Mike Corthell

Mike Corthell
Editor & Publisher at Fryeburg Free Press MEDIA

Friday, July 31, 2009

No Need to Apologize Sgt. Crowley and Bravo You Didn't


''If Dr. Gates is really so concerned about profiling, how about if he can convince young Black criminals to stop committing violent crimes that get all Blacks profiled from time to time. I guess that’s not half so rewarding as playing the victim though, is it?''


Gates you see, made this minor matter into a case of racial profiling, which now is considered a horrible injustice. But used correctly, it’s an effective police tool that can save lives.
That’s because different groups do have varying criminal propensities. We’re talking about averages here. To say that one group is more apt (statistically) to commit a crime by no means implies that every member of the group does. But it’s a fact that the odds are higher with some groups than with others.
Most people instinctively know this, but are afraid to say it publicly. Nowadays, some people could lose their career over talking about it.
By profiling, I don’t mean arresting people based on their group and not their individual behavior. Of course not. But certain groups have more of a statistical propensity toward crime than others, and it’s not wrong for the police to take note of that.
Males and females, for example. Males are statistically much more likely to commit a violent crime than females. So you can profile by gender.
Or, you can profile by age and marital status. A twenty-year old single male is more likely to commit a violent crime than a thirty-year old married man. There’s something about marriage that reduces men’s criminal propensities (on average).
Now, about race. Black activists complain about Blacks being profiled. But there’s a reason for that. The reason is that Blacks have a much higher rate of violent crime than Whites do. That’s a fact.

Obama should tell the Israelis, "Cool the jets!"


''Ahmadinejad is not so tough a customer as Stalin, Khrushchev or Mao, who talked of accepting 300 million dead in a nuclear exchange. Moreover, Ahmadinejad has no nukes, no authority to take Iran to war, and is looking like a very lame duck before his second term has begun.''


Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, who is wired into the cabinet of "Bibi" Netanyahu, warns that if Iran's nuclear program is not aborted by December, Israel will strike to obliterate it.
Defense Secretary Gates'
mission to Israel this week, says Bolton, to relay Obama's red light, was listened to attentively, but will not be decisive.
Israel will decide.
One trusts Gates got into the face of Defense Minister Ehud Barak. For an Israeli strike on Iran, which Joe Biden foolishly said was Israel's call, would drag this country into a third war in the Middle East and destroy a policy that is visibly succeeding.
The Iranian regime is still reeling from the June 12 election, widely perceived in Iran and worldwide as stolen, and its tumultuous aftermath. Hundreds of thousands poured into the streets to protest the election, and then attack the legitimacy itself of the Islamic regime.
The
government is gripped by its worst crisis since the revolution of 1979. Members of Iran's establishment with unimpeachable revolutionary credentials have declared the election a fraud.
Ahmadinejad's selection as first vice president of Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie, whose son is married to his daughter, and who has said some kind words about Israel, outraged conservatives.
Ahmadinejad was ordered by Ayatollah Khamenei to rescind the Mashaie appointment. For days he balked, then sent a curt note saying he would comply. Ahmadinejad further affronted the ayatollah by naming Mashaie his chief of staff.
Teheran is now ablaze over reports that scores of street protesters arrested in June may have been beaten to death in prison.
There is talk in Teheran, even before he has been sworn in for a second term, that Ahmadinejad may be impeached or ousted long before he can complete it.
America's policy of patience is
working.
And as Ahmadinejad is Israel's bete noire, who Netanyahu cites as the religious fanatic who wants to "wipe Israel off the map" and will launch a
nuclear weapon on Tel Aviv as soon as he gets it, why would Israel strike now, and reunite Iranians behind this regime?
Why does Israel insist that America has only five months to halt Iran's nuclear program, or Israel must attack?

A Suggested Read for a Vacationing Congress

How does it all end?

Why not Billy Beer?


What Was Cut from Mom's Womb?


The headlines from hundreds of news outlets tell an unintended story: The brutal Massachusetts murder of a pregnant mom and the child ripped from her womb has confirmed again what we all know about the mainstream media's abortion guilt.
Pregnant moms don't say, "I can feel the fetus kick." Not even an abortionist's pregnant wife would say, "The clump of cells just moved!" And the media knows it's a baby. Yet if Google News search results for July 28 and July 29 are any valid indication, hundreds of news stories reported the murder of "Darlene Haynes" without using the term "baby" to describe the child cut from her womb.
Consider ABC News as a case study. One ABC headline reads: "
Slain pregnant woman lived in same building with accused fetus-stealer." Boy, talk about identify theft. The media avoid the term baby and prefer technical terms that describe states of early human development in their effort to de-humanize the unborn child and prolong the age of de-criminalized abortion. The suspect, Julie Corey, was charged with kidnapping. But in a murder case, ABC referring to the fetus as a kid seems just too close for comfort.
Just two weeks earlier ABC News did use the term baby to refer to an unborn child. Why? Because the context had nothing to do with murder, nor would it invoke the possibility of a dead child. ABC News referred to a fetus as a baby when Dutch researchers played vibroacoustic "sound to the growing baby" in the uterus.
This ABC news report merely documents what we've been telling the public for years about the unborn child's ability to learn his mother's voice and even remember the songs she sings.
The July 29
ABC News headline, for example, "Mom-to-be Darlene Haynes killed, cops search for her fetus," is followed by this copy: "Police … are searching for a fetus that was ripped from her mother's womb. ... At 8 months, there is a chance the fetus could still be alive. …" If alive and outside of the mother's womb, it is technically inaccurate to refer to this little girl as a fetus. The murder of Wichita's George Tiller was not just a very late-term abortion.
ABC's "fetus-stealer" notwithstanding, a
survey of worldwide headlines show that after the child was found alive, the media became more comfortable using the term "baby." The day before, CNN's headline, for example, read, "Woman killed, fetus cut from body." But after the little girl was found: "Baby cut from murdered mother's womb is alive," ran in the AFP and USA Today wrote of the, "Woman accused of cutting baby from mom's womb." http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105502

Requiem for The Obama File


''If such a prayer has but $10 a month to give, he or she could help to underwrite the work of one sentinel like Parker Shannon every month. Ten thousand could meet all his needs by giving only $1 a month, or with $10 they could each month meet the needs of nine others like him. If prayers (people who pray) would stop idly taking God for granted and start actively embodying the blessings they pray for, they alone could be the mighty engine that renews the hope and promise of America's God given liberty.''


I read with sadness but no surprise WND's article about the demise of The Obama File, "an extensive depot of information questioning Barack Obama's eligibility to hold the office of president." According to the article,
Parker Shannon, a 70-year-old retiree who has documented alleged violations by Obama for the past two years from his home in
suburban Boston … stresses his decision to shut down the site had nothing to do with any kind of pressure from the government.
"The Obama camp didn't get to me. They can't," he told WND. "What got to me is my fellow Americans, the cheap bastards."
"I'm disappointed," he said, explaining he lives on Social Security and a small amount of retirement money. "I just am tired of doing what I'm doing, and I get 50
e-mails
a day telling me I'm a great patriot and they're praying for me. I don't want to hear it. Just send me $10."
Shannon says he spent 60 to 70 hours a week on his efforts and received only $240 in the entire two years despite displaying prominent donation buttons. …
The juxtaposition of prayerful good wishes and indolent support highlights one of the saddest realities of our time. Christ advised his disciples to rely for sustenance on the goodwill of friendly hosts, "eating and
drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages" (Luke 10:7). But many of those who work today to defeat the overthrow of our God-given liberty are perishing from the material indifference of those who benefit from and approve of their work.
This partly reflects a successful strategy being implemented by the forces working to achieve the overthrow of liberty. Faced with facts and reasoning they cannot refute, they resort to ad hominem attacks. Chief among these is the accusation that greed motivates the people who try to share facts and arguments the manipulative media systematically ignore. (Ironically greed is, of course, among the chief motives of those who staff the corporate
media outlets.) Meanwhile, the people being accused, people like Parker Shannon, me and others I hear from practically every day, inexorably slide toward bankruptcy . http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105496

Obama's Future?...We'll See


You know, I had to look up from my crossword puzzle when I heard O'Reilly say that. His body language was so confidently dismissive that I thought, "something smells here."
My second thought was that he had been "bought out" by the powers that be. He has caved.
Actually, I have gotten so fed up with his interrupting and talking over his guests that I now mostly switch over to re-runs of the "Gilmore Girls" series.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if this all came back to bite him – and all the other "pooh-poohers" – in the future? After all, the money and the legal work that Obama has expended to keep his paper trail secret is damming in my book; as you have pointed out, all this would take is $10 to make the whole issue go away.
So much for O'Reilly. What really bothers me is that Ann Coulter joined their bandwagon. Surely she reads WorldNetDaily; she is a contributor after all. What, I wonder, could be her excuse?
I read where the guy that ran "Obama File" is taking it down from the web; he says that the story has legs, that the guy is on the way down.
My dad had a saying, it was: "We'll see."

Born in a manger in Honolulu


''The fact that his father was Kenyan means nothing. Obama's mother was an American citizen, therefore he became one automatically. But – here's where the birthers have no ground to stand on – even if she were not an American, it wouldn't make any difference. According to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, "all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power ... are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." (Today, that includes children of undocumented immigrants).''


In September 2002, astronaut Buzz Aldrin was walking out of a Beverly Hills hotel when Bart Sibrel, a leader of the nutty gang who believe the Apollo mission
was actually faked in a Hollywood studio, confronted him.
"You're the one who said you walked on the
moon when you never did," shouted Sibrel. When Aldrin politely asked him to step aside, Sibrel called him a "thief, liar, and coward," whereupon the then-72-year-old Aldrin punched Sibrel in the face.
Good for Aldrin. But, compared to Barack Obama, he got off easy. At least Sibrel didn't question the circumstances of Aldrin's
birth.
There may be a few "moonies" left, but for the most part "birthers" have replaced them. Yes, they actually call themselves that: "Birthers." That name alone proves they're crazy.
According to the birthers, Barack Obama is not the legitimate president of the United States because there's no proof that he was born in the United States. Of
course, neither was John McCain, but why compound one conspiracy with another?
Now, you might expect to encounter birthers in the mountain hollows of West Virginia, but you actually don't have to go that far. They can be found among some of the biggest names in radio, television and the U.S. Capitol. Rush Limbaugh insists that Obama has "yet to prove that he's a citizen." CNN's Lou Dobbs nightly asserts that the "question of Obama's place of birth hasn't been dealt with." Ten Republican members of Congress have sponsored legislation requiring all future candidates for president to produce a valid birth certificate. And former Republican Majority Whip Roy Blunt, now running for U.S. Senate, told reporters: "What I don't know is why the president can't produce a birth certificate. I don't know anybody else that can't produce one. And I think that's a legitimate question."
The Obama birth conspiracy is even the subject of
a new documentary produced by Joseph Farah, publisher of the WorldNetDaily which, proving that it is "fair and balanced," also publishes my weekly column.

Birthers vs the anti-Birthers


''I don't care about anyone's citizenship. Is he human? Was he elected? End of story. I would not care if they want to make it possible for Arnold to run either. Big deal.''


The only thing weirder than the Birthers are the anti-Birthers, who blame the Birthers for being conspiracy theorists yet actively feed the conspiracy by refusing to call for President Obama to release his birth certificate.
The state official in Hawaii who manages such things has
reiterated that there is indeed an original birth certificate on file which would confirm President Obama's having been born in Hawaii and that she has seen it, but state law won't allow her to release it unless the president authorizes it.
So what's the problem here? Release the original and let's be done with this madness.
I realize there are some faith-based Obama supporters who believe without seeing, but the rest of us in the reality-based world are starting to get that strange feeling we got when Mark Sanford tried to convince us that he was away from his family on Father's Day, hiking the Appalachian trail in order to clear his head and write a book.
During the last campaign, John McCain faced similar questions and promptly responded by releasing his original birth
certificate. That's how normal people with nothing to hide handle these things.
Most American's aren't Birthers or anti-Birthers, but we are beginning to wonder why the president doesn't put this one to rest once and for all. Every day he allows this circus to continue is another day that he behaves less like the President of the United States facing weird accusations from fringe groups and more like a strange politician flying to Argentina to visit his soul-mate while pretending to be hiking the Appalachians.

Did Jesus actually reveal name of the antichrist?


''"I want to emphasize I'm not ashamed of what I put there," he told WND. "I'm not proclaiming he is the antichrist, or that I'm some kind of a Hebrew expert, but the word associations are indisputable. The Hebrew word for lightning is 'Baraq' and the word for heights or high places is 'Bamah.'" ''


For centuries, many have wondered about the identity of a biblical leader who will do Satan the devil's bidding, trying to thwart the plans of Jesus Christ shortly before His prophesied return to Earth.
That character has come to be known as "the antichrist," even though the Bible never uses that word to describe any single person.
Now, after endless speculation suggesting Presidents John F. Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush could possibly by the End Times Bad Boy, there's a new viral video placing the current occupant of the White
House into the club.
An American Christian has produced a
brief film for YouTube that connects one statement by Jesus in the Gospel of Luke to President Barack Obama.
His 4-minute video focuses on the direct quote: "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."
(Luke 10:18) "When I started doing a little research, I found the Greek word for 'lightning' is 'astrape', and the Hebrew equivalent is 'Baraq,'" said YouTube contributor "ppsimmons," a self-described Christian with a theological education and many years in the ministry, who spoke to WND under condition of anonymity. "I thought that was fascinating." As he continued looking into the rest of the words in the phrase, he focused on "heaven," and found that it can refer not just to God's dwelling place, but also "the heights" or "high places."

Thursday, July 30, 2009

A Yellow River Flows Through It

At 1600 Penna, The Skunk Pisses on Your Intelligence

Don't Bogart My Suds Edith


Obama Didn't Offer Champagne and Fish Eggs


''One interesting fallout from the tragic business in Cambridge – and it is tragic, let me tell you – was that the president was forced to speak suddenly in his own voice, and at his very best, and not swathed in the authority of his great rank, but simply as a citizen making a sensible comment about a nobody policeman. Yes, I mean “nobody” literally – I know all human beings, if they are Americans, are highly valued and worshiped, indeed, for their wonderfulness and their helpfulness to fellow citizens.''


For those of us who had hoped that the Obama administration would present us with a rebirth of the old republic that was so rudely erased a few years ago by that team of judicial wreckers, Bush and Gonzales, which led, in turn, to a recent incident in Cambridge, Mass. that inspired a degree of alarm in many Americans. But what was most alarming was the plain fact that neither the president nor a “stupid” local policeman seemed to understand the rules of behavior in a new America, where we find ourselves marooned as well as guarded (is that the verb?) by armed police who have been instructed that they are indeed, once armed, the law and may not be criticized verbally or in any other way and are certainly not subject to any restrictions as to whom they arrest or otherwise torment.
This is rather worse than anyone might have predicted, even though the signs have been clear for some years that ours is now a proto-fascist nation and there appears to be no turning back; nor, indeed, much awareness on the part of our ever-alert media. Forgive me if you find my irony heavy, but I too get tired of carrying it about in “the greatest nation in the country,” as Spiro Agnew liked to say.

MSNBC's "Hardball," Chris Matthews Invents Facts - Again


''Chris Matthews said that Gates did not say, "I'll speak with your mama outside," as stated in the police report. "He didn't say this," Matthews asserted as fact. This invented fact allowed Matthews to accuse the cop of engaging in "projection" and to conjure Crowley's psychological state, saying, this is "what a white guy thought a black guy would say."''


You could not ask for a more perfect illustration of the thesis of my latest book, "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America," than the black president of the United States attacking a powerless white cop for arresting a black Harvard professor – in a city with a black mayor and a state with a black governor – as the professor vacations in Martha's Vineyard.
In modern America, the alleged "victim" is always really the aggressor, and the alleged "aggressor" is always the true victim.
President Barack Obama planted the question during a
health care press conference, hoping he could satisfy the Chicago Sun-Times, which has been accusing him of not being black enough. He somehow imagined that the rest of the country might not notice the president of the United States gratuitously attacking a cop in a case of alleged "racial profiling."
Oops.
Suddenly, with the glare of the national spotlight being turned on a small local story, it became clear that there was no "racial profiling" involved – other than by the black Harvard professor, who lorded his credentials and connections over a white
working-class cop.
We wouldn't have known about this case at all if the professor, Henry Louis Gates Jr., hadn't blast e-mailed the universe that he was harassed by racist cops. Gates thought it would be a feather in his cap, not realizing there are huge areas of the country where people don't think it's heroic to browbeat cops checking on you after you break into your own
house, such as 99 percent of the country outside of Cambridge.

Your President is an Alien


''The onus is on Obama to prove that he meets the requirements set forth in the Constitution. If he could do so, he most certainly would have by now. It doesn't matter if he got 100 percent of the vote. He's not eligible to serve. The Senate has no power or authority to intervene in this argument, it cannot retroactively declare him a citizen, and the voice vote''


In a recent prison interview, Barack Obama Bernie Madoff told an interviewer, "I can't believe I got away with it."
Well, Bernie only got away with half of it: the money half. The lying half of it has landed him in federal prison for a 150 year sentence. Given the draconian nature of federal sentencing laws, I'm sure we can expect Bernie to serve at least three-and-a-half years.
That should be time enough for him to write his memoirs, find a publisher, remake himself into a victim and actually earn some honest (everything is relative today, isn't it?) money.
How much Obama gets away with is yet to be seen. Questions about the legitimacy of his citizenship seem to be gaining traction. I say that because the world's greatest deliberative body paused from its stimulation labors long enough to pass a resolution "affirming" that "the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961."
The Senate offered no evidence for its claims. That's not surprising, since there is none.
More importantly, it offered no evidence of the vote; it was a voice vote, and this summer the "folks back home" will hear that "their" senator most certainly did not vote for "that" resolution. It will have passed by a margin of zero for and 100 against. So much for the world's greatest deliberative body.
Please honk if you think these people have been "serving" America too long.
I found it somewhat amusing that Sen. John McCain's campaign lawyers said they explored the citizenship issue, but declined to proceed with it because there was no evidence that Obama was not born in the U.S. I guess that means the next time I try to get back into the U.S. without a passport, they will have to let me in unless there is evidence I was not born there. Give that one a try, folks.

Hey, Bill O'Reilly: We'll decide - You Report


''I think you chose the easy road on this story because you are sucking up to Obama in hopes of another one of those ratings-generating exclusive interviews in which the American people learn nothing. That's not good journalism, Bill. Journalism is comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. Journalism is serving as a watchdog on government and other powerful institutions.''


I have a challenge to my old buddy Bill O'Reilly – put up or shut up!
You told your viewers this week that challenges to Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility are "bogus."
You claimed you and your news organization examined Obama's birth certificate last year and found it to be in order.
Can I ask a question, Bill? Why don't you simply reveal to your viewers exactly what you saw and what you found?
Fox News Channel's slogan is, "We report, you decide." Why don't you try actually reporting the story, rather than deciding for us?
Here's the story, Bill, whether you recognize it or not: Tens of millions of Americans have serious doubts about Obama's right to be in office. They are concerned that the system broke down and did not require proof of his constitutional qualifications. They don't want double talk like they've been getting from politicians and the media elite. They don't want more platitudinous assertions. They don't expect to have their well-informed suspicions be ridiculed by the likes of you, Shepherd Smith, Chris Matthews, the New York Times, the Associated Press and the rest of the media monopoly singing in harmony.
The American people have figured out what you apparently are unable or unwilling to discern: Obama's hiding something. One of the somethings he is undoubtedly hiding is his birth certificate.
I will go also out on a limb, Bill, and proclaim that you were, shall we say, disingenuous when you claimed to have inspected Obama's birth certificate. If you got your hands on it, why didn't you show it to your viewers? If your goal is, as you state, to put an end to a bogus story, the obvious way would have been to share with your audience what you saw.
I don't think you saw anything, Bill.

If You're Fat, You're Part of the Problem


''The majority of the incurred costs relate to diseases that obesity causes, such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. This group is bar far the biggest pointless users of expensive medication. By and large, the path to disease through obesity is self inflicted. The costs are staggering.''


While Democrats shoot themselves in both feet trying to explain how their proposed health care reform will be able to contain costs over time, there is another much better organized group who is pushing very hard to get this legislation through and is poised for dramatic profits at the expense of the American taxpayer. That group is the lobbyists that represent Big Pharma, the American Medical Association, hospital groups, and insurance companies.
According to OpenSecrets.org these groups put up $484 million in lobbying money in 2008, getting ready for this legislation. You can just imagine how much they are spending this year. The reason you can imagine the sum must be quite large is because Obama and company are doing absolutely nothing to address the key issues of how these groups plan to profit from a government-backed stream of millions of new customers.
The trend in the last several years is that employer-sponsored health care plans are shrinking and individual policies are too expensive for many. Government and private insurance are cozying up and private insurance companies are playing a middle-man role in programs like Medicare and Medicaid. At stake is the dividing of the hundreds of billions of dollars per year pie created by fraudulent Big Pharma sales.
The lobbying scenario is quite different than the previous Clinton attempt at a health care overhaul. At that time health industry was by and large against what was going on. This time they are fully on board and pushing very hard to make something happen, jockeying for their position in the New World Health Order.
The sad reality is that this group profits from sickness. They like poor health. They know individuals and companies can’t afford what they have to offer, so they have to call it “health care” or “health insurance,” and run a publicity campaign designed to make the American public feel guilty for not paying for everyone’s often fraudulent care.

Music is Just a Symptom


''These types of popular songs help destroy the moral values of our nation. And once our moral values are destroyed, we will then descend into chaos and ruin just like all past civilizations that lost their moral bearings.''


With the undermining of Biblical values through music, it was therefore not surprising that the year after “Age of Aquarius” was released as a single in 1969, Perry Como in 1970 recorded “It’s Impossible” which became very popular despite its lyrics, “I would sell my very soul and not regret it.” Similarly, in 1977 Debbie Boone recorded the popular “You Light Up My Life,” with the lyrics, “It can’t be wrong when it feels so right,” intimating that how one feels about a female-male relationship is more important than whether it might otherwise (e.g., morally) be wrong.
In the late 1960s and through the 1970s, rock music was followed by “hard rock.” Writing about this in Crisis in Christian Music (2000), Dr. Jack Wheaton explained that “the repetitive, constant loud backbeat” of the drummer, “the pulsating (at an ear-splitting level), low-frequency vibrations, and the soaring, wailing, crying sounds of the amplified guitar trigger major subconscious emotional responses in the body, primarily stimulating aggressiveness, as well as providing increasing, but difficult to control, energy.” He further related that when this music triggers the listener’s fight-or-flight syndrome, “the body is actually getting ‘high’ on its own internally-produced drug (adrenaline), resulting in… an increased tendency to aggressive and anti-social behavior.”
According to Dr. David Noebel, this type of music has harmonic dissonance and melodic discord, which violate man’s natural body rhythms. And Dr. John Diamond, a New York City psychiatrist, some years ago studied beats of over 20,000 recordings and concluded “that a specific beat (‘stopped anapestic rhythm,’ which is contrary to our natural body beats and rhythms) found in over half of the top hits of any given week can actually weaken you…. It interferes with brain wave patterns causing mental stress.”

Palin's poll numbers falling!


''If Obama is lucky, the health care push ends up with mostly cosmetic changes or, even better, falls through altogether. Ditto for a second "stimulus" package.''


Stop the presses (or the tweets)! Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's numbers are falling! Why not concern ourselves with that as 2012 nears. What about Obama's numbers right now? They are tanking – big time. A recent "news" article stated, "While the president remains personally popular ..."
Is he?
Certainly the Gallup poll – the go-to polls for most cable news shows – put Obama's "favorability ratings" among "adults" fairly high. There is, however, another prominent and respected polling firm: Rasmussen Reports.
Look at CNN, the organization that markets itself as real, nonpartisan news. In a recent three-month period, there were 26 instances in which a CNN newscast used the words "Obama" and "approval" and "Gallup." But the words "Obama" and "approval" and "Rasmussen" appeared in only one CNN news show.
What's the diff?
Gallup samples "adults." This includes people, especially the young and mostly liberal, who feel strongly about lots of things – until it's time to show up and vote. Rasmussen, on the other hand, samples "likely voters" – the folks the politicians give a rip about. They vote them in office or throw them out.
Numbers go up and down. But next year – a semi-eternity in politics – the entire House goes up for re-election, as does a third of the Senate. As we approach this first referendum on Obama, politicians, if not CNN, pay attention to the "likelies."
How are the likelies liking him now?
Likely voters now put Obama at less than 50 percent, below the 53 percent who voted for him in November. Of his performance, 29 percent say they "strongly approve." But 39 percent say they "strongly disapprove." That's a minus 10. It's down a tick from a recent minus 11-point gap – the worst ever for Obama. A president's ability to push through his agenda turns on whether congresspersons back him. And they back him when they expect the voters to back them.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Nature not man responsible for recent global warming


''Three Australasian researchers have shown that natural forces are the dominant influence on climate, in a study just published in the highly-regarded Journal of Geophysical Research.''


'Surge in global temps since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean'
A new peer-reviewed climate study is presenting a head on challenge to man-made global warming claims. The study by three climate researchers appears in the July 23, 2009 edition of Journal of Geophysical Research. (
Link to Abstract)
Full Press Release and Abstract to Study:
July 23, 2009
Nature not man responsible for recent global warming
Three Australasian researchers have shown that natural forces are the dominant influence on climate, in a study just published in the highly-regarded Journal of Geophysical Research. According to this study little or none of the late 20th century global warming and cooling can be attributed to human activity.
The research, by Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, John McLean (Melbourne) and Bob Carter (James Cook University), finds that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures seven months later. As an additional influence, intermittent volcanic activity injects cooling aerosols into the atmosphere and produces significant cooling.
"The surge in global temperatures since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean that made warming El Niño conditions more likely than they were over the previous 30 years and cooling La Niña conditions less likely" says corresponding author de Freitas.
"We have shown that internal global climate-system variability accounts for at least 80% of the observed global climate variation over the past half-century. It may even be more if the period of influence of major volcanoes can be more clearly identified and the corresponding data excluded from the analysis.”
Climate researchers have long been aware that ENSO events influence global temperature, for example causing a high temperature spike in 1998 and a subsequent fall as conditions moved to La Niña. It is also well known that volcanic activity has a cooling influence, and as is well documented by the effects of the 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption.

The Prez Now Knows He's Not From Krypton


Read Closely the Fine Print Dear Citizen


''The Senate bill's official summary also authorizes "home visits" to "improve immunization coverage." Will Americans tolerate a knock on the door from a government agent demanding that we and our children receive all government-ordered vaccines?''


The House Democrats' health care bill is titled "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009." No clue is given as to how long we will have a choice, but it will probably be only until the "public option" chases private insurance out of business.
The bill's subtitle states its purpose as health care for everyone, reducing "the growth in health care spending ... and for other purposes." Note that the goal is not to reduce spending but only the "growth" in spending, and we need to worry about the "other purposes" that will be added by the bureaucrats' regulations.
The bill states that health care benefits require "shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the
government." That means the government will force all taxpayers to pay for health care for millions of people who don't now buy insurance because they don't need it, or because insurance doesn't cover what they do need (Page 5).
The bill states that the government will investigate "self-insured
employers not being able to pay obligations." Government agents will audit and then harass small-business owners to force them to pay for insurance they cannot afford (Page 22).
The bill provides for optional "nurse
home visitation services" without specifying who has power to exercise the option. Among the various purposes listed are "increasing birth intervals between pregnancies" (this reminds us of China's policies to reduce childbirth by married couples), reducing "child abuse, neglect, and injury" (giving more authority to the already too powerful Child Protective Services) and promoting school readiness. (Will homeschooling be scorned?) (Page 768)
The bill covers family planning. Those are well-known code words for taxpayer-funded contraception and abortion, and will impose mandatory coverage of abortion on demand in all health plans (Page 772).
The bill provides for "culturally and linguistically appropriate communication and health services" and "shall give priority to applicants that have developed partnerships with community organizations or with agencies with experience in language access." This opens up plenty of funding for health and translation services for illegal aliens (Pages 405 and 407)....

Obama, Gates and black guilt


''Here is Gates on racial profiling in New York magazine from 1997: "Blacks – in particular, black men – swap their experiences of police encounters like war stories, and there are few who don't have more than one story to tell … There's a moving violation that many African-Americans know as DWB: Driving while black."''


The situation in Cambridge, Mass., surrounding professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s arrest has been analyzed and reanalyzed from nearly every angle. The character of police Sgt. James Crowley has been dragged through the mud, then polished, then dragged through the mud again.
But Gates has, for the most part, escaped scrutiny. At worst, he has been described as a racialist, a man who sees every aspect of American life through the lens of ethnicity. At best, he has been described (by racialist and full-fledged polysyllable-babbling idiot Michael Eric Dyson) as the "Rosa Parks of racial profiling."
But Gates is more than that. He is a faux moderate who, underneath it all, is convinced that American society is deeply and irreparably racist. He is an opportunist and a defender and purveyor of the "dominant white racism" myth that continues to plague American society.
He is, underneath it all, Barack Obama.
Which is why President Obama came to Gates' defense without knowing the facts and without knowing Sgt. Crowley. He and Gates are on the same wavelength
: The police are, by and large, a bunch of discriminatory brutes. Whites can never quite do enough to atone for the sins of their ancestors. And blacks, short of openly violent conduct, can never do anything that would justify arrest.

Obama has many shovels with which to bury America


''The truth is, it's not just Obama who confounds me. It's all liberals. I mean, doesn't it even occur to them that when a conservative points out that Obama, Pelosi, Schumer and Barney Frank are burying America in trillions of dollars of debt that saying, "Well, Bush left us with half a trillion dollars of debt" isn't much of a rejoinder? ''


By this time, I'm sure we've all heard more than we care to about professor Henry Gates. Still, I can't let it go without tossing in my two cents. Admitting he didn't know the facts of the case didn't prevent President Obama, allegedly our first post-racial chief executive, from siding with the black professor and admonishing a white Cambridge policeman. Nothing too surprising about that, inasmuch as he appears to be far more concerned with the health and comfort of the Islamic terrorists down in Gitmo than he is with America's elderly citizens.
I also have a bone to pick with the media's portrayal of Gates. The way they kept describing him, you might have thought the guy had cured cancer or invented the microchip. His field happens to be black studies. Even at Harvard, that's tantamount in academic terms to basket weaving.
My own field of study is liberals. As I see it, the major difference between Prof. Gates and me is that he gets paid a lot of money, gets to eat in the faculty
dining room and when he acts like an egotistical jerk and swears at a cop doing his duty, he's the one who not only gets the apology, but gets the president of the United States to defend his boorish behavior.
The other day, a reader sent me an
e-mail in which she stated: "Obama is economically illiterate, 100 percent politically motivated, a bold-faced liar, thin-skinned and completely incompetent. And I must say that, contrary to the majority of the population, I believe he is inarticulate. I don't know what it is that others are seeing, but it certainly escapes me."
In response, I wrote, "Apparently they see the great and powerful Oz, whereas you and I see the mumbling, bumbling bumpkin that Toto exposed behind the curtain."

Biden's 'Jesus Christ' expletive is hate speech




''Had Biden used the name Mohammed in this manner, Muslims would be crying foul. Quite possibly rioting in the streets, to boot. And if the vice president had used "gay" or "Black" as swear words, folks would be rightfully angry about that, too. Hate speech is hate speech...''

People say you should never make small talk on politics or religion with mere acquaintances or strangers because those are topics about which many people have strongly held views that they don't care to have challenged by just anybody.
It's also long been the rule among prudent politicians with national aspirations to say nothing unkind about anybody's religious faith. But the silence that has greeted Vice President Joe Biden's use of "Jesus Christ" as an expletive in an on-the-record interview with The Wall Street Journal, suggests that such prudence has been tossed aside.
Biden isn't the first nor will he be the last politician to abuse the name of the man revered for two millennia by Christians of every denomination as the Savior, the God-Man who created and sustains the universe, and who at His Second Coming will someday return to Earth to judge all men. Jesus Christ is, in short, a heavy dude, if He is indeed the dude He claimed to be.
I have no idea what the vice president believes about Jesus. What I do know is that he apparently thought nothing of taking the name described in Holy Scripture "as the only name given under Heaven by which men are saved" and used it the same way most people routinely use the words "damn," "hell," and others unfit to print in a family newspaper.

The Oceans: Silent, Deep and Covert


“On several occasions the instruments gave reading of material objects moving at incredible speed. Calculations showed speeds of about 230 knots, of 400 kph. Speeding so fast is a challenge even on the surface. But water resistance is much higher. It was like the objects defied the laws of physics. There’s only one explanation: the creatures who built them far surpass us in development''


Russian Navy UFO records say aliens love oceans


The Russian navy has declassified its records of encounters with unidentified objects technologically surpassing anything humanity ever built, reports Svobodnaya Pressa news website.


The records dating back to soviet times were compiled by a special navy group collecting reports of unexplained incidents delivered by submarines and military ships. The group was headed by deputy Navy commander Admiral Nikolay Smirnov, and the documents reveal numerous cases of possible UFO encounters, the website says.
Vladimir Azhazha, former navy officer and a famous Russian UFO researcher, says the materials are of great value.
“Fifty percent of UFO encounters are connected with oceans. Fifteen more – with lakes. So UFOs tend to stick to the water,” he said.
On one occasion a nuclear submarine, which was on a combat mission in the Pacific Ocean, detected six unknown objects. After the crew failed to leave behind their pursuers by maneuvering, the captain ordered to surface. The objects followed suit, took to the air, and flew away.

Founding Fathers' thoughts on 'hate crimes'


''How many Americans of all ages know of James Madison writing to Thomas Jefferson: We have "extinguished forever the ambitious hope of making laws for the human mind." But here we now have added federalization of one way not even Bush and Cheney ever thought of to undermine the 14th Amendment's "equal protection of the laws" for individuals, not protected classes.''


Throughout the Bush-Cheney creation of a society under surveillance and unprecedented government secrecy, I have often praised Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., for resisting that administration's penchant for degrading the Constitution. But on July 16, he proudly watched as the Senate passed his "hate crimes" bill (the Matthew Shepard Act) that is the biggest expansion of federal hate crimes laws since 1968 – providing extra prison time to committers of violent acts perceived to be based on sexual orientation, gender identity or disability (adding to the previous classifications of race, color, religion or national origin).
On the Senate
floor, John McCain, R-Ariz., cut to the unconstitutional core of this bill and all such "hate crime" legislation. Leahy's bill, as of this writing, the president is eager to sign.
Said McCain: "Our legal system is based on identifying, capturing and punishing criminals, and not on using the power of government to try to define biases." In opposing what James Madison condemned as "thought crimes," McCain added: "Crimes motivated by hate deserve vigorous prosecution, but so do crimes motivated by absolute wanton disregard for life of any kind." No matter against whom.
Leahy's bill, like the counterpart "hate crimes" measure of House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., that passed in the House this past April, violates the 14th Amendment's equal protection under the laws for individual Americans by setting up a special collective class of victims whose assailants, when convicted, will be given extra punishment for crimes perceived to be based on gender identity, sexual orientation or disability, among other biases.
Those who attack the elderly, police or those of the poor who are not among the "protected classes" would not get lengthier "hate" sentences than the law provides for the act itself. Doesn't this make lesser citizens of their victims?

Exploiting public ignorance


''If you asked President Obama or a congressman to cite the specific constitutional authority for the bailouts, handouts and corporate takeover, I'd bet the rent money that they would say that their authority lies in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Impost, Excises to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." ''


How can political commentators, politicians and academics get away with statements like "Reagan budget deficits," "Clinton budget
surplus," "Bush budget deficits" or "Obama's tax increases"? The only answer is that they, or the people who believe such statements, are ignorant, conniving or just plain stupid. Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills." A president has no power to raise or lower taxes. He can propose tax measures or veto them, but since Congress can ignore presidential proposals and override a presidential veto, it has the ultimate taxing power. The same principle applies to spending. A president cannot spend a dime that Congress does not first appropriate. As such, presidents cannot be held responsible for budget deficits or surpluses. That means that credit for a budget surplus or blame for budget deficits rests on the congressional majority at the time.
Thinking about today's massive deficits, we might ask: Where in the U.S. Constitution is Congress given the authority to do anything about the economy? Between 1787 and 1930, we have had both mild and severe economic downturns that have ranged from one to seven years. During that time there was no thought that Congress should enact
New Deal legislation or stimulus packages along with massive corporate handouts. It took the Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt administrations to massively intervene in the economy. As a result, they turned what might have been a two or three-year sharp downturn into a 16-year depression that ended in 1946. How they accomplished that is covered very well in a book authored by Jim Powell titled "FDR's Folly." Here's my question: Were the presidents in office
and Congresses assembled from 1787 to 1930 ignorant of their constitutional authority to manage and save the economy?

The 'non-issue' everyone is talking about


''Now, I like Ann Coulter. I consider her a good friend. But when she starts hurling labels like "crank" toward me and my news agency – the only one, by the way, that has thoughtfully, meticulously and thoroughly investigated this matter for 11 months – I take offense.''


Have you noticed the way the rest of the media discusses the Barack Obama eligibility story?
Everyone from Ann Coulter and Michael Medved and Neal Boortz on the right to Geraldo Rivera and Chris Matthews and CNN's heretofore unknown president want you to know there's nothing to talk about here.
But yet they keep on talking about it. And they never really explain why they are talking about it and why it's not worth talking about – other than the fact that it's all been researched before and Barack Obama really is a "natural born citizen."
Now, as one of only a handful of
colleagues who has actually investigated this matter – most of whom work for me – I would like to understand from these people how that little matter was settled. Is one of them capable of uttering even one articulate, coherent statement that would help me understand how Obama established his constitutional eligibility for office?
Did he produce an actual long-form birth certificate that would show which
doctor delivered him and in which hospital?
Who are the two U.S. citizen
parents to whom he was born – an absolute requirement to be a "natural born citizen" circa 1961?
Why do these media people show so little natural curiosity about the conflicting stories that have been dished out by Hawaiian officials claiming they have inspected the original document and later claiming the original document was destroyed in 2001?
Can any of these people point to any official document from Obama's past that he has willingly released?

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Obama's Back-Up Healthcare Plan


Clinton: Still with that liberal appetite


Former President Bill Clinton is one of the featured speakers at today’s inaugural “Weight of the Nation” conference in Washington, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control to focus on obesity prevention and control.
Clinton’s battles with his own weight, of course, are famous -- punctuated by fast-food runs during the early days of his presidency, and the heart bypass operation he needed to undergo in 2004.
How to fuel up for an appearance like today’s conference?
According to
The Washington Post’s “Reliable Source” column (which has the photo to prove it), the former president waited in line Saturday night at Z Burger in Washington’s Tenleytown neighborhood, posing for photos and signing autographs as his take-out order was readied.
His order: double burger (hold the mayo), onion rings, French fries, and an apple-pie milkshake. --Rick Klein

The Hell Files: The Demons are Flying


A woman charged with murdering her 3 1/2-week-old son used a knife and two swords to dismember the child and ate parts of his body, including his brain, before stabbing herself in the torso and slicing her own throat, police said Monday.
Otty Sanchez, 33, is charged with capital murder in the death of her infant son, Scott Wesley Buchholtz-Sanchez. She was recovering from her wounds at a hospital, and was being held on $1 million bail.
San Antonio Police Chief
William McManus said the early Sunday morning attack occurred a week after the child's father moved out. Otty Sanchez's sister and her sister's two children, ages 5 and 7, were in the house, but none were harmed.
Otty Sanchez's aunt,
Gloria Sanchez, said her niece had been "in and out" of a psychiatric ward, and that the hospital called several months ago looking to check up on her. She did not elaborate on the nature of her niece's health problems. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99N0G1O0&show_article=1