September 30, 2013

3 Legged Dog runs to honor 9/11 firefighter in NY

Here's a photo taken Sunday 9/29/13 of a man running in Lower Manhattan with a 3 legged dog (from Brooklyn's Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel) to honor a firefighter who ran in that tunnel on 9/11 to get to Ground Zero where he died trying to save lives. Stephen Siller ran with his fire equipment into the tunnel after working an all night shift as a firefighter in Brooklyn. He was actually picked up by a police vehicle about halfway into the tunnel but I'm not trying to take anything away from him with that factoid. Civilians were fleeing through the tunnel from Manhattan to Brooklyn while Siller ran the other way.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 12:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 779 kb.

September 29, 2013

Republicans at the Gates of Vienna

Timothy Birdnow

"There is nothing inevitable about military victory, even for forces of apparently overwhelming strength. The Greeks at Marathon, Alexander against the Persian Empire, the success of the colonists against the British in the American Revolution, Napoleon over the Austrians in Italy... all offer dramatic evidence to the contrary. In the absence of inspired military leadership... the more powerful side wears down the weaker."

- Bevin Alexander

If you do nothing, nothing happens.

Now this proposition is not always accurate; sometimes events overtake the motionless, but in this world it is generally true that Newton's laws of motion apply to more than just physical objects, and a body at rest remains at rest.

For something to happen we generally must expend energy. Very rarely do we benefit from a deux-ex-machina which happily fixes our problems.

The GOP has been seeking a deux-ex-machina. Terrified of political repercussions, the Republican elites have concluded the best course of action - especially where the Affordable Care Act is concerned - is to do nothing. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has argued that Obamacare will simply collapse of its own weight as has Paul Ryan. In other words, a fairy godmother is going to magically appear and, with a wave of her wand, make the whole thing go away. This magical thinking is arrived at because everyone knows Obamacare is a Casey Jones style train wreck and it CANNOT possibly succeed.

Yeah; sort of like the National Recovery Act during the Roosevelt years (we do our part).

Oh, we don't have that anymore, at least not in name, but we never really got rid of it either, with most of the policies of the NRA still in force. It gave us the National Labor Relations Board, for instance.

Barack Obama is requesting $2.6 billion dollars for the Department of Indian Affairs for next year, so that the red man does not drink firewater and go on the warpath, scalping settlers. It seems that so antiquated a government agency as the BIA is still heavily funded.

As are railroads, and there is a push to build more of them. Obama wants to spend $40 billion on rail transport. suppose we need them to move cavalry to the territories to subdue them rampaging Injuns.

There is Medicare, Social Security, the U.S. Post Office, pick any program, no matter how badly flawed or inefficient, and tell me where it collapsed of its own weight.

Ronald Reagan famously quipped that the closest thing to eternal life on this Earth is a government program. Once they sink roots you cannot get rid of them. Milton Freedman echoed this when he said "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program”. And yet the GOP is content to allow Obamacare to be implemented, so that it will "collapse of its own weight".

Actually this will - right into a template that has been built around it, one giving America single payer i.e. socialized medicine. That is the endgame here, and the people who wrote this law designed it that way.

One thing that will not happen is a return to a market-based system. We haven't really had one for decades anyway.

I suspect the GOP elites know this, but they think this is the wave of the future and they aren't going to damage their credibility with their base fighting the tide. By their base I mean the media; once in Washington the Republican leadership stops worrying about the people who elected them, the people in "flyover country" and concentrates on those who have the real power.

Once the ACA is implemented the old system will be swept away. Many of the smaller insurers will go under while many of the major players will spend billions to reorganize to comply with the law. Contracts will be signed, old contracts will have to be paid off and retired. Health care providers will be forced to buy the new computer systems needed to do business in compliance with the regulations. This thing will swallow the old system; there will be no turning back once this is put into operation.

And the public will be forced onto the rolls. We run into the Newtonian laws again; once there they will not want to leave. And once the subsidies kick in the public will not want to face the vicissitudes of a competitive market.

No - this thing can only be killed in the cradle. Waiting is not an option.

The GOP elites seem to think they can make the Democrats own this, but they fail to see the simple truth; the media will hang this around THEIR necks anyway. The Democrats will argue that GOP obstruction caused the failure of Obamacare, and the ill informed will believe it. Eventually the GOP will be impotently trying to disown the creation of the thing they fought against, and the Democrats will act as though this was a Republican plot. Does anybody remember the HMO? Ted Kennedy authored the legislation, yet it came to be associated with the Republicans in the media and the popular mind.

Good luck with that collapse strategy.

And many in the GOP are on record saying there were elements of Obamacare they could live with. The elites have not been all that opposed to Obamacare. Their unwillingness to fight this thing to the death, preferring to hope for a miracle from the political heavens, has put them in this pickle. The GOP needed to be prepared to die for this issue, but they still see it as, at worst, just another political issue to pander. They do not see this is tearing the fabric of the United States, and their lack of leadership on this bespeaks a monstrous misunderstanding of the will of the people.

That is why they chose Mitt Romney to run against Obama; they didn't understand that Obamacare was THE issue, and Romney had zero credibility on that score (oh, and Romney would not have fought to dismantle it, either, but would have simply tried to reform it.) It's why they turned on Tea Party candidates when the media played "gotcha". It's why they continued with this gentleman's disagreement strategy rather than go after Obama aggressively. We lost this fight over the ACA with the nomination of Mitt Romney.

There are some who understand what needs to be done. Ted Cruz did what any Democrat would do if the tables were turned. Cruz rightly understands that a government shutdown may or may not hurt the GOP, but doing nothing most certainly will. Letting this thing continue to gain steam plays into the Democrats hands. The argument that we can win enough seats to overturn it in 2014 is ludicrous; we will have to be able to override an Obama veto. Nothing will change then. And that is assuming we can win the Senate, which may or may not happen at all. Remember, Obama has all the money thanks to the many "recovery" packages the GOP failed to stop. If the public was so fired up about this, why didn't they turn Mr. Obama out of office last year?

Because the GOP failed to offer anything better. There were no solid promises. There were promises o-plenty, but none had any real credibility, since the GOP has had a proven track record of cowardice in the face of the enemy. Republicans stayed home. Better to die from wounds in battle then to bleed to death by innumerable paper cuts inflicted by your friends. Romney was a sharp-edged War and Peace.

