About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

AFRICAN-AMERICANS SHOULD BE PRO-LIFE

Friday, November 20, 2009

I moved to South Florida in the late fifties, and was witness to the massive invasion of Cubans that were fleeing from the Communist Castro oppressive take over of Cuba. The thousands of young men and women arrived here with nothing but the clothes on their backs, and were desperate to find work, any kind of work to keep from starving. Many had relatives who had he foresight to leave Cuba before Castro took over, and they provided many with shelter, but many were put in camps for refugees under the massive bridge in downtown Miami. At the time the wave of Cuban immigrants hit South Florida. The bellhop, waiters, parking attendants and all service personnel were African-Americans. But the Cubans were willing to work for less money, and gradually they took most of the Hotel jobs.

Fast forward to the 1980s and the Mexicans seeking work and a better way of life started the illegal crossing of the borders of California, Arizona and Texas. At first it was a trickle but soon became a wave that has grown to and estimated 12 million illegals that successfully crossed the border into the USA! These mexicans also were willing to work for less than Americans in the fields and the many businesses that did not require particular skills.

What has this got to do with the pro-life issue? Well, many Blacks soon became a minority group that accepted abortion as a way to keep from having children despite their pastors protestations that abortion was wrong. Although many joined White people who embraced the concept of being a welfare mother who lived off the State and Federal government subsides. AS a result Hispanics outnumber blacks as the largest minority group in the USA for the first time since the government began counting the nation’s population more than two centuries ago. The U.S. Census Bureau’s anouncement confirmed what many have treated as fact for some time. Even so, it’s a symbolic milestone for a nation whose history has been dominated by black-white racial dynamics. Increased racial and ethnic diversity is adding a new dimension to everything from product marketing to political campaigning. There are 38.8 million Hispanics in the USA, according to the latest Census Bureau estimates released Wednesday. The figures, as of July 1, show a 9.8% increase since the Census was taken in April 2000. The U.S. population grew 2.5% to 288.4 million in the same period. Hispanics accounted for half of the national increase. Non-Hispanic blacks, including people who say they’re black and another race, grew at a much slower rate than Hispanics, up 3.1%, to 36.6 million. Hispanics make up 13% of the nation’s population. The number of Asians also surged. They’re up 9% to 13.1 million. The population gains by Hispanics reflect a society that has already embraced Spanish TV and election ballots in Spanish.

The Hispanic population is soaring because of immigration and higher birth rates. The above illustrates the clout that Hispanics have in Washington. Including the drive for amnesty! While the Hispanics have grown in numbers the Blacks have joined the genocide that is abortion. The following is a report printed in CNSNews.com today by a Black female gynecologist, “(CNSNews.com) – Abortion kills more black Americans than the seven leading causes of death combined, according to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 2005, the latest year for which the abortion numbers are available. Abortion killed at least 203,991 blacks in the 36 states and two cities (New York City and the District of Columbia) that reported abortions by race in 2005, according to the CDC. During that same year, according to the CDC, a total of 198,385 blacks nationwide died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, accidents, diabetes, homicide, and chronic lower respiratory diseases combined. These were the seven leading causes of death for black Americans that year. A total of 49 jurisdictions reported their abortion numbers for 2005 to the CDC. These included all 50 states–except California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire–and New York City and the District of Columbia. Of these 49 jurisdiction, only 36 states plus New York City and the District of Columbia reported the number of abortions by race. Of these 36 states, Georgia reported the largest number of abortions–18,325–among African-Americans. Idaho and Montana reported the fewest, 16 and 17 respectively. Among the large states not reporting abortions by race–and thus where the number of blacks killed by abortions is not included in the national total of 203,991–are California, Florida, Illinois and the rest of New York state outside of New York City. According to the CDC, the total of 203,991 blacks killed by abortion in 2005 also does not include those aborted by “private physicians’ procedures.”

Every year since 1969, the CDC has amassed abortion data by state or area of occurrence, requesting information each year from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City. The CDC attempts to collect data on abortions by the age, race and marital status of the women who undergo them as well as the type of abortion procedure. In 2005, a total of 820,151 legal abortions were performed in the 49 jurisdiction that reported abortions to the CDC, according to the “Abortion Surveillance” report, which is published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, or MMWR, for Nov. 28, 2008. (Scroll up to top of report) The report states, “Approximately 1 in 5 U.S. pregnancies have ended in abortion,” and also notes some limitations on the data: “The overall number, ratio, and rate of abortions are conservative estimates; the total numbers of legal induced abortions provided by central health agencies and reported to the CDC for 2005 were probably lower than the numbers actually performed.” The report states that there were 203,991 blacks killed by abortion, which comprises 35.5 percent of all abortions reported for that year.

Rev. Clenard H. Childress, Jr., founder of BlackGenocide.org, told CNSNews.com that according to numbers gleaned from statistics provided by the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion group, 1,784 blacks are aborted each day. Also, he notes on his Web site that three out of five African-American women will obtain an abortion. Childress said the information and sources on his Web site have never been challenged by abortion-access supporters. “This is because they can see that themselves, and they know them probably to be far worse than we’re reporting. The facts come from the pro-abort/pro-choice community,” he said. “You want to go to a reliable source where people can’t dismiss what you’re saying,” Childress said. “Yet the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Urban League, and the National Action Committee of Al Sharpton fail abysmally to report not only the decimation but the health ramifications which are questionably very pertinent and provable,” said Childress. “It would be one thing if we were talking about something hypothetically, but these are actual empirical proofs. … We simply want the health issues of abortion to be discussed,” Childress added. Time for Blacks to decide that Right to Life is good for political clout if not just for the moral travesty that abortion is to the most unprotected children in the USA. A child in the mother’s womb!
 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

INVESTIGATING UNLAWFUL ACTS SHOULD BE BI-PARTISAN

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

 





On June 19,2009 “The White House fired Gerald Walpin. The firing apparently stemmed from Walpin’s investigation of a non-profit group, St. HOPE Academy, run by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California (and a big Obama supporter).
Walpin found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car,” the AP reports. In April, the U.S. attorney declined to file any criminal charges in the matter and criticized Walpin’s investigation. But at the same time Johnson and St. HOPE agreed to repay about half of the $850,000 it had received from AmeriCorps.

