the final straw among many that forced the former Governor to face prosecution:

“The bribery, racketeering, wire fraud and extortion charges go back to the heart of the case, that government can’t trade state action for political gain, the prosecution argued.

On the bribery charges, they asked, did defendants seek to scheme to defraud the public out of honest services? Bribery can occur indirectly or directly; it doesn’t have to be clearly stated. It’s the message that’s important, they said, not the specific words. A government official cannot exchange state action for something of value, as in cash, a new job, campaign contributions, etc.

The prosecution said every time in this case, state action was linked to some political gain for Blagojevich in exchange for the act……”

Charlie Rangel appears to be getting the “slap on the wrist” for years of ethics troubles by his Democrat peers. The man sees no problem with hidden bank accounts and unreported earnings

Mr. Rangel's amended financial disclosure form, which exposes omissions from his 2002 through 2006 records, is a treasure trove of outrage. He neglected to report a checking account with the Congressional Federal Credit Union and one with Merrill Lynch, each valued between $250,000 and $500,000; the tens of thousands of dollars he's earning from dividends from a number of mutual funds and stocks; and the money made from the sale of a Harlem townhouse. As a result, Mr. Rangel's reported net worth doubled, from between $516,015 and $1,316,000 to between $1,028,024 and $2,495,000. link

Rangel’s troubles even prompted President Obama to chime in on the issue, calling the allegations against Rangel “very troubling”:

In a CBS interview, President Obama called the allegations "very troubling," but offered an otherwise sympathetic assessment that referred to the Harlem legend in the past tense.

"Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served his constituents very well," Obama said. "He's somebody who's at the end of his career. ... I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens."

We all know about this “hope” stuff Mr. Obama, but on this one we’re with ya.

Throw in Maxine Waters, (also up on ethics charges), and the Joe Sestak/White House job offers, Mr. Obama’s Chicago style government is “very troubling” indeed.

One could say the Democrats are having a tough year. They’ve found no sanctuary at their own town hall meetings, finding a majority demanding that they rein in spending. Ignoring the “request” from their own constituents, Democrats have spent 1.4 trillion in unfunded debt, (raising the Federal Debt to over 13 trillion), added the most colossal entitlement in one hundred years, (ObamaCare), by cramming the unpopular legislation down the throats of a 60% public majority who rejected the “idea”. Hoping to maintain their jobs, the Democrats have funded their largest campaign contributors (organized labor/unions) to the tune of billions---all at the taxpayer’s expense. Throw in the 10% unemployment rate, (15% to 20% in some regions), and a set of economic indicators predicting our debt to become 100% of GDP by 2025, and you’ve got a recipe for long-term financial disaster. (GDP stats:
What has President Obama done?

For starters, how about an executive order shutting down all oil production in the northern hemisphere.

Or, how about a new deficit commission supplanting the responsibilities of Congress. Further, both of the co-chairmen of Obama’s debt and deficit commission have already issued a sobering warning to the President’s budgetary direction:

BOSTON -- The co-chairmen of President Obama's debt and deficit commission offered an ominous assessment of the nation's fiscal future here Sunday, calling current budgetary trends a cancer "that will destroy the country from within" unless checked by tough action in Washington.

Instead, the President and the Democrats are heading full steam ahead in their spending agenda, ignoring these warnings and claiming the economy is “heading in the right direction”, (which the adoring liberal media repeated in every news broadcast on Friday as Obama toured his new government motor industry) Using the hollow deception of pay-go, (legislation the Democrats passed and Obama signed into law), not one piece of legislation has been funded correctly because it all falls under the exception of “emergency spending”. But, of course, all of this emergency spending is inherited.

Forget that the Democrats have been in full power since 2007. Forget the corruption that’s eating away our political process. Forget that California will be asking for another 20 billion in bailout funds to stay solvent, (or a number of other states also on the brink of bankruptcy looking for billions in Federal funds). Forget that runaway spending is putting this nation on the brink of complete financial ruin.

Grab a golf club and hit the links!

NOTE: THIS POST IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND WILL BE REVISED SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE COMMITTING TO FINAL DRAFT.

