What difference does it make?
Oh, I don't know...how about to punish the guilty and deter such behavior in the future.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
The History of Television News
Liberals are so uninformed about the evolution of television news in America that it borders on
hysteria. Here's the actual history of television news in America...
- For forty long years, all Americans got their news from
one of three networks (ABC, NBC, CBS). All of them leaned Left but viewed themselves
as Centrist. Nothing could be further from the truth.
- Then along came cable and CNN. They leaned heavily Left
but viewed themselves as leaning Left. Nothing could be further from the truth.
- Then along came Fox News and millions of Conservative
Americans began getting their news from them because they leaned Right.
- The major networks threw a hissy fit and, because they
viewed themselves as Centrist in their delivery of the news, they labeled Fox
News as far Right in their news delivery. Nothing could be further from the
truth. Fox News was merely to the Right of the major networks, who leaned Left.
- Then along came MSNBC, who leans heavily Left, but views
themselves as "Progressive". They, too joined the "Fox News is a
far Right news organization" chorus. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
The truth is that historically Americans have
received Left-leaning news from organizations who view themselves as Centrist,
and Fox News merely balanced the scales and gave millions of Conservative-leaning
Americans the news from THEIR perspective.
But people who view themselves as Centrist
and "always right" don't even realize that they lean heavily Left,
which is why they attack Fox News as "far Right".
Leftists are dead wrong about Fox News, but in their howls they remind us that they are always certain but never right.
Thursday, February 7, 2013
WE ARE OUT OF TOMORROWS
 |  |
| Written by Robert Agostinelli | |
| Wednesday, 06 February 2013 | |
After Mr. Obama delivered his second inaugural address week before last, it has been dawning on people that his political strategy is that of the Thunderdome in Mel Gibson's Mad Max 3 movie: "Two men enter, one man leaves." He is totally win/lose, the total antithesis of win/win. From Mau-Mau tautology mixed with Marxist ideals inbred from his absent father and a mother enriched in the heresies of the deep left Communism of Frank Marshall Davis, this man has unfurled his true colors. Unbridled by the need to appear moderate for his next campaign, "the One" has declared war on anything or anyone who would stand in the way of his Progressive radical agenda. Yes, Saul Alinsky's hand can be seen everywhere along with Chicago thuggery, but there is much more. The guardian angel of the Progressive school as pronounced by Alinsky is Lucifer - "Rulesfor Radicals" is dedicated to him -- the first pure rebel from God and his natural laws which abuts our Judeo-Christian ethic and are the predicate to our most sacred documents of individual freedom. It is here that Mr. Obama has taken league and sword to all that would "stand athwart history" and challenge the warped manifest destiny of his twisted manifesto that has driven every socialist tyrant who has ever challenged freedom. In this school, intolerance is mandatory for it is the front line of the zeal of rearranged utopia. It is unquestioned, for to do so would expose the fault lines and inherent lie for what it is. Political Correctness is the pincers head of this intolerance. It shreds our values, questions our origins and speaks of a modernity which is a mere veil for the crooked, indeed evil, root of the radical. Obama bears witness to this blasphemy -- from the infamous 2010 State of the Union address where he challenged the Supremes with lie and insult, to the latest excuse for an inauguration speech where he inverted our history deeming the Progressive dream of centralization and role of the government to be the parent and protector of the individual. Under this thesis the individual rather than free is only "liberated" when he is duly tamed, corrected and led by a higher elite all-knowing body. Hence the difficulty with God, the Constitution, and of course "those Republicans" who are errant pretenders from the wing span of the new order. Having been raised to respect the opposition and loath to attribute the most extreme intent of the Obamanistas, Republicans sought to seek common ground and "work " with the Executive They ignored the evidence and rationalized it as a mere product of a left-leaning exaggeration that could be corrected. They were negotiating with themselves. From an intentional defrocking of our nation through a foreign policy of surrender and embracing of our enemies to a domestic policy bent on reordering the relationship of the individual and "our" government, we have been bystanders to a game of which no one wanted to dare affirm its existence. In his first inauguration speech four years ago, he spoke of "reconciliation" with regard to spending and taxes only, outmaneuvering the gullible minority to extract high tax increases while increasing spending. Within a breath of that victory, he willed that we had no spending or debt problem but a healthcare problem when every fact contradicts the insanity of Obamacare. He now twists the concepts of legislative spending with our national debt as if both are undeniable and insulated from reproach. It is a lie. Our national debt service will be paid even if the debt ceiling is held. The Republicans have one and only one way forward; a fight based on principles and a denial of every crude attempt to usurp our freedom and bankrupt our house. The clarion call is now. We are out of tomorrows. Robert F. Agostinelli is co-founder of The Rhone Group, a private equity firm based in Paris, London, and New York. He is listed among "The World's Billionaires" by Forbes. |
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
How Can It Be??
Heaviest Snowfall in a Century Hits Moscow
05 February 2013 | Issue 5062
The science is settled. LOL!
That’s right, this is what the global warming alarmist do in
the reverse anytime there is any weather related event which supports
their contention that the globe is warming. They point to the weather event
that supports their contention and cry “Global Warming!” Here’s what I say to
those know-it-all geniuses: Prove it! All they ever say is “the science is
settled”, but they never talk about the science. For my money, it’s time they
prove their contention because if these Chicken Little lunatics get their way,
the cost of living will go through the roof for everyone on this
spinning planet. And for what? Absolutely nothing.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Why is government stockpiling guns, ammo?
By Joseph Farrah
WND
Is the U.S. government getting ready for a war we don’t know about?
And, if that’s why Washington is stockpiling massive amounts of ammunition (hollow points, by the way), why is Homeland Security doing the buying instead of the Defense Department?
I have some theories.
Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama’s little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.
Here’s what he actually said at a campaign stop in Colorado July 2, 2008: “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
Click here to see video of Obama's comments
Could what we see happening now in the Department of Homeland Security be the beginning of Obama’s dream and our constitutional nightmare?
We’ve learned more about Obama’s vision since then. Maybe it’s time for a review:
But that brings us up to 2013 and the highly unusual stockpiling of firearms and ammo by Homeland Security – firearms and ammo that Obama would like to deny to ordinary citizens who are not members of his domestic army.
Well, I hate to say it, but I may have predicted this, too.
In a Halloween column last fall, I stated that, if re-elected, Obama would “declare a full-scale war on his domestic opposition.”
I wasn’t joking. I was deadly serious – so serious, in fact, that I did something I pledged I would never do: Vote for Mitt Romney. It was a matter of self-defense and self-preservation. I said then that a second term of Obama might mean we would never see another free and fair election in America.
(I’m not even sure we saw one in 2012.) I suggested due process would go the way of the horse and buggy. I said I expected Obama would move to shut down or destroy all independent media. I even speculated that his biggest critics would eventually be rounded up in the name of national security.
Think about it.
Why does the civilian Department of Homeland Security need billions of rounds of ammunition?
This is the agency that is responsible for policing the border. But it doesn’t.
This is the agency that is responsible for catching terrorists. But it doesn’t.
So why does Homeland Security need so many weapons and enough hollow-point rounds to plug every American six times?
Maybe this is the “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the Defense Department.
These words – “civilian national security force” – have haunted me ever since I first read them.
Obama has never explained what he meant.
He’s never been called to account for that remark.
Doesn’t this sound like police-state talk to you?
The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn’t count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. defense budget was $439 billion. No one knows what the budget is today because Congress stopped passing budgets when Obama took office.
Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? Is this part of his second-term agenda?
He has also set up, as I have reported, a new homeland security bureaucracy to operate under his own direction.
I think it’s worth recalling here that just over a year ago both houses of Congress unwisely passed the defense reauthorization bill that killed the concept of habeas corpus – legislation that authorized the president to use the U.S. military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial.
That legislation would empower a lame-duck Obama to use all of the power of the federal government – constitutional and unconstitutional – to target his political enemies.
If any Republican, conservative, independent journalist, pro-life activist, returning veteran, gun-rights activist, constitutionalist, Bible believer or critic of Obama thinks they will be safe in a second term under this would-be despot, they had better think again – real fast.
The “civilian national security force” is not here to protect any of them. It’s here to destroy the opposition. It’s here to destroy liberty. It’s here to destroy the Constitution.
WND
Is the U.S. government getting ready for a war we don’t know about?
And, if that’s why Washington is stockpiling massive amounts of ammunition (hollow points, by the way), why is Homeland Security doing the buying instead of the Defense Department?
I have some theories.
Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama’s little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.
Here’s what he actually said at a campaign stop in Colorado July 2, 2008: “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
Click here to see video of Obama's comments
Could what we see happening now in the Department of Homeland Security be the beginning of Obama’s dream and our constitutional nightmare?
We’ve learned more about Obama’s vision since then. Maybe it’s time for a review:
- He made the campaign promise to build this $439 billion domestic army, but all references to the initiative were inexplicably deleted from the copy of his speech posted on his website while others mysteriously disappeared from transcripts of the speech distributed by the campaign. That was strange – and ominous.
- At the time, I had never heard anyone use the phrase “civilian national security force” before. But I did a little homework and found out where it originated. It was first proposed by then Bush administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates. On that basis alone, I accurately predicted that, if elected, Obama would name Gates as his own defense secretary. Needless to say, when that appointment came to pass, no media outlet bothered to interview me about my foresight.
- Still during the campaign of 2008, I suggested that what Obama had in mind might be something very sinister indeed – perhaps “some kind of domestic Big Brother program.”
But that brings us up to 2013 and the highly unusual stockpiling of firearms and ammo by Homeland Security – firearms and ammo that Obama would like to deny to ordinary citizens who are not members of his domestic army.
Well, I hate to say it, but I may have predicted this, too.
In a Halloween column last fall, I stated that, if re-elected, Obama would “declare a full-scale war on his domestic opposition.”
I wasn’t joking. I was deadly serious – so serious, in fact, that I did something I pledged I would never do: Vote for Mitt Romney. It was a matter of self-defense and self-preservation. I said then that a second term of Obama might mean we would never see another free and fair election in America.
(I’m not even sure we saw one in 2012.) I suggested due process would go the way of the horse and buggy. I said I expected Obama would move to shut down or destroy all independent media. I even speculated that his biggest critics would eventually be rounded up in the name of national security.
Think about it.
Why does the civilian Department of Homeland Security need billions of rounds of ammunition?
This is the agency that is responsible for policing the border. But it doesn’t.
This is the agency that is responsible for catching terrorists. But it doesn’t.
So why does Homeland Security need so many weapons and enough hollow-point rounds to plug every American six times?
Maybe this is the “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the Defense Department.
These words – “civilian national security force” – have haunted me ever since I first read them.
Obama has never explained what he meant.
He’s never been called to account for that remark.
Doesn’t this sound like police-state talk to you?
The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn’t count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. defense budget was $439 billion. No one knows what the budget is today because Congress stopped passing budgets when Obama took office.
Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? Is this part of his second-term agenda?
He has also set up, as I have reported, a new homeland security bureaucracy to operate under his own direction.
I think it’s worth recalling here that just over a year ago both houses of Congress unwisely passed the defense reauthorization bill that killed the concept of habeas corpus – legislation that authorized the president to use the U.S. military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial.
That legislation would empower a lame-duck Obama to use all of the power of the federal government – constitutional and unconstitutional – to target his political enemies.
If any Republican, conservative, independent journalist, pro-life activist, returning veteran, gun-rights activist, constitutionalist, Bible believer or critic of Obama thinks they will be safe in a second term under this would-be despot, they had better think again – real fast.
The “civilian national security force” is not here to protect any of them. It’s here to destroy the opposition. It’s here to destroy liberty. It’s here to destroy the Constitution.
Sunday, February 3, 2013
The New "American Way"
Recently,
our good friend Michael (a local realtor) shared his experience with
an Obama supporter he encountered while showing homes to a low
income, working family in Pontiac, Michigan. We asked him to write it down
so we could share it with you. Here’s his story…
“I
thought I'd seen or heard it all. I was showing homes in Pontiac , MI.
one afternoon recently and showed up at a home at the 4:00 pm time
my appointment was scheduled for. After I woke up the homeowner, she
let us in and then proceeded to tell my buyers and I that she has
already entered into a contract to sell the home on a short-sale. (A
short-sale is a sale where the banks accepts less money than is owed on the
home).
After
some chit-chat, she proceeded to tell us that she and her sister
(who also lived in the area) were buying each other's homes via the
short-sale process. I mentioned to her that I thought relatives
could not be involved in those transactions. She smiled and said
"We have two different last names so no one knows the
difference".
She went on to tell us that each of them owed over 100K on their homes and were in the process of buying each other's homes for about $10-15K cash. To top it off, they were each receiving $3,000.00 in government provided relocation assistance at the closing.
My buyers and I were amazed that she was outright admitting to fraud and yet, she continued. She began to tell us that the best part of their scheme was that because they currently were not working that they (both) are now receiving Section 8 Vouchers.
I said I thought those were for renters and she said "That's the best part; me and my sister are going to be renting each other's homes so we don't even have to move, and Obama is going to give us each $800.00 a month to pay the rent!" She then picked up a picture she had framed of Obama and did a little happy dance around her living room and while she kissed the picture she was singing "Thank you Obama.... thank you Obama."
She went on to tell us that each of them owed over 100K on their homes and were in the process of buying each other's homes for about $10-15K cash. To top it off, they were each receiving $3,000.00 in government provided relocation assistance at the closing.
My buyers and I were amazed that she was outright admitting to fraud and yet, she continued. She began to tell us that the best part of their scheme was that because they currently were not working that they (both) are now receiving Section 8 Vouchers.
I said I thought those were for renters and she said "That's the best part; me and my sister are going to be renting each other's homes so we don't even have to move, and Obama is going to give us each $800.00 a month to pay the rent!" She then picked up a picture she had framed of Obama and did a little happy dance around her living room and while she kissed the picture she was singing "Thank you Obama.... thank you Obama."
So
here is the bottom line. Both of these scammers got at least $80,000.00 in
debt forgiven, $3,000.00 in cash for relocation (when in fact
they did not relocate) and to boot, you and I will now be paying (through
our taxes) $1,600.00 in rent for each them each and every
month....perhaps forever!
Is it any wonder why so many people have decided that all they have to do is VOTE for the Democrats and they will be taken care of for life at the expense of the taxpayers? I would not be at all surprised if they are receiving food stamps and whatever other programs are available for anyone who is willing to lie to get assistance.
These women went from working and paying about $900.00 each in mortgage payments to staying home and getting paid $800.00 each per month to live in the same home they had been living in and all they had to do was lie on a few papers.
This craziness has to stop! I'm sure this kind of fraud is going on each and every day all across the country and no one wants to touch the subject of entitlements because they might OFFEND someone or lose a vote or two.
By the way...she had an almost new SUV in the driveway, three flat screen TV's and a very nice computer set up in her living room which was furnished entirely with nice leather furniture.
IT'S THE NEW 'AMERICAN WAY'.....
For all of the "do-gooder's" who voted for Obama to help the "less fortunate" .... CHEERS ..... they are now the "most fortunate!"
Is it any wonder why so many people have decided that all they have to do is VOTE for the Democrats and they will be taken care of for life at the expense of the taxpayers? I would not be at all surprised if they are receiving food stamps and whatever other programs are available for anyone who is willing to lie to get assistance.
These women went from working and paying about $900.00 each in mortgage payments to staying home and getting paid $800.00 each per month to live in the same home they had been living in and all they had to do was lie on a few papers.
This craziness has to stop! I'm sure this kind of fraud is going on each and every day all across the country and no one wants to touch the subject of entitlements because they might OFFEND someone or lose a vote or two.
By the way...she had an almost new SUV in the driveway, three flat screen TV's and a very nice computer set up in her living room which was furnished entirely with nice leather furniture.
IT'S THE NEW 'AMERICAN WAY'.....
For all of the "do-gooder's" who voted for Obama to help the "less fortunate" .... CHEERS ..... they are now the "most fortunate!"
Friday, February 1, 2013
The Real Gun Problem
So, let's see...based on these maps, wherever there's a Democrat voting majority there are more restrictions on gun ownership which apparently encourages criminals to break out their guns and start shooting. And wherever there's a Republican majority there are fewer restrictions on gun ownership which apparently discourages criminals from brandishing their weaponry for fear of getting shot by a gun-toting, law-abiding citizen.
I guess you could therefore conclude that gun free zones are nothing more than shooting galleries and the law-abiding citizens are the ducks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