Bottom line: The AmeriCorps IG accused a prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money.The prominent Obama supporter had to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money. Obama fired AmeriCorps IG, Walpin.
The Congress passed a law to protect Independent Prosecutors from just this kind of underhanded firing. The IIRC bill required that the President would have to notify Congress in writing 30 days prior to any action being taken. Given the reports that Teh One’s staff reportedly tried to force him to resign within the hour or be fired, it appears that they do not pay attention to their own legislation, or, conveniently ignore it.Either way Obama and his henchmen violated the law by firing Inspector General Walpin!

This unlawful act by the Obama administration was a violation of a law passed by the Congress, and as such it should be an affront to all members of Congress regardless of party affiliation. But as predicted it is ignored by the Democrats and some Republicans who support Obama.
As a result, key Republicans in both the House and the Senate are accusing the White House of giving “incomplete and misleading” information to investigators probing the president’s abrupt firing of AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin. In return, the White House is hinting that documents concerning its actions in the Walpin affair may be protected by executive privilege.

Both developments are part of an escalating conflict between GOP lawmakers and the Obama administration. Republicans are deeply skeptical of the White House explanation for the June 10 firing of Walpin, a tough investigator who had been probing misuse of AmeriCorps money by Sacramento, Calif., mayor — and prominent Obama supporter — Kevin Johnson. And the administration seems determined to conceal its dealings with AmeriCorps and the organization that oversees it, the Corporation for National and Community Service.

Walpin was dismissed without warning on June 10, when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform. Eisen told Walpin he had one hour either to resign or be fired — an apparent violation of a law giving special job protections to inspectors general. When Walpin refused to quit, he was terminated.

After lawmakers demanded an explanation, the White House said Walpin had been “confused, disoriented [and] unable to answer questions” at a May 20 meeting with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service. The Johnson case was discussed at that meeting, with Walpin harshly criticizing board members for their support of a decision to let Johnson off easy.

There’s no question that members of the board, both Democrat and Republican, were unhappy with Walpin’s criticism of them. They agreed that Alan Solomont, the Democratic fundraiser appointed by President Barack Obama as chairman of the board, should tell the White House what had happened.

But now, at least three board members have told congressional investigators they did not specifically recommend that the administration fire Walpin. Instead, they simply wanted the chairman to express their concerns.

The White House claims it investigated the matter; Eisen told House and Senate aides that officials did an “extensive review” of complaints about Walpin’s performance before deciding to fire him. But there are serious doubts as to whether the White House did, in fact, conduct a serious investigation before getting rid of Walpin.

The three board members have told Congress that the White House did not contact them during the review. (One was told about Walpin’s firing at about the time it happened, and the other two were contacted days later.) No one from the White House contacted Walpin himself, or his top assistant, as part of the review.

Republican aides want to step up the pressure on the firing, because, as one senior committee aide put it: "What's at stake isn't just one man's job: it's how $6 billion in taxpayer money is going to be used by this Administration on an agency with no independent oversight." The six billion was given to the CNCS this year by Obama. This is tax payers money being used to promote Obama special interest plans!

The aide is referring to the Corporation for National and Community Service's primary entity, AmeriCorps, set up in the 1990s by the Clinton Administration to increase public service among young people -- mostly college grads and young professionals -- largely via grant-making to a network of state and local community nonprofit groups.

"Just how AmeriCorps is going to be used by the Obama Administration -- and what steps the administration has taken to ensure that it can do with AmeriCorps what it wants -- is at the heart of our concern," says the GOP House staffer. "We think that the removal of Walpin was part of that agenda." Source:American Spectator

The resources allocated to CNCS amount to more that $6 billion in funds, and those plans include turning AmeriCorps into a supersized, taxpayer-funded ACORN-like organization, focused on the Obama Administration's policy agenda, including health care reform, targeted stimulus spending, and possible work on the upcoming U.S. census in 2010.
Meanwhile, a White House source says the White House is trying to find out if dispersal of parts of the $6 billion budget for CNCS can be sped up under a Presidential request that the funds be considered part of the economic stimulus program. Stimulus?? Sounds more like war chest funds for Obama!!

In the past, AmeriCorps volunteers lobbied and organized groups against the "three strikes" rule in California, and had plans in place to identify groups to support a second attempt at health care reform after Hillarycare went down in flames. Some AmeriCorps resources have gone to assist ACORN projects around the country, including anti-Republican demonstrations in state capitals and in Washington, D.C.
And you can be sure this group will have an affect on the 2010 and 2012 elections to the detriment of fair and honest election results.
And if you doubt my words. I have enclosed a quote from the head of one of ACORNs affiliates that describes the pupose of ACORN and it's "sinister" organizations very well.
"SOCIAL POLICY asks what is to be done to secure basic structural changes in American society. Its pages will provide a meeting ground — and battleground — where ideas, tactics and strategies for radical reconstruction of American institutions can be expressed and exchanged, tested and debated, expanded and deepened.”
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE DEMOCRAT ARGUMENT IS A NON-STARTER

Thursday, September 04, 2008


I do not usually watch political conventions, because of the hot air and hyperbole that are associated with this type event.
But I had to watch last nights speech by Vice-President designate, Governor Palin.And I was both surprised and disgusted by what I saw.