And so, with no other options, the enemies of Obamacare are forced to force Osama’s hand. This strategy is one of desperation, but refusing to fight the enemy usually ends in such desperate last stands. If nothing else, the public admires a fighter and loathes a coward. A huge part of the problems the Republicans face stem from their promises of fighting the next battle. Strategic thinking is important, but not if it leads to inaction. A body at rest remains at rest.

The ancient Chinese military philosopher Sun Tzu stated "opportunities multiply as they are seized". You don't wait around for them; you have to take action, find an opening, and pour through. Once you seize the initiative you will find new opportunities. He also stated "f the enemy leaves a door open, you must rush in."

He also said "Forestall your opponent by seizing what he holds dear."

And this healthcare abomination is quite dear to Mr. Obama and the Democrats. Cruz is striking them in the tender underbelly.

A leader must first and foremost lead, and Ted Cruz is doing just that. He is penetrating deeply into their territory. John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, and the rest of the pusillanimous wing of the GOP are not leading, they are calculating. They are so busy calculating that they never actually do anything. Cruz is doing something.

And even if he is not hatching some brilliant coup that will dazzle and amaze, he is doing what the public sent him to Washington to do. Keeping faith with the voters is huge, and inspires far more than anything a John "Monty Hall" Boehner can accomplish. Cruz has given us a champion.

But, but, but, what does it accomplish to shut the government down?

First, we do not know that this will necessarily hurt the GOP. Contrary to popular assertions (by the media) it did not really hurt the GOP when Clinton shut it down - and that was over something far less understandable or onerous to the public. This is quite different.

Second, it sets up a showdown which will force Obama to show his true face. Already we are seeing that, with his snotty public addresses and condescension. Obama is not the man in the public eye, and this showdown may well reveal that to the public. For the first time in his public life Obama will be faced with something he cannot simply talk his way out of. He will have to actually make a deal (unless the GOP caves and he wins) that actually sacrifices something. He can be forced to back down publicly.

And this shows that there actually is a line the Republicans will not cross to pander. Now the public perceives the Republicans as purely political creatures, bending to the winds. If they refuse to budge despite enormous pressure they show they actually do have principles.

Also, this may actually put some spine in them. Surrender is easy, and gets to be a habit if you do it enough. Republicans have been surrendering since the election of 2000. That election - where Democrats tried to steal victory and we stopped them - galvanized the donkeys and Bush tried his famous conciliation tactic, which meant endless surrender. Power leached away from the GOP, with their losing the Senate and then the House and finally the Presidency. It was this unwillingness to fight, this "duck and cover" strategy (which in an earlier incarnation was at the heart of the GOP's failure to take down Bill Clinton) that gave us this abominationcare.

Anyone who has attended grammar school must know how it works; a bully derives his power from the unwillingness of the victim to fight. Bullies end up owning the school because nobody will stand against them. Politics is no different, and the GOP has been the sniveling victim with black eye and no lunch money. They LET this happen. The public laughs at them because nobody has any respect for a doormat, and the GOP's electoral failings stem as much from their efforts to make nice as anything. Ted Cruz may have engaged in a pointless exercise on the Senate floor, but at least he stood up, and as a result what he did was far from pointless. He has given an example.

I don't think we can predict how the public will react to a government shutdown - especially when the disasters predicted do not happen. Remember, we were told how bad the sequester would be for us politically, and yet we actually gained stature.

During the War of 1812 a Revolutionary War hero named William Hull was tasked with invading Canada. He tentatively entered Canadian territory and immediately scurried back to Fort Detroit because British troops were coming. He had 2500 soldiers whereas the British had 100 regulars, 350 militia, and 150 native allies. Hull surrendered to the British. A frightened old man (sounds like John McCain) he imagined all manner of horrors, until he talked himself right out of fighting. Phantom fears cost the United States the chance to take Canada, not anything the British could do. The Republicans are full of the same phantom fears.!

War and politics are not for the timid. The Republicans fear too much, and for the wrong reasons.

Oh, and Remember the Alamo! And Roarke’s Drift, and Bastogne. And the Battle of Vienna.

Here are a few quotes that may be pertinent to this discussion. Interestingly enough, I found them on Democratic Underground:

Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.
~ Peter F. Drucker

A leader is a dealer in hope
- Napoleon Bonaparte

The very essence of leadership is that you have to have vision. You can't blow an uncertain trumpet.
~ Theodore M. Hesburgh

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:09 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 2242 words, total size 14 kb.

A Very Angry America

By Alan Caruba

I have been trying to remember when there was so much anger between the Democrats and Republicans. Or maybe I should say between liberals and conservatives? Or maybe I should say between the Tea Party and the Republican Party? Or maybe I should say those who find the President of the United States a contemptible liar who has diminished a once great superpower to an object of disrespect?

There is plenty of anger to go around. The mood of the nation is one of anger from one end of the political spectrum to the other.

What is one to make of a White House senior advisor, Dan Pfeiffer, who compared Republicans to arsonists, hostage-takers, and suicide bombers? The Majority Leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, told Republicans that "There’s no need for conversations” telling them to send over a continuing resolution without defunding Obamacare. He has called Tea Party members of the House "anarchists.”

Meanwhile, Republicans who do not want to see the government shut down are labeled "RINOs” (Republicans in Name Only). Instead of keeping the spotlight on the Democrats who foisted Obamacare on us, we have been watching the Republican Party tear itself apart.

As the Wall Street Journal columnist, Kimberly Strassel put it, "The tragic reality is that this vote isn't shaping up to be all that perilous for the owners of the law. Nobody is even talking about Democrats. Nobody has put an iota of pressure on them for months. Every camera, every microphone has been trained on the GOP.”

Her colleague, Daniel Henniger, described the fratricide arising from the dispute over defunding Obamacare, saying, "This effort has not, for some time now, been about victory. It has become as RedState’s Erick Erickson put it with his usual eloquences, about shining a light on the ‘cockroaches’ in the GOP. Ted Cruz has spent months berating his own side as ‘appeasers’ who care only about ‘being invited to all the right cocktail parties in town.”

The result has been a GOP in meltdown while the President happily joined in on Friday calling the Tea Party members in Congress—though not by name-- "extremists.”

All this has brought to mind Barry Goldwater’s declaration to the Republican Party when he accepted their nomination to run for President in 1964. "Let me remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” He lost by a landslide to the incumbent, President Lyndon B. Johnson.