Krauthammer: Beware of the Lame Ducks

Instead of reining in spending policies, Barack Obama continues blaming Republicans for the state of the economy while the President and the Democrats keep producing record deficits and debt by their own fruition---(White House Predicts Record $1.47 Trillion Deficit) Expectations that the mainstream media will report this economic disaster fell further last week as “journalist” like Kathleen Parker at the Washington Post attempted to marginalize Tucker Carlson’s journolist story, calling it "a destructive gotcha mentality".

In a attempt to show the public that her Congress is the most ethical ever, Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are finally getting around to throwing Charlie Rangel under the bus. The only problem is, Rangel’s bus has been in neutral for years while House Democrats, (and others), have looked the other way. Add this to the show trial in Chicago where former Governor Rod Blagojevich may have took ethics violations to a new level, and there’s hardly a case that Democrats have cleaned up the corruption in government.

Election Status

With runaway spending policies by this administration and the Democratic controlled Congress, (along with a sluggish economy and dismal unemployment figures), conservatives and independents are poised to make changes of their own in November. RealClearPolitics suggest House Democrats could lose their strong majority, while Senate Republicans could pick up as many as ten net seats, leaving Democrats assumedly powerless to move their liberal agenda forward. In this case, assumedly may be a dangerous position. We all know the old adage about assuming things---some one ends up looking like an ass.

Enter: The Lame Duck Session

Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece on Friday, (7/23), warning all of us that assumptions may also have “extensions”. There’s this little period between November 3rd and January 20th when “the losers” are still in power. Most critically, this upcoming lame duck session may show the American electorate how little their voices were heard, and how desperate the liberals are to shove their agenda down our throats:

“Barack Obama's considerable political capital, earned on Election Day 2008, is spent. Well spent, mind you, on the enactment of a highly ideological agenda of Obamacare, financial reform and a near-trillion-dollar stimulus that will significantly transform the country. But spent nonetheless. There's nothing left with which to complete his social-democratic ambitions. This would have to await the renewed mandate that would come with a second inaugural.

That's why, as I suggested last week, nothing of major legislative consequence is likely to occur for the next 2 1/2 years. Except, as columnist Irwin Stelzer points out, for one constitutional loophole: a lame-duck Congress called back into session between the elections this November and the swearing-in of the 112th Congress next January…..

…….But assuming the elections go as currently projected, Obama's follow-on reforms are dead. Except for the fact that a lame-duck session, freezing in place the lopsided Democratic majorities of November 2008, would be populated by dozens of Democratic members who had lost reelection (in addition to those retiring). They could then vote for anything -- including measures they today shun as the midterms approach and their seats are threatened-- because they would have nothing to lose. They would be unemployed. And playing along with Obama might even brighten the prospects for, say, an ambassadorship to a sunny Caribbean isle.” LINK

Krauthammer suggest the Democrats make a pledge to promising to adhere to the will of the electorate:

“How then to prevent a runaway lame-duck Congress? Bring the issue up now -- applying the check-and-balance of the people's will before it disappears the morning after Election Day. Every current member should be publicly asked: In the event you lose in November -- a remote and deeply deplorable eventuality, but still not inconceivable -- do you pledge to adhere to the will of the electorate and, in any lame-duck session of Congress, refuse to approve anything but the most routine legislation required to keep the government functioning?”

Don’t hold you breath waiting for this to happen.

MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN DENIAL

Via Newsbusters



(updates pending)

The Beginning of the End

This morning, I’ve listened to the liberal media attempting to explain how and why the Democrat Party is in disarray, and heading for the path of defeat in November. The riff between the President’s press secretary and the Speaker of the House, (Nancy Pelosi), may have very well been by design in an attempt to rally their base. But, even as the liberal media scratches their collective talking heads trying to understand why they have been so wrong, the excuses are falling on deaf ears along with a mounting anger from the people who swallowed these failed policies with the understanding of hope and change. To this end, I say BOO HOO.

Boo hoo! House Democrats not feeling the love from the White House---even when they’ve been the one’s who have “made the tough votes” to advance Obama’s agenda---even against the will and public opinion of their constituents.