The speech by Gov. Plain was a stem winder,it reminded me of the speeches we heard from the late great President Reagan. She took no prisoners, said what she thought of Obama and his minions with style and substance.
Then the Left waded into the mud!!
I was watching the MSNBC feed to our local cable system, and the claws were bared by all who commented on the speech. Every last one admitted she spoke well, but they all uniformly took the position that she ignored the issues of the economy and health care.They slyly avoided talking about National defense and the threat of terrorism!

This was the designated topic to attack both Palin and the Republicans. The "announcers" made a big deal out of the fact that both Obama and Biden had talked about the poor economy and promised Universal Heal Care, but I have yet to hear a solution from either man.
The problem is, the two do not necessarily go together. I am no economist, but simple arithmetic tells me that if you spend billions giving people "Quality" free medical care without raising taxes drastically, you will put an even greater strain on the economy.
The economy is not doing so bad after all. Most of the "EU" would love to have economic growth of 3.3%( that is from April l08 to June 08), as we do! Yes, their are lost jobs, but employment is still lower than it's high in 2002 when we had 457,000 out of work. The present number does need to be reduced by the next Administration, but you cannot help people to get to work if you raise taxes on the employers. The result in increased taxation is layoffs!! Even President Kennedy knew that, so he slashed taxes and improved government income by increasing productivity!

WE must all remember that the tax and spend Democrats want us to elect an empty suit who has no executive experience, but advocates increased taxation on those who make money so he can give it to those who don't! Lenin promised the peasants he would give them all that the landowner had, but all they got was hunger, death and loss of their religion. Obama is no Lenin, but he is on the road to dialectic collectivism I am sure!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

REID ACTS AS THOUGH HE REPRESENTS OPEC!

SENATOR REID IS NO "CHICKEN", HE IS A JUDAS





When next you fill your car, an it costs from 60 to 70 dollars, just remember that you are being betrayed by the Democrat Congress led by the modern day eqivalent of Judas, Senator Harry Reid.

You don't have to be an economist to understand the impact of supply and demand to understand the affect that passing a bill in Congress that would allow drilling off shore and in ANWAR, would have on the psyche of the Arab oil cartel.

Currently they have a grip on our collective necks that is sucking the breath of our economy out of America. Because of the dependence on a diminishing supply of crude oil in the Arab countries, and an increasing demand occurring in so called "developing" countries like China, India and Brazil the speculators and hedge funds have been able to bid up the price of oil to it's present punitive levels.

This makes the Arabs happy, because they are reaping a harvest of wealth from the high price, and the neo-communist Ecology zealots are happy because their dream of destroying our economy is working!
Doubt me, and check the cost of food products, and everything else from your utilities bill to the cost of propane gas to use in your back yard barbecue.

The Arabs, would be given a startling wake-up call, if Congress passed a bill allowing unlimited exploration and drilling for oil here at home. They would anticipate that in five years the flow of oil from our own oil wells would reduce their strangle hold on us to zero, and would begin pumping more oil to take advantage of the high prices while they last.
Venezuela would soon follow suit, as would all other oil producing countries, and the price would plummet! Speculation would dry up and the arbitragers would have to find another commodity to exploit!

Manu Raju,of The Hill wrote the following story for The New Media Journal that explains why I call Senator Reid a "Judas". He is selling out Americans for his "thirty pieces of silver"from the Ecology zealots!

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said Monday that he would not allow a vote on an amendment giving states new authority to seek oil off their coasts when he brings a Democratic energy bill to the floor later this month.

In a sign of escalating tensions, one senior GOP senator called Reid a “chicken” for deciding not to allow amendments on energy production, prompting a Reid spokesman to say that “name calling won't lower the price of oil and gasoline.” Reid criticized President Bush’s announcement earlier in the day to rescind a longstanding executive order banning offshore oil drilling, saying it was a gift to the oil companies that are not exploring for oil in 68 millions of acres available to them.

Republicans are now pressuring Democrats to rescind a congressional moratorium prohibiting the practices and give states the option to decide whether to allow drilling off their coasts. However, Senate Democrats rejected those calls on Monday. “We want oil and gas companies to drill on the leases they’ve been given,” Reid said. He added that oil companies should report to Congress their activities on their leased land and said Congress will invest in renewable energy by pushing through a stalled package of expiring tax incentives".

Democrats blame market speculators on oil industry futures for playing a role in propping up energy prices, and are drafting a bill targeting the practice, which will be unveiled Wednesday. But if they just passed a bill authorizing drilling in ANWAR and OFF Shore, they speculators would be out of business in very short order.

"When the Senate votes on that bill, as soon as this month, Reid said he would not allow amendments dealing with oil drilling, which the Republicans will almost certainly seek...Republicans support targeting speculators as well, but have called for a broader energy package that would also boost domestic production"...Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ARE YOU THE PIGEON IN THIS GAME OF POLITICS?

