Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Sunday, January 31, 2010


This guy Andrew Andrzejewski portrays extreme passion and while I can't whole-heartedly buy the fact that folks of Polish descent, whose ancestors fled Poland for the U.S. to escape socialism, are actually fleeing back to Poland to escape Obama's brand of socialism here, the point is well-taken. But really, isn't Poland in danger because the Obama-led U.S.A. abandoned their anti-missile defense system?

My guess is it's sentiment borne of Lech Walesa's visit to sponsor him. Everyone's entitled to an occasional bout of overreaction based on having a famous ex-leader of a nation sign onto your campaign.

Nonetheless, based on what I've seen so far, this guy would be an excellent choice for folks from Illinois.

The big takeaway here is the notion that conservatism can defeat socialism without letting things get violent.

Adam's website.

h/t to Gateway Pundit


After Obama's State of the Union address on January 27th, Chris Matthews infamously said that he, "forgot (Obama) was black, for an hour". Beck makes the point that Matthews' comments cannot be taken in any other way except that they are racist. Beck then applies the Matthews test to several other examples in an attempt to find a scenario in which it cannot be portrayed as racist. Beck comes up empty but it's great radio.

From the Beck Cam during his radio show..

h/t to Jawa Report


Remember the name Adam Andrzejewski (pronounced And-jee-EV-ski). He could very possibly be the first Governor of Illinois in quite some time who isn't destined for legal trouble. His polish and conservative heritage was spotlighted when former Polish leader Lech Walesa actually showed up in Chicago to endorse him. For those who think Andrzeiewski's name is too difficult to announce, do you need reminded of Blago's full name?

I didn't think so.

Anyway, Big Government interviewed Andrzeiwski on Friday. Here's the video. Fast forward to the 2:45 mark and listen as Andrzejewski says he will be a check on the legislative branch by demanding they open their books. He then calls Obama a liar.

So far, I love this guy! The video is definitely worth the watch.

The race is between Andrzeiewski and the Democrat who filled the vacancy left by Blago, Pat Quinn. As of now, the former trails the latter by 2 percentage points.

h/t to Gateway Pundit


During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama's Truth Squad used similar tactics with college students. Apparently, they're now going after High School students. I guess requiring students to read Saul Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals" would be OK if the intent was to warn them about the consequences of following and evil ideology, teaching them what NOT to do. However, considering that the Alinsky model (Lucifer's model) is what Obama used to ween himself from adolescence, I'd say that's not the goal of this latest offensive by Organizing For America.

Via Atlas Shrugs
Obama is using our public school system to recruit for his Alinsky-inspired private army. Organizing for America is (and I quote) recruiting in our high schools to "build on the movement that elected President Obama by empowering students across the country to help us bring about our agenda" ............of national socialism.

The Ohio High School is Perry Local in Massillon, Ohio.

This is incredible. And evil. Suffer the little children -- enlisted like SS youth. This is no accident. Obama is poisoning our public school system. He acts as if it's his own private breeding farm. Once again academic learning and achievement is hopelessly abandoned, and supplanted by radical leftist activism from the leftwing Alinsky indoctrinators in the perverse public school system.
Corrupting the souls of men is evil. Corrupting the souls of children is the diabolical work of Satanists and atheists. Remember, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer. The upside to this, if there is one, is that the Obama administration could be getting so desperate that they are beginning to overreach in new and despicable ways. Remember, Alinsky said to never stop going on offense. There are some inherent dangers in that strategy. If taken to extreme, it's like going for it on 4th down inside your own 20 yard line in the first half during a tie game. It doesn't make sense.

Also, remember the NEA has Rules for Radicals as suggested reading as well.

h/t to Newsreal


The Book of Eli, starring Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman (JFK), and Mila Kunis (70's show) has one of the most spine tingling endings you'll ever see but more than that, it is a film about the strength of unadulterated Faith in the One true God. It also dabbles in the realm of how the individual can be rendered a vehicle for the Holy Spirit's work.

It is a refreshing change to the Hollywood status quo and if you can overlook the swearing and mildly graphic violence, you won't be disappointed unless you have a problem with Christianity.

Highly recommended and a MUST SEE.

Saturday, January 30, 2010


**ALERT** OBJECTIVITY SIGHTING AT CBS NEWS. Considering the source - CBS' Katie Couric with reporter Jan Crawford - this one is a bit of a shock. CBS appears to be dipping its toe in the water of Lake 'It's OK to criticize Obama', coming down on the side of facts that are unkind to him in this case. Katie plays the role of the passive, unemotional, and objective anchor while Crawford actually states that Obama "overstated" his claim.

I also must make a slight correction. When I originally posted about Alito's reaction to what Obama said about the SCOTUS ruling, I read Alito's lips wrong, saying that he said, "Definitely not true" but after watching this report - another h/t to CBS for enhancing the video of Alito - it's clear he said, "Simply not true".

Watch CBS News Videos Online

h/t to Hot Air


It should be pretty obvious that Lindsey Graham isn't running for re-election until 2014. Even he wouldn't be this dumb if his seat came open this year. There's no way he'd win the primary. Having said that, this RINO is willfully pushing an agenda he KNOWS his constituents don't want.

Even after Climategate - the climate change fraud is being exposed for what it is almost daily and at breakneck speed - and the Osama bin Laden tape, which shows that Lindsey's stance on Cap & Trade mirrors that of America's public enemy #1. Lindsey's reason for wanting to push America closer to brink?

Well, congress needs a win. Courtesy of the National Journal:
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said today that skeptical Republicans and Democrats should throw their support behind climate change legislation not only because it's good for the economy and the environment, but because Congress desperately needs a win under its belt.

"We tried immigration. It's hard. And we failed. We tried Social Security. It's hard. And we failed. We tried health care. It's really hard. And it looks like we're going to have to start over again," Graham somberly told a luncheon audience of energy and climate advocates on the Hill. "On the energy, climate change front, I don't want to add that to the list. There is no reason in my mind that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party can't come together."
Let's illustrate that logic using a football metaphor (it is Super Bowl time). That would be like Team A getting shut out by Team B and because it so desperately wants to put points on the board, Team A intentionally fumbles in its own end zone and stands back to allow Team B to fall on the ball.

