Black Infant Health Program
Notice that there is a phone number on the website.
So I called it.
I posed a question to the woman who answered:
"My girl friend is knocked up, but she is half Hispanic and half black. Does she qualify for this program?"
Turns out not. You have to be "black" to qualify.
What's "black"? By they way these people do business, Barack Obama isn't "black".
Turns out it doesn't matter. They are apparently taking a page from ACORN:
"You can just self-report race so it should be no problem."
I wonder what would have happened had I told her my girl friend was a hooker who needed an abortion so I could put her back to work cuz I need munny to buy dope.
We have the woman's name. The question now is -- do we send this to FoxNews and watch the excitement?
This week, the building is being lit up, and decorated, in red and yellow.
These are the colors of Communist China. Red China.
There is much to celebrate in Chinese history and Chinese accomplishments. The establishment of a Communist regime is not one of them.
Here is a good opinion piece on that:
Honor China, not its communist government
"Would the Empire State Building honor the government of Sudan or the birth of Nazi Germany?" asked Thor Halvorssen, whose Human Rights Foundation has an office in this building. "It's sad that a symbol of free enterprise honors the butchers of Beijing."
Communism is the root of the honor and nothing has harmed China so much. The nightmare began with Mao Zedong in 1949. He imported the alien ideology that is still around, diluted only because the authorities made such an economic hash of the country. By Mao's 1976 death, his successors had no choice but to open up.
Before that, the communist regime was responsible for wars, purges and famine on a scale untold in human civilization. According to University of Hawaii historian R.J. Rummel, the communist regime is responsible for the deaths of nearly 77 million people.
So General Stanley McChrystal, commanding the forces in Afghanistan, wants another 40,000 troops.
Our military people are fighting and suffering wounds, and dying, in Afghanistan. McChrystal wants 40,000 more troops. He believes this will allow him to stabilize the current mayhem, and presumably even accomplish something more along the lines of ... winning. If 'winning' is an applicable term over there.
If he doesn't get the 40,000 troops, he can:
a) continue on with the current ops, in which case we are going to lose more people while not gaining much if anything;
b) hunker down in a kind of garrison mode, reducing casualties, which case the Taliban and other thugs can regroup, resupply, re-organize, and do all those things the North Vietnamese used to do whenever the US slacked off;
c) try to push out even harder with what he has, which undoubtedly will result in even more casualties.
What is the Commander-in-Chief doing about McChrystal's request?
Nothing. He's looking at a wait of 'several weeks' while he hems and haws about a 'new strategy'.
I have an idea.
Obama should tell the Taliban they'd better surrender before Congress recesses for the Thanksgiving holiday.
After all, his authoritative, commanding presence and leadership and drawing the line in the sand worked so well with Congress before the August recess ...
Obama delays troop request
and two from Chris Muir:
And a child shall lead them
When does this nonsense cross over and become blasphemy?
This video is reportedly from last December:
This is a Gamaliel Organization event.
The Gamaliel Organization has ties to ACORN and Obama and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers; it also has political and financial ties to the Woods Foundation, for which Obama was a board member. The Woods Foundation has a mission statement very similar to that of ACORN. Some of their grantees are listed here: A Guide to the Political Left: The Woods Foundation).
Here we have an earlier video link in which Obama talks about how ACORN and Gamaliel will "shape his presidential agenda":
Obama was genning up yet another crisis atmosphere, this time over the Iranian's "secret" nuclear facility. You know, the "secret" facility we've known about for years.
Here's a good take on Obama the Snake Oil Salesman:
Time for Obama to start acting like the president
Most tellingly, he gave Congress an August deadline for passage of health-care legislation -- "Now, if there are no deadlines, nothing gets done in this town . . . " -- and then let it pass. It seemed not to occur to Obama that a deadline comes with a consequence -- meet it or else.
Obama lost credibility with his deadline-that-never-was, and now he threatens to lose some more with his posturing toward Iran. He has gotten into a demeaning dialogue with Ahmadinejad, an accomplished liar. (The next day, the Iranian used a news conference to counter Obama and, days later, Iran tested some intermediate-range missiles.) Obama is our version of a Supreme Leader, not given to making idle threats, setting idle deadlines, reversing course on momentous issues, creating a TV crisis where none existed or, unbelievably, pitching Chicago for the 2016 Olympics. Obama's the president. Time he understood that.That business of pitching Chicago for the Olympics is another good one. What in the world is the President of the United States doing, behaving like that? Why not simply ask someone like Ron Davis to make the pitch. That's what economic development people do.
But no ... our president is in his Snake Oil Salesman role. His pitchman role. What's next? Obama going door to door, selling vortex vacuum machines to stimulate the economy?
Here's more on that: Obama's Emergency Trip to Denmark
And how far does he think he's going to get with this going on in Chicago:
Outrage in Chicago
They should be taking a leaf from our book, and not mentioning all that 'negative' stuff. What are they thinking?
That was written by Patrick Henry, he of "Give me liberty or give me death!" fame. Boy howdy, but what red-blooded American cannot help but be stirred by that?
What red-blooded American Christian cannot help but be stirred by Henry's statement as a founder of the nation? Certainly, Patrick Henry would would agree wholeheartedly with today’s opponents to separation of church and state.
Henry also believed very deeply in freedom of religious choice ... although he believed that choice was limited to which Christian church you were obligated to belong. Henry believed that every man must belong to a Christian church, and that every man must pay taxes to support that church, and to support "teachers of the Christian religion".
I imagine that must give our anti-separatist friends and neighbors a Chris Matthews-like tingle up the leg.
On the other hand ... government-mandated tithing? Government-mandated membership in an “approved” church? How many of us today, no matter what our faith, would go along with that?
You know what? They didn’t go along with it back then, either, and a group of unlikely bedfellows, evangelists and Enlightenment rationalists, defeated Henry’s attempt in the Virginia legislature. Why? One group was afraid of government interference in the church, while the other group was afraid of church interference with government. The idea is to protect the church from the government, and the government from the church. You won't often hear opponents to the separation of church and state cite Patrick Henry, however, lest someone point out that Henry led the opposition to Virginia's ratification of the Constitution. Patrick Henry didn't like the Constitution, and he opposed its adoption vociferously. That's one of those Inconvenient Truths that gets in the way the argument, don't you think?
In her recent letter to the editor, Laurie Gloyd, an anti-separatist, draws on one of their favorite observations: "Separation of church and state is not found in the Constitution”.
That is true. What is also true, however, is the fact that “God” is not found in the Constitution. Moreover, the Constitution actually prevents the use of any religious test as a qualifier to hold office. Therefore, Constitutionally, an atheist is as qualified to hold office as the most rabid Christian fundamentalist … or Islamic fundamentalist, for that matter. And, while a president-elect may place his or her hand upon a Bible while taking the oath, there is no requirement to do so. Nor does the oath of office make any reference to “God”.
The same individuals often point out that the Declaration of Independence refers to a “Creator”, though they gloss over a lack of reference to "Christ" or "Christianity" anywhere in the document. But the Declaration does not have force of law. The Constitution, on the other hand, is the framework for the law of the land. The Constitution was written by elected officials, then ratified by the people of the several states. The framers of the Constitution were an eclectic bunch, representing deists, Trinitarians, Unitarians, Episcopalians, and Christians who today would be called ‘evangelical’. All were deeply concerned about the relationship of church and state.
At the same time, at least two colonies, two states in the early days of the republic, had government-approved churches.
How can this be, given the First Amendment?
We have to remember that until the 14th Amendment, the Federal Constitution applied only to Federal issues. It is the 14th Amendment, with its Equal Protection clause, that extends the power of the Federal Constitution to not only the states, but all the way down to local government, even in Judge Manley’s municipal court. So in the early days, the republic and the states operated under some very different legal rules and principles.
We have a fine quote from Justice Harry Blackmun, taken from Lee v. Weisman in 1992: "When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some [over others]."
Of course, Blackmun is one of those 'illiterate liberal judges' to whom Mr. Reilly referred in his earlier letter on this subject. Everyone knows that Israel is 'God's chosen people', so therefore their decendents must be Constitutionally-exempt. I don't know how that applies to the separation of church and state but I just had to toss it in.
So. Let's do away with that separation of church and state. How are we going to do it? Constitutional amendment? I doubt it. That requires a majority for ratification, and Christians have managed to dig themselves into such a self-righteously deep hole, that kind of thing isn't going to happen. They just don't have the juice any more.That's the unfortunate result of out-Phariseeing the Pharisees.
But wait! As Obama has shown us, we don't need the Constitution. We can have a "religion czar"!
Who shall it be?
How about ... the Reverend Jeremiah Wright? No? How about ... the Reverend Jesse Jackson? No? How about ... the Reverend Al Sharpton?
Wowsers. How about Reverend Fred Phelps, of the Westboro Baptist Church, a fine example of Christian thought and a real anti-separatist? Brother Phelps views on homosexuals should make him particularly acceptable to Christian fundamentalists, don't you think?
So many choices. Who will make the choice? Congress? The President? Certainly not you or me.
Separation of church and state. The only thing keeping the worst of the whackjobs away from the rest of us.
The 3 R's in the Age of Obama
Acknowledging the historic nature of Obama’s presidency (“the first black American”) is one thing. Deifying him with creepy spiritual references (“red, yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight” is cribbed from the famous hymn “Jesus Loves the Little Children;” cheering “you are No. 1”) is quite another. Burlington Township (NJ) school officials said Thursday the recording and dissemination of the video was “unauthorized,” but acknowledged that the Obama praise session was part of the students’ official curriculum.
"Yes, Barack loves me ... Yes, Barack loves me ... Yes, Barack loves me ...
This I know ... for the DNC tells me so ..."
All praise to our Beloved and Benevolent Great Leader! All praise to The One! All praise to the Obamessiah!
It's enough to make a dyspeptic hyena puke.
And it fits perfectly with The Obamessiah's self-focus:
Obama mentions himself 1200 times in his recent speeches
Obama's favorite word in the entire English language? "I". He loves the upright pronoun. Second favorite? It's a tie for "me" and "my".
Altimirano punches through the Trinidad line, carrying the pigskin for a gain of several yards despite nearly having his jersey ripped off.
The Miners all hit Altimirano at the same time, struggling to stop him. They were successful only after more players piled on.
This Cub takes a hard hit from two Trinidad Miners, coughing up the ball as he went down under the onslaught.
The Cubs center gets ready to snap the ball.
This Miner snags the ball from mid-air.
While this one tries to come to a screeching halt in order avoid the oncoming Cubs.
This reminds me of those Chinese propaganda flicks from the late 1950's and early 60's, wherein Chinese kids were lined up singing praises to Great Benevolent Leader Mao Tse Tung.
But that's just me.
Oh ... this just in, from the school (source: Kevin McCullough):
1. The school refuses to acknowledge that the events on the tape even occurred.
2. They refuse to admit whether or not information concerning the activity, and the right of a family or child to opt out of it, was made available.
3. They refuse to admit whether or not the children were offered other options, as opposed to being forced to memorize the words, "Hello, Mr. President, we honor you today! For all your great accomplishments we all do say "hooray!" Hooray, Mr. President, you're number one!
4. But the spokesperson I talked with at B. Bernice Elementary school did say the school was aware of, and considering taking actions against, the persons "who illegally taped and distributed a video recording of a private class activity."
In any case:
Frank seeks to clarify ...
But on Wednesday, Frank objected to his signature on the letter because of partisanship that he says has been injected into the issue.
But after complaining about this 'partisanship', Barney went on:
Frank noted that ACORN receiving $14.2 million in funding from Bush administration through HUD.
"And I do not remember during the period from 2001 to 2006 when the Republicans controlled the White House, HUD, the House and the Senate, and ACORN was receiving millions of dollars, any Republican objection to this," he said.
Of course, that isn't 'partisanship'. Apparently.
If Barney had been paying attention, he would have known that a number of people, mostly Republicans and Independents, have been objecting to ACORN for years.
Meanwhile, ACORN head cheeses, though expressing shock and dismay and outrage (yadda yadda yadda) over their recent faux pas, 'shoot the messenger' while tap dancing around over just how crooked they really are:
ACORN shoots the messenger
ACORN is suing the two youngsters who had the cojones and the smarts to expose the rot within the organization.
But ACORN says no tax returns were actually prepared at the Baltimore office, and that the audio portion of the video recorded there was obtained illegally, since Maryland requires two-party consent for sound recordings. The multimillion-dollar lawsuit cites "extreme emotional distress" on behalf of two workers who were fired after the video was posted online.
The workers are suffering extreme emotional distress because their slime and corruption was exposed? Is this nuts, or what.
If our CongressClowns had been doing their jobs, we wouldn't have a couple of amateurs rooting out this garbage.
The federal government resorted to bullying tactics when it ordered an investigation of Humana -- one of the country's biggest private insurers -- for its decision to send customers a letter alerting them about pending health reform legislation, a leading Republican charged Wednesday.
"This is so clearly an outrage," McConnell said on the Senate floor. "For explaining to seniors how legislation might affect them, the federal government has now issued a gag order on that company, and any other company that communicates with clients on the issue, telling them to shut up -- or else.
"This is precisely the kind of thing Americans are worried about with the administration's health care plan. They're worried that government agencies which were created to enforce violations even-handedly will instead be used against those who voice a different point of view," he said.This is consistent with the behavior of the Obamanians all along. Their idea of 'bipartisan' or 'reasoned discourse' is ... "we tell you want we want, and you agree with it."
Or ... "When we want your opinion we'll give it to you."
That's a dog that don't hunt.
Qadaffi lauds Obama then launches into rambling attack on UN ("we'd be content and happy if Obama can stay president forever")
And then Obama threw Israel under the bus. Well ... why not. There's lots of company under there, most recently the Poles and Czechs:
US does not recognize 'legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements'
Well shoot ... why not just give the Iranians or even Kha-Daffy a couple of our nukes and let them take care of the 'problem.'
John Dickinson wrote a series of twelve letters, from 1767-1768, taking issue with the infamous Townshend Acts and other British policies toward the colonies. As you can see, Mr. Dickinson had much in common with many of us who live today. Though we may not be farmers, we are the middle class, as was Dickinson. Substitute Porkulus Americanus, the auto industry bailout, Obamacare, and other such Obamanian ineptitudes for the Townshend Acts. Then you will see why Pelosi's and Obama's insulting characterizations of those who oppose them as 'terrorists', or 'mobs', or 'un-American', displays a pathetic lack of knowledge about our - their - American heritage. Those people bank on you not knowing your heritage.
Here is Dickinson's first letter. If you wish to read the others, please go here:
A web of English history (yes ... this site is in the UK, and it is about English, not American, history. Odd, don't you think?)
My DEAR COUNTRYMEN,
I am a farmer, settled after a variety of fortunes near the banks of the river Delaware, in the province of Pennsylvania. I received a liberal education and have been engaged in the busy scenes of life, but am now convinced, that a man may be as happy without bustle as with it. My farm is small, my servants are few and good, I have a little money at interest, I wish for no more, my employment in my own affairs is easy, and with a contented, grateful mind, undisturbed by worldly hopes or fears relating to myself, I am completing the number of days allotted to me by divine goodness.
Being generally master of my time, I spend a good deal of it in a library, which I think the most valuable part of my small estate; and being acquainted with two or three gentlemen of abilities and learning who honour me with their friendship, I have acquired, I believe, a greater knowledge in history and the laws and constitution of my country, than is generally attained by men of my class, many of them not being so fortunate as I have been in the opportunities of getting information.
From my infancy I was taught to love humanity and liberty. Enquiry and experience have since confirmed my reverence for the lessons then given me, by convincing me more fully of, their truth and excellence. Benevolence towards mankind excites wishes for their welfare, and such wishes endear the means of fulfilling them. These can be found in liberty only, and therefore her sacred cause ought to be espoused by every man on every occasion, to the utmost of his power. As a charitable but poor person does not withhold his mite because he cannot relieve all the distresses of the miserable, so should not any honest man suppress his sentiments concerning freedom, however small their influence is likely to be. Perhaps he may touch some wheel' that will have an effect greater than he could reasonably expect.
These being my sentiments, I am encouraged to offer to you, my countrymen, my thoughts on some late transactions that appear to me to be of the utmost importance to you. Conscious of my own defects, I have waited some time, in expectation of seeing the subject treated by persons much better qualified for the task; but being therein disappointed, and apprehensive that longer delays will be injurious, I venture at length to request the attention of the public, praying that these lines may be read with the same zeal for the happiness of British America, with which they were wrote.
With a good deal of surprize I have observed that little notice has been taken of an Act of Parliament, as injurious in its principle to the liberties of these colonies, as the Stamp Act was: I mean the act for suspending the legislation of New York.
[N.B. This refers to the Quartering Act of 1765 (5 Geo. III, C. 33) which required colonial local authorities to provide the king's troops with barracks or billets, and to furnish them gratis with candles, firing, bedding, cooking utensils, salt and vinegar, and five pints of small beer or cider, or a gill of rum per man, per diem. The New York Assembly, on 3 July 1766, voted to fulfil all these requirements, save the salt, vinegar, and liquor, for about eleven hundred men. This was deemed insufficient by the Lords of Trade, and, as the Assembly refused to incur an additional "ruinous and insupportable" expense, Parliament, by 7 Geo.III, c. 59, declared all Acts, &c., of the New York Assembly to be null and void until it should comply in full with the Quartering Act. The Assembly of 1769 gave in.]
The Assembly of that Government complied with a former Act of Parliament, requiring certain provisions to be made for the troops in America, in every particular, I think, except the articles of salt, pepper, and vinegar. In my opinion they acted imprudently, considering all circumstances, in not complying so far as would have given satisfaction, as several colonies did. But my dislike of their conduct in that instance has not blinded me so much that I cannot Plainly perceive that they have been punished in a manner pernicious to American freedom. and justly alarming to all the colonies.
If the British Parliament has a legal authority to issue an order that we shall furnish a single article for the troops here, and to compel obedience to that order, they have the same right to issue an order for us to supply those troops with arms, cloths, and every necessary; and to compel obedience to that order also; in short, to lay any burthens they please upon us. What is this but taxing us at a certain sum, and leaving to us only the manner of raising it? How is this mode more tolerable than the Stamp Act? Would that Act have appeared more pleasing to Americans, if being ordered thereby to raise the sum total of the taxes, the mighty privilege had been left to them, of saying how much should be paid for an instrument of writing on paper, and how much for another on parchment?
An Act of Parliament commanding us to do a certain thing, if it has any validity, is a tax upon us for the expence that accrues in complying with it; and for this reason, I believe, every colony on the continent, that chose to give a mark of their respect for Great Britain in complying with the Act relating to the troops, cautiously avoided the mention of that Act, lest their conduct should be attributed to its supposed obligation.
The matter being thus stated, the Assembly of New York either had, or had not a right to refuse submission to that Act. If they had, and I imagine no American will say they had not, then the Parliament had no right to compel them to execute it. If they had not that right they had no right to punish them for not executing it; and therefore no right to attempts as a mutual inattention to the interests of each other. To divide and thus to destroy is the first political maxim in attacking those who are powerful by their union. He certainly is not a wise man who folds his arms and reposes himself at home, viewing with unconcern the flames that have invaded his neighbour's house, without using any endeavours to extinguish them. When Mr. Hampden's ship money cause for three shillings and fourpence was tried, all the people of England, with anxious expectations, interested themselves in the important decision; and when the slightest point touching the freedom of one colony is agitated, I earnestly wish that the rest may with equal ardour support their sister. Very much may be said on this subject; but I hope more at present is unnecessary.
With concern I have observed that two Assemblies of this Province have sat and adjourned, without taking any notice of this Act. It may perhaps be asked, what would have been proper for them to do? I am by no means fond of inflammatory measures; I detest them. I should be sorry that any thing should be done which might justly displease our sovereign or our mother country. But a firm, modest exertion of a free spirit should never be wanting on public occasions. It appears to me that it would have been sufficient for the Assembly to have ordered our agents to represent to the King's ministers, their sense of the Suspending Act, and to pray for its repeal. Thus we should have borne our testimony against it; and might therefore reasonably expect that, on a like occasion, we might receive the same assistance from the other colonies
Concordia res parva crescunt.
Small things grow great by concord.
It seems that Obama is everywhere, like Big Brother.
Sunday: Obama appeared on pre-taped interviews with ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and Univision. The White House did not make Obama available for "FOX News Sunday."
Monday: Obama delivered remarks on "innovation" at Hudson Valley Community College in Troy, N.Y. He later planned to tape an appearance on "The Late Show With David Letterman" in New York City.
Tuesday: Obama meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in New York. Then he hosts a summit on arms control and gives a speech on climate change.
Wednesday: Obama is to deliver an address to the U.N. General Assembly.
Thursday: Obama heads to Pittsburgh for the G-20 summit.
I gotta wonder when we'll have the big LCD panels on every street corner, with images of Obama looking benevolently down on us, and the Shepard Fairey poster with its not-so-subliminal "OBEY" pasted on walls all over town.
Perhaps Rahm "The Fish" Emanuel should tell him the campaign is over, that it's time to put give the teleprompters a rest, and and that it's time to actually hang around the Orchid Office and do some work.
Obama has been giving Obamacare the hard sell. The problem is this:
What has changed since the last time he pimped his wares? The answer, of course, is that nothing has changed. We have some bills in Congress, none of which are particularly palatable and some of which are downright toxic. Obama can't explain what his plan is, because he doesn't have one.
Obama used his platform Sunday to hammer key points of his proposals and beat back criticism.
He rejected charges that a requirement for Americans to buy health insurance amounts to a tax increase. He repeated his view that a government-run insurance plan -- favored by the left, but despised by the right -- should be a "part of this," but should not be considered the "silver bullet" for health care problems.
Republican strategist Terry Holt, a consultant with America's Health Insurance Plans, said the president is offering a message that is often divorced from reality.
"The president is just fundamentally disconnected from what he is selling," Holt said. "His generalities about the plan do not match with the legislation that is being proposed in the Congress. ... The president is talking one game, but the American people are looking at legislation that is a totally different thing."
But that thought is turning out to be the understatement of the century. We thought Bush II was a Happy Meal of political duplicity, but Obama is turning out to be a regular daily circus.
In this morning's observations:
Obama is taking the media to task for being 'negative'. Like wowsers. The guy ought to run for a position on the La Junta Chamber of Commerce. The mainstream media, long Obama's primary cheerleaders and ideological whores, are slowly beginning to wake up. Obama is miffed that they have been printing the ongoing drama over Joe Wilson ... never mind that while Wilson apologized for his rude outburst and Obama accepted it, it has been Pelosi and her buffoonish entourage that has kept it going.
Along with that, Obama is 'pleased to look at' SB. 673, the Federal tax writeoff for ... newspapers. Yep. Well, once he gets his socialistic hooks into the editorial staffs, he'll just fire whoever disagrees with him. It worked for the auto industry; why not the newspapers? The question is, do you really want Obama and his henchmen running the nation's newspapers? Obama should take a read of Tocqueville's observations about newspapers; they certainly apply here, and the Federal bailout card was not on the table way back then. Another question ... if the Obamanians lose the tax income from the nation's newspapers, from whom will they draw enough blood to make it up? Will they put a surcharge on each paper? I think we went through something like that once before, didn't we? George III's Chancellor of the Exchequer called it 'taxes in trade'. Note that a 'surcharge' is not a 'tax', nor is a 'fee'. Obama is right in line with Bill Ritter on that, but then, they are both Democrats. This weekend, Obama got into a bit of a dustup with George Stephanopoulis over that very thing, about when is a 'tax increase' not a 'tax increase:
"Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don't. How is that not a tax?" the host asked.
Obama responded: " No, but -- but, George, you -- you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase."
Stephanopoulos then offered the dictionary definition.
"I don't think I'm making it up. Merriam-Webster's dictionary: 'Tax, a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes,'" he said.
Visibly taken aback, Obama rejected the notion it was a tax increase and said pulling the dictionary out was a sign the host was "stretching" a little.
I'd suggest that Obama also take a read of John Dickenson's 'Farmer's Letters', written back in 1767, about this very subject.
Then we have the leak of the confidential report from General Stanley McChrystal, wherein McChrystal unequivocally states:
"Resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it," Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote in a five-page Commander's Summary. His 66-page report, sent to Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Aug. 30, is now under review by Obama.
"Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall effort is deteriorating," McChrystal said of the war's progress.
But ... our 'allies' have consistently refused to send new troops to Afghanistan, and there is no indication they are going to change their minds on that.
Then we have Hillary Clinton, who, as Rich Galen illustrates, has likely taken over from Joltin' Joe Biden the title of "Gaffe-ist in Chief" with these diplomatic 'accomplishments'(the list is from the Washington Post):
- NATO allies have refused to send new troops to Afghanistan.
- Few countries have agreed to accept detainees held at Guantanamo.
- Scottish officials ignored Obama's plea to keep the Lockerbie bomber in prison.
- U.S. efforts to head off a coup in Honduras were ineffective.
- North Korea continues to develop nuclear weapons.
- Iran may be making nukes, too.
- Middle East leaders have rebuffed Obama's efforts at peacemaking.
Quite a list. And Obama's only been at this for eight months. Imagine how many international problems he and Hillary can exacerbate in four full years.
And Bertha Lewis, the goofball who is running ACORN, refuses to appear before Congress to answer questions about what she is doing with our tax dollars:
"There is no God-given right for any organization to receive a grant from the American people. The fact is there are organizations standing in line that wish they won instead of you, and they're giving us the transparency so we can have the confidence the money is spent only for the purpose of the grant," [Congressman Darryl]Issa said.
Lewis said her organization has "firewalls" to prevent non-political money from going toward political purposes, but Issa said that's not true.
"You shouldn't get another penny of federal dollars until you demonstrate that those dollars are firewalled for only that use, and that has not been the history of the organization," Issa said.
Well shoot ... I don't know why Lewis should be held accountable for what she is doing with our tax bux. The La Junta golf course has refused for years to account for what they do with our tax bux, so why not ACORN. It's just a few tens of millions more.
"From whence comes the term, 'The Orchid Office'?"
The answer is, thusly:
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK."
- Barack Obama, May 18, 2008
That's what Barack Obama told America, back then. All the Greenies got tingles up their legs, and Chris Matthews fainted in throes of orgasmic pleasure.
Shortly after moving into the White House, last winter, The One took the opportunity to chastise Washingtonians, who were vapor locking and closing schools over some snow and ice. But then in almost the same breath, we had this:
US capital "flew into a bit of a tizzy" when, on his first full day in the White House, Mr Obama was photographed in the Oval Office without his suit jacket. There was, however, a logical explanation, the paper found: Mr Obama, who hates the cold, had cranked up the thermostat.
"He's from Hawaii, OK?" Mr Axelrod told the paper. "He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there."
The Orchid Office. Shortly thereafter, The Obamessiah was feeding his cronies Wagyu steaks on the taxpayers' dime. Wagyu's go for about a hundred bux a pound. Yessir, Mr. President, sir, we can't eat all we want and we can't keep the temp at 72. But that doesn't apply to the president.
Some related links:
Do as I say, not as I do
The president is outraged, but enjoys his Wagyu steaks
"Green" pizza And if you think the carbon footprint was bad on those babies, what about:
The simple pleasures of a farm stand The carbon footprint from Michelle's little tomatos would probably match a couple of dozen soccer mom SUV's for a year.
Was Joe Wilson right?
Da Judge puts forth all the reasons why Wilson was right when he hollered, "You lie" during Obama's Shuck and Jive performance. Of course, Wilson violated the Rules of the House when he did that, but that doesn't negate the fact that he was right. He was rude, too, but that doesn't negate the fact that he was right.
Take a read of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Note how the term 'citizen' is used throughout the section ... until you get down to that part about "equal protection of the laws'. Now we don't see the word 'citizen'. We see the word 'person'. The authors knew what they were writing. They clearly understood the difference between 'citizen' and 'person', yet chose to use 'person' in the Equal Protection clause.
This is why Senor and Senora Mojado, both illegal aliens, enjoy the protections of the Constitution. Remember the wetbacks who were whaled upon and beaten senseless by Riverside County deputies some years back, all why "News at 11" hovered overhead, videotaping? Said wetbacks sued Riverside County and each one of them was awarded $750,000. Why? "Equal protection of the laws". It isn't rocket science, and it isn't arcane legal mumbo jumbo ... and it is the law of the land. You may be here illegally, but that fact doesn't mean you can be a punching bag for the cops.
Nor can you be excluded because the president finds it convenient to obfuscate or ignore the facts of the case.
Da Judge is on the money.
GOP California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger now wants an investigation. But neither the Terminator nor any other California public officials raised a peep when the very same San Diego ACORN office publicly announced a partnership with Citibank to secure home loans for illegal aliens. In 2005, Citibank and ACORN Housing Corporation – which has received tens of millions of tax dollars under the Bush administration alone — began recruiting Mexican illegal aliens for a lucrative program offering loans with below-market interest rates, down-payment assistance and no mortgage insurance requirements. Instead of Social Security numbers required of law-abiding citizens, the program allows illegal alien applicants to supply loosely-monitored tax identification numbers issued by the IRS.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that “undocumented residents” comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of “$44 billion in mortgages.” Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersehttp://acornhousing.org/index.phpy City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn., and at all of ACORN Housing’s 12 California offices. San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even “nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments.”
This nonsense with ACORN has been going on for some time. The Bush administration and the Republicans are not remaining untarnished, either.
Read the whole thing here:
ACORN's illegal alien home loan racket
No ... I'm not talking about Hanagan's in Swink, or Van Hook's in La Junta, or Knapp's in Rocky Vegas.
I'm talking about Michelle Obama and "The Farm at Sunnyside" market, there in DC.
Excerpts from The First Lady's recent shopping trip to the roadside farm market stand:
Let's say you're preparing dinner and you realize with dismay that you don't have any certified organic Tuscan kale. What to do?
Here's how Michelle Obama handled this very predicament Thursday afternoon:
The Secret Service and the D.C. police brought in three dozen vehicles and shut down H Street, Vermont Avenue, two lanes of I Street and an entrance to the McPherson Square Metro station. They swept the area, in front of the Department of Veterans Affairs, with bomb-sniffing dogs and installed magnetometers in the middle of the street, put up barricades to keep pedestrians out, and took positions with binoculars atop trucks. Though the produce stand was only a block or so from the White House, the first lady hopped into her armored limousine and pulled into the market amid the wail of sirens.
Then ... with several hundred people gathering to watch the excitement:
"Now it's time to buy some food," she told several hundred people who came to watch. "Let's shop!"
Obama, in her brief speech to the vendors and patrons, handled the affordability issue by pointing out that people who pay with food stamps would get double the coupon value at the market. Even then, though, it's hard to imagine somebody using food stamps to buy what the market offered: $19 bison steak from Gunpowder Bison, organic dandelion greens for $12 per pound from Blueberry Hill Vegetables, the Piedmont Reserve cheese from Everson Dairy at $29 a pound. Rounding out the potential shopping cart: $4 for a piece of "walnut dacquoise" from the Praline Bakery, $9 for a jumbo crab cake at Chris's Marketplace, $8 for a loaf of cranberry-walnut bread and $32 for a bolt of yarn.
Then Obama illustrated the simple humanity of Life in the Orchid Office:
The first lady, in gray slacks and blue sweater, marveled that the people were "so pumped up" despite the rain. "I have never seen so many people so excited about fruits and vegetables!" she said. (Must be the tender baby arugula.)
She spoke of the global reach of her cause: "The first thing world leaders, prime ministers, kings, queens ask me about is the White House garden. And then they ask about Bo."
She spoke of the fuel fed to the world's most powerful man: "I've learned that when my family eats fresh food, healthy food, that it really affects how we feel, how we get through the day . . . whether there's a Cabinet meeting or whether we're just walking the dog."
And she spoke of her own culinary efforts: "There are times when putting together a healthy meal is harder than you might imagine."
Particularly when it involves a soundstage, an interpreter for the deaf, three TV satellite trucks and the closing of part of downtown Washington.
Wasn't it George Bush the First who was chastized by the press for not being familiar with bar scanners in the supermarket? For being 'out of touch' with the little people?
Huh. And the Obamas have the unmitigated gall to tell you and me what we need in healthcare and in handling the rest of our affairs?
"Qu'ils mangent de la brioche," I say.
Let 'em eat cake.
"Consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down...an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange..."
-- President Barack Obama, September 9
Two claims are made all the time in the health care debate: 1) that there is little competition among those providing health insurance and 2) that it is important to take the profit motive out of providing health insurance. Both are myths. It turns out that claims about too little competition are based on a misinterpretation of the data and that non-profit insurers are so abundant that the largest insurer in virtually every state is a non-profit.
... they leave out the fact that for most people it is their employer, not the insurance companies, that pays for any bad health outcomes. The firm does so out of the company’s own pocket. The companies do what is called “self-insure” or “self-fund” their plans, and that occurs for around 55 percent of employees ...
So what about President Obama’s claim that in the 34 states most concentrated states 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies? Given that self-insured firms cover 57 percent of people insured in those states, the correct total market share for the largest five firms control is 32 percent, not 75 percent.
Obama has to know this. But he also knows that most of us don't. And that is why he tried so hard to shove this down our throats by rushing it through Congress before the recess. Pelosi knows it, too.
This is just one example of the falsehoods and misinformation spread by our CongressClowns and by Obama. They bank on your ignorance.
Take a read of the entire article and the links contained within.
Gibbs v. ACORN
It's kind of hard to see how Obama can 'distance' himself from an organization which has campaigned hard for him ... though ACORN is supposed to be non-partisan. The $800,000 the Obama campaign gave to ACORN in an under-the-table move is a tight tether.
“Barack Obama’s failure to accurately report his campaign’s financial records is an incredibly suspicious situation that appears to be an attempt to hide his campaign’s interaction with a left-wing organization previously convicted of voter fraud. For a candidate who claims to be practicing ‘new’ politics, his FEC reports look an awful lot like the ‘old-style’ Chicago politics of yesterday.”
But wait! There's more!
Remember SEIU? The purple-shirted thugs who were assaulting Obamacare protestors at town hall meetings? The unionistas who shoveled wheelbarrows full of money into the Obama campaign? SEIU is "one of the pillars of the ACORN family":
ACORN controls or significantly dominates several Big Labor unions and organizations. ACORN created and controls SEIU 100 (Gulf Region) and SEIU 880 (a recently expanded SEIU mega-local that covers Chicago, Illinois, Indiana, and Kansas).
ACORN founder S. Wade Rathke referred to mega-union SEIU 880 as “one of the pillars of the ACORN Family.”Here are some of the political and mainstream media connections. You can see why the MSM has been reluctant to report on the ACORN scandal:
Schumer, Gutierrez and Waters Honored for Governing the "ACORN Way" at Anniversary Celebration
Day by Day
"A whitebread pimp and his plucky prostitute arrange to smuggle in child sex slaves from El Salvador, bringing them in through Tijuana, all with the aid of a powerful yet comically incompetent cartel."
Conservatives draw blood from ACORN
But as one might expect from the Fourth Estate’s chief Obama PR firm, it is somewhat ... incomplete. It’s more than incomplete; it’s a tacit defense of ACORN.
Apparently the New York Times sees nothing wrong with ACORN staffers counseling on how to set up bordellos using underage girls brought in from Central America; apparently the New York Times sees nothing wrong with money laundering; apparently the New York Times sees nothing wrong with cheating the IRS . . after all, the Secretary of the Treasury can, so why not a pimp and his prime hooker?
Instead the Times focuses on the amateur status of OKeefe and Giles. What the Times should be focusing on is how one of the nation’s largest newpapers, once famous for its investigative reporting, has sunk to such a pathetic low as to be no more than a tabloid mouthpiece for scum such as ACORN.
For more on what is not in the Times article, please see:
What's missing from the New York Times coverage of ACORN
Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: An Allergic Reaction To The Race Card
# ACORN is an acronym for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. It is one of those manufactured acronyms that come before the name is invented to fit the acronym. Does that explanation make any sense?
# Whether it does or not, ACORN is an unreconstructed Liberal organization which was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the Obama campaign to turn out the vote for … Obama.
# According to Fox News
The organization has been accused by Republicans and conservative activists with fraud in voter registration drives around the country and has been under fire since last year for its support of President Obama and for its planned participation in next year's census.
# But, because it was a Liberal group doing potentially illegal things and the Liberal group was being accused by Republicans … whatever ACORN was doing was ignored, if not actively applauded by much of the major media
The major media continues to ignore the stuff breaking about ACORN.
It seems that in at least four cases ACORN counselors advised two young people who presented themselves as a prostitute and her pimp on how to cheat and lie to get a government sponsored mortgage. The videos of the transactions are posted on the BigGovernment.com website.
# The two people - described by the LA Times as "conservative activists" - went into ACORN offices in Washington, DC, Baltimore, New York City, and San Bernardino, California and asked for advice on how to account the $96,000 in income the woman (who said her name was Kenya) had earned the previous year as a prostitute on her tax returns so they could buy a house.
# She was told to list her income as $9,600 instead of $96,000 and in the block which asks for occupation say she was a "performance artist."
Read the rest over on Galen's site. He gets into the ACORN workers giving advice on how to cover up using underage girls as hookers.
These are Obama's pals.
Because I think this, along with Obamacare, Porkulus Americanus, and pretty much everything Obama has done as president - as a senator, for that matter - is so much BS, I'm a racist. Why am I a racist? Because Jimmy Carter says so. Because Tax King Charles Rangel says so.
Hope and Change.
ACORN gives advice on how to start whorehouses using underage girls from overseas
"We're bringing these girls from overseas, but we are going to take a cut of the profit and intend to use the profit from the tricks the girls perform to fund my political campaign and the advertising," O'Keefe tells Kaelke, adding that it'll fund at least 50 percent of his planned run as a Democratic congressional candidate.
Kaelke, who told the couple that she once worked as a paid escort herself, at one point admits she was unqualified to counsel but stops well short of reporting O'Keefe and Giles to authorities.
Kaelke does note that her supervisor "would shoot this down faster than a bat out of hell" ... but then tells them how to get around all those little moral and legal questions.
Then she says, "ACORN will tell you the same thing, they will. You might get an old-timer like myself who really knows what's up and who could care less."
These ACORNers are so stupid it's making me wonder if it isn't all some kind of reverse setup, of bloggers and Foxnews. Fox is the only mainstream media carrying the story. The rest of the Obamanian butt-smoochers are ignoring it. Can ACORN employ so many complete idiots? Is it possible?
They got the ball rolling for the Senate to cut off funding to the child pandering accomplices at ACORN:
Senate votes to cut ACORN housing funding
At least some of the funding, that is.
ACORN. Community organizers. Panderers of child exploitation. Voter fraud professionals.
All on your dime.
Let's not forget ... like the New Black Panthers and their voter intimidation ... ACORN is/are Obama's pals.
Kris Abel was injured during the horse race at the Ark Valley Fair. She was hospitalized in Denver with 5 fractured vertebrae. She is back home now, on limited and light duty at work. The dinner is to help defray expenses from the injury.
Tickets are on sale at Kelly's Guns, La Junta Veterinary Clinic, Harris Pharmacy in Rocky Ford, and at the Swink Town Hall. Tickets are also available at the door this evening. Tickets are $7.00 per person or $25.00 for a family of four.
The menu: spaghetti, tossed salad, veggies, French bread, dessert, and drinks, with take-out available.
Modern Woodmen of America is matching funds.
For more information, please call 384-7155.
Pledge of Confusion? Schools Wrestle With Flag Policy in Classroom
The Pledge of Allegiance has an interesting history.
It was authored by a fellow who was a Christian Socialist, one Frank Bellamy, who was also a Baptist preacher. Christian socialism is an interesting mix of Christianity and socialism, with a twist of liberation theology, shaken, not stirred.
The pledge was quite simple when first used:
"I Pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
With 'liberty and justice for all'.
Yet Bellamy reportedly considered adding the words Fraternity and Equality. Shades of the French Revolution! Liberté, égalité, fraternité!
He left them out because he realized there was a great deal of opposition to equal rights for women and African Americans. So much for that 'liberty and justice for all', huh? Nice if you can get it but let's not rock that boat too much.
That 'under God' never came up until about 1948, and was not made official until 1954, during the McCarthy witch hunts. Some of our younger readers may not remember those. Joe McCarthy, a CongressClown, decided to accuse a significant number of Americans of Communist - and by extension 'ungodly' - leanings. The Pledge of Allegiance, heretofore a fairly harmless bit of feel-good emotional fluff, somewhat meaningless given that hedge over 'liberty and justice for all' except blacks and women, now became a mandated loyalty oath.
Since when do we Americans force other Americans to take 'loyalty oaths'?
Of what value is a 'loyalty oath' that is forced?
It's probably about as worthy as a forced pretension of a belief in whatever God d'jour is being forced upon people by the local ministerial association. America. Love it or leave it. Screw you and the horse you rode in on. We real Americans know what American values are all about.
The Jehovah's Witnesses protested being forced to recite the Pledge, back in the forties. They have this odd notion that one does not swear allegiance to a lesser being or entity than God.
They were beaten senseless and vilified by good, red-blooded Americans who knew what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and American values are all about.
A compelled Pledge of Allegiance is a joke. Rather than requiring ... compelling ... a Pledge, how about requiring a good education in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. How our government is supposed to work. They used to call that 'civics'. Some history wouldn't hurt either.
Then, when kids recite the Pledge, they are moved to do so voluntarily, because they understand what this country is all about. Or supposed to be all about. Not because some clown with more emotion than brains forces them into it by beating them senseless if they don't recite it. Can we all spell "Sieg Heil"? Can we all sing "L'Internationale"?
The same reasoning should apply to those pastors and 'Christians' who think God should be required in government. The truth of the matter is this: A truly 'Christian' lifestyle is voluntarily undertaken. Christian values become a part of how one does things, how one regards self and others. If this is so, then it is naturally reflected in how a government is run. Perhaps these pastors and 'Christians' are not leading such an exemplary Christian life, and so do not lead lost sheep to the flock. Perhaps if they worked more on that failing, our churches would not be declining.
Can it be possible that they have the cart before the horse?
Third Videotape Reveals ACORN Assisting 'Pimp,' 'Prostitute' in Brooklyn, N.Y.
The ACORN head cheese, one Bertha Lewis, is throwing a fit over all this. Rather than accept the fact that ACORN is a like a rotting melon in the field, covered with flies and leaking noxious juices, she is talking about suing James O'Keefe, the indie film maker who, along with Hannah Giles, posed as pimp and prostitute and video-taped their 'interactions' with ACORN officials.
O'Keefe is not intimidated by the predictably thuggish ACORN threats, and says, "Bring it on."
As in their previous undercover stings, filmmaker James O'Keefe, 25, and partner Hannah Giles, 20, who posed as a prostitute, received advice from ACORN workers on how to launder their earnings and avoid detection from law enforcement officials while running a prostitution business.
"You have to find another name for it," an ACORN employee tells the pair seeking a mortgage in the Brooklyn office. "Honesty is not going to get you the house. You can't say what you do for a living."As in their previous undercover stings, filmmaker James O'Keefe, 25, and partner Hannah Giles, 20, who posed as a prostitute, received advice from ACORN workers on how to launder their earnings and avoid detection from law enforcement officials while running a prostitution business.
"You have to find another name for it," an ACORN employee tells the pair seeking a mortgage in the Brooklyn office. "Honesty is not going to get you the house. You can't say what you do for a living."
What was it again that got us into the current fiscal fiasco? Housing mortgages?
"Honesty is not going to get you the house".
Yep. Obama's pals in ACORN, the primo 'community organizers'.
Lewis insists that the tapes are "doctored, edited, and in no way the result of the fabricated story being portrayed by conservative activist 'filmmaker' O'Keefe and his partner in crime."
Yet she has fired the workers involved in this "fabricated story". If it's all a Big Lie (a very popular phrase these days) then why isn't Lewis standing by her maligned employees? Who is really the "partner in crime" here?
More on how our tax bux fund the ACORN's sleazy doings:
After Census Severs Ties, ACORN May Face Scrutiny of Housing Grants
ACORN received $1.6 million to provide housing services to low-income communities in this fiscal year
Hope and Change! Hope and Change!
It's entitled "A small gathering at the Capitol".
# None of the national evening news anchors were there to bring you breathless coverage.
# None of the networks suspended regular programming to show the event in real time.
# A number of the weekend shows were taped on Thursday or Friday and didn't even mention it.
# The Washington, DC subway - called the Metro - which regularly puts on extra trains for large events announced it would actually close stations if they became too crowded.
# The Washington Times said, "Rally leaders estimated the crowd at about 75,000" the Washington Post said it was "in the many tens of thousands."
# It is one thing for Democrats to have ridiculed the people who turned out to those town-hall meetings as isolated groups of extremists. It is something else to have "many tens of thousands" of people show up on a Saturday afternoon on the West Front of the Capitol to express their dismay over how their government is being run.
Galen goes on to note the challenge to the Republicans:
The issue for Republicans is simple. Conservatives have shown you the parade route. The question is: Who, if anyone, will be able to race to the front and lead it?
An unlikely 'baton twirler' is coming out: Joe Wilson. Wilson has raised, he says, over a million bux in campaign funds contributions since his unseemly outburst the night of Obama's Shuck and Jive on healthcare.
The point there is that while Wilson lost his mind temporarily, he did so in a way that 'resonates' with millions of Americans, Americans who are fed up to the gills with what Obama and his socialista henchmen are doing to our country ... with our tax dollars.
I like Joe Wilson. I agree with him on refusing to make more apologies. It's time someone stood his ground and told Nancy Pelosi - who is pushing for censure - to shove it where the moon don't shine.
Where will Wilson shake out on all this. Who knows. He may not have the temperament to become a national leader, but at the moment, he is the only Republican with the balls to have told it like it is.
From Galen's closing comments:
# As Keanu Reeves said in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, "Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K." If we in Washington are as smart as we think we are we will sit up, pay close attention, and meet the folks when they show up at the Circle-K.
The White House has a message to the tens of thousands of protesters who railed against big government during a rally in Washington Saturday: You're wrong.
White House senior adviser David Axelrod said Sunday that the protesters, part of the "tea party" movement, do not represent the views of the broader public when it comes to health care reform."I don't think it's indicative of the nation's mood," Axelrod said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "You know, I don't think we ought to be distracted by that. My message to them is, they're wrong."
Obama and his henchmen - chief among whom we find Axelrod - have been calling us 'terrorists'; a 'mob'; and the worst of all: "organized".
This is the best indicator they are going to try to ram that legislative abortion down our throats. Just like with Porkulus Americanus.
Remember how hard Obama tried to have Obamacare pushed through before the summer recess?
The more we look at Obamacare, the more we find to dislike.
Everything Obama does is based on a crisis mentality. A 'sky is falling' mentality. He loves to generate fear, and the idea that He is The One that can Save Us. More and more of us are no longer falling for that crap sandwich.
Axelrod says tea party protestors are wrong
The 'leftist media' is pretty much most of the so-called 'mainstream media', a collection of Obamanian sycophants and brown-nosers like CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, etc.
Most of the print media is in the same league. Editorial policies are spineless, gutless, vapid.
From the Baltimore Sun, a fishwrapper almost as bad as the New York Times:
ACORN, which provides services to the needy, emerged as a target of Republicans during the 2008 presidential campaign, when it was accused of submitting fraudulent voter registration cards in several states. Although officially nonpartisan, the organization tends to serve poor and minority communities that traditionally vote Democratic.Posted online Thursday, the video made waves, particularly in conservative circles. Although it first appeared on a Web site called Big Hollywood (actually Big Government), (ACORN-Maryland lead organizer Stuart) Katzenberg said it was part of a "coordinated" campaign by FOX News to damage ACORN. He could not offer evidence to support his claim, and a spokeswoman for FOX News said the allegations were without merit.
See more here:
Meanwhile, here are the videos of the ACORN officials advising on how to lie to the IRS, and how to establish a whorehouse using underage girls:
Next three are the Koshares:
Vendors were friendly.
Serving up Rocky Mountain oysters at the Testicle Festival.
The skateboard park was well-used, with a contest in the early afternoon.
The next three are some of the fishermen/women at City Park Pond:
And the mutt population was well represented
Separation of church and state is a Big Lie
Mr. Reilly states that "certain people chose some years ago to begin an attack on our religious freedoms with the 'big lie' ..." regarding the concept of separation of church and state.
He names no names.
Can he mean Thomas Jefferson, who in his letter to the Danbury Baptists referred to a 'wall of separation between church and state', as he explained the First Amendment? Jefferson wrote that letter in 1802, which was 'some years ago'. The Danbury Baptists had written to Jefferson, then our freshly elected president. They had grave misgivings about government meddling in religion. They wrote:
"Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty — That Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals — That no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious Opinions - That the legitimate Power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor ...".
Jefferson replied, "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
Jefferson had some influence in the founding of this nation. I am not sure if Mr. Reilly is aware of this, given his statements.
Jefferson was profoundly influenced by the writings of John Locke, an Englishman whose views also influenced many of Jefferson's contemporaries.
Evidence of Locke's "Two Treatises of Government" may be found in much of the Founders' writings and in our legal heritage. Locke's views on private property form the foundation of the 'defense' against the Federal government's use of eminent domain in the Pinon Canyon matter. You will find passages from Locke's Second Treatise quoted verbatim in the Declaration of Independence.
Jefferson wrote, "Bacon, Locke and Newton..I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundation of those superstructures which have been raised in the Physical and Moral sciences".
So Jefferson, who had great influence in structuring the foundation of our nation, was himself greatly influenced by Locke.
In his writings, Locke very clearly espouses the concept of separation of church and state. In his "Letter Concerning Toleration", written in 1689, Locke very clearly and very strongly argues for that 'wall of separation'.
Are James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, the Danbury Baptists, and John Locke among those who began that 'attack on our religious freedoms'?
Then there is Roger Williams, one of my favorite preachers, and apparently another of those people who Mr. Reilly accuses of attacking our religious freedoms over this 'separation of church and state' thing.
Roger Williams founded Rhode Island and Providence Plantations - now the state of Rhode Island - and started either the first or second Baptist church on this continent. In 1644, he authored "The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience", another example of thinking that influenced the Founders of this nation. In that work, he eloquently argues for separation of church and state. Here are a few excerpts:
Fifthly, all civil states with their officers of justice in their respective constitutions and administrations are proved essentially civil, and therefore not judges, governors, or defenders of the spiritual or Christian state and worship.
Sixthly, it is the will and command of God that (since the coming of his Son the Lord Jesus) a permission of the most paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or antichristian consciences and worships, be granted to all men in all nations and countries; and they are only to be fought against with that sword which is only (in soul matters) able to conquer, to wit, the sword of God's Spirit, the Word of God.
Seventhly, the state of the Land of Israel, the kings and people thereof in peace and war, is proved figurative and ceremonial, and no pattern nor president for any kingdom or civil state in the world to follow.
Eighthly, God requireth not a uniformity of religion to be enacted and enforced in any civil state; which enforced uniformity (sooner or later) is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing of conscience, persecution of Christ Jesus in his servants, and of the hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls.
Tenthly, an enforced uniformity of religion throughout a nation or civil state, confounds the civil and religious, denies the principles of Christianity and civility, and that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
The book argues for a separation between church and state and for state toleration of various Christian denominations and also "paganish, Jewish, Turkish or anti-Christian consciences and worships."
I smell a bit of a rat here. I suspect that Mr. Reilly is one of those who does in fact subscribe to what really is a "Big Lie"; that "this nation was founded as a Christian nation". I suspect what he really wants is to introduce his brand of Christianity into our secular lives, much as those other fundamentalists want to do with Islam.
Mr. Reilly is correct in that 'separation of church and state' do not literally appear in the Constitution.
However, it is very clear that the Founders wanted not only the church protected from the state, but the state protected from the church. I would suggest that Mr. Reilly either educate himself on these matters, or stick to taking Scripture out of context, staying out of secular affairs. I really do not want to live my life based on what Mr. Reilly thinks are the salient passages of the Bible. I prefer not to be stoned or crucified because I do not subscribe to his particular brand of Christianity.
Mr. Reilly's thought processes remind me of the assassin's warning to Robert Langdon in “Angels and Demons”: "Be careful. These are men of God."