Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts

Friday, March 09, 2012

California to Texas Translation Guide

R. F.:

Due to the large number of jobs moving from California to Texas, the Lone Star State has compiled a "Californian to Texan" translation guide.

CALIFORNIA TEXAS
Arsenal of Weapons Gun Collection
Delicate Wetlands Swamp
Undocumented Worker Illegal Alien
Cruelty-Free Materials Synthetic Fiber
Assault and Battery Attitude Adjustment
Heavily Armed Well-protected
Narrow-minded Righteous
Taxes or Your Fair Share Coerced Theft
Commonsense Gun Control Gun Confiscation Plot
Illegal Hazardous Explosives Fireworks for Stump Removal
Nonviable Tissue Mass Unborn Baby
Equal Access to Opportunity Socialism
Multicultural Community High Crime Area
Fairness or Social Progress Marxism
Upper Class or "The Rich " Self-Employed
Progressive, Change Big Government Scheme
Homeless or Disadvantaged Bums or Welfare Leeches
Sniper Rifle Scoped Deer Rifle
Investment For the Future Higher Taxes
Healthcare Reform Socialized Medicine
Extremist, Judgmental, or Hater Conservative
Truants Homeschoolers
Victim or Oppressed Criminal or Lazy Good-For-Nothing
High Capacity Magazine Standard Capacity Magazine
Religious Zealot Church-going
Reintroduced Wolves Sheep and Deer Killers
Fair Trade Coffee Overpriced Yuppie Coffee
Exploiters or "The Rich " Employed or Land Owner
The Gun Lobby NRA Members
Assault Weapon Semi-Auto (Grandpa's M1 Carbine)
Fiscal Stimulus New Taxes and Higher Taxes
Same Sex Marriage Legalized Perversion
Mandated Eco-Friendly Lighting Chinese Mercury-Laden Light Bulbs

Thursday, March 08, 2012

Crowd-sourcing Derrick Bell

Who is Derrick Bell? Given Barack Obama's endorsement of Bell's radical and bizarre views, I thought it worthwhile to research his background.

One of the more interesting items I found is a an article in the Boston College Law Review, published on 1 May 1999. Authored by Jeffrey J. Pyl, its title is Race, Equality and the Rule of Law: Critical Race Theory's Attack on the Promises of Liberalism (PDF).


Take a look. Let me know what you think, either in the comments or privately via email.

Bell was a dangerous brand of crackpot, roughly equivalent to a black David Duke, only more extreme. Obama's devotion to Bell offers us another puzzle piece of a rapidly emerging picture. And the complete image will be assembled by all of us -- an Army of Breitbarts -- who have effectively replaced an old media too crippled by ideology, intellectual dishonesty and stupidity to do any useful work whatsoever.


Tuesday, March 06, 2012

WE are the 99 percent

As James Pethokoukis describes it, "For 99 percent of Americans, the Obama recovery has been no recovery at all."

Liberal economist Emmanuel Saez has updated his much-referenced income inequality research. Here’s how the recovery is going after the Great Recession:

In 2010, average real income per family grew by 2.3%, but the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.6% while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.2%. Hence, the top 1% captured 93% of the income gains in the first year of recovery. Such an uneven recovery can help explain the recent public demonstrations against inequality. It is likely that this uneven recovery has continued in 2011 as the stock market has continued to recover...

1. So this isn’t exactly an endorsement of the Obama recovery is it? I mean, for 99 percent of Americans there has been no recovery, according to Saez...

2. Saez embraces and promotes the back-to-the-1950s nostalgia economics of Obamanomics and modern liberalism: “A number of factors may help explain this increase in inequality, not only underlying technological changes but also the retreat of institutions developed during the New Deal and World War II—such as progressive tax policies, powerful unions, corporate provision of health and retirement benefits, and changing social norms regarding pay inequality.” Indeed, Saez thinks the top marginal tax rate should more than double to 80 percent...

[And j] ust what is the right level of inequality? And how much economic growth is Saez willing to sacrifice to get it? ... Let me repeat this bit from a 2008 study on income inequality from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis:

It is important to understand that income inequality is a byproduct of a well-functioning capitalist economy. Individuals’ earnings are directly related to their productivity. Wealthy people are not wealthy because they have more money; it is because they have greater productivity. Different incomes, thus, reflect different productivity levels. The unconstrained opportunity for individuals to create value for society, which is reflected by their income, encourages innovation and entrepreneurship. Economic research has documented a positive correlation between entrepreneurship/innovation and overall economic growth. A wary eye should be cast on policies that aim to shrink the income distribution by redistributing income from the more productive to the less productive simply for the sake of “fairness.”

The National Social Democrat Party -- and its court jester, Paul Krugman -- hardest hit.


Hilarious Stock Chart o' the Day ( $CARB )

Business. Strategery. At. Its. Finest.