Oh, and not only is Lindsey on the same page with Osama in this area, he's also aligning with John Kerry and Climate czar, Carol Browner. Not only that but Graham and John McCain are practically two peas in a pod when it comes to what legislation they're for. If Graham believes this, odds are good that McCain does too, but he won't say it. Why?

Because McCain IS up for re-election this year and he's going to wait until at least after the primary. In fact, if it weren't for the formidable challenger, J.D. Hayworth in the Arizona primary, McCain might even be willing to outwardly express support for Graham right now. My guess is he won't come close to this issue until / if Hayworth is in his rearview mirror. If Hayworth is smart, he will use Cap & Trade - including this recent news about Graham - against McCain between now and the primary vote. Have I mentioned that Sarah Palin is stumping for McCain against conservative Republican J.D. Hayworth?

Shame on Sarah - BIG TIME.

It's pretty safe to say if you want to know what either McCain or Graham is thinking, look at what the other one is DOING. It's quite possible that the political winds will have shifted so significantly by 2014 that Graham may not have to worry. McCain, on the other hand, should be VERY worried this year.

h/t to Free Republic

Friday, January 29, 2010


Senator Judd Gregg (R) of New Hampshire is hardly one of the more conservative members of the Senate. That didn't stop MSNBC's Contessa Brewer and her co-anchor from acting like childish little girls BEFORE ever taking an economics class.

Witness evidence that there are people responsible for presenting news to millions of people, who have NO IDEA where money comes from (Brewer and her sidekick).


h/t to Hot Air Pundit


On one level, it pains me to give Bill Clinton this much credit but it doesn't take long to see that he was a much better politician than the 44th president is. On another level, Obama may actually be better for conservatism than McCain ever could have been as president.

Naked Emperor News does it again with this video, demonstrating why Clinton was a politician and Obama, emotionally, hasn't aged much since birth.

Kinda makes me wonder how different things might be had George Soros put his money on Hillary. Something tells me he's regretting not doing so. Hillary wouldn't have been as outwardly radical despite being an Alinsky disciple as well. Hillary is just as radical but she's also much more politically aware and mature.

If I'd have behaved at age 10 like Obama behaved in the video below, I'd have been spanked and sent to my room without dinner.

Babies ain't got much savvy.


Looks like Hayworth is one step closer to making his run against progressive incumbent John McCain formal. He hasn't announced that he's running but he's officially announced that he will be announcing it soon, with robo-calls.

Via USA Today, here is the text of the Robo-call:
Hi, this is JD Hayworth calling. If you share my opinion that John McCain has admirably served our country but that 28 years in Washington is just too long, then I want you to know that I will soon be announcing my candidacy for the United States Senate.

Arizona's Republicans deserve a choice and an alternative to Senator McCain¹s moderate record on taxes, social issues, the border, and bailing out the banks. I will be a consistent, faithful conservative that you can rely on to put Arizona first. This is going to be a great debate, and I need you. Please get involved by going to
There are so many dynamics to this race, it quite possibly could rival what happened in Massachusetts. Hayworth has Sheriff Joe Arpaio on his side while McCain somehow convinced Sarah Palin to stump for him in the primary, which the Tea Party movement is none too happy about. I have commented on that extensively on both this blog and my radio program. Sarah Palin is making a huge mistake because the ideals she claims to champion are in direct opposition to those of McCain who while she does owe him political favor, it shouldn't be paid back at the expense of that movement.

Hayworth is going to have to withstand the "big spender" label while McCain will have to shake-off that amnesty for illegals history he has.

h/t to Free Republic


Wow! This marks the second time in a week that Comedy Central's Jon Stewart has basically shredded an MSNBC host. In fact, it's two most annoying. Last week, Stewart shamed Keith Olbermann for his attack of Scott Brown. Now he justifiably goes after Chris Matthews for actually saying he forgot Barack Obama "was black for an hour".

Sing it with me..

The wheels on the bus are coming off, coming off, coming off.....

There maybe something wrong with the embed video code so if you're having trouble viewing, click HERE.

via MediaITE


When your nation's most notorious enemy agrees with you on anything, it should cause a moment of self-reflection, especially when that matter of agreement is centered around such a huge issue.

With the entire global warming / climate change movement already on its heals after the hundreds of emails from East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit were released, leading to what is now known as Climategate, Al Gore's obsession is dealt another severe body blow.

The AP reports:
Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden has called for the world to boycott American goods and the U.S. dollar, blaming the United States and other industrialized countries for global warming, according to a new audiotape released Friday.

In the tape, broadcast in part on Al-Jazeera television, bin Laden warned of the dangers of climate change and says that the way to stop it is to bring "the wheels of the American economy" to a halt.
Global Warming / Climate change has been Allegory's #1 issue for quite some time. Gore's absence is conspicuous during one of the coldest winters on record. Perhaps he's hibernating. If so, bin Laden coming out in favor of his cause is likely to serve as the equivalent of another snow storm and six more weeks of winter.

If I could ask Allegory one question, it would be: Is it true that you and Osama bin Laden are in total agreement when it comes to your most important crusade?

THIS can't be good.

Thursday, January 28, 2010


Ah, the Levin rant. Kicking off, Levin vehemently denounces McCain's re-election bid while throwing his full support behind J.D. Hayworth (are you listening, Sarah Palin). He then proceeds into another, much larger rant about fiscal unsustainability.

While McCain's strategy against Hayworth appears to focus on Hayworth's spending while a congressman, the former has presided over quite a bit more spending and even signed on to TARP, which would likely dwarf any problems Hayworth might have in that area.

McCain needs to go and Levin does a good job of explaining why.

Click HERE for the audio.

h/t to Doug Ross


In light of the bald-faced fraud global warming (climate change) has been exposed as being, I'm actually mildly surprised that Obama actually went here but with how blatantly obstinate and out of touch he's been so far, it's par for the course. He actually said, "I know there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change."