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadis

As I have written before, Obama changes positions more than a Chameleon changes color depending on it's environment. Apparently, the change he was calling foreign his campaign slogan, was not for Washington politics, but for his primary campaign positions. Abortion, gun control, capital punishment, FISA laws, the status of Jerusalem, faith-based federal programs, public financing of his campaign, welfare, NAFTA and free trade, and his commitment to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity Church all have fallen to reconsideration, rephrasing, changed rhetorical modulation, and other semantic miracles. source : Tony Blankley

As a conservative, of course, I like all his changed views except for the fact that I believe he is insincere. and doesn't believe his current statements of principle any more than he believed his previous positions he used in the primary.

H.L. Mencken defined a demagogue as “one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." It is not surprising that the youth is particularly enchanted by the senator from Illinois. Being young, they are inexperienced in the ways of the world, and subject to flights of fantasy and promises of better times! Obama and his handlers know just the right formula to spin what ever audience he is speaking to, but only a fool would believe a man who means what he says could change positions and policies as often as he changes his underwear!

But as Tony Blankley said in the Patriot Post; " When you are invited to a new poker game and look around the table for the pigeon but can't spot him, you're the pigeon".Our we the pigeon in Obama's political shell game?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

UNION HELPS OBAMA SLIDE AROUND ELECTION LAWS

Thursday, July 10, 2008

IS SEIU TRYING TO BUY THE OVAL OFFICE?




This is one of the most important presidential elections workers have faced. Families are struggling, we’re fighting two wars, and a majority of Americans are now worried that their children will be worse off than they are".source SEIU home page


The election laws require that so-called "independent expenditures" by political committees be limited to communications, such as the ubiquitous TV spots and newspaper ads to which we have all become accustomed, but SEIU's PACs have paid for such campaign essentials as door-to-door canvassing for Obama, voter identification and registration, and even bus rental and food for pro-Obama rallies.


A number of the expenditures listed in their report to the Elections Commission, show such reimbursement of SEIU employees' per Diem expenses or food for an Election Day rally, can qualify as "communication" by only the most Clintonian parsing of terms. Instead, they look like the nuts and bolts of running a campaignOne union with a long time connection with Obama, and 2 million members,is attempting to buy the presidential election this November. The Service Employees International Union was solicited by Obama to help his election campaign, and they jumped in with both feetas this quote from2/15/08 by Jennifer Farmer of SEIU illustrates!

“The outcome of this election will decide whether we finally achieve quality, affordable healthcare for everyone, whether we have economic fairness, whether we bring our sons and daughters home from Iraq, and whether workers in America finally have the freedom to form unions without intimidation” said Dave Regan, President, SEIU District 1199. “We intend to mobilize our members in an unprecedented way in support of Senator Barack Obama,” Regan concluded.

SEIU outlined the key reasons for the Obama endorsement:



The SEIU announced on June 24th that they plan "a budget of $85 million for this election, targeting swing states for Obama's presidential campaign" and other candidates. In addition, SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger said, "More than 100,000 SEIU members will be volunteering their time to ... elect Barrack Obama as our next president." (Which begs the question if the "volunteers' salaries and per Diem's will also be reimbursed.)source: American Thinker


As if to intentionally add new heights to political hypocrisy, the announcement followed by mere days Obama's pronouncement that the Democratic National Committee "won't take another dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. They do not fund my campaign. They will not fund our party".
The truth apparently is a stranger to Obama and his campaign as this quote attests.
The story also raises to new levels Obama's hypocrisy about PAC money, since he is accused of doling out just such donations in exchange for endorsements". source: Washington Post


Obama apparently learned a lesson from the mistakes of the Kerry campaign. By opting out of accepting cash donations directly from PACs. He became the first major party candidate to opt out of federal funding and the restrictions that come with it -- Obama steered the committees who support him, and whose support he even "begged" for, down a path which allows limitless spending on his behalf!

And to rub salt in the wounds of the Republican party, the media elite goes after Vets for Freedom for making a TV buy for John McCain,but they're giving Barack Obama a free ride as he surfs a wave of PAC money to the Democratic nomination, a wave that, if anything, is nearing tsunami proportions despite his boasts (aka: lies) that he doesn't accept money from Pacs.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DO WE WANT OIL OR SHOULD WE LET CHINA TAKE IT ALL?

Friday, June 20, 2008

DRILL NOW OR CHINA WILL!




It is time for all Americans to say no thanks to the Arabs. For decades the USA has relied on tankers to transport thousands of gallon of crude oil, and sometimes even refined gasoline from places like Iran and Saudi Arabia. The huge tankers are bigger than battleships, and they dock in major port cities to offload their cargoes. There has not been a major oil spill since 1969, when the Valdez ran aground because the skipper was allegedly intoxicated and asleep!

Geologists that specialize in estimates of potential oil resources, have stated that we have almost three times the amount of untapped oil in the offshore fields below the Gulf Of Mexico. Ecologists claim that drilling will damage sea life, and the hurricanes will break down the oil rigs causing catastrophic oil spills.

If hurricane Katrina only damaged some pipe line leading to the refineries in Louisiana, and did not cause any significant damage to the oil rigs themselves. This become a specious argument!
The claim that drilling for oil will damage our beaches, I live in Florida, is ridiculous. Try to find a beach that is not concreted over with condominiums. There is less and less available public beach available, and the deadly red tide that occurs periodically in the gulf causes the death of hundreds of sea animals and fish.
Forget about the ecology arguments. They would be happy if we had to all ride bicycles!