Cake, meet icing: "Announcing The Carbonite Accountability Project."


Monday, March 05, 2012

All you need to know about Sandra Fluke in 30 seconds

Here's the real Sandra Fluke:

Fluke is a liar: during her testimony, she claimed that birth control had cost a stunning $3,000 during her three years of law school. Unfortunately, it turns out that Walmart and a nearby Target have offered $9-a-month birth control since 2007. Not to mention the fact that there appear to be four Planned Parenthood offices within walking distance of Georgetown Law School, where they seem to dispense contraceptives like candy.

Fluke is a kook: among her prior positions (policy positions, that is...), she argued that insurers be required to cover sex-change surgery and other "transgender services".

Fluke is a professional abortion rights activist: and that's her own description of herself - "A Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies major at Cornell, [she] is also a past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice."

No, Fluke is an activist and a plant.

My only question: what did George Stephanapoulous know and when did he know it?


Hat tip: BadBlue.com.

What Would Breitbart Do? Rally for Rush! #WWBD

Jeffrey Lord's latest must-read in the American Spectator is a call to action to defend free speech, inspired by Andrew Breitbart's example. It traces the advertisers that have abandoned Rush's program, many after decades of support. Lord notes that only a pathetic 21 percent of Americans identify themselves as liberals. And he rightly observes that disenfranchising 79 percent of Americans is a decidedly flawed business strategy.

The time to be bullied is OVER. You hear me? It's OVER.

Here's how we're going to fight back against "The Cowardly Seven", as I like to call the advertisers who abandoned Rush over calling Sandra Fluke a "slut", when a more apt description for her is "a lying plant".

Sleep Train: This gutless company says it has been advertising with Rush for 25 years. They should be ashamed of themselves. Absolutely ashamed...
This is the e-mail for Sleep Train's customer service: customerservice@sleeptrain.com. This is the 800 phone number for Sleep Train: 1-800-919-2337. This is the 800 fax number for Sleep Train: 1-866-293-5719.

Legal Zoom: The Co-founders of this company are Brian Liu, Brian Lee, Eddie Hartman & Robert Shapiro... The address for e-mails is here. The Corporate Headquarters phone number is: 1-323-962-8600. The fax number is: 323-962-8300.

Citrix: Mark B. Templeton is the President and CEO... The contact info for the Citrix Corporate Headquarters is... Toll Free Phone: 1-800-424-8749, Phone: 954-267-3000, Fax: 954-267-9319.

Quicken Loans: Quicken, under the leadership of its Founder and Chairman Dan Gilbert.... has gone the extra mile to antagonize the 40 percent. It has this statement on its website: Due to Rush Limbaugh's continued inflammatory comments -- along with the valued feedback we have received from our clients and team members -- Quicken Loans has suspended all advertising on the Rush Limbaugh radio program.

Note: Quicken is so skittish the above message appears for mere seconds before vanishing. It took repeated tries to copy verbatim the simple, highly provocative message above.

The Quicken contact info is found on this page of their website. Note: The company has an online chat function on this page. Also: Phone, Client Relations: 1-800-863-4332.

Pro-Flowers: Their contact info is here.

Carbonite: ...contact info here...

...DO YOU GET the picture? The American Left -- whether it pops up in the form of Media Matters, Color of Change, MoveOn.org, Texans for Truth or other groups -- is determined to shut off conservative dissent from their agenda by whatever means necessary. Fueled in part by money like that they received from David Friend of Carbonite. To do this they are quite specifically going after conservative talk radio hosts and television commentators one by one by one. The fact that David Friend of MoveOn.org/Carbonite is there to stick it to Rush is all the better. The fact that Ed Schulz called Laura Ingraham a slut is one big no-big-deal to Sandra Fluke herself when she wants air time on with Mr. Ed. Why should David Friend care if Ms. Fluke doesn't? So, Carbonite continues as Mr. Ed's sponsor, sluts be damned.

As noted earlier, what began with Don Imus, Lou Dobbs, and Glenn Beck has just hit Pat Buchanan... Now, they want Rush's scalp...

In his last speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) just weeks ago, Andrew Breitbart stood at the podium and said: "Conservatives used to take it and we're not taking it anymore."

...By doing what they have now done, these one-time sponsors of Rush Limbaugh's show have now startlingly indicated that they are signing on with anti-First Amendment thugs.

We've got work to do, friends. It's time to Rally for Rush.

And, please: pass it on.


Hat tip: R.L.

Sunday, March 04, 2012

Carbonite caves in to the Left's efforts to silence Rush Limbaugh $CARB

William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection is closely following the Left's efforts to silence Rush Limbaugh through advertiser boycotts.

Liberal groups have seized on a strategy I didn’t think would be effective, but has had some success, to go after advertisers of prominent conservative media personalities. ... ...Media Matters explicitly seeks to bring down Fox News and investigate its executives, and Fox News advertisers have been targeted by groups like Color of Change, which has targeted Glenn Beck, Eric Bolling, Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan and Andrew Breitbart.

Now Rush Limbaugh advertisers are the target because of an analogy he used... [and the controversy] distracted from the attack on religious freedom which is the heart of the controversy.

As has become the pattern, Rush’s advertisers immediately were attacked and threatened, and several gave in quickly, like Quicken Loans and Sleep Number, pulling their advertising.

No advertiser was more associated with Rush than Carbonite, an online computer back up company. Rush often would read Carbonite’s ads himself, and would tout their service.

Carbonite initially took a principled position, asserting that it advertises on both conservative and liberal shows, and that its advertising does not constitute an endorsement of what any particular host says... Indeed, Carbonite still advertises on the show of Ed Schultz, who makes unhinged attacks on the Tea Party and conservatives daily, and called conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham a slut (for which he later apologized).

...Saturday night, the CEO of Carbonite issued a statement withdrawing advertising from Rush’s show notwithstanding that earlier in the day Rush has issued an apology... This is an attempt find something, anything, to force Rush off the air. Ms. Magazine has launched a campaign do do just that by going after Clear Channel Communications, whose stations carry Rush’s program.

Today's Leftists have a totalitarian mindset. They despise free speech.

Unable to win in the marketplace of ideas (remember Air America?), the would-be despots of the hard Left instead try to silence the voices of those with whom they disagree.

The Statists, the Marxists, the progressives -- what ever name you prefer to call the hard Left kooks that now dominate the Democrat Party -- would be at home in the Soviet Union, or North Korea, or Venezuela. They are an appendage of centralized government and bent on retaining their white-knuckled death-grip on power.

Their anti-American efforts must be stopped. And Carbonite is as good a place to start resisting these regressives as any.


Update: Dan Riehl has more details on Carbonite's P.R. debacle (hat tip: BadBlue.com).

Funniest article I've seen in years: a mystified Washington Post wonders 'What's ailing the Chevy Volt?'

No, I'm serious.

What’s ailing the Chevy Volt?


On Friday, GM announced it was halting production of the Chevrolet Volt until April, so as to maintain “proper inventory levels.” Sales of the electric vehicle have been disappointing, with the company missing its target of 10,000 Volts sold last year. Why hasn’t the car caught on?

Might I venture a few answers?

• The Volt has an annoying habit of sometimes blowing up

• It's incredibly expensive

• It's a coal-powered car

• It's the result of central planning, as opposed to actual market demands

The whole focus on electric cars is, in my opinion, borderline insane. Battery technologies are decades away from real suitability in automobiles. And, even more concerning, the Obama administration is waging a war on America's electric generation, thanks to an out-of-control EPA:

GenOn Energy just announced it will be shuttering eight power plants over the next couple of years, taking about 15% of its total generating capacity offline

Two Chicago-area power plants are slated to close

Three midwest power plants owned by FirstEnergy will be forced to close

And the list goes on and on and on. Obama's war to de-industrialize America continues apace.


Saturday, March 03, 2012

BREITBART IS HERE

The irreplaceable iOwnTheWorld has the idea (note: the site appears to be either too busy or under DDOS attack at the moment, but special thanks to Atlas Shrugs for relaying the idea).

Okay, we are flying by the seat of our pants here. We’re going to do this frenetically and impulsively, just like my idol Andrew Breitbart, I’ve negotiated a deal with Anthem Studios to have these opened up for ordering. I will have the link asap.

Just to be clear, this is going to be done at cost, which includes labor, shipping and materials. More details to follow.

The owner of Anthem Studios was a friend of Andrew Breitbart and he just showed me the most beautiful picture of his wife and himself with Mr. Breitbart. This project is in good and well-intentioned hands.

UPDATE 2: I smell a prairie fire. Some biggies have e-mailed and are of the opinion that Breitbart, in death, has more impact than most in life.

I will be working on the different files and formats necessary to get this rolling. I will update again later.


As soon as I get an order link, I will relay word.

Update: T-Shirt Order Page Is Here

Oh. And Breitbart is here, you leftist miscreants.


The Obama-Democrat-Media Complex In One Photograph

You're welcome.


Government is their god

President Obama's recent attacks on the Catholic Church, which ignited a firestorm of controversy over First Amendment issues, are simply part of a bigger picture. Consider:

• In the words of Robert Bernal Aguirre, Obama's move to assuage the controversy that forces religious institutions to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients, is "nothing more than a shell game":

On February 10 Obama moved the immoral pea from one shell to another when he stood before the nation to announce a “compromise” and an “accommodation” -- one that he discussed with none of the offended parties. .. The great irony is that the very groups that put him in office – Catholics and Hispanics – have consistently been among those most offended by this administration...

...President Obama demeans our belief in life and he obliterates our constitutional protection of religious freedom. He is telling not just Hispanics and not just Catholics – but all people of faith – that our faith-formed opinions have no place in the public square. Such is the state of democracy in America in this election year of 2012.

• As the Heritage Foundation observes, President Obama has made five attempts to slash the charitable tax deduction, a critical source of funds for religious institutions.

...the President’s plan would likely dampen charitable giving at a time when nonprofits have been forced to do more with less. The greatest impact would probably hit organizations like hospitals and educational institutions... Sadly, many of these nonprofit organizations are the same charities whose religious liberty is under attack by Obamacare’s anti-conscience mandate... [He] has engaged in a pattern of weakening the status and identity of civil society institutions.

• Obama has, on multiple occasions, omitted references to God that are foundational to the Declaration of Independence.

• He has also routinely skipped thanks to the Lord during the President's traditional Thanksgiving address.

• And these omissions are entirely consistent with the secular, anti-American message promoted by the Democrat media complex, which routinely removes phrases like "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why would liberals remove God from its rightful role in America's founding?

Because, in their view, government grants rights. Your God-given, individual rights mean nothing to them.

Government is their god. Government is all-powerful. Government comes first. And that is why they promote secularism. It's not about "separation of church and state". It's about power.

The power of government to dominate the individual.


Friday, March 02, 2012

Got Slut? The Left Launches a Coordinated Attack Against Rush Limbaugh

If a ringer goes in front of Congress and demands that I pay for her birth control, then obviously she must suffer from nymphomania. Because contraceptives don't cost a heck of a lot of money. And, if she's truly needy, there's -- what -- a Planned Parenthood in every neighborhood?

I mean, she wants free contraceptives, but what about cancer patients? Should we be subsidizing Sandra Fluke's sex life? Or should we be spending that money on cancer research or other real women's health issues?

• Someone named "Sandra Fluke" -- if that is her real name -- testified in front of Congress in support of a "contraception mandate". That is, she publicly demanded free contraceptives as a matter of "women's health" and was treated to a liberal media smucker-fest.

• Well, it turns out Fluke, positioned by the media as a 23-year old law student, is actually a 30-year old "reproductive rights advocate".

• Rush Limbaugh, like any right-thinking American, was offended:

What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps.

And he's right. Where are the advocates for cancer patients? How about heart attack victims? Or is the major "women's health" problem in this country access to contraceptives?

• Never ones to let a crisis go to waste, the totalitarian loons on the left -- who despise free speech -- began demanding that advertisers boycott the Limbaugh show. A couple of them actually caved, including advertisers Sleep Number and Sleep Train.

Turns out I need to buy a new bed and was thinking about a Sleep Number mattress. No more. They can go find some hippies to buy their products.

• Senate Democrats -- with no pressing matters to which to attend like the economy or the debt or passing a budget -- began circulating a petition and raising money for free condoms their campaigns.

• In response, Rush announced he was waiting for Bill Clinton to call Sandra Fluke to see if she is okay.

• And just a few hours ago, President Obama (with little else to do, since there are no looming economic or foreign policy crises) joined in the attacks: Obama considers Limbaugh’s remarks “reprehensible,” according to White House spokesman Jay Carney. He said the president called Fluke to “express his disappointment that she has been the subject of inappropriate personal attacks” and to thank her for speaking out...

Meanwhile, Iran still is moving ahead with their plans for nuclear terrorism, gas prices are poised to hit $5/gal. and real inflation is moving toward 10%. And Obama wants free contraceptives. Happy to see that Democrats have their heads screwed on straight.


Thursday, March 01, 2012

Think Big, America [Chris Muir]

Chris Muir of Day By Day:


Hat tip: Fausta's Blog.

Andrew Breitbart's Legacy Codified at CPAC: "I will march behind who ever our candidate is"

If there is one thing that we can take from the shocking, tragic, and premature passing of Andrew Breitbart, it is that we must put aside our petty differences to defeat the Marxist Left.

Just a few weeks ago, Breitbart delivered a rousing speech at CPAC, the transcript of which was produced by none other than Biff Spackle.

Right now, my Twitter feed is already calling me a big fat homosexual. Hello, children at home. No, your Dad's not gay. That's how the Left rolls.

Everybody asks me: why do you retweet? Why do you do that? ...In fact, there's probably no one in the world I respect more than Professor Hugh Hewitt and the other day he took me aside. He said, "I don't think you should do that, Andrew." Well, Professor Hewitt, on this issue I disagree.

Because they've held over our heads -- with contempt -- the false narrative of their innate tolerance. The least tolerant people you'll ever meet in your entire lives -- I know it, I live it every day. And I retweet it to remind them that I know exactly who they are.

...This is my war cry for 2012. You need to join me in my war against the institutional left.

This is not your mother's Democratic Party... duh! John Podesta and George Soros? This is not your mother's Democratic Party You know whose party it is? ...I have a thesis about who we're fighting against on the hard left... [In college] I had no idea these [left-wing academics] people were actually serious about the malarkey they were teaching. The post-structuralist, politically correct garbage.

Unfortunately in 2004, the radical Left [executed] a coup d'etat of the Democratic Party. And basically kicked a person -- that four years was called 'the standard-bearer of decency in the Democratic Party'. And that person was Joe Lieberman.

That was the end of the Democratic Party. And in 2010, the DLC went under.

There's no such thing as a moderate Democrat. And so what do we get now, in Barack Obama?

In this election we're going to vet him


I've got videos, by the way, and in this election we're going to vet him. I've got videos. This election we're going to vet him. From his college days, to show you why racial division and class warfare are central to what 'hope and change' was sold in 2008.

The videos are going to come out. The narrative is going to come out: that Barack Obama met a bunch of silver pony-tails [left wing academics] back in the 1980s, like Bill [Ayers] and Bernadine Dohrn who said "one day, we're going to have the presidency.'

And the rest of us slept while they plotted and they plotted and they plotted. And they oversaw hundreds of millions of dollars in the Annenberg Challenge, from real capitalists, who gave it to their children and their children's children [who] then became communists. We've got to work on that...

Barack Obama is a radical and we should not be afraid to say it. And Barack Obama was launched from Bill and Bernadine's salon... it became self-evident to me that [Obama enjoyed] many a meal there... And don't tell me, ABC, CBS and NBC that I can't posit that theory, because it is a self-evident truth. Just like it was a self-evident truth that he was with Jeremiah Wright. And just as it was a self-evident truth that when he was at Harvard, he was advocating for the worst of the worst to join the faculty. Radicals. Radicals at "Beirut on the Charles".

And that who's in the White House. And that's who's outside right now [the Occupy movement] telling you that you don't have a right to be here. They would squelch your free speech just as easily as they do at Harvard, Vassar, Yale, Wesleyan - they're a bunch of totalitarian freaks.

The media can no longer be called objective journalists


And they pal around with our friends in the mainstream media. I always thought the media leaned to the left... but when they act like a Provost at a politically correct university and tell people to shut up, [then] no longer can they be called objective journalists. They're playing for the other side.

They've been part of demonizing good and decent people. They tried to defeat the Tea Party and when they failed, just like when they tried to create a [leftist] Rush Limbaugh and they failed with Air America, they want what they can't have. They wanted what they could not have and what did they create?

They created the "Occupy Movement". What is the Occupy Movement, you may ask? It's a natural, organic group of people -- you've never seen before in your life. Wait a sec-- these exact people protested against you at the GOP Welcoming Committee in 2008-- and two of them were arrested for planting Molotov cocktails. [These] are radicals against the police, radicals against you, exactly like Occupy, the same exact people, the same people who organized "Camp Casey" in Crawford, these are the same exact people who went down the highway at the end of the summer when Katrina happened, created Occupy New Orleans.

It's the same radicals, they've been in your life since 'Senator Obama' became part of your vocabulary. They are at war with you. They attack you. They throw eggs at you. And -- guess what? -- the media looks the other way. You're domestic terrorists, you know. Janet Napolitano warned me about that.

Yet when this group emerged, what happened? ...This is my thesis: the anti-war movement was never about anti-war. It was a Saul Alinsky community-organizing tool to get Barack Obama and the Left elected. It went away immediately.

The Occupy Movement is the Definition of Un-American


And the mainstream media created a narrative... Time Magazine's "Person of the Year... this is the anti-war movement! How do I know this? Because if I told this to ABC, CBS and NBC, they'd tell me it's a conspiracy theory -- that it's just a bunch of organic people. There's no organization going on, even though we have the emails to prove it. Or the undercover videos of Natasha Leonard of The New York Times organizing with the radicals. No, that didn't mean anything!

Bernadine Dohrn pointed out to me when I was snarkily asking 'What ever happened to the anti-war movement?', she let loose an affirmation of everything I know to be true. She said, "Well, that's not true... it's more or less what Occupy Wall Street is." And the mainstream media refuses to tell you that these are the same shock troops that have been ... instigating [against] us, instigating riots against the police, these people are the definition of un-American.

I don't care who our candidate is


You want a unity speech? I'll give you a unity speech. I don't care who our candidate is.

I haven't since the beginning of this... ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate!

And that's what the Tea Party is.

We are there to confront [the radical left] on behalf of our candidate!

I will march behind who ever our candidate is. Because if we don't, we lose.

There are two paths! There are two paths! One is America, the other is Occupy! One is America, the other is Occupy! And I don't care, and along the way... I've realized over the last three years that the Republican Party and the conservative movement is not what ABC, CBS and NBC put on the screen.

They try to portray you in the worst possible light... and when I travel around the United States meeting people in the Tea Party who care -- black, white, gay, straight -- anyone that's willing to stand next to me to fight the progressive left, I will be in that bunker, and if you're not in that bunker 'cause you're not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you. You're on the other side.

Rest In Peace, Andrew Breitbart. You will be missed.


Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Now Egypt wants a prisoner swap: will legacy media finally report that we have a HOSTAGE FREAKING CRISIS?

Did someone say Jimmy Carter, Part Deux? Dan from NY writes:

Shades of Jimmy Carter. For 30 years. while Mubarak was running things, Egypt considered us an ally. Now, almost overnight, the new Muslim Brotherhood regime sees us as infidels. How can we ever thank you, Mr. Obama?

Egypt Demands Prisoner Swap: Terrorist Detainees for NGO Civilians


Are the bitter fruits of Senator John McCain’s “diligent diplomacy” a humiliating prisoner “exchange”—innocent US NGO workers, for hardened jihadists, including the notorious “Blind Sheikh” Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman, who orchestrated the murderous 1993 World Trade Center bombing?

My colleague at Translating Jihad has fully translated an Arabic Al-Arabiya story entitled (pathognomonically), “ ‘Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman at Forefront of Egyptian-American Prisoner Exchange Deal.”

The Egyptian government began taking steps to respond with the American offer to release 50 Egyptians being held in American prisons–including Shaykh ‘Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman—in exchange for the release of 19 Americans accused in the case of foreign funding of civil society organizations. This is according to what was confirmed by Major General Muhammad Hani Zahir, an expert in military studies and international counterterrorism.

Zahir in comments to the newspaper ‘al-Masriyun’ said it was necessary for Egypt to exploit America’s weak position, especially after condemning its citizens in cases affecting Egyptian sovereignty over its territory. He added that Egypt should not permit this exchange to take place unless the American administration agrees to release more than 500 Egyptians being held in American prisons, of whom the Egyptian foreign ministry knows nothing.


If the crux of this story is accurate, it will represent a modern variant of capitulation to the anti-modern dictates of jihad warfare. Jihad, this ancient, but vibrant Islamic institution grounded upon hatred of the non-Muslim infidel, has long used captured infidels—including, prominently, non-combatants seized as “booty” during endless, unprovoked incursions into the lands of the infidel—to ransom in exchange for captured murderous jihadists.

I wonder how bad business has to get for legacy media to start actually reporting the news?

Or is that now the responsibility of the blogosphere?


Monday, February 27, 2012

Good News: DHS Spending $11 Million Scouring Web for Criticism of Its Policies

I'd have loved to have heard the shrieks of indignation coming from The New York Times and the rest of the leftist infrastructure had John Ashcroft and other Bush administration officials engaged in this kind of egregious behavior.

No double standards here, folks.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been paying a defense contractor $11.4 million to monitor social media websites and other Internet communications to find criticisms of the department’s policies and actions.

A government watchdog organization, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), obtained hundreds of documents from DHS through the Freedom of Information Act and found details of the arrangement with General Dynamics. The company was contracted to monitor the Web for “reports that reflect adversely on DHS,” including sub-agencies like the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In testimony submitted to the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, Ginger McCall, director of EPIC’s Open Government Project, stated that “the agency is monitoring constantly, under very broad search terms, and is not limiting that monitoring to events or activities related to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or manmade disasters…. The DHS has no legal authority to engage in this monitoring.”

McCall added: “This has a profound effect on free speech online if you feel like a government law enforcement agency—particularly the Department of Homeland Security, which is supposed to look for terrorists—is monitoring your criticism, your dissent, of the government.”

Rest assured that our beloved, baritone DHS secretary -- and her ostensible boss, Eric "Fast 'n' Furious" Holder -- would never, ever use this kind of information to go after private citizens. They're just doing research.

As far as you know.

Consider this reason number 43,263 to kick this administration's ample rear out of office in November.


Update: PrairiePundit writes: "This may explain my jump in hits."


Hat tip: BadBlue.com.

Friday, February 24, 2012

Mark Levin Nukes Obama's Energy Lies [Transcript]

The living national treasure known as Mark Levin shredded President Obama's fundraising energy policy speech in Miami yesterday, delivering an epic smackdown.

This man has never given a speech, never given a presidential statement without lacing it with politics and his own ego...

"[Obama:] Only in politics do people root for bad news... you can bet that, since it's an election year, they're already dusting off their three-point plan for two dollar gas. And I'll save you the suspense. Step one is to drill and step two is to drill. And then step three is to keep drilling. We heard the same line in 2007 when I was running for president. We hear the same thing every year. We've heard the same thing for 30 years. Well, the American people aren't stupid. They know that's not a plan. "

Mr. President, you may not know this. You may not understand this, because you've never actually taken the time to understand how this works.

But, yes, you have to drill to get oil, to get natural gas. You have to drill. You see, Mr. President, when that fleet of cars drives up to the local gas stations... and they fuel those cars, at our expense of course, the fuel isn't actually in those pumps to begin with, Mr. President.

You have to drill to get that stuff.

That's right! You have to get drill to get gasoline for your car! So a policy that says 'drill', number one, 'drill' number two, and 'drill' number three, is actually the only way to get gasoline, isn't it? Is there some other way to get gasoline, other than drilling?

Is there some other way to get home heating oil, other than drilling?

...So the president, on the one side of his considerable mouth mocks the Republicans for trying to drill, and on the other side of his mouth, mocks drilling! So, ladies and gentlemen, if we don't drill, we don't get oil!

If we don't drill, we don't get gas! Somebody's got to drill!

And there was Hillary Rotten Clinton, her Thighness, yesterday all excited about a deal with the Mexican government to drill in the Gulf in areas that are said to be shared... I could've sworn I heard Hillary Clinton talk about drilling! And we give millions, if not billions, to the Brazilians to do what? To drill!

And what are they doing in the Middle East? These massive ships that the oil companies have to have, that bring fuel back. Where do they get that? Oh, they drill? Yes, they drill!

So he mocks drilling and doesn't realize he sounds like idiot!

No, here's where we're going to get it: from the sun! Really? Solar. And wind! Now he's been president for three years, had complete control of the government for two years, and what did we get from this wind and solar? We got crony capitalism; campaign bundlers who made a fortune and then broke the companies; companies that can't work and don't work because a top-down, government mastermind like Obama can't -- just because he has the law and our money behind him -- do whatever he wants to do, against the laws of nature and physics, until we are able to develop it over the course of time. Until it's profitable, until it makes sense.

We call that whole process, "capitalism."


Related: Deconstructing Barack Obama's Blatant Energy Lies

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Fact Checking National Journal's "Fact Check": Yes, Obama Voted to Legalize Infanticide. Not Once, But Twice.

"National Journal" (if that is its real name) is a political analysis website that appears to get its content from the deepest crevices of the far left Beltway machine. Its latest hilarious missive is entitled "FACT CHECK: Gingrich Claim on Obama Infanticide Vote A Stretch":

Obama did not vote to legalize infanticide, and the media did not ignore the issue.

In answering a CNN debate question about birth control, Newt Gingrich lashed out at the media for giving President Obama a free pass during his 2008 bid.
“Not once did anybody in the elite media ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,” Gingrich said.

Gingrich was presumably referencing Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ proposed version of a “born alive” law, intended to require doctors to administer immediate medical care to any infant that survived an intended abortion.

According to Politifact [Ed: Politifact, far from the unbiased arbiter it pretends to be, is a provably left-wing outfit] ... Obama voiced his opposition to the new legislation as a state senator because it would have given legal status to fetuses and would thus have been struck down by the courts, and because Illinois already had laws to ensure infants who survived abortions would be given medical attention.

This is, to put it in terms progressives can understand, horsecrap.

Physical evidence (the actual IL General Assembly vote tally [below]) shows that on March 13, 2003, Barack Obama voted for an amendment making the IL Born Alive Infants Protection Act identical to the federal Born Alive bill.

Obama then voted against the amended bill, making him more pro-abortion that any other U.S. senator, who all voted unanimously for Born Alive. It makes Obama more pro-abortion than [even] NARAL... which went neutral on the federal Bill.

Yet after the Saddleback Showdown on August 16, 2008, Obama stood by his lie when asked about it by CBN's David Brody, as shown on CNN.

David Freddoso at the National Review puts it in stark terms.

Sen. Obama is currently misleading people about what he voted against, specifically claiming that the bill he voted against in his committee lacked “neutrality” language on Roe v. Wade. The bill did contain this language. He even participated in the unanimous vote to put it in.

Want to see the actual differences between the federal and state laws? Non-existent other than the stylistic changes for Illinois wording. The identical neutrality clause as added by Obama is present.

On March 12-13, 2003, the Illinois state senate committee chaired by Senator Barack Obama amended the proposed state Born-Alive Infants Protection bill (SB 1082) to exactly track the language of the already-enacted federal BAIPA, by adopting Senate Amendment No. 1, 10-0.  The committee then voted to kill the amended bill, 6-4, with Obama and the other Democrats on the committee voting against it.  The bill that Obama and his colleges voted to kill, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law.  The entirely non-substantive points at which the state bill language still differed from the federal law are shown in brackets below (except we have ignored differences in capitalizing).

 ---------------------------------------------------------Public Law 107–207 [Illinois SB 1082]
107th Congress
An Act
To protect [Illinois: concerning] infants who are
born alive.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[Illinois: Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly:  Section 5.  The Statute on Statutes is amended by adding Section 1.36 as follows:]

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Born-Alive Infants Protection
Act of 2002’’.
[Illinois: no formal title]
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF BORN-ALIVE INFANT. [Illinois: Section 1.36.  Born-alive infant.]
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘§ 8. ‘Person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’ as
including born-alive infant 
[Illinois: lacks this section heading]
‘‘(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, [Illinois: statute] or
of any ruling [Illinois: rule], regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States [Illinois: this State], the words ‘person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’, shall include
[Illinois: include] every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
‘‘(b) As used in this section, the term ‘born alive’, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her  [Illinois: its] mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such
[Illinois: that]
expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut,
,   Illinois: no comma] and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
‘‘(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny,
expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ [Illinois: no quotes] as defined in this section.’’.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning
of chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:
‘‘8. ‘Person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’ as including born-alive infant.’’. 
[Illinois: Section 99.  Effective date.  This Act takes effect upon becoming law.]
 

Obama's bald-faced fabrication is shocking. Perhaps that's the "Audacity of Hope": he hopes no one will call him on this audacious lie.

Barack Obama opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois. The law was pushed after State Senator Patrick O'Malley heard the horrific story about an infant born alive after an abortion from Jill Stanek, a nurse... David Brody can play it as straight as he wants to play it. But, Barack Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. He said it was because the state statute lacked federal protections for abortion. Once the National Right to Life Committee proved that excuse a lie, Obama called NRLC liars until the campaign admitted that, regardless of the facts, abortion laws would have still been hindered by the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

And during the 2008 debate over Obama's votes, the media was in full spin mode to protect their beloved candidate:

All the spin will make you dizzy... After the media ignored the Obama campaign admitting that he lied about a vote he made in 2003... now Obama is accusing others of “attacking” him with “outrageous lies”! ....Don’t count on the media to do any fact checking. If they were interested in doing that, the documents and facts are easily available. I can see why Obama thinks he can get away with this. The media ignored his lies once, they’ll most likely continue to eat them up. Meanwhile, Obama’s arrogance and audacity will continue to reach uncharted levels.

In summary: the National Journal's "FACT CHECK" (capitalized to make it extra believable!) is just as legitimate as Politifact. Which is to say, it's just a skosh to the left of Sean Penn.


Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Curiously juxtaposed headlines o' the day

Spotted at BadBlue.com:

Ann Coulter asks, "What's their problem with Romney?" The word their means, oh, about 95% of the Tea Party and Constitutional Conservatives in the U.S.

Jimmie Bise, Jr. at Sundries Shack more than adequately answers Ann's question with "Romney’s Plan: No Spending Cuts. No Tax Reform. No Bueno.."

Eh, case closed, bailiff.


Sunday, February 19, 2012

Legacy Media: Hostage Crisis? What Hostage Crisis?

19 American hostages are being held by the new Islamist government in Egypt and to read the funny papers, you'd never know it.

Nineteen American citizens working for well-known and well-established nonprofit groups are being held on trumped-up charges that they tried to destabilize Egypt. Their offices were raided in late December, some are holed up in the U.S. embassy and all of them have been barred from flying out of Egypt... December is when Congress passed a number of conditions for aid to the Egyptian military, including proving a “commitment to Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel, progress toward democratic reforms, and the protection of free expression, association and religion.” Not only are the last two of those conditions not being met by Egypt, but Time adds that Cairo’s case against the Americans is “propagated by the military-led regime.”

That’s also an important part of the story. To its credit, the Egyptian military played a key role in persuading Mubarak to cede power, and in preventing Egypt from careening into chaos. The Egyptian military is now trying to serve as something of a referee/power broker/king-maker. Up until this crisis, Washington recognized that while having the Egyptian military in charge is not ideal, it may be necessary to hold the political pieces together in Egypt. But if this is how the “responsible” parties in post-Mubarak Egypt are going to treat Americans, then it’s time to reevaluate everything about this interests-based relationship. Hopefully, Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey is conveying that very message in his talks in Cairo...

Performing a Google News search on this topic will provide you with stories from Commentary, FrontPage, AllAfrica, The Foundry (the Heritage Foundation's blog), Tablet (a Jewish news magazine), IOL News (South Africa), and even the New Republic.

There are no recent stories from The New York Times. Nothing from The Washington Post. Nothing from ABC News. Or NBC. Or MSNBC. Or CBS.

And what does David Gregory on Meet the Press want to discuss with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan?

Not the "Jimmy Carter, Part Deux" hostage crisis.

Not the disastrous spike in gas prices thanks to Obama's policies of shutting off access to America's vast natural treasure trove of energy.

Not the deficit disaster awaiting America.

No, the pencil-necked liberal hack wants to talk about... contraception.

This pathetic legacy media can't vanish into bankruptcy fast enough.