It was met with roaring laughter.

Going down the climate change path was a huge mistake for him. First, with the winter our country has experienced this year, putting those two words together during the SOTU made about as much sense as Al Gore doing an interview with Glenn Beck. Secondly, the mantra of the global warming advocates has been that the science is "settled". Obama acknowledges here that there is disagreement. Not good for his cause. His conceding that such disagreement exists wasn't just met with acceptance but laughter at the opposing view, an opposing view Obama shares.

Watch at the end of this clip for the infamous Obama smirk. It almost indicates he knows it's a fraud too.

h/t to Gateway Pundit


I can't lie. I did fall asleep while watching the SOTU. In fact, maybe that was Obama's strategy to get people not to watch the Republican response, but I digress. One part I did see live was when Barack tore into the Supreme Court for its recent decision in the Citizens United case, overturning a huge chunk of McCain / Feingold (if Obama's mad about it, probably good for country).

Keep a close eye on Alito, who is on Sotomayor's right. As Obama chastises the decision, Alito looks like he got into a bad bag of sweet tarts before mouthing the words, "Definitely not true". While Alito didn't make the scene or sound that Joe Wilson did, he carries much more weight and sat front and center, unlike the freshman representative. Alito's reaction is just as powerful (perhaps more so) as Wilson's. It's just that Alito doesn't have to do as much for that ripple effect.

Not much difference between, "you lie" and "definitely not true" though.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

The Politico reports some interesting dynamics taking place:
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) was glad the president called out the Supreme Court.

"He [Alito] deserved to be criticized, if he didn't like it he can mouth whatever they want," Weiner said. "These Supreme Court justices sometimes forget that we live in the real world. They got a real world reminder tonight, if you make a boneheaded decision, someone's going to call you out on it."

But one conservative legal expert took sides with Alito -- at least on the substance of Obama's comments.

“The President’s swipe at the Supreme Court was a breach of decorum, and represents the worst of Washington politics — scapegoating ‘special interest’ bogeymen for all that ails Washington in attempt to silence the diverse range of speakers in our democracy,” said Bradley A. Smith, chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics, in The Corner blog on
I was struck by Obama's swipe at the SCOTUS when it happened and remember thinking, "oh, that didn't sound right". Don't you love how these leftwingers like Weiner accuses others of not living in the real world?

h/t to Hot Air

Wednesday, January 27, 2010


Should be obvious that not only is yours truly NOT advising Sarah Palin - if I was, I'd tell her not to stump for John McCain in the Arizona primary against J.D. Hayworth - but I'm clearly not advising McCain's opponent, Hayworth. If I was advising Hayworth, telling him to leave the Obama birth certificate issue alone would be at the top of the list. It's red meat for the DSCC and plays right into their hands.

It may be that Hayworth is simply trying to get media exposure but this isn't the way to do it. Obama is the master at mis-direction and birther-gate is a blind alley that leads to perpetual distraction. For the best arguments against pursuing the Birth certificate angle, visit Andrew Walden at Hawaii Free Press.

If Hayworth was smart, he'd tackle McCain on two fronts.

1.) Immigration. America's sheriff Joe Arpaio has already expressed support for Hayworth and all the signs point to him and McCain having a respectful but adversarial relationship. Hayworth should exploit this as much as physically possible. It might even end serve to neutralize the Palin effect.

2.) McCain didn't see the signs about Obama while average, every day Americans did well before the election. We can't afford to have someone who can't see a freight train coming at the country head-on. McCain didn't see it and Hayworth should be calling him on it.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

h/t to Hot Air


It's government excess vs. we the people. Once again, a very well done video from Verum Serum. Once again, the music coupled with still-shot imagery and an occasional sound bite very powerful. Using a 'Lord of the Rings' theme, there is a subplot involving how health care was Ted Kennedy's lifelong mission. That life lasted almost long enough for Kennedy to help ram it through.

Not only was he unable to do that but the people of Massachusetts dumped that mission into the harbor.


via Verum Serum


Last week, Barack Obama said his administration and agenda ran into a "buzzsaw". He should thank House minority leader John Boehner for clarifying exactly what that buzzsaw was because Obama obviously got blindsided and doesn't seem to know. Boehner, speaking openly to Obama, tells him who that buzzsaw really was - the American people.

Remember when Obama mocked those Tea Parties?

h/t to Hot Air Pundit


Over the years, current U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has done plenty to make people question his motives. Whether it be his role in pardoning two Weather Underground terrorists, Marc Rich, or members of the FALN during the Clinton administration or his time as a partner at Covington Burling, a law firm that defends Gitmo detainess pro-bono, more people are asking questions about his loyalty.

The New York Post writes:
Whose side is the Justice Department on: America's -- or the terrorists'?
It's just insane that a lawyer who defended Osama bin Laden's driver and bodyguard -- and who sought constitutional rights for terrorists -- could be one of the Obama administration's top legal officials.

But there's Neal Katyal, occupying a top perch at the Justice Department as the principal deputy solicitor general.

Then there's Jennifer Daskal -- who just months ago was an anti-Guantanamo activist. Now she's in Justice's National Security Division -- working on detainee issues.

Talk about conflicts of interest.
Not only is it a conflict of interest issue but one of double standards as the piece explains further that private sector employees wouldn't get away with such things.

Read the whole thing.

h/t to Free Republic


This one sent in by TimBo from Chicago. John Kass, who provided necessary insight into the Chicago Way when the Blagojevich story broke in late 2008, is suggesting that one year into the Obama administration, the soaring rhetoric of Hope has turned into a smidgeon of Hopium that Obama's teleprompter-writers are likely to hope gets smoked.
In his State of the Union address Wednesday night, Obama is expected to boast about freezing discretionary spending. Politically, this is a response to that Boston Tea Party that cost him his supermajority in the Senate. But he's freezing only a tiny fraction of the federal budget. And he's already spent us into the poorhouse.