Boo hoo! All these Democrats (that walked and voted lockstep with Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama’s life-long dream to decimate the private healthcare system in favor of a government run system that will neither reduce health care cost nor provide the quality of care promised), are now feeling the brunt of their decisions that completely ignored the needs of the working taxpayer while expanding the scope and power of the federal government. And let us never forget the words of Speaker Pelosi, "We need to pass the health care bill to find out what’s in it..."

Boo hoo! The liberal left of the Democrat Party who bought into this entitlement expansion mentality costing the country billions in unfunded liabilities. By pouring billions more in real debt into public sector jobs, (see Porkulus), and pandering to their own special interest, (SEIU, labor unions, etc.), the Democrats thought they had secured their campaign funds and loyalty of their voters to keep them in power.

Boo hoo! Instead of realizing that the rise of the working class being over-burdened with higher taxes, government regulation, the loss of individual liberties, and staggering unemployment, (see grassroots Tea Party), the Democrats in the House and the Senate have instead embraced the demagoguery of such groups as the NAACP who are claiming falsely that we are all racist bigots for fighting back against failed national policies that are putting this nation in financial peril, and generational debt.

Boo hoo! Ever since the Democrats have been in power, (2007-present), their legislation has done nothing to enhance small business or the private sector companies that has always been the engine that drives a healthy economy. Instead, they have embraced these big government policies with the designation of re-distributing wealth (under the guise of extracting money from the big bad corporations and profiteers). Their results have been stifling to the growth of both large corporations and the small companies who have refused to expand their investments in human capital because of the uncertainty of big government policies that plan to tax them to death.

Boo hoo! The Democrat Party has allowed this President to create more commissions and Czars than any other administration to disguise and transfer the constitutional responsibilities of the House and Senate. Instead, they have embraced this new power structure as a future scapegoat for their own lack of skills to govern as representatives of their districts.

Boo hoo! Lastly, the Democrats have relied on the liberal media to also walk lock-step with every disastrous decision of this administration as if it was ordained by God. Instead of listening to their constituents at the town hall meetings, the Democrats have fallen into the trap of believing the liberal media’s endorsements of Barack Obama’s new world order. Not daring to label Obama’s policies as socialist or Marxist, the media has provided the necessary cover of a cloak and dagger government designed to further empower this body at the complete expense of the middle-class taxpayer. Once again, the egos of the Democrat power structure has fallen to the fodder of their own self importance over the daily needs of the people they were elected to represent.

This November the Democrats will see the full weight of the people who have rejected their big government philosophy and the spending madness in Washington that has continued to create the largest burden of personal debt in U.S. history. The cost for their arrogance should be swift and the message “perfectly clear”----YOU HAVE REFUSED TO LISTEN, THEREFOR YOU WILL NO LONGER REPRESENT ME.

BOO HOO!

New York Times on the 2nd Amendment---The Supreme Court Acted Stupidly

As expected, the New York Times editorial board has come out strongly against the supreme court’s decision to confirm that the 2nd amendment is a fundamental individual right. The liberal Times attempts to justify their argument on the fact that “ten thousand Americans died by handgun violence.” :

"About 10,000 Americans died by handgun violence, according to federal statistics, in the four months that the Supreme Court debated which clause of the Constitution it would use to subvert Chicago’s entirely sensible ban on handgun ownership. The arguments that led to Monday’s decision undermining Chicago’s law were infuriatingly abstract, but the results will be all too real and bloody."

It would be startling if the Times showed a similar level of compassion since Roe v. Wade was passed where millions of unborn have been subjected to the “real and bloody” reality of extinction. But, for the sake of saving this argument for a later date, let’s agree in principle that abortions are also an individual right under current law.

Just as the fringe end of social conservatives would prefer that all abortions be outlawed, our far left liberal society would advocate striking the 2nd amendment from the Bill of Rights.

What I find intriguing is how both sides of the political spectrum so passionately defend the 1st amendment to the constitution, (in which our Founding Fathers found it critical to allow a redress of grievances to our government without prohibitions), and yet, (to further protect American citizens from an over-zealous government), when the fathers inserted and insisted that all citizens had the right to bear arms---under the same intentions to protect individual rights---the liberal mindset of this society has for far too long advocated restricting or abolishing the 2nd amendment, which has finally been recognized as an individual right.