Our Governor, Charles Crist, has called for a repeal of the moratorium against off shore drilling, and he is supported by 75% of those who live here!
The issue is mute anyway, as Communist China is NOW exploring off the shores of the Gulf states to locate oil. When they do, they will start extracting oil for their oil hungry growing economy. While we listen to fools like Senator Reid who had this to say about this issue.
"We cannot drill our way out of this problem," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. "The math is simple: America has just 3 percent of the world's oil reserves, but Americans use a quarter of its oil. And the Energy Information Administration says that even if we do open the coasts to oil drilling, prices wouldn't drop until 2030." And to think that this idiot heads the Senate is mind boggling! His figures and statistics are either lies or stupidity!

Experts say that if we drill now we could be independent of the Arabs and Venezuela in two years. Not because we will have the oil to fuel our economy, but because once the Arbitragers and mega-wealthy speculators learn that we are drilling their interest will wane and they will move on to another commodity. The price will drop rapidly, and in five to ten years we could be like Russia is now. An oil GIANT!

We should also start drilling in ANWAR immediately. When we began the Alaskan pipe line the ecology commies cried we would destroy wildlife, but in the decades since the pipeline became operational that fear has not materialise either!

WE are talking about opening 2,000 acres of 20 million acres in the North Tundra. This is less than .01% of the total land mass available to Caribou and polar bears. This area could provide 10 billion barrels of crude oil!

Leftists like the anointed Barrack Obama, insult the American public intelligence by saying, that drilling would be "A solution based on old ideas". I am here to tell you that there are many old ideas that hold this Republic together. Just a few are: Traditional Americanisms like patriotism, a stong military, the idea that Free Enterprise trumps Darwin Socialism, and Independence is much better than Dependence on some one else!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Two Leftists Used Change For Their Message

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

 


Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.

MORAL RELATIVISM AND SECULARISM ARE THE POISON PEN OF FREEDOM
« previous entry | next entry »
Jun. 9th, 2008 | 05:56 pm

TODAY'S LEFT IS NOTHING MORE OR LESS THAN A CONTINUATION OF THE MARXIST DOCTRINE OF THE 19TH CENTURY.
Karl Marx was an amoral relativist and secular humanist, who was the designer and indirect accomplice in the demise of what we call "common sense".
He was the "father of the ba***rd children of the twisted ideologies of multi-cultural ism with the phony emphasis on "diversity".
Most of our public school teachers, at all levels, are doctrinaire leftists, who apparently worship at the feet of Marx. Thus we have college freshman who can only read at an eight grade level. And mathematics has become a lost ability. If you don't believe me, go into a convenience store and buy an item that costs $11.83, and watch the young person struggle with change for a twenty dollar bill!

When Marx died in March of 1883 his tombstone, that was built and paid for by the Communist party in 1953, had the following words carved on it below the heading, "WORKERS OF ALL LANDS UNITE“
"THE PHILOSOPHERS HAVE ONLY INTERPRETED THE WORLD IN VARIOUS WAYS - THE POINT HOWEVER IS TO CHANGE".
Where have you heard the word "CHANGE" used lately?

It is strange that so many Jews in America appear to be followers of,if not Marx himself, at least the basic principals of humanism and secularism.

In his paper ON THE JEWISH QUESTION, he wrote, "let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the real emancipation of our time".
Sounds a lot like the mentor and Pastor of the Democrat Presidential nominee, Reverend Wright!

"We need to take faith seriously not simply to block the religious right but to engage all persons of faith in the larger project of American renewal". So says Obama in his "Audacity of Hope" book, and it sounds strangely similar to a quote of Marx. "Religion is the opiate of the people".
Karl Marx seemed to regard religion as one of the toughest roadblocks to mounting and sustaining a proper revolution by the proletariat. That the masses would continue to stubbornly cling to their religions, placing their hope in God rather than man, was evidently one the more disturbing aspects of his quest for a Communist society.source:Wikapedia

This sounds strangely similar to the comments OF OBAMA about people IN SMALL TOWN AMERICA where residents “cling to guns and religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them".

Should freedom loving Americans take a chance on a man who acts and sounds like the modern day equivalent of Karl Marx?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE UNITED NATIONS INVESTIGATING RACISM IN THE USA?

Saturday, May 24, 2008





As Americans contemplate electing a mixed-race man for president, race is becoming an explosive issue. And taking this opportunity to stir the simmering pot of racial division is none other than The United Nations.
Jamil Dakwar, director of the ACLU Human Rights Program, said: “The visit of the special rapporteur is a critical opportunity to shed light on the pervasive and systemic problem of racism and discrimination in the United States.
In this election year, the eyes of the world will be turned toward America and its long-standing promise to end racial and ethnic inequalities.”
When both the Democratic candidate, and his wife, are graduates of Harvard law school. It would seem racial bias has been effectively neutralized by affirmative action in the USA!


A UN representative( Dr. Diene, a Muslim lawyer from Senegal) arrived Monday for a three-week visit to eight American cities—from New York to L.A., Chicago to New Orleans—at Washington’s unenthusiastic invitation. His mission “to gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.” Islamaphobia will be one of the main priorities of his investigation.
That’s right. As Arabs enslave and slaughter blacks in Sudan, as violent anti-Semitism chokes the Middle East—this is how the United Nations Human Rights Council (unhrc) chooses to allocate its resources: by criticizing the freest and most universally prosperous integrated society on Earth.
Interesting timing. The racial climate in the U.S. at this moment can be described as charged, and presidential power is in play. Could it be that the UN is planning to intervene in United States politics? It is not the first time that the UN has investigated the USA while ignoring racial hot spots like Dafur!


As Arabs enslave and slaughter blacks in Sudan, as violent anti-Semitism chokes the Middle East—this is how the United Nations Human Rights Council (unhrc) chooses to allocate its resources: by criticizing the most free and most universally prosperous integrated society on Earth!

discrimination in the United States.” Yes, that’s exactly what it will do, whether true or not—and whether it will help a problem or intensify it.