The Republicans sneer that Obama speechifying about fiscal responsibility is like a fat man going on a diet after winning a pie-eating contest. But I remember the Republicans in full congressional power. You could identify them by all that sticky rhubarb filling running down their chins and jowls, and the crumbs from the crusts on their lapels.

So how can America prepare for Obama's newfound fiscal prudence?


Yes, Hopium, the stuff that numbs the nation, harvested from the lush green fros of the Happy Obama Chia Head and the Determined Obama Chia Head. Wednesday's speech calls for a special blend: 70 percent determined Obama and 25 percent Happy Obama. Let's fill the rest of the pipe with aromatic tobacco leaf from Turkey.

On Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office buzz killers reported that the deficit smudged with Obama's fingerprints has risen to $1.35 trillion.
Read the whole thing as there is some interesting reading about some characters on the local Chicago scene that reminds us about how that Chicago way works.


Democratic congressman Rush Holt of New Jersey held a town hall this week and his first response to a slew of very tough questions that started with the premise that our country is bankrupt, started by attempting to dismiss that premise. Shortly after Holt says, "our country isn't bankrupt", he is met with a slew of scoffs and boos. Holt then proceeds to hem and haw to the point of rummaging through his papers trying to find a USA Today article of all things, to make his case. Notice I said, "trying to find".

What Hold did is all anyone can really do when faced with the cold hard truth in front of an informed audience. Pretty obvious he wanted to leave but couldn't.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010


In case you missed it, though not many did, Glenn Beck's documentary, "The Revolutionary Holocaust - Live Free or Die" is now up on YouTube. Having watched it, there aren't any cogent arguments that refute it, that I've seen. In fact, the ones I read were quite lame. They all included martyrs for the Democratic party. What critics will not refute is what they will not acknowledge.

Pretty hard to argue that Mao, Chavez, Guevera, et. al. are being idolized these days. Critics of the documentary don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to that.

Definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it yet.

Monday, January 25, 2010


Barack Obama's broken promises since being inaugurated are so many that they're difficult to count or recall due to their sheer volume. Bret Baier does a good job of encapsulating the discrepancies here. This segment focused on Obama's domestic promises, including the one about the $787 Billion stimulus package preventing unemployment from going above 8%.

Paging Joe Wilson.....

Of particular interest is the excerpt from the presidential debate in October of 2008. Notice that Obama said there are two things that MUST be done - New energy policy and new health care system. Yet another reason to be relieved that cap & tax / government run health care hasn't been ramrodded through yet. The former is based on the fraud that is Climate change and the latter is an absolute disaster.

via HotAirPundit

Sunday, January 24, 2010


Excellent! Fast moving images identify Saul Alinsky's most prized pupil (Obama) as well as countless other radicals, including Hillary, that make up the batch of Alinsky-ites who are running our country. The fact that John McCain didn't hammer on this stuff before the election is inexcusable. Every-day citizens who aren't even in politics knew more about Obama than he did.

Oh yeah, this song is very good too.

"No Rules are the Rules for Radicals"

h/t to Jawa Report


Tax Man has always been one of my more favorite Beatles' songs. I think I like it more now after seeing this. I don't remember Obama ever uttering the term but he obviously has and the maker of this video beats it to death. This one is a must-see. It's one of those you're going to want to watch more than once.

Just in time for tax season.


Patterico's Pontifications is the place to go to keep up to date on this one. It's well known that David Axelrod is the master of Astroturfing. We also know that Obama's Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein has advocated exactly the kind of antics that the Ellie Light story appears to be. In short, Ellie Light is a staunch Obama apologist and not only has her letter appeared in countless newspapers across the country but in each case, her residence is in a town nearby each one of those papers.

Calling Ellie "ubiquitous" would be kind.

Sabrina Eaton at the Cleveland Plain Dealer caught the many discrepancies and actually had some correspondence with this mystery woman. Another thing that sticks out as being par for the Obama administration course when confronted with some unpleasant facts - avoid answering the question.

In this case Easton attempted to get Light to explain the many addresses listed as home. The back and forth is a must-read. Sabrina has posted them here.

The other aspect of this that seems to point to the Obama administration and the astroturfing antics made infamous by Axelrod is that Sunstein has advocated this kind of thing in past writings. Aaron Klein has written about it.
Continued Sunstein: "We suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity."

Sunstein said government agents "might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."
Something really stinks about this story. If Sunstein's nefarious tactics are being implemented by this administration, some big names should be jettisoned.

h/ to Patterico's Pontifications

Saturday, January 23, 2010


In 2005, Bush's approval ratings were on a downward slide, never to recover. Anyone need reminded of the 2006 elections? Social Security reform was almost exactly as popular as Obama's health care monstrosity. The difference is that taking a government program and privatizing it, which was the proposal for social security, is a much better idea than taking a private industry and making it government run.

Video from 2005. Obama tells Republicans to "let go of their egos".


via Breitbart


If we've learned anything about Barack Hussein Obama, it's that he constantly seeks first place. Who'd have thought he wanted to win the blue ribbon in hypocrisy too. This may trump everything he's said in the past when it comes to not walking the walk. His argument against this week's Supreme Court decision that struck down a huge portion of McCain / Feingold?

It will open the door for lobbyists?


h/t to HotAirPundit

Thursday, January 21, 2010


Simply amazing video when juxtaposed with how Barack Obama is likely to act in the coming days. In Bill Clinton's state of the union address after losing the House in 1994 because of health care, Clinton struck a conciliatory tone and moved to the middle.

For Obama to do this, he would have to abandon the Alinsky script. If you thought he didn't know what he was doing before, wait until he has to do that.

Via Verum Serum


Once again, Ron Paul demonstrates why he has endeared himself to the 9/11 Truther movement. When Paul talks about auditing the Fed, I'm right there with him. When he talks about the CIA being a "government unto themselves", he finds himself in the looney bin column.

It's ironic that the folks who like to invoke the Creature from Jekyll island also seem to turn into Hyde when they get off of it.

h/t to Hot Air


Some extremely good news when the majority of the news seems to be less so. Rifqa Bary, the 17 year-old girl from Columbus who converted to Christianity despite her Muslim parents' objections will be living in a foster home in Columbus until she turns 18, at which point she can do as she wishes.