While I do agree with the Time’s contention, (and the Supreme Court's), that there should be limited restrictions placed by the states and municipalities to keep arms out of the hands of felons or the mentally ill, the blanket bans of both Washington D.C. and now Chicago have been overturned. Yet the Times chooses to ignore this landmark civil right and instead continues to look at the 2nd amendment as a threat to society as they “suggest” further government restrictions:

“Mayors and state lawmakers will have to use all of that room and keep adopting the most restrictive possible gun laws — to protect the lives of Americans and aid the work of law enforcement officials. They should continue to impose background checks, limit bulk gun purchases, regulate dealers, close gun-show loopholes.

They should not be intimidated by the theoretical debate that has now concluded at the court or the relentless stream of lawsuits sure to follow from the gun lobby that will undoubtedly keep pressing to overturn any and all restrictions. Officials will have to press back even harder. Too many lives are at stake. “

Of course, the Times completely ignores the fact that in every case where guns have been banned outright from law abiding citizens, (see footnotes below), the murder and crime rates have risen dramatically. Short of disarming every American and eliminating all weapons from society, (which would suit the liberal elites and the Times), restricting law abiding citizens from possessing guns will do nothing to prevent criminals from breaking these laws. The Times again fails to demonstrate how keeping guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens would make society appreciably safer or change the number of crimes committed by criminals illegally possessing guns. As long as and free society is allowed to be armed, criminals will think twice about brazenly breaking into homes or businesses. Thankfully, the Supreme Court agreed.

Footnotes:

Guns Vs. Crime (by Jeremy D. Blanks) (no puns please)

Gun Control: The Brady Campaign, White Lies, And Damn Lies (by Howard Nemerov)

More Guns, Less Crime (by John Lott)

Property of Mexico---Keep Out!

Governor Jan Brewer got her visit to the President's domain, and this is the answer she, (and the state of Arizona), received:



Instead, our federal government---the Obama administration---has decided to insult this nation's intelligence by suing Arizona for attempting to protect their sovereign property from a foreign assualt of trafficing drugs, guns, and humans. Where's our homeland security? Janet Napolitano says, "the Arizona borders are the safest they've ever been". Then why the signs Ms. Napolitano?

Further, why when even Arizona Democrats are urging the Obama administration not to sue the state, and yet the federal government is going full steam ahead, along with Hillary Clinton's blessing.

Chris Matthews Declares War on The Tea Party Movement---Calling His “Report” a Documentary, While Attacking Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, and Bachmann


With Glenn Beck hitting on all cylinders in the 5pm slot on cable news networks, Chris Matthew’s longtime running segment, Hardball, (in the same time slot), has been dismal at best. Beck is hitting two million viewers while at the same time Matthews is struggling to hit a half million. In the 8pm prime time slot The O’Reilly Factor viewership is almost triple of Keith Olbermann’s Countdown. Along with the impending retirement of Larry King, Matthew’s Hardball might be heading on the same path where “progressive news” has become nothing more than far left opinion hit jobs, butting their heads against a growing public viewership that disagrees with the liberal media’s rhetorical disdain for a center-right nation.

Glenn Beck – 2,079,000 viewers (479,000) (968,000)
Situation Room—683,000 viewers (187,000) (277,000)
Hardball w/ C. Matthews – 492,000 viewers (87,000) (187,000)
Fast Money – 205,000 viewers (a scratch w/49,000) (89,000)
Showbiz Tonight — 172,000 viewers (65,000) (92,000)
link

With MSNBC and FOX NEWS cable networks going in two different directions, tonight’s Hardball edition, (airing at 7pm eastern time to avoid Beck's numbers*), will be seen as another typical hit job by Matthews and his producers to attempt to demonize the Tea Party Movement. Indeed, Matthews will make the feeble attempt to claim the “Rise of the New Right” is an organized group of right wing radicals with the intent of over-throwing the government by violence:

MATTHEWS: "Let me finish tonight with our big documentary coming up here tomorrow night. " The Rise of the New Right" at 7:00 p.m. Eastern tomorrow night will stun you with what`s happening to this country. You`ll never again believe the so-called Tea Party Movement is just about taxes or deficits or Obamacare. No, what you`ll see is far more like the original Tea Party up in Boston, the one that previewed our war against the British. Look at the Gadsden flag they wield, that warning of "Don`t Tread on Me" with the coiled rattlesnake. In 1776, it served warning to those who threatened America from abroad. Today, it`s being waved in contempt of our own honestly elected American government in Washington. Listen to Rush Limbaugh`s stir on the new right by calling the government in Washington a regime, or Orly Taitz, leader of the birthers, calling the president illegitimate. Listen to militiamen on guard against tyranny here on the Potomac and you get the full force of what`s happening."

"This isn`t about what the tax rate should be. It`s an argument about whether the federal government deserves toppling like any other tyranny or illegitimate regime in history. It`s not the talk of politics, but of revolution. Listen to Limbaugh, Beck and Palin and Michele Bachmann, Orly Taitz, and, yes, Rand Paul, and you`ll hear of a Washington that has usurped authority of a president who`s not one of us, of a Congress that needs to be investigated for treason, of a country itself that`s been taken over and needs to be taken back. The voices you`ll hear speak for themselves, the guns you see, the semi-automatic weapons in the arms of those who see the government of the United States as the looming tower of tyranny. If I can put it as bluntly as possible, catch " The Rise of the New Right" here tomorrow night at 7:00, and you`ll suddenly get why you`re seeing men at political rallies for the first time ever wearing guns." video link here

Got all that? Pretty scary stuff, if you're the paranoid left looking for an answer to escape the financial damage inflicted on this nation since the end of 2006.

In Matthews segment here, he explains that today’s Tea Party Movement parallels the anti-communist movement in the fifties and sixties accusing Michelle Bachmann as an instigator and a quasi McCarthyist for the media not investigating “democratic members of congress for anti-American attitudes”. Matthews takes Bachmann's statement completely out of context, but what else is new[s].

While I would suggest boycotting the Matthews diatribe of paranoia, maybe it would be best to just watch Glenn Beck a 5pm, (2pm for us west coasters) and let Matthews and his screed of viewers suck on his lolly-pop spittle. It's a poor excuse of objective journalism. Calling it a documentary is a pathetic joke. Perhaps they can have a contest to see which leg tingles tonight---you can bet it's the left.

(Editor's note: I've attempted, (several times), to post the video embeds in this post, but most of the embeds have been mysteriously re-directed to "other MSNBC spots".)

* At this posting, not certain if Matthew's hit piece will air at both 5pm and the repeat 7pm times---will attempt to update later.

Nancy Pelosi Considering Re-Writing Ethics Rules

As expected, some Democrats facing ethics violations are pressing Nancy Pelosi to revise the congressional ethics policies. From the Hill:

Pelosi considering rewriting ethics rules

By Susan Crabtree - 06/10/10 08:28 PM ET

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has privately indicated she is willing to rewrite some of the the ethics rules that House Democrats implemented two years ago.

Pelosi late last month met with members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) about the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), which was created to bolster the ethics of the lower chamber.

At the meeting, which was also attended by CBC lawmaker and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), sources said Pelosi heard complaints about the OCE’s new powers and investigation tactics.

Pelosi and Clyburn were sympathetic, because the OCE has produced some unintended consequences, according to two sources in the room.

Please read the complete story here

When the rules don't fit, you must acquit---change the rules.

President Obama---Stop Playing Political Racist Games With This Nation's Security

You're the President of the United States----start acting like it! The people of this country completely understand that our southern boarders are under siege with violence and corruption; uncontrolled borders smuggling guns and drugs that threatens every citizen.

Meanwhile, you and your liberal democrat party are tearing this nation apart with this pure and vile use of false racism designed for political gain and no other reason. We know for a fact that the recent Arizona legislation is not even stronger than the federal laws now on the books. The fact that a person can not even be questioned without a cause or violation prefaced, makes Arizona's law within Federal standards. Any person can be asked for identification by federal authorities, yet under the Arizona statute there must be a reason in advance of asking.

So, Mr. President, stop with the lies. Stop with the racist accusations. Stop and think about what you have pledged to do to protect this nation and its people. Start acting like a President, and not playing these childlike petty games that are embarrassing your office, your citizens, and your country. Stand up a be a man about our borders and secure them now. Your country demands it.

If you think this healthcare joke will cost your party control, you've seen nothing when you and your pathetic advisers realize 80% of the nation wants border security now.

This has absolutely nothing to do with race.........unless you consider the race to the bottomless pit your party is heading----a race you will surely win.

NOW THIS IS HOW A MARINE RUNS A CAMPAIGN



(disclaimer---the editor has not confirmed this video or the "candidate" is authentic, but he does like the delivery.)

Is Today’s “Mainstream Media” Out of Touch With Mainstream America?

When the controversial law was passed in Arizona recently, polling across the country produced one obvious outcome---70% of this nation’s citizens felt something had to be done about our southern borders. They also felt the Arizona law was not going to lead to racial profiling. When the law was written, the legislators specifically made sure that that the statutes remained in line with federal law which, if implemented, would pass the litmus test if challenged by the higher courts. Governor Jan Brewer and the legislators even went back and revised critical language that may have allowed an incorrect interpretation of how the law was implemented by law enforcement agencies. Brewer was adamant that racial profiling would not be tolerated in Arizona:

“Taking into consideration questions and concerns that have been expressed about the SB1070 legislation I signed last week, today I signed HB 2162 which defines and clarifies even further the proper implementation and enforcement of the law. These changes specifically answer legal questions raised by some who expressed fears that the original law would somehow allow or lead to racial profiling. These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated in Arizona.” link

With Arizona’s southern borders quickly becoming a clear and present danger to all who lived in the border region, Brewer agreed that something had to be done:

"We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels," Brewer said. "We cannot stand idly by as drophouses, kidnappings and violence compromise our quality of life."

Enter----A Mainstream Media with a boatload of bias

As critics of the bill, (from the Mexican government to the ACLU), began to sound off, our ever reliable liberal media began a barrage of negative stories that included outright lies about the substance of the bill and its intent. The network news agencies predictably reported what their “sources reported” and with deliberate intent, failed to report the overwhelming support for the legislation.

This negative slant followed suit in the newsprint media where more distortions and outright fabrications went unchecked and ignored by leading editors and publishers.

The un-official count of Negative stories vs. Positive stories has ran about one in twelve. The favorite line by both the networks and newspapers was the accusation that Arizona had implemented outright racial profiling against all Mexicans whether legal or illegally residing inside our borders.

While the “mainstream media” and the official response from the White House has been nothing but condemnation, nation-wide polling still shows Americans in full support of Arizona’s decision to do what the Federal government has refused to do---stop the violence and secure the borders.

The Political Slant

While the legal wrangling has just begun, the political ramifications are taking place among the liberal democrats who have long coveted the Latino voting block. But no longer is the promise of open doors and all expense paid living quarters---all at the taxpayer’s expense---being used as a ringing endorsement. The voting public that includes millions of independents and moderate democrats are rejecting these policies of open borders at any cost. With unemployment at 10% nation-wide, competition in the job markets has every legal citizen searching for work. Even legal Mexican-Americans are seeing the injustice of coming in “the front door”, paying their dues, and following the laws of the promised land, only to see millions step ahead in line with no respect for the process.

President Obama, the liberal democrats, and the “out of touch” mainstream media are banking on our humility and compassion to keep the status quo on the immigration policies, but what they don’t see is a nation that has said enough is enough. The futile attempt to paint Republicans as mean spirited racial bigots is falling on deaf and defiant ears. Perhaps they’ll see the light in November when they’re no longer in power or considered a voice of the people.

(edited and revised at the authors discretion)

Governor Brewer's Response to Obama




H/T---Hot Air

Keep laughing Mr. President. This "joke" will be great theater in 2012.

JUST WHAT IS THE DESCRIPTION OF TERRORISM, MR. HOLDER?


In an AP article posted by Breitbart our resident attorney general said today that it was “too early” to designate the Times Square bomb plot as terrorism. I would guess if the perpetrator was just in town for some sight-seeing and forgot to leave home his groundhog eradication apparatus, Mr. Holder could make this “assumption”.

"Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that investigators have some good leads in addition to the videotape of the man. Holder said in remarks to reporters that it is too early to say whether the incident was of foreign or domestic origin or to designate it as terrorism."

Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson, in a Fox New interview with Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, attempted several times to get Napolitano to at least admit this was an act of terrorism, but there must still remain a strict Obama policy to restrict using the word. (complete video here)

Carlson moves on to questioning Ms. Napolitano about her statements concerning the “much safer southern borders” where there’s also no terrorism taking place at this posting.

A search of the liberal online news outlets only faintly produce the word terrorism in their postings:

In the New York Times:

"While the authorities said they were treating the failed bombing — described as a “one-off” by Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary — as a potential terrorist attack, they said there was no evidence of a continued threat to the city."

From the Washington Post:

"Obviously, it wasn't an accident," Kelly said. "It was somebody who brought this to the location to send a message, to terrorize people in the area......"

"The bomb found in the Pathfinder was "a sober reminder that New York is a target for people who want to come here and do us harm," Kelly said Sunday. He said the device would have sent up a fireball from the center of a popular and bustling tourist landmark known to have symbolic importance for militant groups at war with the United States......."

This would be New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, but no where in the Wapo story do they use the word terrorist or terrorist plot in their own context. The Post did mention at the bottom of page two that our “overseas contingency operations”, (my quote), may have riled up our foreign enemies. A friend has suggested that this may have been a “dry run” to see if they, (THE TERRORIST), could get bomb in the Square---remember the towers did not come down on the first attempt---but who or what ever the plot, let’s keep that dirty word “terrorist” out of the conversation. Sadly, I guess when a building comes down and hundreds or thousands more perish, the media and our “leadership” will get around to calling this what it is---TERRORISM.

(cross-posted in the Green Room---Hot Air)

President Makes "Legal" Payoffs to Unions

News you might not read about in the mainstream media...

In what has the appearance of a quid pro quo, President Obama has found a way to subsidize the beleaguered unions by executive order. With the swift stroke of the pen, Obama is directing all non-union employees contracting with public construction projects to "donate" 4-5% of their paychecks into the fledgling union pension funds. In the fifties and sixties, they called this extortion and racketeering. Today, it's apparently called legal payback.

Obama Gives Unions a 'Massive Payback' with Executive Order, Contractors Claim

(CNSNews.com) – The nation’s non-union contractors, who constitute the bulk of the construction industry, say President Obama has given a “massive payback” to unions by implementing an executive order that would help them secure billions of dollars in construction contracts on public projects -- and a House Republican congressman agrees.

The executive order, implemented in mid-April, encourages federal agencies to use “project labor agreements” or PLAs on their construction projects, which could require any non-union workers to pay into ailing union pension funds and follow work guidelines set out by a union. link

In an industry where thousands are struggling to find work, this sweetheart deal/payoff from the President to the underfunded union pension funds serves as another blow to private businesses while propping up unions that can not compete in the private sector because their retirement plans are out of line with industry standards. Under Obama's PLA directive, this would be no problem by transferring non-union wages into the funds. Rep. John Kline (R-Minn)agrees:

Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), who joined the news conference, agreed, telling CNSNews.com he believed that the new policy saw unions “scrambling” to make their under-funded pension plans solvent by adding new contributors through PLAs.

Union pension plans, Kline said, are “grotesquely under-funded.”

“(Unions) are desperate,” Kline said. "(T)he real solution here is for them to seriously look at the benefits and renegotiate the exorbitant benefits that they’re getting -- in other words tightening their belt --and they’ve been unwilling to do that, so they’re scrambling for anything else to make these things solvent.”

Brett McMahon, a vice president at Miller & Long Concrete Construction, explained how union pension plans will benefit under PLAs from his private workers, because workers at competitive companies are essentially giving their wages to union retirees.

“We would have to divert contributions -- 4 or 5 percent of weekly paycheck, literally --into a pension fund where just by the rules of it -- just by the rules of the vesting schedule, which is a 5 year minimum -- there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that a new worker will be vested during the course of a project. How could anyone possibly rationalize taking 4 or 5 or 6 percent of a guy’s literal paycheck, and depositing something that he has absolutely no possibility whatsoever of being on?”

For the full story on how the PLA's work, (and the union's response) please read the whole article at CNS.

How only 15% of the construction workforce is currying favor with our President while the other 85% are being asked/directed to subsidize the unions should be a criminal act, but not so in today's business climate. Once again, the private sector gets the shaft.

Liberal Congresswoman Really Thinks You're That Stupid

Rep. Wasserman Schultz Insists Health Care Law Doesn't Require Individuals to Buy Insurance

From Matt Cover at CNSNEWS.COM

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) is insisting that the new health care law she voted for last month does not mandate that individuals buy health insurance, despite language in the law that plainly says otherwise.

At an April 5 town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale (see video below), a constituent asked Wasserman Shultz where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance. She responded that the new health care law did not require individuals to buy health insurance.

In a written statement to CNSNews.com on Wednesday, her press secretary, Jonathan Beeton, said it was true that the health care law did not mandate that individuals buy health insurance and that Wasserman Schultz stood by her assertion at the townhall meeting.

“We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance,” Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting.

“Yes, this is accurate,” Beeton said in his statement to CNSNews.com. “You have a choice of insuring yourself with affordable coverage, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other insured Americans and taxpayers by not being insured.”

Not only has the Democrat Party passed a law that a strong majority of this country rejected, this party believes you are stupid enough to think you are not punished when you refuse to participate. I suppose when the IRS denies your tax refund because you failed to purchase this "optional" health insurance, the reminder will be "it was your choice".

Judgment Day---Healthcare Bill Goes To House Floor

Damn the torpedoes and icebergs---full steam ahead.

Congressman Joe Barton, (R-TX) said this morning on America's Newsroom, (with Bill Hemmer and Martha McCallum working on Sunday, that the Democrats DO NOT have the 216 votes needed to pass ObamaCare. "Others", (including deputy whip Debbie Wasserman, (D-FL) have said they don't have the "hard numbers". Could Nancy Pelosi actually bring this legislation to the floor not knowing the final results? Pelosi has once before allowed a vote to go to the floor that got defeated back in September of 2008. This failure was the first of many government proposed bailouts to prop up Wall Street. Sources, back then said Pelosi may have been the major reason for its failure, because of a speech she made just days before the vote:

"Following the bill's failure, both parties embarked on a round of bitter finger-pointing. Congressional Republicans cited a speech by Ms. Pelosi on the House floor that blamed the economic crisis on years of Republican economic policies, including deregulation. "For too long this government, eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation," Rep. Pelosi said. "It has created not jobs, not capital; it has created chaos."

Little did Ms. Pelosi know we would be revisiting her profound words today. While it's doubtful Ms. Pelosi will make the same mistake again today prior to this "historic vote", the above bolded quote could easily describe this first year of a Democrat controlled government. One of the best arguments in this healthcare debate has been the cost of another "big government" entitlement in an environment where unemployment hovers at 10% or higher. With national polls for months now showing a majority against the bill, Barack Obama and the Democrats have put all their eggs in this one basket, not only ignoring the will of the people, but having to spend every piece of political capital, (including taxpayer capital to purchase votes with backroom deals), to rein in Democrats within their own party.

The process for this historical legislation has been just as disruptive and corruptive as the substance. From the Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase, to the "deem and pass" and reconciliation, (that will take place just days after this vote), and the "fake, but accurate" legislation submitted to the CBO, the Democrats have invested their careers to pass this poorly crafted bill. Whether this nation can afford another government entitlement that will pile on billions more in national debt, including taxing an already fiscally strapped public will be decided in just a few short hours.

The Democrats will tell the public that they gave everyone seventy-two hours to decipher and decide the fate of this "new direction" designed to empower an already bloated government, and yet, even in the face of public opposition, they’re in a “damn the torpedoes/icebergs, full steam ahead modus. However the outcome after today, one thing is certain: change is coming---again. And we will all be searching for a lifeboat on this “unsinkable legislation”.