Though the unhrc report on U.S. racism won’t be released until spring of 2009, we can already predict its outcome. Just consider the source.
The unhrc is the United Nations at its hypocritical best. Similar to the Commission on Human Rights that it replaced in 2006, the unhrc is filled with human rights abusers in high-profile positions who use it as a cloak for their own abuses. Among its current 47 members are human-rights hypocrites like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Cuba, China and Russia; the ngo Freedom House rates nearly a third of them “not free.”


The UN investigator has been charged to to search out “contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” specifically “any form of discrimination against blacks, Arabs and Muslims, xenophobia, negrophobia, anti-Semitism and related intolerance ….” Yes, supposedly he’s looking for anti-Semitism, but those searches invariably come up empty. Source: James Reine, UN correspondent.


Is it not strange that this investigation takes place in the middle of a Presidential campaign when the Democrat front runner has been accused of spending twenty years attending a church led by a pastor who is a racist Black activist?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE REAL VILLANS IN TODAYS PRICE OF OIL

Friday, May 23, 2008




IN 1988 A $150 million lawsuit was brought to court against the Hunt brothers of Dallas in Manhattan, with a lawyer representing the leading Peruvian mineral company accusing the Hunts of engaging in an elaborate scheme in 1979 and 1980 to manipulate silver prices.

In addition to the Hunts, the suit named as co-conspirators two Saudi Arabian sheiks - Ali bin-Mussallam and Mohammad Aboud al-Amoudi -as well as Mahmoud Fustok, a Saudi businessman; Naji Nahas, a Lebanese citizen who lives in Brazil, and the International Metals Investment Company, a Bermuda partnership.

From 1973 to 1979 the Hunt brothers managed to capture enough silver futures( about half of the worlds silver) to drive the price from $1.95 per ounce to $54.00 an ounce!

After the Hunts crashed and burned and were sent to jail for conspiring to manipulate the silver market. Some ultra-wealthy investors such as Warren Buffett, George Soros (through Apex Silver) and Bill Gates (through Pan American Silver) took on significant silver positions. I hardly think that any of these well-known investors were like the Hunt brothers, but more likely these masters of wealth saw a profitable trade in having major positions in silver where others didn't.


That was a major scandal that the Federal government discovered involving manipulation of a commodity that was in a finite supply.
Now we have the potential for another commodities scandal. This time the culprits are Arbitragers and big commodity players, I believe.


We now have a similar situation, to 1988, that our government should look at, but probably will not. Prices for crude peaked above $135 a barrel Thursday in electronic trading on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Globex platform. See Futures Movers. Record prices over the past several months have raised questions over manipulation of the market.
A U.S. Senate panel listened to testimony on May 20 that said financial speculation by institutional investors and hedge funds in the commodity markets are contributing to energy and food inflation.
See full story.
"The regulatory environment is becoming so undesirable to foreign and domestic funds that they have no choice but to go offshore," said Kevin Kerr, president of Kerr Trading International and editor of MarketWatch's Global Resources Trader.
Speculative activity in commodity markets has grown "enormously" over the past several years, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said in a news release. source: Market Watch

They pointed out that in five years, from 2003 to 2008, investment in the index funds tied to commodities has grown by 20-fold -- to $260 billion from $13 billion.
The growth offers "justifiable concerns that speculative demand, divorced from the market realities, is driving food and energy price inflation and causing human suffering," HSGAC said.


My belief is that the high price of oil is just what the Socialist Democrats want. They need an issue to hammer home in the months preceding the November Presidential election. What better than the high cost of food and fuel! They can blame the Republicans for their connection to "big-oil" even though many Senators and Congressional Democrats also have oil stocks and accept campaign funds from the oil companies and their producers. These people play both sides of the street! And are the same players, Soros and Buffett, that support the candidacy of Obama, back at their old game of manipulation?

Before we blame "Big Oil", I think we need to look at who is manipulating the crude oil futures! And we need to look at ourselves for letting a special interest group of Ecologist keep us from extracting crude oil from known sources here at home which could make us independent of OPEC!


With a controversial candidate like Obama, and all the Baggage he carries with him. The Democrats would like nothing better than for the voting public to ignore the fact that he may be a apostate Muslim, or a closet Muslim and a total Socialist and racist candidate.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BARRACK YOU ARE NOT JOHN KENNEDY OR RONALD REAGAN!

Wednesday | May 21, 2008


During a speech Obama gave today in Billings, Montana he took a swipe at John McCain, who had said yesterday that Obama showed recklessness and inexperience, because he said he would talk to Iran's president with no preconditions.



Obama said the threat from Iran had grown as a result of the US war in Iraq. "Iran is the biggest single beneficiary of a war in Iraq that should have never been authorized and should have never been waged,"(I guess he forgot that the war got rid of the tyrant Saddam Hussein) he said. "And John McCain wants to double down that failed policy."
If McCain is elected, Obama said, "We'll keep talking tough in Washington, while countries like Iran ignore our tough talk." ( and they won't ignore a man born of a Muslim father?)

The alternative, Obama said, is to follow the example of Presidents John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, who negotiated with the Soviet Union. Obama called for "tough, disciplined and direct diplomacy."
"That's what Kennedy did; that's what Reagan did," he said.



Obama either knows nothing about history, or he chooses like all other liberals, to write his own version. History shows that it was not talk, but the Naval blockade that stopped the Cuban missile crisis during the Kennedy administration. And during the Cold War the build up of the Strategic Air Command, and building a ring of missiles under the sea in submarines around Russia, that defeated the Russian Bear, not talk!


"President Ronald Reagan proposed a new missile defense system, the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), dubbed "Star Wars". In an interview with the Soviet press, Reagan proposed eliminating nuclear weapons before deploying the missile shield; in other reports he suggested sharing the Star Wars technology with the Soviets. Although both of these suggestions were later repudiated, they demonstrate Reagan’s hope that a missile shield would render nuclear weapons obsolete".His talk was accompanied by "conditions". Only a political hack who is uninformed would propose a talk with no "Quid pro Quo"..
source: Wikapedia



Uploaded Images



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

SOCIAL ENGINERS TAMPER WITH JUDICAL SYSTEM

THE DOWNSIDE OF SOCIALISM




The British have had their own form of Socialism since Margaret Thatcher was defeated by the socialists in 1990.For over 50 years the French,Germans and most of Europe have their own forms of socialism or neo-communism as found in Italy.

Now we are faced with two Democrats that propose to take our Republic further down the road to Godless socialism, and I think it appropriate to illustrate a situation that just developed in England.


"Judges will have their freedom to set jail terms restricted and instead will be required to follow a sentencing “grid” drawn up by an independent commission, according to Government proposals. The Ministry of Justice last night conceded that the move could cut the number of short prison terms imposed and lead to more criminals being given community sentences".


The plans, which were revealed in the draft Queen’s Speech published this week, are designed to take the pressure off the overcrowded prison system. Under the scheme, judges would enter data, including information about prison resources, into a matrix which would then produce upper and lower sentences. source: News Telegraph


This is being done, because there are 82,000 people in the jails of England and Wales, and the socialist, wannabe communists, believe that too much money is being diverted from the "welfare state" to the prison system. Thus more criminals will be set free to do "community service"and the public beware!They already have problem with radical Muslim riots on the streets. Now they will have criminals freed to roam the streets as well!


This is just one more move to remove another capitalistic system from the British society, and replace it with a scheme that is designed for the "common good". To understand where the British, French and Germans are today, and where people like Obama and Hillary plan to take the USA. It is important to consider the master plan of the British Communist party as relates to the current British socialism.


The following is an excerpt from the Communist Party of Britain's "The Road To Socialism".

"Socialism will be merely the first, lower stage of communist society. The state would still be needed—not only to help plan production—but to defend the socialist system against internal and external attack.
But by continuously planning and expanding production to meet everyone’s material needs, liberating humanity from exploitation and want, socialism will lay the basis for a second, higher stage.
As the threat from capitalism recedes nationally and internationally, the socialist state begins to wither away, except for some technical and administrative functions; humanity can finally create a world free from all forms of oppression, based on common ownership of the means of production, working them co-operatively and ecologically to produce abundance for all.
The guiding principle of full communism will be: “
from each according to their potential—to each according to their need.”
A new morality will characterise the social relations between people: the egotistical individualism of capitalism will be replaced by collective care and concern for every individual and for the full, all-round development of the human personality. If there is working class unity in Britain, and international solidarity with all the other major forces in the world fighting for progress and socialism, then we can defeat the moribund system of state-monopoly capitalism in Britain.
This will contribute to the liberation of working people everywhere. The socialist society for which Communists are fighting in Britain will have essential features in common with other socialist societies—but it will be constructed by the peoples of Britain, on the basis of our democratic and revolutionary heritage".


This sounds eerily like "It Takes a Village", and "We will have to take from the haves to give to the have nots". In the coming election you will have a choice between one of two affirmative action, political correct Socialist candidates --- Hillary or Obama --- and a GOP Capitalist candidate who made it the hard way, via five years in the "Hanoi Hilton". McCain is bound to be scapegoated for being white and over 50. It will not be subtle, and it is bound to happen because too many people make their living, or depend upon the Democrat form of socialism, for their "daily bread". Like the entire Democrat Party.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DEMOCRATS WILL NOT HEAR GOOD NEWS

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

THE DEMOCATS BARE THEIR CLAWS




Even as the London Times, not an admirer of President Bush, headlines the fact the The leader of the Madi army is willing to lay down the arms of his 60,000 man militia. The "shecat' Speaker of the house and the two Democratic aspirants to the Oval Office show their animus toward the Iraq war in general and the Generals leading the fight. The line in the sand has been drawn. The Democrats fervently want a withdrawal and a symbolic failure in Iraq, and no amount of good news will dissuade them or their sycophant Media to let up on the attack against our effort in Iraq.


Never the less, I enclose an excerpt from the London Times that I doubt you will find in either the visual or print media.

"Iraq’s largest and most dangerous militia will voluntarily disband if Shia scholars advise its leader to do so, officials said yesterday — a dramatic move that could quell much of the fighting in the war-torn country.
Aides to Hojatoleslam Moqtada al-Sadr said that he would send delegations to Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a moderate religious leader in Najaf, and to senior clerics in Iran to consult on whether he should stand down his 60,000-strong al-Mahdi Army.
The sudden announcement — the first time that the rebellious cleric had offered to disband his forces — came as US and Iraqi troops were poised for a key offensive into his Baghdad stronghold of Sadr City".
A massive American and Iraqi security presence had ringed the area, with police and soldiers guarding every exit with many predicting a final, bloody showdown as popular support drained from al-Mahdi Army"


Speaker Pelosi had the gaul to warn them before General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker have spoken one word to the Congressional Committees. On April 4, Pelosi admonished General David Petraeus not to “put a shine” on developments in Iraq when he and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker testify before Congress this week.

Senator Obama appears to ignore the military success and will question the progress that appears to not have been made in forming a stable government. Obama's advisers said he also intends to focus his statements and questions on the future in Iraq, such as whether the war is making Americans safer, how it has affected the military's ability to respond to threats around the world and whether Iraqis are taking responsibility for their country.


Clinton's spokesman said she expects the committee will question Petraeus and Crocker closely on the lack of political progress in Iraq, the rising influence of Iran in the region and the strain on the military caused by the large numbers of troops serving in Iraq.
Both Democrats have changed their criticism from the lack of military success, including comparison of Iraq to Vietnam, now that the "surge" has produced positive results. They now attack with criticism of the "nation building" efforts in Iraq.


True Patriots, with good heads and good hearts, would cheer the results of the heroic military men and women;s success, and reserve criticism of the fledgling government until a final defeat of the forces of evil, raical Islam, has been ccomplished
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Does Obama Want Carter Endorsement?

His Worst Nightmare!




Not only does Senator Obama have to carry around his neck the heavy weight of his racist Pastor, and his indicted Syrian born friend, Tony Rezko.

Now news comes that the worst President this Country ever had, is supporting Obama!


The "myway" news site has an article today, written by Ben Evans, that details an interview with Carter during which the following is quoted : "Former President Carter left little doubt this week about whom he'd like to see in the White House next year".
Speaking to local reporters Wednesday on a trip to Nigeria, the former Democratic president noted that Barack Obama had won his home state of Georgia and his hometown of Plains.
"My children and their spouses are pro-Obama. My grandchildren are also pro-Obama," he said at a news conference, according to the Nigerian newspaper This Day. "As a super delegate, I would not disclose who I am rooting for, but I leave you to make that guess."


President Carter, forever remembered for 18% interest rates on money, gas lines around the block, and the deposing of an American ally, The Shah of Iran. This led to the take over by the ayatollah Khomeini, who promptly killed over 20,000 pro-Western officials, and you know what he plotted for 9/11/2001!


During Carter's Presidency, the U.S. Embassy in Iran was stormed and 52 Americans taken hostage for 444 days. America's lack of resolve was confirmed in the jihadist mind, so on Nov. 4, 1979, 400 Khomeini followers broke down the door of the embassy in Tehran, seizing the compound and the Americans inside. The hostage takers posed for the cameras next to a poster with a caricature of Carter and the slogan: "America cannot do a damn thing". They were correct for over 400 days!


Carter's anti-Israeli, pro-Plalestinian stance and his coziness with Venezuela's Chavez and former dictator Castro won't add to the vote tally of Jewish and Cuban American votes for Obama.


With the crisis brewing in Iran over their quest for nuclear weapons, and the "saber rattling" of Putin in Russia. The one thing this threatened Free Country doesn't need is a "clone" of Carter.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

All People Have Someone Who Hates Them

NEVER THE TWAIN SHALL MEET









Walter Williams is one of my favorite columnists. He is a close friend of another columnist whom I enjoy reading on a regular basis. Both he and Professor Thomas Sowell are Black College professors of economics who write columns about economics and the state of affairs in the USA. They are frequent guests of television and radio programs for their insightful views about the American scene.

With all the furor about the hate speech of the Reverend Wright, and the speech that followed by Senator Obama, during which he concentrated on the race problems still existing in America. I believe it is appropriate to comment on this situation.

As Mr. Williams says in his March 26, 2008 column for the Patriot Post. "Is Obama Ready For America"?
"At one time black Americans did not have the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.While not every single vestige of racial discrimination has disappeared, Obama and the Rev. Wright are absolutely wrong in suggesting that racial discrimination is anywhere near the major problem confronting a large segment of the black community. The major problems are: family breakdown, illegitimacy, fraudulent education and a high rate of criminality".


If you believed what the main stream media prints and says on TV and radio, you would think only Black people have people who detest them. Not so, New Yorkers and generally North East Coast residents have little "truck" with Southerners and Midwesterners. They are "red necks and hicks". The Muslims hate the Jews and visa verse. Germans fight and argue with "Poles"(aka pollacks) and the Irish Catholics dislike and some even hate the Orange men of Northern Ireland.

During World War II, Japanese Americans were herded into "camps of internemnt", and the Chinese and Blacks were fierce enemies in San Francisco until the civil rights act was passed.


But we only hear about the racism against Blacks from Obama's constituents. Why?

The lynching was stopped years ago, and affirmative action has made it possible for anyone of color to go to college if he/she studies hard, and starting a business has become easier for Blacks via set asides and quotas. The playing field has been leveled, and in so doing many White Americans have been passed over for promotion in all manner of employment. You hear about it and see it in the papers when lawsuits are filed for firemen, policemen and other public employees who they thought were unfairly passed over to satisfy a government imposed quota. Tempers flair in such situations as would be expected, but violence seldom occurs.


Yet we have threats from Black activists that if their "Man" doesn't receive his just due, and is nominated to be the Democrat standard bearer. WE will have riots in the streets reminiscent of the Chicago, Los Angeles and Detroit riots of the past.


I believe this is a product of 40 years of listening to the tirades of people like Reverend Wright, Monique Harden, and Louis Farrakhan and too many other Blacks that exhibit a lethal cocktail of pathological aggression, infantile self-pity and a devastating lack of self-insight. These rabble rousers make their sumptuous living by rabble rousing the men and women of broken homes with little promise for the future, because of lack of education and learned skills.Thus exists a tinder box for anarchy! The Left would love that!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »