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

Monday, February 15, 2010


The video on Breitbart TV at the bottom of this post features an interview with a man named Dr. John C. Drew who claims to have met Barack Obama when the latter attended Occidental Community College in 1980. While he didn't have an extensive relationship with the 44th president, he did have lengthy political discussions with him. Drew claims that at the time, he was a marxist and that Obama was as well. He now considers himself a conservative and you will hear him explain his transformation in the Breitbart interview.

Before checking out the interview, I encourage you to read Ronald Kessler's piece in Newsmax that highlights some very interesting claims about Obama made by Drew.
Dr. John C. Drew, a grant writing consultant in Laguna Niguel, Calif., tells Newsmax he met Obama in 1980 when Obama was a sophomore at Occidental College in Los Angeles. Drew had just graduated from Occidental and was attending graduate school at Cornell University.

Drew’s then girlfriend, Caroline Boss — now Grauman-Boss — knew Obama because she shared classes with him at Occidental.

During Christmas break, Drew says he was at Grauman-Boss’ home in Palo Alto when Obama came over with Mohammed Hasan Chandoo, his roommate from Pakistan.

“Barack and Hasan showed up at the house in a BMW, and then we went to a restaurant together,” Drew says. “We had a nice meal, and then we came back to the house and smoked cigarettes and drank and argued politics.”
For the next several hours, they discussed Marxism.

“He was arguing a straightforward Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view, which anticipated that there would be a revolution of the working class, led by revolutionaries, who would overthrow the capitalist system and institute a new socialist government that would redistribute the wealth,” says Drew, who says he himself was then a Marxist.
If you have the time, be sure to check out the interview with Drew below. Among other things, he talks about how serious it was to be practicing Marxists in 1980. He explains that it wasn't to be taken lightly that they were just college students experimenting with socialism. They viewed it as serious business and viewed themselves as enemies of the United States government.

Bringing it back to 2008, Drew explains that he became frustrated when no media outlets would take interest in his story, including Fox News. For all of the questions surrounding lack of information about Obama's college transcripts / history, etc. I do find it a bit perplexing that this guy wasn't given a forum.

Nonetheless, feel free to compare what Drew says Obama wanted to do when he spoke to him in 1980 with what Obama is DOING in 2010. Moreover, compare the mea culpa mentality of Drew with the lack of one from Obama regarding Marxism.

h/t to New Zeal Blog


The good news, aside from the fact that the judge dismissed a case re-filed by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) against Dave Gaubatz, author of "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that's Conspiring to Islamize America", is that America is being provided with a glimpse into how CAIR intends to intimidate its opponents through endless lawsuits. That's also the bad news. In order to defeat CAIR in court, be prepared for a fight.

It all started when Gaubatz' son, Chris went undercover as a young Muslim intern, working for CAIR. He was given documents by the group that he was supposed to shred. Instead, he retrieved 12,000 pages that prove quite damaging to CAIR, which are detailed in the book. A judge ruled that the documents were to be returned to CAIR. However, the FBI almost simultaneously had them subpoenaed and now possesses copies.

World Net Daily reports on the latest ruling against CAIR:
A federal judge has dismissed an attempt by the Council on American-Islamic Relations to re-file yet another lawsuit against Air Force special agent P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris, the father-and-son team that investigated and exposed the group's terrorist ties.

Defense lawyers are hailing the decision as a victory over CAIR's alleged plan to "chill" free speech critical of the organization through an avalanche of court cases and legal costs.

"We briefed, counter briefed, we spent thousands of dollars on the case," said Daniel Horowitz, one of the three lawyers for the defense. "Only then did they file this new lawsuit, which would have effectively forced us to start all over."

"But the new lawsuit didn't have anything substantively new," Horowitz told WND. "And yet, that's their whole goal. They know they can't win the case, but they can chill the First Amendment by making it so expensive to speak against them that no one can challenge Saudi-funded CAIR. In the end, they can just keep getting more and more money from overseas and burn out opposition with lawsuits."
If this strategy on the part of CAIR is truly intended to further Saudi interests in the west, which allegedly includes the goal of replacing the U.S. Constitution with some form of Sharia Law, then the United States judicial system needs some courageous judges and lines need to be drawn. In this case, the judge stood up to CAIR:
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, however, "denied as moot" CAIR's request to re-file the case.

"The judge looked at papers and said, 'Look, you don't have a right to do this; everything was fully briefed; you had your opportunity,'" Horowitz explained.
Another interesting aspect to this case is that earlier, Horowitz filed a motion saying that CAIR had no right to claim the documents because it had changed its name almost immediately after being named as a co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, which kicked off in 1997 and was re-tried a year later. HLF, along with individual defendants, lost big.

Gaubatz has a website with much more information.

Be sure to read the entire WND article.


This one is really big. In light of last week's news that Phil Jones, climate scientist at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) who had to step down a few months ago for his prominent role in the scandal, contemplated suicide, he may be going through a real catharsis here. If he truly is having an epiphany, he needs support and not derision.

Did he do wrong? Absolutely, but when a human being puts this amount of pride and intellectual / emotional investment aside and truly humbles himself, it is a victory for that individual to be celebrated. It is liberating, whatever the consequences to himself. I don't know if that's happened with Jones but signs are that he's close to doing so if he considered taking his own life and is making these stunning admissions.

Courtesy of the Daily Mail:
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
While Jones' admissions were somewhat stunning, they didn't go all the way.
But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made.

Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.

‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’
Maybe I have a different take on this than most but if any of us were in a similar position, we'd be broken human beings in desperate need of support. Jones needs people around him that are going to help him go all the way through this admission. If he does, he will come out the other side as potentially one of the strongest allies in the fight against this despicable fraud. He's on the brink of admitting the entire truth and confessing the whole thing.

I am not saying that Jones shouldn't be held accountable for his complicity but I am saying it's time to start showing a little mercy and compassion.

Michael Mann on the other hand, still appears to be digging in his heels, displaying the raw arrogance and pride that only serves to anger those of us who know this entire charade is criminal. After all, now that his hockey stick chart has been proven to be completely fraudulent, he comes across as an arrogant boob, denying his hand is the one at the other end of his arm, inside the cookie jar.

'fess up, Mann.

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