The judge in the case, ruled that she does NOT have to be returned to her parents.

Fox News reported:
The agreement Tuesday says that 17-year-old Rifqa Bary will stay in a foster home under state custody in Columbus until she turns 18 in August. After that, she'll be an adult and free to live where she chooses.
This is very good news and because of how much media attention she has gotten, she may be safe, despite having to live in her home town. Then again, who really knows? If she is harmed between now and her next birthday, the system will have still failed because she should have been able to remain in Florida.

That said, this is definitely a victory for common sense.


As usual, Brit Hume does an excellent job of succinctly making his point, regardless of the subject. In the case of Obama spinning the Scott Brown win in Massachusetts, Hume ends his commentary simply by saying, "wow". After showing the utter absurdity of the notion that Scott Brown - a Republican - won because voters in a heavily blue state are still mad at Bush, which is Obama's view, what else could he say?


Wednesday, January 20, 2010


Sarah Palin has lost me. Up to this point, she was the only potential candidate in the current field of likely Republican nominees for president in 2012 that had my support. She's now off the short list. It has been announced that she will stump for moderate John McCain not in his race against whoever his Democrat opponent will ultimately be but during the primary.

That's not ok. Former Republican congressman J.D. Hayworth has been seriously mulling a run for McCain's seat. Unlike progressive John McCain, Hayworth is a staunch conservative and having Palin stump for McCain doesn't help Hayworth's chances but it may eventually hurt Palin with conservatives - it has with this one.

CNN reports:
Sarah Palin, McCain's former running mate and perhaps the most powerful brand in Republican politics, will stump for McCain in Arizona on March 26 and 27, a Palin adviser told CNN. The presence of Palin - and the considerable crowds and media attention she will draw - might give pause to J.D. Hayworth, the former Republican congressman and radio host who opposes McCain's position on illegal immigration and is mulling a Senate run of his own.
In light of the extremely strong rise of conservatism, using the word unfortunate to describe Palin's pledged campaign support for McCain is an understatement. Yes, this is obviously her returning the favor for being chosen as McCain's running mate but she risks losing significant capital with the conservative movement. Palin is revealing her allegiance to conservatism by choosing this option to repay the unspoken debt to McCain.

If Palin is concerned about re-paying that debt, she should hold back any support or endorsement until AFTER the primary, if McCain wins. She doesn't have to support Hayworth but based on her having successfully ingratiated herself with the conservative movement, she absolutely should NOT put her support behind a progressive Republican, no matter what is owed to him or what his chances of winning without her.

When Palin resigned from the governorship, many questioned her resolve to stick to the job she signed on to. It hurt her chances with some Republicans. Her commitment to stump for John McCain against a true conservative like J.D. Hayworth, it will not only hurt her chances with conservatives, especially if the primary is close, it will cause people to wonder if she has the resolve not to let conservatism get trumped by political favors.

Support J.D. Hayworth

h/t to Free Republic


David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs provide the latest example of leftwing delusion, with the former saying that people are making too much of the results from the Massachusetts senate race. The political earthquake of that election is so blatantly obvious that the entire Obama administration and the Democrat leadership in congress makes Baghdad Bob look like Honest Abe.

Watch for their combined response when Axelrod is asked how the results can be interpreted any other way than that voters don't want the health care monstrosity because Brown said he would be the filibuster-busting vote. Axelrod looks to Gibbs to answer and is met with Gibbs' signature, "uhhhh" before Axelrod decides to deliver his own brand of a rambling non-answer.

These two really should have worn clown suits for this interview.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

That display is EXACTLY what John Boehner is talking about here.

h/t to Hot Air Pundit for both videos


Notice the stark contrast painted by Tingles. In this corner, we have voters who will vote for Coakley and get the health care reform that they want. In this corner we have "pre-meditated" murderers of health care. At some point, this guy has got to issue a standard disclaimer with each broadcast saying he's an Alinsky-ite shill for socialism, marxism, and liberalism while attempting to portray an air of objectivity and should not be taken seriously unless you agree with him.

Everybody with a brain knows it but there are still some out there who think this is objective journalism.

Yes, people who voted for Scott Brown are guilty of "pre-meditated murder" according to Matthews.

h/t to Hot Air


Erroll Southers likely would have been to the TSA what Eric Holder is to the Justice Department - an absolute nightmare for the United States of America. Once again, a good man in senator Jim DeMint stands up when it seems like martyrdom to do so. No way someone like Lindsey Graham or Susan Collins would have the same kind of courage. They'd likely see it as a loser and hope for a victory later on when it's more practical, hoping to use their caving in on that loser as capital.

Note to such people - standing on principle matters and DeMint gets it. He also got a victory when Southers pulled out. It may be time to add DeMint to the list of Davids out there like Roberto Micheletti, Vaclav Klaus, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio who actually know what standing up for what's right means.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:
In a statement, Erroll Southers said he was pulling out because his nomination had become a lightning rod for those with a political agenda. President Barack Obama tapped Southers, a former FBI agent, to lead the TSA in September but his confirmation has been blocked by Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, who says he was worried Southers would allow TSA employees to engage in collective bargaining with the government.

Questions have also been raised about a reprimand that Southers received for running background checks on his then-estranged wife's boyfriend two decades ago. Southers wrote a letter to lawmakers earlier this month acknowledging that he had given inconsistent answers to Congress on that issue.
For a small taste of why Erroll Southers would have been so dangerous, check out these short videos of him talking about our enemies.

Living With Terrorism

h/t to Hot Air for the Wapo link


Pride has such a funny way of making people look beyond absurd to those on the outside looking in. What's really funny is the fact that they have GOT to know it but simply can't help themselves. The latest instance comes courtesy of House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, who actually attempts to make the case that the reason the heavily Democratic state of Massachusetts was going Republican was not because of the Democrats' agenda but because of the Republicans' obstructing it.


The Hill Reported on the day of the election, when Steny saw the Stenyography on the wall:
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Tuesday said that angst voters have expressed early this election year is the result of GOP obstructionism, not the Democrats agenda.

Hoyer's remarks come as Republican state Sen. Scott Brown has surged in the Massachusetts special Senate election in part due to his pledge to be the GOP's 41st vote to filibuster healthcare reform legislation.

"I think what the public is angry about is they see, first of all, an opposition for opposition's sake," Hoyer told reporters.
Uh, Steny, maybe it was the fact that people like this registered Democrat saw through your lies. This man called you a liar to your face and you still ignored the majority of Americans who see your agenda for what it is - wicked.

More analysis at Hot Air


The far left looney Democrats are simply too emotionally invested in this health care monstrosity to stop now. The doubling down continues. When it comes to the Super Majority in the senate necessary to overcome a filibuster, Barney wants to do away with it at a time when it's inconvenient for passage of the health care monstrosity.

Barney provides further audacity by invoking the Constitution to support his claim. Uh, Barney, do you really want to go there at this point?

Now for those wondering what Barney's opinion was back in 2005 when Bush's judicial nominees were getting filibustered constantly, I found this excerpt from the Boston Herald on Free Republic although the link to the actual article is dead.
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, who publicly crusaded against Senate filibusters 12 years ago, now says he opposes banning filibusters against judicial nominees - the so-called "nuclear option" fueling a bruising Capitol Hill showdown.

"I would vote against changing the filibuster rule right now,'' Frank (D-Newton) told the Herald in a telephone interview Thursday. Frank explained he still supports an "across-the-board'' ban against all filibusters, but he opposes the Republican "nuclear option'' because it only outlaws filibusters against judicial nominees.

"I object to (a filibuster ban) being used in a very specific instance,'' Frank said. "If they make an improvement going forward, I would maybe look at it differently.''

Frank's comments come as the Senate braces for a showdown vote over President Bush's filibustered judicial picks, a battle that could affect federal justices from the district level all the way to the next Supreme Court nominee.

In 1993, Frank led a public fight to end Senate filibusters, asserting in a Washington Post op-ed piece: "I believe legislative bodies should scrupulously abide by two principles: complete openness and majority rule. The filibuster is a godsend to potential gridlockers.''

Republicans at the time were using filibusters to block President Clinton's agenda in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Today, it is frustrated Democrats in the GOP-run Senate who are using filibuster tactics to block Bush's judicial nominees, whom they consider to be too conservative.

The time-honored Senate practice of the filibuster, whereby lawmakers can block a nominee or a bill by refusing to stop debating, has sparked acrimony on Capitol Hill expected to reach a climax this week. Sixty of 100 Senate votes are required to kill a filibuster.

Republicans, who accuse Democrats of blocking Bush's judge picks for sheer partisan advantage, want a straight up-or-down majority vote on the president's court picks. Their bill would outlaw filibusters against judicial nominees.

Frank scoffed at Republican claims Bush is being unfairly shortchanged on nominees.

The Newton Democrat recalled the nomination of former Bay State Gov. William F. Weld to be ambassador to Mexico. GOP senators blocked a vote on Weld because they questioned his conservative credentials. "Why didn't the Republicans apply the same standard to Bill Weld?'' Frank asked.
Quite obvious that Barney is AGAINST the filibuster when Democrats have a majority but not a super-majority and he's FOR it when Republicans have the majority but not a super-majority. In 2005, the Republicans had a majority of 55 senators. At that time, Barney re-calibrated his position by saying the filibuster should NOT be banned in the case of judicial nominees. So, Barney was for the filibuster after he was against it and before he was against it again. Beautiful.

Let's also not forget that while the Social Security reform initiative Bush attempted was also met with Democrat resistance in the form of a threat to filibuster. Wouldn't you love to know what Barney's view were on that one too?

Video via Breitbart


We all knew it was coming but there's just something about watching it unfold that is still jaw-dropping. Nancy Pelosi couldn't wait 24 minutes let alone 24 hours - after it became apparent that Scott Brown had won - to open her yap about still being determined to ram the health care monstrosity down the throats of Americans.

The Politico reports that as she was leaving her office at 11:30pm, she dug in her heels:
And already Tuesday night, Democrats were being forced to come to terms with the prospect that their decades-long goal of health reform might once again fall short, despite getting closer to becoming law than ever before.

Pelosi insisted Democrats could still make it happen. "We will get the job done. I am confident of that. I have always been confident of that," she told reporters as she left the Capitol at 11:30 p.m.

"Massachusetts has health care and so the rest of the country would like to have that too," Pelosi said, referring to the state’s health care program. "So we don't [think] a state that already has health care should determine whether the rest of the country should."
I don't know what's going on inside that delusional mind of hers but she obviously has no clue how utterly ludicrous she appears to an increasingly overwhelming majority in this country. Arrogance, pride, and indifference all wrapped up inside a botox shell.

As if more irony was necessary in the Massachusetts senate saga. Perhaps Nancy should re-read the cover of her own book, which flopped monumentally, despite her appearing on every forum possible. Remember THIS? Be sure to read the reviews of that awful, awful book.

Spock would think twice before performing a mind meld on this woman.


There are SO many ironic elements to Scott Brown winning in Massachusetts. Whether it's the fact that the Tea Party movement levied its strongest blow in a state where the original tea party took place or the fact that a special election certainly unforeseen by the Obama administration has sunk the health care monstrosity. Let's not forget WHY there was a special election - Teddy Kennedy. The man who made passing a health care monstrosity his life's work also remained in the senate well after diagnosed with a terminal illness.

Enter Erick Erickson of Red State, who was on a panel at CNN talking about what Scott Brown winning in Massachusetts means for the health care monstrosity.

His argument? If Teddy Kennedy would have resigned when he was diagnosed, the Democrats wouldn't have been in this position. Paul Begala calls it a "low blow".

The truth hurts, doesn't it Paul?

h/t to HotAirPundit

Tuesday, January 19, 2010


Even if you overlook the hatchet job on a sentence allegedly in english and give her a pass, after you re-construct the slur that masqueraded as words into the sentence she was attempting to enunciate, it STILL makes no sense.

via Verum Serum


Two videos from the belly of the beast. First, a reporter goes to a Coakley phone bank at 7am after being told it would be open and busy by 6am. When he arrives, the place is empty and the doors are locked.

Next up, two very upbeat and happy Coakley workers pleasantly greet the alternative media by calling them nazis.

via HotAirPundit


Michelle Malkin is reporting that Ohio "Republican" Senator George Voinovich has been summoned to the White House, presumably to be the 60th vote for the health care monstrosity if Scott Brown wins.

The POLITICO has already reported that insiders are saying Obama will only become more combative if the Massachusetts race doesn't go his way, rather than follow the Bill Clinton template of moving to the center after losing the House in 1994:

President Barack Obama plans a combative response if, as White House aides fear, Democrats lose Tuesday’s special Senate election in Massachusetts, close advisers say.

“This is not a moment that causes the president or anybody who works for him to express any doubt,” a senior administration official said. “It more reinforces the conviction to fight hard.”

A defeat by Martha Coakley for the seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy would be embarrassing for the party — and potentially debilitating, since Democrats will lose their filibuster-proof, 60-vote hold on the Senate.

Summoning George Voinovich to the White House as Plan B may also be a sign that Obama is conceding defeat in Massachusetts though it's too early to tell.

In light of the fact that the health care monstrosity will destroy the livelihoods of future generations, I find this Voinovich meltdown in 2005 over the prospect of John Bolton becoming America's ambassador to the U.N. particularly unnerving. Voinovich cried because of what such an appointment could mean for his grandchildren.

If Voinovich votes for the monstrosity, will it mean he found John Bolton a greater threat to future generations than government-run health care? If so, wouldn't you like to know how Bolton feels about that?

More at Michelle Malkin


Watching the left literally unmask itself and implode before the election has even taken place is plenty indicative of the fact that conservatism will get a win regardless of whether or not Scott Brown is the next senator of Massachusetts.

Schultz and Matthews both advocate voter fraud and Olbermann ratchets up the rhetoric in his nonsensical rants.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

h/t to NB


These people are really unmasking themselves but what's behind the mask is even worse than so many thought. First we had Lib-talker Ed Schultz claim that if he lived in Massachusetts, he'd vote "ten times". Now we learn, courtesy of the audio below, that Chris Matthews is openly advocating the use of "street money" to buy votes with the help of "street corner guys".

Making this even worse is who Matthews is talking to when he says these things. That would be MSNBC reporter Chuck Todd, a man who is supposed to be an objective reporter. A man who is part of the press and not a pundit like Matthews. Anyone with any sense at all has long known that both are liberals but this exchange reveals they are so disheartened by the prospect that Massachusetts may get a Republican senator that they're advocating voter fraud.


Audio courtesy of Sharp Elbows

h/t to GP

Monday, January 18, 2010


This righteous rant by Pat Condell against perhaps the most notorious British Islamist, Anjem Choudary, when compared to the 86 pages of dreck put out by the Department of Defense about the breakdown at Fort Hood makes the top military leaders in the free world look even more embarrassingly feckless.

The vacuum left by the cowardice in the DOD's report is filled by Condell. A good dose of the latter is the prescription for those feeling outraged by the former.

In case you'd like to see Anjem Choudary in action, here's a nice little snippet. My recommendation is that you watch Condell again after seeing this one.

HERE again is a link to the Ralph Peters column in which he excoriates the DOD report on Fort Hood.

h/t to SIOA


The epitome of arrogant denial. Reminds me of the guy who loses all of his friends because of his arrogance and then blames all of them for not understanding his reality. At some point, folks like David Shuster are going to hit rock bottom and have to face some very cold hard facts by having a face to face with themselves.

At some point, folks like Shuster should ask what's wrong with the Obama agenda instead of what's wrong with Massachusetts voters.


h/t to NB


h/t to Barrackaid #34 for sending this one in. I guess we can call this one East Anglia West. Meteorologist John Coleman at KUSI TV in San Diego is calling out the Allegory crowd, claiming slam dunk evidence of global warming fraud. When data manipulation at East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Great Britain was revealed to have taken place, many wondered when the research centers here in the United States would have to face the music.

The two big entities that "skeptics" have had their eyes on are NASA's Goddard Science and Space Institute (GSSI), with a center at Columbia University and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which falls under the umbrella of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

In this incredibly damning video, one of the allegations made is that beginning in 1989-90, the NCDC cut back from measuring temperatures in 6000 locations all over the world to about 1500. The even larger problem with that is that the colder locations are the ones that got removed from the data set so it wasn't even about reducing the sample size. It was about eliminating undesirable facts.

How does it feel to have your tax dollars going toward entities engaged in fraudulent practices in order to line the pockets of politicians?

Yet another example of something that should cause the American people to unplug themselves but hey, if the ACORN videos didn't do it......

Part 6 of 7 on YouTube (part four on KUSI website)

Part 7 of 7 on YouTube

HERE is a link to the KUSI page featuring the video, which has links to other blog posts on the subject.

HERE is a link to Coleman's page on the KUSI website.

Time to unplug, people. You're the victims of an international conspiracy - a provable one.


Fred Barnes at the Weekly Standard is reporting that Republican attorneys are saying that the threat from the Democrats to hold off on seating Scott Brown if he wins may not be idle but it could very well be inconsequential. Interim Senator Paul Kirk (D) has already gone on record saying that he will vote for the Health care bill if the vote takes place on his watch.

Well, if Barnes' report is correct, that vote will have to take place before midnight Tuesday evening:
Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys.

Kirk has vowed to vote for the Democratic bill even if Republican Scott Brown is elected but not yet certified by state officials and officially seated in the Senate. Kirk’s vote is crucial because without the 60 votes necessary to stop a Republican filibuster, the bill will be defeated.
Scott Brown has pledged that he will be the 41st vote against the bill which would secure the filibuster. However, the 41st vote is not nearly as important as the 60th. If Kirk is out after Tuesday, regardless of what happens, there could only be 99 sitting senators, 40 of which would be against the health care bill, leaving Reid's posse one short of the necessary filibuster-proof super-majority.

Well Harry, it might be time to see how many Republicans can be bribed.

Read the WHOLE THING. This is getting interesting in case you hadn't noticed.



It seems that everywhere you look, the leadership in the United States seems most concerned about things other than our greatest threats. As we plummet toward unsustainable debt and deficits, spending more money via Obama's health care monstrosity is the focus. As the threat of Islamic terrorism continues to rise, the CIA is directed to focus on global warming.

Now this - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has decided to hone in on the unjust laws regarding homosexuality in Uganda. Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media has more:
The State Department may not be able to keep terrorists out of the United States, but Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has enough time on her hands to spend 45 minutes complaining to the President of Uganda about an effort in that country to toughen laws against homosexuality.

The President of Uganda, Yoweri Museveni, says that Clinton spoke to him for 45 minutes about the proposed legislation, which hasn't even been the subject of hearings by the parliament. Museveni, who rules over a conservative East African country that is 85 percent Christian, said that he told Clinton that the bill will be considered by the appropriate authorities and that he had heard that homosexuals come from Europe and recruit young people using money. He said that Mrs. Clinton agreed that such practices constituted sexual exploitation.
45 MINUTES?! If Hillary is interested in squashing rumors about her own sexual preferences, this doesn't help. However, that aspect of the story only warrants mention because of how blatantly out of phase her priorities appear to be here. In today's upside-down world, it would seem that a crusade to end homophobia in Uganda would be far down on the list of priorities for the Secretary of State. Then again, with Uganda being conservative and 85% Christian, maybe her crusade is more about her disdain for Christianity.

If Clinton's focus on Uganda is more about the latter then perhaps - as Kincaid points out - atheist and anti-conservative George Soros may be involved:
Mrs. Clinton's preoccupation with Uganda's opposition to homosexuality may have something to do with the fact that billionaire George Soros, a major financial backer of the Democratic Party and President Obama, has been funding efforts in Africa to promote the interests of "sexual minorities." Obama has embraced the "gay rights" agenda.
Shouldn't the duly elected government of Uganda be allowed to make its own laws? It sounds like the main thrust of the law in question may not even be about sexual preference but instead sexual exploitation. Museveni seems rightly concerned about homosexual Europeans entering his country and recruiting poverty-stricken Ugandan youths for the sex trade. Banning homosexuality in that country might just give authorities more leverage against that type of vermin.

Read the WHOLE THING as there are many layers to the story, including none other than Rick Warren coming down on the side of Hillary on the issue by urging Ugandan pastors to oppose the Bill.



It's really a shame that there aren't more guys like this who are actually in the highest positions of power inside the military. Col. Ralph Peters (Ret) gets it that the military brass in this country are afraid to identify the root causes of what happened at Fort Hood on November 5th. It may be true that he wouldn't speak this forthrightly if he was active but I have a tough time believing he'd have put his name on a report like the one released by the DOD.

Peters also wrote about this in the NY POST.

HERE is a link to the 86 page report. Feel free to read it if you enjoy ponderous dreck.

h/t to H4A


Every high profile political campaign takes on a life of its own, with unforeseen plot lines and subtexts developing. In the case of the senate race in Massachusetts, one of those interesting dynamics is the attention being given to Scott Brown's truck, which is suddenly front and center, in a way not too dissimilar from how Joe the Plumber found the spot light.

Brown is winning this race on the ground and his old truck has been the vehicle to get him from point A to point B. It has nearly 200,000 miles and is quickly becoming a symbol in this campaign.

So Barack Obama hops on Air Force 1 and heads to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley. While doing so, he calls out Brown's truck, mocking it.

There's a slight problem with that. The truck Obama is mocking was built by the company he owns (GM).

"Everybody can buy a truck." Really? Well, not everyone can fly Air Force 1.

Here is a Scott Brown ad featuring that truck.

h/t to GP

Sunday, January 17, 2010


Currently, Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal owns 5.5% of News Corp., Fox News' parent company which is headed by none other than Rupert Murdoch. Not only is bin Talal considering expanding his reach inside News Corp. but Murdoch appears to be quite interested in doing much more business with bin Talal.

The AP reports:
The Saudi billionaire whose investment firm is one of the biggest stakeholders in Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. said he is looking to expand his alliances with the media giant, in the latest indication that his appetite for growth remains robust even as his company retrenches.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a nephew of the Saudi king and who was listed last year by Forbes as the world's 22nd richest person, met with News Corp.'s chief executive Rupert Murdoch on Jan. 14 in a meeting that "touched upon future potential alliances with News Corp.," according to a statement released by his Kingdom Holding Co. late Saturday.

Media reports have indicated that News Corp, parent to Fox News and Dow Jones & Co., among others, may be thinking of buying a stake in Alwaleed's Rotana Media Group, which includes a number of satellite channels that air in the Middle East.
Has anyone ever noticed that Fox News does very little on the Islamic threat to America? Even Glenn Beck, for all the good he does, has done virtually NOTHING on the Council on American Islamic Relations' (CAIR) ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. When Bill O'Reilly interviews representatives from CAIR, they are given a pass when it comes to those ties. You will also not likely see an opposing guest who knows what CAIR is on at the same time.

An incredibly well-researched WND article reminds us of those riots in France in 2005 in which bin Talal contacted Murdoch when he didn't like how the rioters were being portrayed:
As WND reported, during violent street protests involving Muslim immigrants in France in 2005, the Saudi prince persuaded Murdoch to change a screen banner that identified the unrest as "Muslim riots."

"I picked up the phone and called Murdoch (and told him) these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty," bin Talal said. "Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from 'Muslim riots' to 'civil riots.' "

Fox News has acknowledged it changed the banner after receiving complaints from unnamed Muslims abroad. It has not denied bin Talal's influence in its internal operations.
I cover this in my January 17th show. I hope you check it out. Click HERE.

h/t to DRUDGE
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive