7/29/10

Obama ... on The View

From Michael Ramirez

Obama on The View

What a clown, our president.

He could have been having an all-American hot dog with the Boy Scouts. Rubbing sticks together, tying knots, practicing knife-throwing or whatever. It's their 100th Anniversary.

Instead, he met with a collection of simpering silly women in one of those pathetic kaffee klatches to tell us how he's been governing, not campaigning, since Inauguration Day.

I'd hate to see what the man calls 'campaigning' if what he's been doing ain't it.

Oh I feel so good about things now.

Retired, former Airmen eligible for stop loss special pay

Daniel P. Elkins
Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs Office
RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, Texas (AFRNS) -- Thousands of current, retired and former Air Force members remain eligible to receive $500 in retroactive special pay for each month they were affected by stop loss. Airmen have until Oct. 21 to apply through the Air Force Personnel Center here.
Air Force people eligible include active, retired and former members as well as Reserve component members who served on active duty while their enlistment or period of obligated service was involuntarily extended, or whose eligibility for separation or retirement was suspended as a result of stop loss. Those who accepted a selective re-enlistment bonus subsequent to being affected by stop loss are not eligible for the special pay.
Air Force officials used stop loss for Operation Enduring Freedom from Oct. 2, 2001, through Jan. 31, 2003, and Operation Iraqi Freedom from May 2 through Dec. 31, 2003. Individuals who were deployed during either operation may be eligible beyond the inclusive dates depending on their Air Force specialty and deployment return date. The 2009 War Supplemental Appropriation Act set aside $534.4 million for the retroactive stop loss special pay compensation authority.
Personnel officials are encouraging those who were involuntarily held on active duty during either of the stop loss periods to contact AFPC to determine if they might be eligible for the special pay compensation.
“We want to exhaust all efforts in our attempts to reach as many eligible members as possible while the authority is in place to compensate them for their extended duty,” said Col. Bill Foote, the AFPC director of personnel services. “Of course, many of those eligible to receive this special pay are no longer in our ranks, so we’re opening channels to reach out to veterans to help spread the word about this valuable benefit throughout their communities.”
More than 3,000 claims by Airmen have been approved for retroactive stop loss special pay since officials here began accepting claims in September 2009. Officials estimate an additional 13,000 current and former Air Force members may be eligible for the compensation.
Whether or not Air Force veterans are sure they are eligible, Colonel Foote encourages those impacted by stop loss to apply. Claims are evaluated based upon historical records already available to personnel officials as well as any supporting documentation the applicant may submit.
To file a claim, eligible members or legally designated beneficiaries may download a stop loss claim application at www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/stoploss. Applicants who were serving in the Reserve or Guard at the time of stop loss may apply by visiting the Air Reserve Personnel Center website at https://arpc.afrc.af.mil/vPC-GR.
For more information on program eligibility and claims instructions, call the Total Force Service Center at 800-525-0102.

For more retiree news and information, please visit www.retirees.af.mil.

The mosque at Ground Zero

There is a Great Controversy in New York City. A fundamentalist Islamic group plans to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero.

Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf is the leader of the group. Rauf has stated regarding 9/11: “... United States’ policies were an accessory to the crime that happened...”, and “... in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.” Rauf is a supporter of the attempts to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza, and when challenged on Aaron Klein's radio show, he refused to recognize that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Rauf is also a major donor to the Free Gaza movement, which is pro-Hamas.

Survivors of 9/11 and relatives of victims of 9/11, and just regular people in general, are severely chastising the New York City government. They do not want a mosque built anywhere near Ground Zero. They are incensed by the Obama administration's refusal to recognize Islamic fundamentalism for what it is: a savage, intolerant medieval religious zealotry that thrives on murder and mayhem.

But with all that, there are some Inconvenient Truths to consider.

The area in which Rauf wants to build his mosque is zoned to allow religious institutions. The government cannot ban a Christian church, or a synagogue, and so it cannot ban a mosque. While the anger of the 9/11 survivors and relatives of victims is perfectly understandable, the government cannot ban a mosque simply because it is not the right kind of church. The government could not ban a new church building for Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptists, of www.godhatesfags.com fame, nor could the government ban a church planned by Jeremiah Wright, he of those racist, hate-filled sermons, nor could it ban a place of worship funded by the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, they who promise the "... bringing of a message of hope and deliverance to white Christian America!"

All religions, and even the lack of religion, are protected by the First Amendment. The government of New York City cannot deny Rauf the permitting to construct the mosque, simply because Rauf is an Islamic fundamentalist and says things many of us don't like. Rauf could be prosecuted as a criminal if he committed criminal acts, but he has not. He is an adherent of an Islamic sect that we don't like.

This is a point often missed by our red-blooded all-American super patriots. Isn't it amazing that those who fall into paroxysms of fury over the idea of taking God off our nickels or over the fact that some people really don't care for their children being forced to recite a loyalty oath authored by a Baptist preacher who was defrocked for his views on 'social justice' and which was later modified to fit Joe McCarthy's views on "true Americanism"miss this point so badly? That those who wrap themselves in the flag and wave the Constitution as though it were handed to them personally by the Framers as God presented the tablets to Moses ... isn't it amazing that they totally fail to understand those American values at their most fundamental level?

We the People have shed too much blood, paid too great a price, to allow the government to deny Rauf his mosque simply because we do not like his hateful religious sect. Do we really think our national cemeteries are full of people who died for this nation so we could pick and choose whom or what the Constitution protects, based on our own transient prejudices, perceptions, likes and dislikes? How insulting to their service and sacrifice that is!

The bottom line is this: the construction of the mosque cannot be denied through government action simply because it's a mosque. Our American values simply will not allow it.

Now then, if you'll excuse me ... I'm going to go watch Glenn Beck's latest rant on why we should require loyalty oaths of our school children, and then listen to Barack H. Obama patronize us with one of his ‘teachable moments’, as though We the People are a crowd of simpletons.

I don't know who are the biggest domestic enemies of the Constitution - our right-wing red-blooded all-American Christian super patriots ... or the left-wing socialist American apologists currently running the country into the ground. God save us and the Republic from them all.

7/28/10

Racist

Howie Dean has deemed (the Democrats like that) that FoxNews is 'racist':

Dean says FoxNews racist for Sherrod coverage

The left has made so many accusations of 'racism' that the term has become pretty much meaningless these days.

If you disagree with presidential policies, you're 'racist.'

If you disagree with Nancy Pelosi, you're 'racist', because Pelosi is pushing the presidential agenda. Actually, Obama is pushing the Pelosi agenda, but that's another story.

If you disagree with Eric Holder and his rather odd prosecutorial priorities, you must be 'racist'.

If you don't watch Oprah, you must be 'racist.'

Yadda yadda yadda.

And then we have the Journolists, defending one of the most racist figures of modern times, Jeremiah Wright:

“If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us,” Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. “Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

It's meaningless, except as a political smear, and even that is something of a joke these days.

We've come a long way, baby.

7/27/10

Obama's "Tony Hayward" Moment

Remember when BP cheese Tony Hayward was whining about 'getting his life back'?

And how he was dumped on left and right for his 'insensitivity'?

Check this:




Yeah. I feel your pain, bro.

Tigercats

I was taking a trip down memory lane this morning, and came across this little jewel:

"Big Bossman"

Here's a photo from that site. The image is by Jim Buckel and is one of several really good ones there:




The Tigercat was a slick piece of work:

The opinion of Captain Fred M. Trapnell, one of the Navy's premier test pilots, was that the "It's the best damn fighter I've ever flown."

but it was just in the wrong place at the wrong time:

The Grumman F7F Tigercat was the first twin-engined fighter aircraft design to enter service with the United States Navy. Designed for the new Midway class aircraft carriers, the aircraft were too large to operate from earlier decks. Although delivered to United States Marine Corps combat units before the end of World War II, the Tigercat did not see combat service in that war. Most F7Fs ended up in land-based service, as attack aircraft or night fighters; only the later F7F-4N was certified for carrier service. They saw service in the Korean war and were withdrawn from service in 1954.

I vaguely remember seeing a few of these at Cherry Point - maybe up at Lakehurst but that was mostly helicopters and blimps way back then, or so I recall, also vaguely - I was a squeaker at the time and it's all in the dim recesses of history.

They were quite the ripsnorters.

Arlington two-steps round the tombstones

Thousands of Arlington graves 'mislabeled'

Why am I not surprised?

Well what the hell, just throw some stimulus money at it.

McCaskill called the growing scandal a matter of "heartbreaking incompetence" and said the military has spent more than $5.5 million over seven years in its unsuccessful attempts to computerize the cemetery's burial records.

$5.5 million is hardly enough for any Federal government project. What were they thinking? Print up another $100 million or so, hire a thousand or so people (jobs creation!), dig 'em all up and do a musical graves routine.

That oughta take care of it, and next year, when Barack H. Obama visits on Memorial Day (like this year, you see), he can point to it as a showcase of the effectiveness of Porkulus Americana.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' subcommittee on contracting oversight, chaired by McCaskill, will hold a hearing in Washington on Thursday on its cemetery investigation.

The list of invited witnesses includes former cemetery superintendent John Metzler and deputy superintendent Thurman Higginbotham. Both retired earlier this month after they were forced to resign, and McCaskill said she is not certain if either will show up to the hearing. She declined to say whether the subcommittee would subpoena either man.

$5.5 million? What a pair of pikers, our Higginbotham and Metzler. Tony Hayward spent billions to clean up his mess, and is walking away with $20 million as a 'performance award'.

What did Higginbotham and Metzler get? A nice fat Federal pension? What a pair of pikers.

Go git 'em, Congresscritters. Show us how you're takin' care of bidness ...

7/23/10

Hike for our heroes

Iraq war veteran Troy Yocum is hiking 7,000 miles across America, banging his drum and sounding the call for $5 million to help military families in need. Troy is hiking with Emmie the SuperDog by his side, as well as his wife Mareike. He took the first step of his 16-month quest on April 17, 2010.

For more information, please see:

www.drumhike.com

Please come down to Santa Fe Plaza Monday at 6 PM to greet him as he comes into La Junta.


La Junta Chamber of Commerce
110 Santa Fe Avenue
La Junta, CO 81050
719-384-7411
www.lajuntachamber.com

Way too much chalk dust

So here's an interesting observation I recently heard, about our current exemplary student of theology, Glenn Beck:

"Well, Beck's probably not really a Mormon, you know, not deep down where it counts. I heard he became a Mormon because his wife's a Mormon, and he had to be one in order to get married."

Aha. Since a good many Christians, especially Christian Fundamentalists or the Christian Right, don't see Mormons as "real" Christians, they get around the Inconvenient Truth of Beck's Mormonism by rationalizing that he really isn't a "real" Mormon.

A convertee of convenience.

How about "John Doe is really an atheist, but his wife is a real bible-thumper, so he had to claim to be a Christian fundamentalist so they could get married."

How's that sit with the Christian Right? If it makes Beck acceptable to them, then John Doe must also be acceptable.

In other words, one's belief and faith can be a matter of personal convenience, especially when mixed in with one's political leanings.

Or how about this one, for our staunch Christian fundamentalists:

Barack H. Obama, the secret Muslim Manchurian candidate, having usurped the Constitution completely, issues an executive order: "Everyone will convert to Islam, or die."

So ... all of our Christian fundies convert to Islam, but not really, wink wink nudge nudge.

Another one:

"Beck really did a good presentation on the nature of Salvation. You could have heard the same thing in any (pick a denomination) Christian church."

The implication there is that Beck did a great job in spite of not being a "real Christian" and not even a "real" Mormon.

OTOH, any televangelist can give a really good presentation on the nature of Salvation. And, talk you out of a sizeable chunk of change while doing it. Like a used car salesman.

Rationalization of Beck's rantings is a symptom of sniffing way too much chalk dust.

7/22/10

The inefficiency of the US Postal Service

So I have this order through Amazon.com.

For whatever reason, Amazon chose to ship it via USPS rather than UPS.

Amazon thoughtfully gave me a USPS tracking number when they shipped the order on July 16. Six days ago.

I've been checking the tracking number on the USPS site.

No info. Nothing. Nada. For six days.

Today, they had this useful bit of information:

The U.S. Postal Service was electronically notified by the shipper on July 21, 2010 to expect your package for mailing. This does not indicate receipt by the USPS or the actual mailing date. Delivery status information will be provided if / when available. Information, if available, is updated periodically throughout the day. Please check again later.

Amazon says they shipped it six days ago. USPS says they just received info today to expect the package from Amazon, for shipping, on 21 July.

That's pretty good. USPS should raise their rates in order to fund all these useful and helpful customer-oriented services.

USPS should give lessons to USP and FedEx on how to track packages.

Yep.

7/21/10

Strange Bedfellows

One of the oddest things I have noticed is the alliance between the Christian Right and Glenn Beck. I will confess that I didn't pay much attention to it at first. Oh, I received all those emails forwarded and re-forwarded: Obama is really a Muslim, Obama banned the National Day of Prayer; Obama created one for the Muslims; Obama doesn’t hold his hand over his heart for the National Anthem.. Never mind there's not one iota of truth to it. The Christian Right loves it. Then I started giving it some thought. Beck, that is.

Their infatuation with Beck confounds me, especially given Beck’s adversarial relationship with the church. Beck really doesn't like 'liberation theology' or 'social justice'.

Beck is just another huckster, pandering for ratings like a politician panders for votes … or like Benny Hinn and Charles Stanley pander for money because … Jesus needs a new Mercedes! 

Truth is the first casualty when one is bitten by a rabid dogma. When the dogma is religious or political, the venom goes straight to the brain and kills all capacity for reason.

Beck's attack began with his rants against "social justice:"

"I'm begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!"
According to Beck, if your church believes in "social justice", your religious freedoms are doomed. It is all a conspiracy by the socialist left, led by that Muslim pretender to the Throne of Freedom, Barack H. Obama.

Beck ignores that many well-established churches are steeped in the concept of "social justice." The Church of the Nazarene is such a church, in the Wesleyan theological camp. John Wesley deeply believed in “social justice”, noting "there is no holiness but social holiness." Wesley preached against slavery; he advocated for prison reform; he held strongly for the downtrodden. The Church of the Nazarene’s Compassionate Ministries are a form of "social justice", an exercise in social holiness in the best Wesleyan tradition. In our own community, we have several “social justice” churches, including the Mennonites, the Catholics, the Presbyterians, and more. Beck even counters the teachings of his own church, as found in King Benjamin’s sermon in Mosiah 4:26 in the Book of Mormon. 

The exercise of "social justice" is but one way we try to live up to Christ's New Commandment, that we love one another as he loved us. 
Beck confuses "social justice" on the part of our churches with "redistribution of wealth" on the part of our government. 

If the members of a congregation freely give of their time and personal wealth, for the benefit of the poor and needy ... that is "social justice", and it is in keeping with the essence of Christian teachings: “…for I was hungry, and you gave me food; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink; I was a stranger and you welcomed me …”.

If the government takes your personal wealth under pain of imprisonment, and the government redistributes that wealth as it sees fit ... that is not "social justice". That is "redistribution of wealth”, and it is not a teaching of the church.

So why is Beck attacking the church? Why is he calling upon people to flee the church? More puzzling to me is why the Christian Right, who are among Beck’s staunchest fans, accept his continual attacks on the church. Do Beck’s followers despise Obama so much they will accept his lies? How does this serve either the nation or the church? Or more importantly, how does following Beck translate into following Christ?

In the last week, Beck has been back at it, attacking the church over “social justice” and lecturing Obama on the Ten Commandments. Beck is what we call a “parking lot theologian”. His knowledge is shallow and incomplete. He is a “false prophet.” Yet the Christian Right seems to be sniffing up the chalk dust and asking for more.

Strange bedfellows, Glenn Beck and the Christian right.

"Snookered"

The NAACP is blaming FoxNews for the Sherrod Fiasco.

Yet it was NAACP who had the entire video, not just the edited clip put up by Breitbart.com. The video was made for them. They contracted for it. Right?

So why did the NAACP initially vilify Sherrod?

NAACP CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous originally released a statement calling Sherrod's comments "shameful" and saying the group was "appalled by her actions." But the NAACP later said Tuesday it would conduct an "investigation" and review the full tape, which was shot for the NAACP by media company DCTV.

What a bunch of clowns. (Update 07.22.2010: It turns out Benjamin Jealous was actually at Sherrod's presentation, so unless he was sleeping soundly, he heard the whole thing. He knew the context. So why the rush by the NAACP to condemn Sherrod?)

Then ...

The White House added to the flames:

The Obama administration is standing by its quick decision to oust a black Agriculture Department employee over racially tinged remarks at an NAACP banquet in Georgia, despite evidence that her remarks were misconstrued and growing calls for USDA to reconsider.

Now look. If the Obamanians can issue a statement like that, and the NAACP, is it not reasonable to presume that the video clip was valid?

I mean, like, wow. Certainly the White House would have the facts, right? Certainly the White House wouldn't be ... 'rushing to judgment' ... nor would the NAACP. Right?

Well ...

There's that business of The One's rush to judgment of the Cambridge cops, that led to The Beer Summit.

There's that business of getting arrested on an ice cream outing, down in Arizona, clear evidence that when Obama spoke, he was brain-dead.

We could find more.

So ... yeah ... the last source to trust on this kind of thing is ... The White House. Not Fox News, in spite of Glenn Beck and Megyn Kelly. Not Breitbart. Nope.

The last source to trust is the White House.

We all should have known better.

Buffoonery inside the Beltway

So ...

The Orchid Office is denying any connection with the firing of Shirley.

Surely they jest. Who really believes that. Of course, with the Obmanians, all they have to do is say it, decree it, and they think it is so.

Let's float this a bit.

First, we had the NAACP go alpha sierra over the Tea Party. They just had to label the TP as "racist". Never mind they settled on simply calling certain elements within the TP as racist, and never mind that it was true.

It was true? Of course it was true. Just listen to some of the comments at any local TP rally. And then we have the Inconvenient Truth of the Tea Party Express, and the rather purile and rather assinine rant by Mark Williams, which led to the TPE being given the boot by whoever in charge of the TP, whatever the TP really is.

So there are in fact certain elements within the TP that are in fact 'racist'. But now, all people register is that the NAACP has labeled the entire TP movement as racist. Fiction becomes fact.

Then we had the deeply edited video clip of Shirley. Like, wowsers. It sure sounded like a racist rant, and a lot of people went for it, including we here at blogger central. Why not? It fit. It fit with our own experiences with black racists. It fit with the model set by The New Black Panthers.

The problem is not so much we Little People who got suckered in.

The problem is that the NAACP, who are supposed to be providing some of that adult leadership not only to the black community, but to the nation, didn't even wait to be suckered in. They denounced Shirley even before the Orchid Office did. Even before Shirley was ordered to the side of the road to resign via Blackberry.

I think were I in Shirley's place, by then I would have told whoever was on the phone to shove the Blackberry up Obama's ass.

"Let me be perfectly clear about this. Take this Blackberry, and your job, and your pathetic little pandering mindset, and shove it up Obama's ass."

Yep. Just like that. And then I would have lawyered up and sued everyone I could, and subpoenaed the rest.

Then Vilsack the Impaler (aka "The Secretary of Agriculture") insisted that they had done the right thing in firing Shirley.

And then the Obama administration, from The Big O, our Buffoon-in-Chief, on down to Vilsack and his accomplices, was crucified on Brett Baier's "Special Report."

And now Vilsack the Impaler is 'rethinking' the Firing of Shirley, and will conduct a 'full investigation'.

Makes me wonder who is going to take the bullet for the team on this one.

And of course, the NAACP, having since fallen all over its collective self to retract the original Vilification of Shirley, is blaming Foxnews for all of it:

USDA reconsiders ouster

while Shirley is really miffed at the Obama administration:

Sherrod, in a TV interview Tuesday morning, said she lost her job because the Obama administration overreacted to the original story.

"They were not interested in hearing the truth. No one wanted to hear the truth," she said.

I'm wondering when they'll figure out a way to blame Bush. Meanwhile, the Orchid Office is denying any knowledge of it until after the fact, despite that Shirley continues to insist that in all of the calls that were made to her on her cell while she was on the Beltway (or wherever), the ranter told her the order was coming from the White House.

I think at this point, the only one with any credibility is ... Shirley.

Meanwhile, we still have all those NAACP 'chucklers' over the white boy getting screwed.

7/20/10

Diary of a Mad Black Woman

That would be Shirley Sherrod, and she is madder than blue blazes.

It seems that Shirley, the de-frocked USDA official who got the NAACP members to yukking over the white farmer who she screwed - figuratively, not literally - some time back ... now it seems she is claiming that it's she who has been screwed. Figuratively, if not literally.

You see, she claims she was merely illustrating how she came to be ... not-racist. She claims that the story she told, to the amusement of the racists in the NAACP audience, was an illustration of her racial maturing.

She also claims to have received three calls on her cell phone whilst driving along the highway, encouraging her to resign and finally firing her. In all three calls, she maintains, she was told that the vapor-locking was straight from the White House.

So here's the thing.

Maybe she was in fact simply telling how she moved from being a racist to a non-racist. I'm sure we can all see how this could be so. After all, in the decades since the civil rights dustups of the 50's and 60's, a lot of attitudes have changed. It seems reasonable that Sherrod could be part of that. Maybe.

But we still have the racists in the NAACP audience laughing over the idea of a white farmer standing, hat in hand, before a black woman, asking for a form of salvation.

And what if Sherrod is not a racist? What if, like she says, all this happened back in the 80's when she didn't even work for the government, but was working for a non-profit? What if it's like she says it was: she was using a past incident as an example of how she used to think and how she changed. People do change. Her interview sure sounds credible.

But wait! There's even more! It seems the wife of the white farmer she says she screwed is still around, and ...

The wife of the farmer who was the subject of Sherrod's story told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that the administration should not have forced out Sherrod, who actually helped the couple save their farm.

"She'll always be my friend," Eloise Spooner said. She said the incident Sherrod was referring to happened more than two decades ago and that she and her husband Roger worked together closely to keep the farm out of foreclosure.

Huh. Shirley surely doesn't seem like she's in the same boat as King Samir Shabazz, does she?

Obama had Sherrod canned without due process. Even if she is as racist in her own way as the Grand Dragon of the KKK is in his, what about her right to due process?

It would seem that the Tea Party has Obama and his henchmen wetting their pants, figuratively if not literally, and doing even stupider things than they usually do.

I like the idea of those people wetting their pants, even figuratively. It means that We the People still have some influence.

Yep. I like that.

I wonder if Shirley will get her job back.

Obama doesn't really seem to be all that 'post-racist', does he.

And we still have all those NAACP member yukking it up over a white man coming to a black woman to save his buns.

7/19/10

The NAACP's racist scum

Here we go. It was just a matter of time:

USDA official admits not helping white farmer; NAACP members yuk it up

From the March 27 NAACP Freedom Fund banquet:

Shirley Sherrod, the department's Georgia director of Rural Development, is shown in the clip describing "the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm." Sherrod, who is black, claimed the farmer took a long time trying to show he was "superior" to her. The audience laughed as she described how she determined his fate.

"He had to come to me for help. What he didn't know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him," she said. "I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land -- so I didn't give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough."



I guess he didn't kiss her ass enough.

Was he supposed to bow and scrape and grovel with a few "Yassa missus, yassa missus" thrown in for good measure?

And we're to believe Obama's Department of Injustice isn't running on a philosophy of racial payback?

Tea Party Whackjobs

The Tea Party ... whatever that is ... raised the roof with its loud denials of racism after the NAACP took its shot at the movement, declaring them to at least possess some racist elements.

"No! No!" shouted hundreds, if not thousands, of Tea Partiers.

Of course, anyone who has been around even a couple of TP rallies understands that at least some TP'ers possess racist proclivities. In our little small towns, where everyone knows everyone else, it's pretty hard to hide it. Even if they remain in the closet, we all know who has the racist viewpoints, expressed in the little Breakfast Clubs at McDonald's or the Copper Kitchen or The Railyard or even in the Sunday School classes of our local churches.

Yep.

So the denials really don't wash very well.

I agree with the NAACP that there are racists in the Tea Party. I also think that some of the nation's most rabid racists can be found within the NAACP.

Naturally, both outfits vehemently deny this while pointing fingers at each other.

OTOH, when you have the likes of Mark Williams ranting immediately following the accusations by NAACP, it's rather hard to deny it.

Tea Party Tension Flares

Of course, the Tea Party Express isn't the 'real' Tea Party, or so they say, since it was founded by PACifists through GOP'ers:

But while the internal dispute served as fodder for Tea Party foes, the split might not have been a tough call for the federation and its affiliates. Tea Party Express, which organizes semi-regular cross-country bus tours of conservative activists and endorses conservative candidates, is shunned by certain sectors of the Tea Party movement in the first place. Funded by a PAC started by GOP consultants, the Tea Party Express is seen by some in the movement as too closely tied to the party and not authentic.

In any case, the Tea Party - whatever that is - has given Williams the jackboot up the backside. One wonders if they would have done that lacking the NAACP denouncement of the Tea Party ... I rather doubt it. Why would they have?

Now, when is the NAACP going to give the axe to its own racists? When are they going to condemn the New Black Panthers for the racist thugs that they are? How many more times are they going to have Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright address their meetings?

7/17/10

The Gravy Train

Over on Day by Day:

Obama's Gravy Train.




Shocking news!

PROSPECTIVE ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN ALCOHOL AND DRUG CONSUMPTION AND RISKY SEX AMONG FEMALE COLLEGE STUDENTS. By: Caldeira, Kimberly M.; Arria, Amelia M.; Zarate, Elizabeth M.; Vincent, Kathryn B.; Wish, Eric D.; O'Grady, Kevin E.. Journal of Alcohol & Drug Education, Aug2009, Vol. 53 Issue 2, p71-92, 22p. Abstract: Females who had vaginal sex were interviewed annually in their first two years of college (n=386, ages 17 to 20 at study out-set and asked about risky sex behaviors and substance use. In year one, 60.2%wt, had intoxicated sex, 31.4%wt, had multiple sex partners, and 48.9%wthad unprotected sex (i.e., without a condom). At follow-up, high rates of persistence (86.0%, 52.7%, 78.8% respectively) and initiation (36.0%, 23.9%, 41.8%) were observed. In multiple logistic regression analyses, drug use and drinking were independently associated with having multiple sex partners. Intoxicated sex independently predicted condom non-use and multiple sex partners, and appeared to mediate the relationship between substance use and multiple sex partners. Implications for prevention and future research are discussed. (AN 44683960)

Back in the day, this used to be summed up as "Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker."

I suppose Obama should now appoint a Blue Ribbon Commission, headed by Michelle Obama and our surgeon general, to spend a few billion in stimulus (no pun intended) money to examine this in greater detail.

7/16/10

Oooo-rah!

Story by By Gretel C. Kovach , San Diego Union-Tribune staff writer.



Photo/ Staff Sgt. Jennifer Brofer / USMC

Marine Warrant Officer John W. Hermann (right) is awarded the Silver Star by Brig. Gen. Charles Hudson Thursday at Forward Operating Base Delaram II in Afghanistan.

They were welcomed into the village with rocket propelled grenades, mortars and gunfire. But Staff Sgt. John W. Hermann, a bomb disposal technician with Camp Pendleton’s 1st Marine Special Operations Battalion, ignored his bleeding shrapnel wounds and ran through machine gun fire to save another Marine’s life.

For his “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action,” in Afghanistan, Hermann was honored Thursday with the Silver Star. “His quick decision making, technical competence, and bravery saved the wounded Marine from enemy fire and enabled the platoon to continue clearing the village, resulting in the destruction of 13 enemy fighters,” said the citation signed by James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps.

Hermann and a reconnaissance patrol had been attacked that day, Feb. 26, 2008, amid the mud-walled crossroads of Dahaneh, a bastion of Taliban fighters and opium traders in the southern Afghanistan province of Helmand.

When the shooting started, Hermann and a teammate ran from their vehicle across open terrain and charged an entrenchment of enemy fighters. One Marine went down with a shot to the leg. After Hermann “single-handedly destroyed the enemy assailants,” he ran back for the wounded Marine as insurgents shot at him from another direction.

He applied a tourniquet, silenced another enemy machine-gunner, established a security cordon to protect the wounded and directed Marines to hunt the remaining fighters, Marine officials said.

Hermann, now a 32-year-old warrant officer on duty again in Afghanistan with the 1st Marine Logistics Group, had asked for the medal to be mailed to him, a spokeswoman for the unit said. Ignoring his request, Maj. Gen. Richard P. Mills, commander of NATO forces in southwestern Afghanistan, joined other Marine officials and fellow troops to honor Hermann with a ceremony Thursday morning at Forward Operating Base Delaram II.

Brig. Gen. Charles Hudson, commanding general of the logistics group, pinned the medal to Hermann’s camouflage uniform. Hermann saluted and turned, his boots crunching on stone, and went back to work.

7/15/10

More 'racists' and the Tea Party

Here's a good essay on the NAACP's sleazy motives behind its disdain and hatred for the Tea Party movement:

Why the NAACP hates the Tea Party

An excerpt:

The NAACP resolution goes on to state -- without evidence to back up its baseless claims -- that in March of this year at a Tea Party Rally in Washington, D.C. members of the Congressional Black Caucus were "accosted" by Tea Party demonstrators and were subjected to "racial epithets."

The fact is that no one was ever charged or convicted for an assault on a member of Congress or for any violation of their civil rights.

In fact, it appeared to me that some members of the Congressional Black Caucus were looking for an incident to occur that day. They purposefully appeared in the crowd and defiantly walked through the demonstration hoping for the incidents, which I believe they later manufactured.

With all of the personal camera phones and the sheer number of members of the press that swarmed that event not one person appeared to with evidence to corroborate the charges of what they say occurred.

Neither the NAACP nor those allegedly attacked were able to identify or name the "perpetrators" of the acts they allege.

In fact, the demonstration site that day was teaming with Capitol Police and other law enforcement officials who accompanied these Congressmen as they made their way through the crowd.

Surely they would have taken action had they witnessed the actions that were alleged or were made aware of these incidents at the time they allegedly occurred.


For decades people have let scoundrels like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Jeremiah Wright, etc etc etc ad nauseam get away with their own racist rhetoric, because if anyone dared challenge them, those anyones would be branded as 'racist' themselves.

Today, if you express dissatisfaction with Obama's policies and behaviors, you must be a 'racist'. It couldn't simply be good old fashioned American politics and democracy at work.

It seems those times of cowering under the table, afraid to speak out against black or Hispanic or other forms of racism, have passed - nobody really cares if they are branded 'racist' by the NAACP, or the Democrats, not after this nonsense - and it is time to recognize that the NAACP and the Democratic Party harbor their own racist elements.

I too must be a 'racist'

Most of us are aware of the current Department of Justice fiasco. No, not the lawsuit against Arizona. No, not the rather scathing letter just sent by Lindsey Graham to Eric Holder about the bumbling incompetence Holder is displaying over the Trial of the MasterMind up in New York City. No, not the fact that Holder is ignoring the blatant illegality of the so-called 'sanctuary' cities.

We're looking at the voter intimidation fiasco, from the 2008 elections, up in Phillie.

The one that Holder's boys and girls in the civil rights division torpedoed.

All kinds of leftie talking heads have been on various talk shows, wide-eyed with innocence, stating that they really don't see this as a big deal. They claim they really don't see it as real voter intimidation.

To refresh your memory, here it is again:



The other guy? Why, he was an official poll-monitor. I guess that's normal garb for poll-monitors up in Phillie. I guess official poll-monitors don't mind thugs shaking batons - billy clubs - at voters. I guess that's a normal thing for the left, for the Democrats.

And here is the racist, hate-filled rant by the guy who was carrying the baton:




But here's the thing. Look at the white boy who flounces up to the thug. He allows the thug to keep him from going in. He 'confronts' the thug, asks some milktoast questions, and he just walks away. Ever since we've been hearing about how the polling place and the ballot box are sacrosanct, here in The Republic.

Back in mid-February 1965, the Reverend C.T. Vivian confronted Sheriff Jim Clark on the steps of the courthouse in Selma, Alabama. Vivian meant to 'have the vote'. He intended for black Americans to register, to have that vote. Clark, standing there in his sheriff suit, wearing that surplus US Army helmet, punched Vivian in the face and knocked him down the steps.

Vivian stood up to voter intimidation. He had the guts to do so. And he has the vote.

Why didn't that white boy, up there in Phillie, stand up to King Samir Shabazz? Why did he just walk away from it? Are the polling place and the ballot box sacrosanct or not? Are they worth defending or not? Are they worth standing up to thuggery or not? Certainly, we can't depend on the Federal government to stand up for us; we see that in this case and we see it with illegal immigration.

So, we have the United States Department of Justice refusing to prosecute voter intimidation cases. And we have racist, hate-mongering thugs like King Samir Shabazz getting pathetically weak slaps on the wrist. This, from the same Federal government that comes out of the box like Tony the Tiger, wielding 1983 actions left and right, up and down, when people of color are subjected to civil rights violations.

It is the right thing for the Federal government to do, when civil rights are violated. But why not in the Phillie case?

Meanwhile, the NAACP, that bastion of civil rights protectors and protections, has declared the Tea Party be possessed of racist, bigoted elements. Well ... that's true. Sorry, but it is. There are indeed racists in the Tea Party. Note that they do not say that the Tea Party itself is a racist organization. That too is true. It isn't; it isn't even an "organization" in the same sense as is the NAACP. The "Tea Party" is a loose conglomeration, a mishmash of affiliates, some of which are strongly libertarian in outlook, some of which are so far to the right they make General Ed Walker look like a running mate for Hillary Clinton. Some are whackjobs by any standard. Some, most, I think, are ordinary people badly frightened and angry about what Obama and the Democrats have done and continue to do to this country.

But where is the NAACP's condemnation of The New Black Panthers? Where is Jesse Jackson's or Al Sharpton's outrage over this King Samir Shabazz' hate-filled, racist rants?

Good luck in finding it.

It isn't about racism. It's about politics, and right now, the Tea Party movement has the NAACP and the Democrats wetting their pants. If the Tea Party can keep the whackjobs within its ranks from making the whole outfit seem like a tinfoil hat lovefest, they'll have the Democrats crapping their drawers.

That's not a bad thing. If the Republicans, pathetic as they are, could take the House in November, then perhaps we could at least achieve a stagnant state where that collection of incompetents in the Congress and the White House could do minimal damage.

And where are the Republicans? Are they still eating their own young? As in the Arizona 3rd, where they have ten ... count 'em, ten ... candidates in the primary for that one district? You gotta love a political party that really has it together, don't you?

I think our President is an incompetent amateur, in way over his head, and I think our Department of Justice is playing 'racial payback'. And while I think the Tea Party has entirely too many whackjobs in their visible spectrum, I generally agree with what they stand for.

I guess I too am a racist.

7/14/10

New rule for VA claims for PTSD

Release No. 07-03-10
July 14, 2010
Fact sheet outlines new rule for PTSD claims

WASHINGTON (AFRNS) -- The Veterans Affairs Department has posted a fact sheet including questions and answers about the new rule governing post-traumatic stress disorder claims.
This new rule, to be published in the Federal Register, relaxes the evidence requirement of certain PTSD stressor claims by veterans. The fact sheet is available online at

www.va.gov/PTSD_QA.pdf.

Veterans of any era or conflict can file a claim under the new rule. The rule covers claims received by VA on or after July 13; before July 13, but not yet decided by a VA regional office; and in other specific instances outlined in the fact sheet.

"This nation has a solemn obligation to the men and women who have honorably served this country and suffer from the often-devastating emotional wounds of war," Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki said in a statement issued July 12. "This final regulation goes a long way to ensure that veterans receive the benefits and services they need."

The new rule relaxes the evidence requirement of certain PTSD stressor claims by veterans.

7/13/10

Raising Arizona

Here is a great essay on why our Federal leadership really needs to be removed from office, and the sooner the better:

Arizona immigration

... watching events play out in and around the state of Arizona in the wake of the state's recent immigration law makes me more and more wary of blind allegiance to ideology and wary, too, of the emergence of a whole class of people who strike me as being immune to logic, reason, analogy and thoughtful debate, trapped in a Never Never Land in which conclusions are reached and then held on to, just because.

and

Come to think of it, I object to the Arizona law as well, I’ve decided, but only because it doesn’t go far enough. And maybe the action of the Arizona legislature will be a kind of Waterloo for millions of Americans who will say, “enough.”

Enough to a kind of blind, faith-based allegiance to leaders and ideologies, enough to the suspension of the common sense and quiet wisdom of the American people. Enough pussy-footing around and catering to those who glory in their perceived victimization.


Obama and Holder can waste time and our tax bux suing Arizona against all common sense, yet their so-called 'civil rights division' of the Department of Justice can white-wash (pun, if that's what it is, intended) black racism and hate directed at white voters.

It's a form of racial payback.

Meanwhile, a multitude of states are preparing their own illegal immigration enforcement statutes, despite Obama, Holder, Napolitano, the city council of Los Angeles, and major league baseball. That's because a majority of Americans believe in the Arizona statute. That's because we believe Arizona is doing the right thing, because Barack H. Obama isn't.

The result:

Democrats expecting a mid-term meltdown

Every morning brings more self-destructive behavior on the part of Obama and his accomplices. They just don't get it.

What can they possibly pull out of their rectums next? It certainly isn't going to be their heads.

From LJ Economic Development

Saturday, August 7th the La Junta Elks Lodge is sponsoring the Downtown Parade for the Kid’s Rodeo at 10:00 AM. All we need now is entrants! Get creative and be a part of the parade. Churches, service clubs, and individuals are encouraged to support this event. There is no theme…it is just a plain old fashioned parade! There is no cost to enter….call Ron Davis at 469-1081 to find out when and where to line up. (For information about the Rodeo, call Kent Waggoner at 643-5365.)

Earlier that morning visit the Community Wide Yard Sale on the downtown sidewalks of La Junta. There is no cost to participate and you can set up any where you’d like except where a merchant posts a sign requesting you not to set up. Set up as early as you like and stay as long as you want. Call Ron Davis at 469-1081 for more details. Finish off the day with Music At the Junction opening at 2:00 at Potter’s Park. This year’s headliner is Eddie Money. See www.MusicAtTheJunction.com for more details.

Delbert Jones has contacts that have teams and wagons that could be hired by a business or organization to “chauffer” them in a parade. There is obviously a cost since getting the wagons and teams here from out of town cost the owners. The going rate for services like this is $350. If your business or organization would be interested in having a team be their “chauffer” in either the Kid’s Rodeo Parade (Aug. 7) or Early Settler’s Day Parade (Sept. 11) please contact the Chamber Office at 384-7411

Ron Davis
Director - La Junta Economic Development
————————————————————
tel 719.384.6965 cell 719.469.1081 fax 719.384.6960
1802 Colorado, La Junta, CO 81050
www.LaJuntaEconomicDevelopment.net

www.visitlajunta.net

7/11/10

In the bag

It took long enough, but the little turd called "The Barefoot Bandit" has been bagged down in the Bahamas:

Barefoot Bandit Bagged in Bahamas

Obama: "Boy, did I have a dream!"

From Christ Muir this morning:

Tea Time






7/9/10

The Tabares Question

Economic Development director Ron Davis originally brought the purchase of the Tabares building before the Urban Renewal Board. From the Urban Renewal Board minutes of 09.13.2007:

Ron Davis discussed his application to purchase the Tabares Building for a Highway 50 museum. His proposal is that a non-profit entity, such as Urban Renewal, be the owner of the building. Much discussion was held concerning the condition and safety of the building and the fact that the owner is not willing to allow anyone to inspect the building. The consensus of the Board members was that this building qualifies as blight and Urban Renewal could purchase the building and if it is not possible to rehab, it could be demolished.

Sandra Leonard made a motion, seconded by Rebecca Goodwin, that Urban Renewal purchase the Tabares Building at 8 & 10 East 1st Street for the purchase price of $22,000 with the acknowledgment that it is considered blight. Motion carried with a vote of 6 Yes and 1 No.


Though the minutes do not reflect this, it was specifically mentioned that the building could be turned into a parking lot if nothing else. Note that the motion to purchase acknowledged the 'blight' status of the building.

We have heard a fair amount of talk about how these buildings on First Street can be a draw for AMTRAK passengers, who pass through by the tens of thousands each year. However, given that AMTRAK passengers now spend very little time in La Junta, the building's potential use as a draw for that market would seem to have gone by the boards. The Southwest Chief, for example, is here for only 15 minutes in the morning, and 10 minutes in the evening. That's not a lot of time for tea and crumpets at the Kit Carson, or for browsing the Visitor Center at the Tabares Building, or skating over to The Barista for a coffee much less soup and a sandwich. The lack of time spent by train passengers seems to have been lost on those who keep harping on all those 'visitors' as a market. The AMTRAK passenger list is a non-player in downtown development 'issues', unless someone wants to hawk weenies from a pushcart.

So what's the deal? Another Kit Carson, where we try to rake in piles of all that "free Federal money" in the form of grants? From whence does that "free Federal money" come? Does Barack H. Obama just print it up and hand it out by the wheelbarrow load? Or does it come from your pockets and mine?

Why would we want to invest all that "free Federal money" (or "free state money" for that matter) in a building that is not seen as a viable business opportunity by America's entrepreneurs? Why would a private charitable organization want to waste money given by donors on a building project that is not likely to go anywhere? If it were, if there were a real market, business would be investing in it.

But there is no market, not with the current thinking and approaches to problem solution. So why waste increasingly scarce fiscal resources on it?

Tear them both down, the Tabares and the Kit Carson, and make empty lots out of them. There may not be any visitors to park in them, but the blight will be gone, and we can always stick a bunch of planters in them.

What don't Obama and Salazar understand about "No"?

They're still at it.

They're still trying for that offshore drilling moratorium. You know, the one where the courts have twice told Obama and his accomplices to 'go fish' (if they can find a place that isn't drenched in oil).

They've tried at least three times now.

If they keep at it, eventually they'll figure out a way around it.

I'm so glad to see our Federal government spending our tax dollars so wisely.

Brother Ken must not have a whole lot in his in basket.

What's he doing to make sure his outfit actually inspects for safety compliance? The government has stuck its nose into the oil business, so now the government has a responsibility to make sure the drilling operations are safe. They haven't demonstrated they are not, BP's incompetence and indifference notwithstanding. After all, if Ken's inspectors had been on the stick rather than taking kickbacks and watching porn, BP is not likely to have gotten away with it.

"It shouldn't take a scandal ..."

Andrea Tantaros has written a good essay about the war in Afghanistan:

General Stanley McChrystal and Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele have something in common. Both men took a lot of heat recently for their comments on Afghanistan. Though many seek to chastise them for their off-putting rhetoric and poor word choice they should be thanked for one thing: getting our attention homed in on one of the most critical wars of our time.

Until now the media has covered the war in Afghanistan as background chatter to the more sizzling and sexy news of the day. Many newspapers lack the resources to send reporters to the region for quality, in depth coverage, and many who are put on the foreign affairs beat have been distracted with issues in North Korea, Israel, Gaza, Iran, Greece and the war in Iraq.

Covering a war, especially a long war, is also a tough job. Members of the media would rather write about Bill Clinton, bailouts or Blago. When it comes to covering McChrystal, it was easy to write the “he resigned” piece. It was also fascinating to reporters that one of their own in the press took him down.

As for Steele, the left leaning mainstream media is always looking for ways to exacerbate GOP party infighting or capitalize on a Republican misstep for as many media cycles as they can. So covering the controversy, even on a holiday weekend, was welcomed.

Now that both news cycles have passed, take a look at the papers. They’re back to chasing Lindsay Lohan, the saga of LeBron James and Russian spy swaps. But for short snapshot in our chaotic, cluttered news cycle, the media and opinion pages were focused on Afghanistan – what I call "the new Forgotten War."

Thanks to McChrystal and Steele, we were finally asking legitimate questions about our goals in the country, how we define winning and whether or not Obama is committed to his timeline for troop withdrawl. The debate shifted from whether Obama should keep the General to a more important question: was McChrystal right?

At long last, the suffocating levels of micro-management, also known as "Rules of Engagement," that are making our troops the most unsafe on the battlefield had finally been exposed, as were the troublesome rifts between the diplomats on the ground and our military leaders.

While both men caused many to shake their head in disbelief, agreement, or disdain, I don't think that Steele or General McChrystal is a "stay-at-home" traitor, nor do I think either one was trying obstruct the war effort.

While their method of message delivery was side-swiped clumsily into our consciousness with a figurative wrecking ball than nicely placed into our laps wrapped in a Tiffany box, they moved the national conversation to the war, where it needs to go with regularity.

This cannot be a half-hearted measure nor should it devolve into a fight with ill-defined goals. It’s up to the government to focus on this war, up to the media to follow this war, and it’s up to us as citizens of this great nation to hold them to it. Our most precious treasure, our military, deserves our full attention. It shouldn't take a scandal to give it to them.

7/8/10

Kids' sports camp

La Junta First Church of the Nazarene will be hosting its first ever VBS Sports Camp, August 10th through August 13th from 9am-12pm daily. A special awards ceremony will be held Sunday morning August 15th at 10:30am.

Sports camp is open to all children entering 1st through 5th grade this fall. Each child will be placed on a team and will be participating in a different sporting event each day. Age appropriate training will be provided. Friday will be a special water sports day. The cost is 10.00 and each child will receive a t-shirt. Registration forms can be printed here and need to be returned to the church office at La Junta First Church of the Nazarene, 10th and Topeka.

OJC Cheerleading Camp

OTERO JUNIOR COLLEGE

2010 Youth Cheerleading Camp
Location: Student Center Banquet Room
2001 San Juan Ave., La Junta, CO

July 27th thru July 29th
Tuesday thru Thursday
6:00 to 7:30 pm


$30 includes a t-shirt and participation in half time performance at 1st Soccer Home Game-Sept. 1st

Ages: 4 to14

Registration Time: Tuesday, July 27th at 5:30

Student Center Banquet Room

Come join the OJC Cheer Club for an exciting 3 day session designed to introduce youth to the joy of cheerleading! Our camp will expose participants to the basics of cheers, chants, motions and jumps. It will amaze you at how much these future cheerleaders will learn in 3 days!


CALL 719-384-6889 FOR MORE INFORMATION


Contact:

Deb Nicholson
OJC Bookstore Manager
719-384-6889

Pragmatists

"Independent voters aren't partisans; they're pragmatists," said Democratic strategist Steve McMahon. "What they really want is bipartisanship, fiscal restraint and balanced approaches to problem solving. And they tend to punish the party in power -- whether Republican or Democrat -- when they believe any of those things are too far out of balance."

McMahon is right on the money with that statement.

Here is the WaPo article:

Independents abandon Obama

We aren't getting any of that from Obama and his accomplices. We don't have bipartisanship; in fact, we have a virulently, vituperatively divided Congress and general assembly.

There is no fiscal restraint whatsoever. Obama and his entourage of fiscal idiots are spending our money like drunken sailors on leave in Subic Bay, and for about the same purpose, figuratively if not literally.

And Obama wouldn't know 'balance' if a balance beam fell out of the sky and brained him.

Nor does his Henchman-in-Chief, Dave Axelrod, get it:

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said that the criticism of Obama as a big-spending liberal grows out of decisions the president felt he had to make to prevent a depression. "We were forced to do things from the start to deal with this economic crisis that helped create a false narrative about spending and deficits that's had some impact on independent voters," Axelrod said. "And that's something we have to work on."

A 'false narrative'?

What's the current deficit, Dave?

How about the way in which Obama shoved ObamaCare down our throats?

How about the way he is shoving his healthcare rationing, death panel doc Don Berwick up another orifice?

How about all that 'transparency'? Like in the Department of Justice? Like in Russia-Gate? Speaking of which, just what is it, Barry O, that you don't want us to find out? Why the rush to get these guys out of the country? Whose hands did you find in their pockets?

Morons.

Obama and his henchmen. Clueless, bumbling amateurs who just ain't ready for prime time.

Go on back to Chicago, boys, and sharpen your skills shaking down the Garbage Collectors' union for payoffs out of the pension fund.

7/7/10

Lie-clocks

A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.

He asked, 'What are all those clocks?'

St. Peter answered, 'Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move.'

'Oh,' said the man, 'whose clock is that?'

'That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie.'

'Incredible,' said the man. 'And whose clock is that one?'

St. Peter responded,'That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life.'

'Where's President OBama's clock?' asked the man.

'Obama's clock is in Jesus' office. He's using it as a ceiling fan.'

New NASA Logo

From The Snake on the Flag:

Obama's Death Panels

Remember when healthcare rationing came up during what passed for 'debate' over ObamaCare?

Remember when those 'death panels' came up?

Remember when Obama so arrogantly passed all that off as nothing more than lunatic ravings?

Guess what.

They're back.

Obama is going to ram his Medicare/Medicaid director down our throats, bypassing senatorial review and approval.

Donald Berwick is a great supporter of rationing health care. He is an admirer of the British health care system.

In Britain, they cannot afford to spend more than $22,000 on a patient with 6 months or less to live.

So who is going to decide who has six months to live? Are they going to rely on a statistical chart? The opinions of government-appointed doctors sitting on a political board? Bean-counters in the Congressional Budget Office?

Guess what. If you go by that, they would have pulled the plug on Sue's and Gordon's treatments right at the start, because neither of them would pass the ObamaCare Criteria. That's Sue Steeves and Gordon Gossman, both of whom died after long fights with cancer. The operative word there is 'long'. A lot longer than six months. And they did pretty good during that time, too.

What does Donald Berwick think about wasting all that money and those medical resources on people in long term care? Boy howdy, but ObamaCare under this character will sure clean out Nursing East and Nursing West, won't it?

So now, the fate of people like Sue Steeves and Gordon Gossman, perhaps members of your family, perhaps you yourself, is going to be in the hands of a political appointee, put in place after bypassing the United States Senate, by an arrogant empty suit who got where he is, in the Orchid Office, by gripping and grinning his way up the Chicago political machine, a man full of empty promises, slick rhetoric, and political spinmeistering. A cheap union hack with the mentality of a Chicago ward boss.

It boils down to rationed health care and death panels, no matter how you lubricate it before you shove it up America's backside. Call it what you will: a panel of political appointees will decide who gets medical care, and when they get it, and who doesn't. That's a 'death panel'.

And does anyone out there really not think that Barack H. Obama and his family, or Donald Berwick's family, or the families of any of our CongressClowns are going to exempt themselves from that?

They already have.

Does anyone think that Michael Bennet and Mark Udall won't brainlessly go along with this? They don't have the balls or the moral substance or the common sense to think for themselves or act in the best interests of We the People. All they know how to do is kowtow to The Obamessiah and go along with his incompetence. One thing you can bet on: you won't see the Obamas, or the Bennets, or the Udalls standing around waiting for their medical requirements to be approved by a board of political hacks with MD's after their names.

That's reserved for you and yours.

Politicians

Chris Muir's Day by Day:

The Common Touch

"Ramming speed, Mr Sulu ... ramming speed!"

Obama is getting ready to ram it home yet one more time, this time bypassing the Senate with his appointment of Donald Berwick to serve as director of Medicare and Medicaid.

He's going to make the appointment when Congress, exhausted by all their hard work spending trillions of our dollars, our childrens' dollars, and our grand-childrens' dollars, and maybe our great-grand-childrens' dollars ... takes a recess.

He knows this would be a tough sell. Why?

Berwick loves the British socialized medicine health care scheme. He thinks it's great.

"This recess appointment is an insult to the American people," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said Tuesday night. "Dr. Berwick is a self-professed supporter of rationing health care, and he won't even have to explain his views to the American people in a Congressional hearing."

Here's the whole thing:

Obama to Fill Medicare and Medicaid Post Without Senate Approval

You'll note that the entire health care industry supports Berwick. That should be a warning right there.

The dichotomy is interesting. Obama lambastes the health care industry at every opportunity - they are almost as evil and greedy as BP - yet he is slipping this guy in the back door.

Why is that, do you think?

Meanwhile, Lindsay Lohan is going to do 90 days in the local jail, and is vaporlocking over the idea. After all, she is ... Lindsay Lohan ... and how could anyone, like, you know, stick her in, like, jail, which is all icky and full of like, drunks, you know, and like, dopers.

Wait! Isn't Lindsay Lohan a drunk and a doper? Could it be that's why she's going to jail? That, and a rather cavalier attitude toward judge's orders?

Oh, the humanity of it!

7/6/10

Michael Steele pulls a Biden

The chairman of the Republican National Party, Michael Steele, has pulled another Biden:

This was a war of Obama's choosing. This is not -- this is not something that the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in. Well, if he's such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that's the one thing you don't do is engage in a land war in Afghanistan, all right, because everyone who's tried over a thousand years of history has failed.

That was Steele expressing his view of the war in Afghanistan at an RNC fundraiser.

It's just the latest example of Steele's ineptitude as leader of the Republicans.

Remember how they paid off the travel claims for the guys who went to the lesbian stripper club in Vegas?

Remember how Steele was pouring all those donations into his own perks, like the chauffered limo and private jets?

Does Steele remember so little about 9.11, the Taliban, and Al Quaeda in Afghanistan that he really believes that this is "Obama's War"?

If Steele really believes that, then why are our Republican CongressClowns not hollering for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan?

Is this the official viewpoint of the Republican Party? Is it kind of like the official position of the Otero County Republican Party, which believes that if the Democrats remain in power we will have no more elections?

Is this really the best the Republican Party has to offer the nation?

Why is Rand Paul defending this nonsense?

7/5/10

NASA priority: Help Muslims feel good about themselves.

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

The story:

NASA's priority mission

No, that isn't one of those satire pieces from The Onion.

It's the New NASA Mission.

I can think of so many things to say about this, but all of them require a lot of expletive deleteds.

But one thing I must do, if I am to get along in Obama's 'post-partisan' world: I have to go practice singing 'Kumbaya'.

7/4/10

Bent's Old Fort 4th of July

Leading the parade from the parking area to the fort.


Reading of the Declaration of Independence: " And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."


Reading of the Declaration of Independence: " And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."


The main courtyard of the fort.


The flag today was much larger than that usually flown.


Lieutenant of the First Regiment of Dragoons. Very soon after the commencement of hostilities between the United States and Mexico, preparations were begun for the invasion of Mexican territory at various points. One expedition was to advance from the Missouri River west to Mexico, Santa Fé being its objective point. It was immediately determined, however, to push on with this column and occupy Upper California. General Kearny was placed in command of this "Army of the West," which consisted of Companies B, C, G, I and K, 1st Dragoons, two companies of artillery, two of infantry and nine companies of Missouri volunteer cavalry under command of Colonel A. W. Doniphan, in all about 1800 men. This command was concentrated at Bent's Fort on the Arkansas, from which point it marched for Santa Fé, August 1, 1846.*


Explaining the Army's presence at Bent's Old Fort at the time of the Mexican War.

The temperance speech, wherein the pitfalls of demon rum, the Devil's brew, are expounded upon. Following the speech, the occupants of the fort repaired to the saloon for 'light libations'.

More Bent's Old Fort imagery: Bent's Old Fort

* Excerpt about the First Regiment of Dragoons drawn from "The army of the United States : historical sketches of staff and line with protraits of generals-in-chief" by Theophilus Francis Rodenbough and William Lawrence Haskin, New York : Maynard, Merrill, & Co., 1896

The idiots in Washington

Following Nancy Pelosi's idiotic statement that unemployment benefits are the best source of job creation, and Obama's buffoonish claim that the June jobs report is 'evidence' that we are 'headed in the right direction', the Wall Street Journal came up with this rant:

President Obama hailed yesterday's jobs report for June as more evidence that "we're headed in the right direction," and with any more such good news the U.S. economy will soon be where Japan was in its lost growth decade of the 1990s. If we're lucky.

The reality is that this is another disappointing jobs report at a time in the recovery when new hiring ought to be picking up. Economic growth turned positive about a year ago, and normal recoveries become self-sustaining: Job creation follows the pickup in growth, which means rising income, which leads to more consumer spending, which leads to more business confidence and investment, and even more job creation.

This jobs recovery seems stuck in the Washington mud. The decline in the headline unemployment rate to 9.5% from 9.7% is welcome news, as is the continued gain in manufacturing (9,000 jobs, and 136,000 since last December). However, the labor force shrank again by some 652,000 following a 322,000 decline in May. The average hours worked per week fell to 34.1 from 34.2, when employers should be adding to worker shifts given the big gains in productivity.

After some healthy gains earlier this year, private hiring has been barely positive in the last two months, up 33,000 in May and 83,000 in June. (Census hiring of temporary workers fell by a net 225,000.) A useful rule of thumb is that roughly 150,000 new jobs are needed each month to keep up with normal growth in the labor market to accommodate young entrants and immigrants. To get the jobless rate down even to 8% will require 250,000 new jobs a month for the next three years.

Private employers appear to be in a holding pattern, waiting on hiring decisions until they see how much more the political class will raise their costs. A pair of recent reports by the Business Roundtable and the Manufacturers Alliance have warned about the destructive impact that higher taxes, trade restrictions and more regulation, among other policies, are having on job creation and new investment.

Meanwhile, Washington continues to believe its own advertising that government spending creates growth. Speaker Nancy Pelosi asserted this week that another extension of jobless benefits will cause more people to work, and Mr. Obama responded to a question in Wisconsin about job creation by saying that he wants to create a new tax break for Americans to weatherize their homes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Their worst critics couldn't make this up.

No, they couldn't.

They just don't, they really don't get it.

7/2/10

God in the Constitution

One of the most common arguments used by those who consider the separation of church and state a “fallacy” is the observation: "Separation of church and state is not found in the Constitution”.

That is true. What is also true is that “God” is not found in the Constitution either. 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 anti-separatists often point out that the Declaration of Independence refers to a generic “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, while the Constitution is the law of the land. The Constitution was written by elected officials, and ratified by We the People. 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 least two states in the early days of the republic had government-approved churches. Connecticut did until 1818, and Massachusetts required every man to belong to a Christian church of some kind, and to pay taxes to support it, until 1833.

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. How would you feel if today the General Assembly could require you to belong to a Christian church and pay taxes for it?

Connecticut drove the Reverend Roger Williams to flee that colony to found the Rhode Island and Providence plantations, where he insisted upon complete freedom of religion – or no religion at all. In 1644 he wrote “The Bloudy Tenet of Persecution”, about religious persecution in the colonies – persecution by Christians of other Christians – or anyone, for that matter, who did not toe the line in the matter of the colony’s government-designated church. The Constitutional framers were very familiar with Williams’ thoughts and writings, and our modern-day pastorate would do well do follow their lead. Those who fled religious persecution in Europe were not at all averse to practicing it themselves, a point noted in some detail by Paige Smith in his great two volume history of the Revolutionary War, “A New Age Has Now Begun.”

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]."

Let's do away with separation of church and state. How? Constitutional amendment? That requires a majority for ratification, and Christians have managed to dig themselves into such a self-righteously deep hole, that isn’t going to happen. They don't have the juice. That’s the unfortunate result of out-Phariseeing the Pharisees.

Excerpting from the Great Agnostic, Robert Ingersoll: "And if there is to be an acknowledgment of God in the Constitution, the question naturally arises as to which God is to have this honor. Shall we select the God of the Catholics -- he who has established an infallible church presided over by an infallible pope, and who is delighted with certain ceremonies and placated by prayers uttered in exceedingly common Latin? Is it the God of the Presbyterian with the Five Points of Calvinism, who is ingenious enough to harmonize necessity and responsibility, and who in some way justifies himself for damning most of his own children? Is it the God of the Puritan, the enemy of joy -- of the Baptist, who is great enough to govern the universe, and small enough to allow the destiny of a soul to depend on whether the body it inhabited was immersed or sprinkled? What God is it proposed to put in the Constitution? Is it the God of the Old Testament, who was a believer in slavery and who justified polygamy? If slavery was right then, it is right now; and if Jehovah was right then, the Mormons are right now. Are we to have the God who issued a commandment against all art -- who was the enemy of investigation and of free speech? Is it the God who commanded the husband to stone his wife to death because she differed with him on the subject of religion? Are we to have a God who will re-enact the Mosaic code and punish hundreds of offences with death? What court, what tribunal of last resort, is to define this God, and who is to make known his will? In his presence, laws passed by men will be of no value. The decisions of courts will be as nothing. But who is to make known the will of this supreme God? Will there be a supreme tribunal composed of priests?"

Which God do you want in your government?