I understood what Goldwater meant, but extremism has never played well in American politics. Indeed, the Constitution is constructed so that any form of extremism can be thwarted by the checks and balances that slow any rush toward ill-considered legislation. That, however, did not work when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and imposed Obamacare on everyone.

Those who believe that, even with a Republican majority after the 2014 midterm elections, President Obama would not veto a bill to repeal Obamacare are deluding themselves.

Hating Obama is not enough. Understanding how our republic works is essential.

Tea Party came about initially as a protest against Obamacare and then grew has a grassroots political movement that elected a number of those it supported to the House. It is this bloc of votes that Speaker John Boehner has struggled to work with. In the Senate, Tea Party members include Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Tom Coburn, Marco Rubio, and Pat Toomey.

Obama has many faults, but he has proven himself a master manipulator. The current struggle over Obamacare has played into his hands. That is unfortunate because what the GOP must do between now and the 2014 midterm elections is to focus on defeating those Democrats up for election who have supported Obama.

The general anger against Obamacare will gain in momentum, but if the GOP is seen as a bunch of crazies, it will affect the outcome. That’s the way it played out in 1964.

At this writing the possibility of a government shutdown is fifty-fifty. It will be over quickly, but by then the GOP will have dealt itself a disservice.

Until the GOP secures control of the Senate, the House, and the White House Obamacare will remain the law of the land. That is very bad news for all Americans and the future of America. Meanwhile, it is a good idea to remember that many bad laws have been reversed and repealed.

© Alan Caruba, 2013

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 750 words, total size 6 kb.

September 28, 2013

National Community Recycling Protocols

A.J. Cameron

Agenda 21 in action; community recycling protocols.

"ICLEI has produced the Recycling and Composting Emissions Protocol (RC Protocol) in recognition of the contribution recycling and composting can make to greenhouse gas reduction efforts, and the high degree of influence that local governments have in this area.

The RC Protocol represents the new national standard for measuring emissions benefits of recycling and composting at the community level. The RC Protocol complements ICLEI's Community Protocol by providing additional guidance on accounting for the emissions benefits of recycling and composting activities in a community.

The RC Protocol is intended to help local governments account for the overall net emissions benefits of recycling and composting activities in their communities, as well as to estimate additional emissions reductions that occur outside the boundary of a community inventory"

End excerpt.

Read it all!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:16 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

A Great Unapologetic Article

Jack Kemp

I draw your attention to an article at The American Spectator. Here below is a quote from "Ted Cruz Extends the Buckley Rule" and a link to the first page of the four page piece.

One result that I want to clarify because the author was concentrating on conservative principles and not so much election returns: when William Buckley's own brother James ran for the U.S. Senate in 1970 on the Conservative Party line in New York, he succeeded in beating both the Democrat and the Republican SENATOR. The Republican was the appointee of Gov. Nelson Rockefeller to fill the seat of the assassinated Robert F. Kennedy - and he obviously was a "Rockefeller Republican."

Cruz supporters have been called "Cruzaders." I like it and wish I made up that term.

"Those ideas were based on fundamental beliefs in freedom and liberty, not on the idea of consensus-building. Which is exactly the battle Ted Cruz was engaged in on that Senate floor the other night.

Plainly put, as Neal Freeman said of Buckley’s Rule, what Cruz is about is once again conservatizing the country — and not to put too fine a point on it, re-conservatizing the Republican Party. And to do it by promoting the conservative cause with the "rightwardmost viable” issue — defunding Obamacare.

There is no accident in this story by Kerry Picket over at Breitbart "Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments Spotted Among Cruz’s Reading Material.”

What Ted Cruz understands is exactly what this battle over defunding Obamacare represents.

Obamacare is but the latest leftward turn that every Democratic administration since Woodrow Wilson has been engineering in a bid to dramatically remake America in the progressive image. Unfortunately, of the eight Republicans that have been elected president since Wilson’s departure in 1920 (and we leave out Warren Harding who died two years into his term), only two — Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan — have had the political courage to firmly grasp the wheel and take the country forward to its original ideas of a nation based on individual liberty and freedom. All the others — Hoover, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and the two Bushes — took Wilson’s progressive vision and either added to it or simply refused to change course.

From Hoover’s tax increase (the income tax was raised from 25% to 63%) to Eisenhower’s creation of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (the predecessor bureaucracy of today’s Health and Human Services) to Nixon’s creation of the EPA, Ford’s pro-choice Supreme Court pick and the Bush 41 and 43 insistence on raising taxes and expanding the Department of Education, every single GOP president save two has gone along with the liberal agenda. Just trimming at the edges and managing better.


There is no patience anymore for what are perceived as wimpy strategies that have proved themselves to be less than worthless in execution. And there certainly is no more patience for timid Republican leaders who are seen as smooth talkers of the talk but quake at walking the walk when not, as in the case at hand, refusing to walk that walk outright.

In the words of Buckley nephew Brent Bozell of For America, as noted, the sentiment now is: "You fund it, you own it.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:33 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 549 words, total size 4 kb.

September 27, 2013

A Pox Upon Them!

Timothy Birdnow

Here is the litany of shame, those Republicans who voted for cloture and thus gave Harry Reid the authority to strip out the defunding of Obamacare from the continuing resolution. A pox upon their bouses:

McConnell and Sens. John Cornyn (Texas), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Rob Portman (Ohio), John Thune (S.D.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Jeff Chiesa (N.J.), Roger Wicker (Miss.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Pat Toomey (Pa.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Susan Collins (Maine), Jerry Moran (Kan.), Roy Blunt (Mo.), Dan Coats (Ind.), Dean Heller (Nev.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.)

Hat tip: Red State

All of these Republicans should be targeted for primary challenges in the next election. Also, they should be defunded themselves by We the People. Every one of these turncoats is dead to me.

Washington Irving's story of the Headless Horseman features a character named Ichabod Crane. Ichabod is a name that comes from the Bible and means fool; it was used as a kind of little curse; you would point at someone and say "Ichabod". Well I say "Ichabod" to this batch of weasles. We don't need them.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:23 PM | Comments (84) | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 1 kb.

Tiny Bubbles in the (Lending Tree) Vine


Timothy Birdnow

A new credit bubble is inflating.!

According to Inman News:

"Online mortgage originator LendingTree’s monthly Credit Accessibility Report shows the average accessibility score for U.S. borrowers rose from 103 to 106 between July and August, indicating that borrowers had easier access to mortgage credit."


"As home prices rise, refinance activity slows and government programs change, potential borrowers are, in fact, finding it easier to gain access to credit, LendingTree CEO Doug Lebda said in a statement. That’s because lenders are easing up on down payment and credit score requirements, while still adhering to conforming loan guidelines."

End excerpts.

Why are home prices rising? Generally speaking because of inflationary pressures from government inflation of the money supply. Being non-portable and limited, real estate tends to feel the effects of programs like Quantitative Easing first. This means there is no real increase in value but a perceived increase since prices rise. People jump on this "recovery" without a there being there.

Also, the Feds are still pushing easy mortgages and are keeping interest rates artificially low. It's a classic bubble, and this story does nothing to dispel the notion.

We haven't learned one damn thing from the crash of 2008.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 2 kb.

Obama's 'Fake' Twitter Followers Explained

By Daren Jonescu

Barack Obama has 36.9 million Twitter followers, 19.5 million of whom, it turns out, are fake. This is a very disturbing sign for Obama's opponents, as it demonstrates just how much appeal the president still has with his key support base, namely those who identify most closely with him on a personal level -- fake people.

The Daily Mail Online has analyzed the numbers and discovered that among U.S. political figures, the four Twitter accounts with the most fake followers -- that is, followers who don't really exist -- are those of Barack Obama (by a landslide), Joe Biden, Michelle Obama, and the White House communications department. Those who would laugh this off as evidence of a pathetic progressive attempt to manipulate public perceptions are perhaps missing the point. Americans who care about the downfall of their country ought to be most concerned about the trend indicated here. A hitherto negligible segment of the population, nonexistent humans, has found in the present U.S. administration a powerful reason to emerge from the shadows at last and become fully engaged participants in the political process. There is no clearer indication of the dangers facing America than this surge in political activity among people who do not exist, especially when one considers that this group vastly outnumbers the existent.

But why all this political enthusiasm among the unreal, all of a sudden? The answer is all too clear. In 2008, America elected its historic first fake president, thus giving hope and a lifeline to fakers everywhere: "Maybe I can participate on equal terms with real people, too."

Consider the president -- or rather, don't. As a matter of fact, you can't. For all intents and purposes, he doesn't exist. The "first black president" was born of a white mother, and raised by white grandparents. Wonder what courses he took in college? Don't -- you're not allowed to know. How did this self-described drug-addled loafer get into so many top shelf universities, seemingly transferring from one to another in mid-program effortlessly? Don't ask -- his applications and letters of acceptance are apparently national security secrets.

He was president of the Harvard Law Review, but never wrote an article for the journal. He was described even in those days as being well-liked and trusted by conservatives, in spite of being ideologically dedicated to destroying everything they believed in. His trajectory-setting first autobiography was a fake, romanticizing a spiritual kinship with a man he barely met, in language he probably couldn't have written himself. His literary agency publicized him as Kenyan-born for sixteen years, using a short author's bio he presumably wrote or approved himself -- until the moment (in 2007) when that biographical detail ceased to function as instant credibility, and instead became grounds for instant disqualification.

His friend and colleague, Bill Ayers, was hustled off to the Sesame Street haze of "the neighborhood" when his prominence in Obama's life became uncomfortable. The same goes for the minister who married him, but whom he cast aside easily when the views he learned from that minister became politically embarrassing. And don't bother examining his voting record prior to becoming president. He almost never voted for or against anything. He voted "present" -- that is, he checked his name on the attendance sheet and then slept through class. He ran for president not even knowing how many states are in the Union, although he himself was (presumably) born and raised in the fiftieth and final state.

But all of this was merely the preamble to his more impressive incarnation as the historic fake president. There were traces of a man -- a man in hiding from adult reality -- in all the fakery of his life prior to 2008. Not so after that point. For as president he became perfectly immersed in the machinery of the world's first successful fake political philosophy, namely progressivism, which is what tyranny began calling itself when tyrants finally got over the primordial vanity of needing everyone to know the identity of their oppressor and to fear him, and realized that bloodthirsty power lust is served more effectively by a simple mask of lies.

So it is that the quest for a globally micromanaged caste system overseen by a self-aggrandizing elite has defined itself as the fight for equality; that a "movement" whose central tenets are the destruction of the private family and the perpetuation of an ever-expanding dependent underclass has proclaimed itself the natural home of "the downtrodden"; that policies explicitly designed by leading progressive intellectuals as means of undermining individualism and rationalism in favor of collectivist sentimentalism are sold to the "masses" as means of protecting "the little guy" (talk about irony!); that the systematic annihilation of private property, including its most basic instantiation, self-ownership, is represented as the granting of new rights; and that the blatant disregard for actual human life, and the willingness to permit or precipitate death, hardship and destruction for the sake of achieving or preserving illegitimate power is touted as a quest for peace and community.

Obama is the figurehead of this movement. A figurehead is, of course, a fake leader. So Obama is the fake leader of a fake political philosophy. In this role, he has fronted the fight to establish a single-payer healthcare system by gradual steps -- exactly as he promised to do before he was president -- but explicitly denied that this was his intention. He has overseen the growth of the U.S. federal debt to economic meltdown proportions -- exactly as he promised not to do. He has left his representatives in Libya to die in a terrorist attack without lifting a finger to help, then delivered a pro forma statement lamenting their death before heading off to a campaign fundraiser in Las Vegas. He then lied about the cause of the Benghazi attack, as well as about his own initial response to it.

He is the nominal leader of the push to expand rights-violating regulations of personal and commercial behavior in the name of a fake scientific theory -- what would you call a theory whose proponents have changed its name, its predictions, and even its fundamental hypothesis? -- about a drastic manmade alteration of the planet that the theory's own advocates admit isn't actually happening. He was presented to the world as a model of America's transcendence of racial division, and yet has made more explicit statements designed to instigate racial tensions and hostility than perhaps any previous president. He is the mouthpiece of a political movement that seeks to maintain comprehensive records of every human being's telephone and electronic communications, health condition, daily habits, sexual activity, and whereabouts -- and yet objects to demands that people provide identification before voting, on the grounds that this is unnecessarily intrusive and intimidating.

He has supported the Muslim Brotherhood, a fake religious organization dedicated to the destruction of representative government, Western civilization, freedom of speech, and women, and an organization that has just been outlawed (again) in its home country, even while Obama was demanding its "equal" participation in that country's political reconfiguration -- a reconfiguration necessitated by the Muslim Brotherhood's own attempt to entrap the country in the box of sharia law.

Now I ask you, if you did not exist, but wished to stand up and be counted anyway, could you choose a better faction with which to align yourself than the Obama administration, a better cause to join than progressivism? The defining characteristic of a nonexistent person is, of course, his unreality. And who represents the cause of unreality more vigorously than President Obama? Though some of his opponents have not yet accepted the postmodern truth of this man, it has for some time been apparent that the reason we do not know "who he really is" is the most obvious reason of all -- he really isn't.

He talks about his sons, who do not exist. He tells elaborate stories of his youth which simply never happened. He relates imaginary tales of his own mother's dying days. When asked what he did during a national security emergency, he describes abstract instructions he supposedly gave which are completely incongruous with the circumstances he is being asked to describe.

Barack Obama perfectly represents the zeitgeist: glossy but empty, the well-creased pant leg with no living being inside. He is loved by pop celebrities and pseudo-intellectuals, from Beyoncé to David Brooks -- the two groups of people who make their living at creating surfaces with no substance. They see that he is, as Brooks so revealingly put it in 2008, "one of us." A fake.

So dismiss Barack Obama's 19.5 million fake Twitter followers, or his wife's 1.9 million (the second highest total) at your peril. There are more of them than there are of you, and they are on the vanguard of mankind's descent into the abyss, while you are mere dust being swept up in the wind of this downward spiral.

Am I foolish to imagine the nonexistent can have any effect on anything? You ask such a question in an age in which the most powerful office on Earth is currently occupied by one of them? An age in which the wealthiest nation in history is in debt up to its next four generations' eyeballs? An age in which the world's last fortress of liberty is now history's most advanced surveillance state? An age in which the nation of cowboys and frontiersmen has been reduced to standing by meekly at airports while its wives, daughters and grandmothers have their (formerly) private parts manually probed by the government? An age in which the only nation ever explicitly founded on the principle that a man has a right to be alive and preserve himself is in the process of turning that man's physical existence over to the disinterested calculations and whims of a medical bureaucracy?

Don't make me laugh. It is precisely the existent -- those with moral substance, a finite physical reality they feel obliged to preserve, those who wish to work, take responsibility for themselves and their own loved ones, and have thoughts not prepackaged in the mass retardation factory of public education -- whose value, voice, and practical decision-making authority are in decline. And if the existent are on the way out, who does that leave in the driver's seat?

That's right: Barack Obama and his millions of Twitter followers, more than half of whom are "his people," namely fakes. You are living through something rarely seen on this Earth. This is the age of the Void: we are under the global control of a fake philosophy, ruled by fake leaders who give fake "great orations," and justify their actions with fake histories and fake science. There is no place for reality here -- for the true, the good, and the beautiful. Lies, consciencelessness, and the aesthetic of ugliness have won the day. In short, Being is on the wane. If you don't exist, this is your moment.

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:33 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 1853 words, total size 12 kb.

Mischa Popoff commentary -- The latest Italian job

Paul Driessen

The EU’s handling of pesticides and biotech seeds has gotten "curiouser and curiouser” with almost every passing year. But recently a new milestone was established.

European corn borers have been chewing their way through Italy’s cornfields for several years, and also providing pathways and nutrients for microscopic fungi that release lethal natural poisons known as fumonisins, which can cause severe neurological damage in human fetuses. Droughts have further devastated the Italian corn crops. American farmers have successfully controlled both infestations, and low moisture conditions, by using limited amounts of pesticides but primarily relying on genetically modified Bt corn that is also engineered to withstand drought. However, these safe, modern, proven technologies are banned in Europe which means they are unavailable to farmers who desperately need them. That has led to some truly absurd responses by EU regulators.

You have to read Mischa Popoff’s entire story to grasp the insanity of it all. But as they say, the difference between fiction and nonfiction stories is that fiction has to make sense


The latest Italian job

Italian farmers, facing insect infestation, pay dearly for Europe’s anti-GM stance. So do consumers.

Mischa Popoff

"Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel.” John Quinton, UK George Cross recipient

Nowhere is the art of bureaucratic precaution and obfuscation practiced with greater enthusiasm and single-minded efficiency than in Europe. And nowhere is this more in evidence than in Europe’s battle against technological progress in farming.

The following true saga captures the insanity, hypocrisy and tyranny of Europe’s war on chemicals and biotechnology. Lewis Carroll would have been proud to have authored it. The tale would be hilarious, if it were not so costly to so many. The situation certainly has gotten "curiouser and curiouser” with every passing year.

Highly nutritious corn (maize) has been produced in sunny Italy since it was first imported from the New World almost five centuries ago. Corn provides a lucrative export to countries with less temperate climates that cannot grow it. When it comes to staple crops, it has been as important a staple to the Italian agricultural economy as potatoes are to Ireland and Idaho. At least it was, until a few years ago.

No one knows for certain when the tiny moth Pyrausta nubilalis (aka the European corn borer) started eating its way through Italy’s cornfields. Compounding matters, the pest’s feces provide fodder for a bevy of microscopic fungi, which release some of the most lethal natural poisons known to man, such as pathogenic fumonisins, which can cause permanent neurological damage in human fetuses.

In spite of this threat, Tiberio Rabboni, chai­rman of Emilia-Romagna, one of Italy’s most important regional agricultural departments, insisted for the longest time that only traditional, organic methods be used to fight this plague. However, he never explained exactly what these methods were. He couldn’t.

Rabboni has never run a farm, never even worked on one. And yet, even though this challenging situation cried out for a sophisticated, scientific response, he has been intransigent in his rabid support of organic farming to the exclusion of all else.

Eventually, Rabboni conceded that synthetic pesticides should probably be used. But the only pesticides approved for use in Europe had proven ineffective. So he indicated he was willing to ignore and not punish farmers who might resort to using chemicals that science oversight bodies worldwide have deemed safe and are routinely used in North America. The chemicals are nonetheless deemed "dangerous” and thus banned by EU authorities, who are guided by the precautionary principle.

Then in July, just as Rabonni was relenting on which chemicals might be used against the corn borer, Italy became the ninth EU country to slam the door shut on any possibility of allowing its farmers to grow GM (genetically modified) corn, although the corn had previously never been grown officially.

Corn farmers in North America no longer face problems like this. In addition to having a longer list of approved chemicals at their disposal, farmers grow GM varieties of corn that are resistant to this pesky parasite. That means fewer chemicals need to be used per acre to protect against pests. As an added bonus, today’s pest resistant corn varieties are also drought tolerant.

According to Italian academician Antonio Saltini, author of the four-volume work Storico delle scienze agrarie (History of agrarian sciences in Western civilization), GM corn became all the more enticing to Italy’s farmers three years ago when drought struck. What little corn survived the corn borer produced withered kernels that were very low in starch, rendering them unsuitable even for animal consumption.

In turn, and because of the drought, moth populations grew exponentially, breeding even more lethal pathogens that feed upon their feces, and thus more fumonisin. But since GM crops are banned in Europe, there was no way lifelong bureaucrat Rabboni was even going to consider making an exception.

Chemicals – even those prohibited in Europe – could be used in emergencies, but not any of the scientific community’s most recent agricultural advancements. Farmers pleaded with Rabboni and the rest of Europe’s white-collar policy makers to be allowed to use GM corn, to no avail. And with only rare exceptions like Saltini, the academic community remained largely silent.

Rabboni proclaimed instead that crops that had not suffered as badly could perhaps be blended with fumonisin-infected toxic crops to make them minimally acceptable to feed to pigs. But when scientists started testing, they realized the majority of Italy’s corn was too toxic even for animal feed. And so, after months of secret negotiations with other agricultural bureaucrats, Rabboni made a rather telling decision:

"Clean” corn could be imported from America to mix with Italy’s toxic corn. But most of America’s corn is GM. So now the same GM corn that Italian farmers are not allowed to grow was to be given an exemption and permitted to be blended with Italian corn, in order to bring overall toxicity levels down to a degree acceptable to feed to animals.

This decision caused great consternation for farmers, not just in Italy, but throughout Europe. After all, if GM feed corn could be imported, why not let European farmers just grow it themselves and avoid these problems in the first place? Indeed, farmers in the Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Romani and Slovakia do grow transgenic corn under a confusing array of highly-bureaucratic special exemptions. Not so in Italy though, nor in the lion’s share of the rest of Europe.

Therefore, amidst a firestorm of controversy and accusations of hypocrisy, Rabboni made yet one more pronouncement on everyone’s behalf: Italy’s seriously compromised corn harvest would not be cut with healthy GM corn from America, after all. Instead, it would all go to energy production. Controversy resolved, sort of.

The twisted, arbitrary executive decisions left a huge gap in the core of Italy’s agricultural economy. What were farmers supposed to feed their pigs? And what would become of next year’s supply of prosciutto, if pigs were simply shot and buried due to a lack of feed? So Rabboni then made his last and most ironic decision amid this crisis. GM corn could indeed be imported from America after all, not to be blended with Italy’s contaminated corn, but simply to be fed directly to Italy’s pigs.

It was not merely the fact that an Italian bureaucrat decided to import an otherwise banned GM crop from America that was so ironic. In addition to the special exemptions granted on a case-by-case basis to Czech, Spanish, Portuguese and Slovakian farmers, countries throughout Europe, including Italy, have imported GM corn from America in the past under a whole different array of special, case-by-case exemptions granted on a strictly controlled basis by bureaucrats in Brussels.

What made Rabboni’s final decision so hypocritical, and frankly absurd, were the sheer quantities involved and the astronomical expense for an already overextended Italian treasury.

Because drought had also hit the United States, combined with massive subsidies to the American ethanol industry that relies on corn as feedstock, the price of American corn had risen steadily over the prior few years. Thus not only did Italy import 300 percent more American corn than it had at any other time, it paid triple the price to American farmers, sending feed and thus pork prices skyrocketing.

Meanwhile Italian farmers, who are not allowed so much as a single GM seed on their farms, watched the fruits of their labor go for mere cents on the euro, to be burned for electricity. All just so Europe’s time-honored ban on a perfectly safe, proven technology could be upheld on ideological grounds.

To this day, it is not known just how much of Italy’s corn production went to animal feed, how much for energy production, and how much was simply destroyed when the cost of the energy required to transport it to an electrical-generating facility exceeded the value of the electricity it would produce.

The quantity of Italian corn that will be buried in the ground this year is simply not deemed a topic appropriate to discuss in polite circles, especially when policy makers in Europe remain faithful in their conviction that genetic engineering is the devil’s work, no matter what farmers themselves might think.

The aforementioned Italian agrarian academic Saltini aptly summed up the bizarre predicament. "Many politicians in Italy take it as a rule,” he observed, "that convenience determines truth. What is convenient guarantees consensus, votes and power, while something which might be received with skepticism or aversion cannot possibly be true. For any true son of Machiavelli, what is true must be useful.”

[From Saltini, Mais "inquinato” dal caldo: una storia italiana (Corn "polluted” by the heat: An Italian story) June 2013.]

Sadly for the people of Italy, the embrace of anti-technological agrarian ideology provides few if any benefits to farmers or consumers. Meanwhile bureaucrats thrive – this huge army of aparatchiks, most of whom have never worked a day on a farm, but earn a sumptuous living off the backs of those who do. They are an army of white-collar statists who, in the words of American author Robert Zubrin, are really nothing more than antihuman "merchants of despair.”

In broader terms, Samuel Adams put it best when he warned, "If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” Evidently, there is a severe lack of Garibaldi patriots in Italy these days. And a severe lack of corn.


Mischa Popoff is a former organic farmer and Advanced Organic Farm and Process Inspector who worked on contract under the USDA’s National Organic Program. He is a policy analyst with the Heartland Institute, Frontier Centre for Public Policy and Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, and author of Is it Organic? This article is reposted with permission from The Genetic Literacy Project.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1821 words, total size 12 kb.

September 26, 2013

John McCain Appeases

Daren Jonescu

After twenty-four hours of Ted Cruz acting like a man -- a man who sees his country on the brink of expiring -- the Democrats have pulled the Senate floor out from under him. And as has become the custom, they have been aided in their bullying by Senator John McCain.
As Charles Schumer was about to scold Cruz for "trampling on the rights of his colleagues," he interrupted himself to yield the floor to McCain. For a moment, there was confusion over whether the time yielded would be his own or the Republicans', but the Democrat leadership quickly jumped in to express its pleasure at allowing McCain to speak under any conditions. That is, they knew he was going to do some of their dirty work for them, thus lending credibility to their authoritarianism. And so he did.

McCain began his doddering diatribe by informing Cruz that "elections have consequences," that in democracies the majority rules, and that a "sizable majority" elected and re-elected Barack Obama, suggesting that Cruz' efforts displayed a lack of respect for the will of the victorious majority. Of course, this bizarre logic ignored the fact that Cruz also won a majority of votes in his own Senate election, and that the majority who voted for him probably elected him to be something more than a rubber stamp for Democrat policy. McCain seems to have revealed useful information about his own lack of backbone in the Senate, however; apparently he believes it is the role of the minority to express official distaste for the majority's plans, and then vigorously support those plans anyway. After all, failing to do so would be disrespectful of those who voted for the majority party.

McCain then moved on to address a particular point made by Cruz during his overnight session. Cruz, responding to the establishment pundits who have so viciously attacked and mocked him of late, compared the view that his actions are worthless because ObamaCare is going to be funded anyway to Neville Chamberlain and other British appeasers who resisted calls for forceful action against Hitler on the grounds that he was too powerful to be confronted directly.

McCain expressed mock outrage at this characterization, claiming that Cruz had dishonored all the men who fought and defeated Hitler, including his own grandfather and father. Huh? How does referring to Hitler's appeasers dishonor his non-appeasers, exactly? Oh yes, this is John McCain -- we should not be looking for rationality or factual accuracy here.
McCain was suggesting -- as with his previous assaults on conservatives, such as Michele Bachmann, McCain merely "suggests," as his words are never coherent enough to be called a direct statement of anything -- that there were no appeasers of Hitler, and that to say there were is to spit on his grandfather's grave. Or he was suggesting that comparing today's Republican appeasers to Britain's parliamentary appeasers is dirty pool, since, as he took the time to inform Cruz, Hitler sent people on ships and trains to gas chambers. He strongly objected, apparently in answer to Cruz' use of the word "appeasement," that men responded with outrage and force to Hitler's horrors. In other words, he seemingly wished to suggest that the fact that some men refused to appease Hitler disproved Cruz' claim that others had appeased him. He also seemed to have confused pre-war appeasement with wartime action.

After this mangled diatribe -- he sounded as though he were the one who had been awake all night -- McCain argued that he strongly objected to President Obama's policies, but that the majority re-elected Obama and supports him, so who is he, and more importantly who is Ted Cruz, to resist those policies?

In other words, after lecturing Cruz about how brave his father and grandfather were, and expressing shock and outrage at Cruz' claim that some establishment pundits are acting like appeasers, he concluded by explaining his own motives in terms that made Neville Chamberlain look positively Churchillian.

At the conclusion of his remarks, Senator Durbin took to the floor to thank McCain, and to acknowledge the courage and sacrifice of McCain's father and grandfather. The entire episode placed in bold relief just how sad a case is that of John McCain. From the son of heroes, to a hero in his own right, to a rising Republican star -- to a foolish appeaser and leg-breaker for the progressive elite. There is perhaps a very deep psychological reason why McCain is so disturbed by the use of the word "appeasement," and why he feels the need to invoke his own family name in the attempt to bury such references. The son of men who fought progressive tyranny, himself a man who bravely resisted progressive tyranny, he now proudly breaks bread with progressive would-be tyrants, and meekly defends their destruction of his own country by saying "Elections have consequences."

Is Senator Cruz the one dishonoring the memories of John McCain I and II?

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:01 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 845 words, total size 6 kb.

The Genesis of Darth Vader

Timothy Birdnow

arth_Vader.jpg" title="David Prowse as Darth Vader in Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.">

"No, I said CPAC, not CPAP! I want to go to CPAC you silly woman!"

Anakin Skywalker's fairy godmother is getting a bit hard of hearing.


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 2 kb.

Somalis in Minnesota - AT's take

Jack Kemp forwards this:

September 26, 2013
Let's Drop the Hyphens
Jim Yardley

News from Nairobi, Kenya continues to be almost incomprehensible. Scores of dead. Men, women and children murdered by a gang of psychopaths trying to hide their innate evil behind the veil of the "Religion of Peace."

Reports, particularly from British media, continue to identify a small number of the attackers involved in this outrage as "Americans" or "Somali-Americans." Apparently no matter how horrendous an event may be, the Progressive media, both at home and abroad, continue their effort to make all Americans feel guilty over something that was not their fault, was not done at their instigation, and as any rational person could see, were not acts that were committed by an American.

Let's be more specific. These "Americans" are not Americans in any sense of the word. Calling them Somali-"HYPHEN"-Americans is not any better. They obviously think of themselves as Somalis, and not Americans at all. These people did not move to Minnesota to pursue the American dream. They asked for asylum in the United State because they didn't have the firepower available to them to counter other gangs of Somali thugs in Somalia. Once offered bigger and better (i.e., more deadly) weapons, and a chance to return to Somalia to settle old scores, they traveled back across half the world, picked up their new guns, and cut loose with all the ammunition that they could carry.

No, they are not Somali-Americans, they are Somalis. Period. The hyphen in their group identity label (and that's all it is, a label) indicates that they are not American. Their language, culture, resistance to integrating into American society and their refusal to exchange the cultural norms of their nation of birth for the culture of the United States exposes the fantasy that the media is attempting to foist off upon all of us that somehow America is partially responsible for the tragedy in Kenya.

The left wants us to feel responsible, they want us to feel guilty, they want us to wring our hands and beg forgiveness with thoughts of "How could Americans have done this horrible thing?" Oh, and as long as we're wringing our hands, let's change our foreign policies and adjust our immigration quotas for those who claim that they need asylum from Islamist/Jihadi terrorists.

See, now everything is better, isn't it?

And let's not forget the nearly simultaneous attack in Pakistan, our "ally" on the Indian subcontinent. It's easy to forget since the media hasn't found a way to connect it to Americans in some way, other than the fact that the victims were Christians, and after all, American churches have spent hundreds of years sending missionaries out among the heathen to convert them to Christianity. Yeah, that means the slaughter of 81 worshipers at a church in Peshawar, Pakistan must be laid at our feet as well. Of course it does, even if there were no Pakistani-Americans directly involved in the atrocity. Perhaps the left could play upon the fact that it was Pakistani-Americans who sent money "home" to pay for the explosives that were used to kill those 81 Bible-clinging Christians. That wouldn't be a real stretch for the leftist press.

But the main problem is the use of group identity labels that contains a hyphen. When the term Somali-Americans is not shortened to "Somalis" but rather to just "Americans", then our nation is subjected to slanders of the worst kind. When those hyphenated labels are applied to Italian-Americans, those who are grouped with that label are not, in their own minds, Italians. They may be of Italian descent, but they are third and fourth-generation Americans.

Recent immigrants, especially those who did not apply for admission to the United States except as asylum seekers should never be referred to as "Whatever-Americans." They did not come here because they wanted to become Americans. They came here to escape from something, real or imagined, in their respective countries of origin. Perhaps their children, or more likely grandchildren, can be class labeled as "Americans of Somali descent" but the first generation immigrants are not, and will never actually be, Americans.

Being an American involves more than passing a citizenship test and living within U.S. borders for a period of time. Being an American means accepting the culture and behavioral norms of America and of other Americans. It means at least trying to be racially, religiously and politically tolerant of others. It also means not being "hyphenated."

Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller, a two-tour Vietnam veteran and writes frequently about political idiocy, business and economic idiocy and American cultural idiocy. Jim also blogs at, and can be contacted directly at

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:37 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 794 words, total size 5 kb.

Dutch Auschwitz on Wheels

A.J. Cameron

I believe this is coming to the U. S., especially with the deployment of ObamaCare. The big difference will be due to the 'rulings' of the appointed & unaccountable members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

The pro-life movement needs to be expanded to include all unnatural deaths, pushed by a society that has strayed so far from God.

A. J.

According to the article:

"Number of Dutch killed by euthanasia rises by 13 per cent
The number of Dutch people killed by medical euthanasia has more than doubled in the 10 years since legislation was changed to permit it, rising 13 per cent last year to 4,188."


"As previously controversial "mercy killings" have become socially and medically acceptable, the number of cases, the vast majority of medical euthanasia, have more than doubled over the decade to 2012.

One explanation for the steep rise of Dutch cases is the introduction last year of mobile euthanasia units allowing patients to be killed by volunatry lethal injection when family doctors refused. "

End excerpt.

So, euthenasia welcome wagons are roaming the streets, looking for people to kill. What a great innovation! Even the Nazis didn't think of a mobile Auschwitz.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:33 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.

CAIR culpable in Muslim mall massacre

Jack Kemp forwards this:

Pamela Geller, WND Column: CAIR culpable in Muslim mall massacre
The terror-linked Muslim Brotherhood group CAIR is doing incalculable damage to this country, and presents a very real and dangerous national security risk. CAIR objects to the description of al-Shabaab as an "Islamic extremist terrorism."

In 2011, former Ramsey County sheriff Bob Fletcher organized an educational seminar on Somalia addressing these very issues. The seminar, called "Understanding the People of Somalia," provided training on al-Shabaab. But Hamas-CAIR actively sought to destroy and discredit the event and its organizers. CAIR sent letters to law enforcement agencies throughout the state who might be sending people to the seminar warning that the attendees "will receive inaccurate and biased information about Muslims and Somalis" -- that according to A. Lori Saroya, president of the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MN).

Hamas-CAIR attacked the Muslim speakers at the event. All of the speakers were Somali Muslims. The message said two speakers at the seminar -- Omar Jamal, former executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, and Abdirizak Bihi, director of the Somali Education and Social Advocacy Center -- were "unrepresentative of their community and unqualified to speak on the topics outlined in the upcoming presentation." Jamal was the Somali representative to the United Nations. Abdirizak Bihi's nephew, Burhan Hassan, went missing from Minneapolis. He had joined the jihad in Somalia and was shot and killed. (thanks to Larry Estavan)

CAIR culpable in Muslim mall massacre
Exclusive: Pamela Geller cites group's impeding of probe into jihad recruitment in U.S.
The very week the Muslim Brotherhood front group known as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a report deriding opponents of jihad, and most particularly Rep. Peter King’s hearings on jihad recruitment of Muslims to Somalia for terror training, there came the horrific news that American Muslims were part of the Muslim militia that slaughtered non-Muslims (mostly women and children) in an attack on an upscale mall frequented by Westerners in Nairobi. CAIR and its affiliated organizations are the jihad enemy within working to disarm us.

Nihad Awad, CAIR’s founder and executive director, has said, "I am in support of the Hamas movement more than the PLO.” He and his cohorts fiercely attack and smear those who are working to keep us safe from these devout savages. In CAIR’s "Legislating Fear” report, they devote an entire section to Rep. King’s "anti-Muslim” hearings.

In the smear report, Awad said that King "uses his office to foster anti-Muslim sentiment” (page v). In their new report, "Islamophobia and its Impact in the United States: Legislating Fear,” they go after Congressman King for holding a hearing on "Al Shabaab Recruitment and Radicalization Within the Muslim American Community and the Threat to the Homeland,” implying that this radicalization was a non-existent myth created by King to drum up "anti-Muslim sentiment.”

The jihadis in Kenya say that there are five American Muslims among them: Ahmed Mohamed Isse from Saint Paul, Minn.; Abdifatah Osman Keenadiid from Minneapolis; Gen Mustafe Noorudiin from Kansas City; Abdelkarem Ali Mohamed from Illinois; Abdishakur Sheikh Hassan from Maine; and Shafie Die, from Tucson, Ariz.
Get the best expose of the Muslim Brotherhood ever done: "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.”

If this is true, Al Shabaab recruited these jihadis here. But CAIR tried to impede the investigation of this recruitment. Abdirizak Bihi, a Somali leader in Minnesota, has been trying to stop that recruitment – but then CAIR targeted him. They even called Bihi an "Islamophobe.” Bihi said: "They say that I am a bad person, that I am anti-Muslim, and that I don’t represent a hundred percent the Somali community. They lie about my life most of the time and try to destroy my character, my capability and my trust in the community.”

That’s CAIR’s modus operandi. But I repeat: The media are aligned with the jihad force, so expect little coverage of what’s germane to this story. It’s up to you to get the word out. Facebook, tweet and email it. The facts are that American Muslims took up arms to slaughter non-Muslims at an upscale shopping mall in Kenya. American Muslims joined a multi-national force of Muslims to wage holy war in Kenya; hostages and victims were told "all Muslims leave … we only want to kill non-Muslims.” They released anyone who could prove they were Muslim by reciting a prayer. They attacked American and Jewish shops. Women and children were slaughtered if they could not recite the Quran. The jihadis cut the hands off the bodies of their victims and burned their faces, bodies everywhere.

And CAIR called someone who tried to stop this group from recruiting in the U.S. an "Islamophobe.”
American media are scrubbing the news reports. These were American Muslims – it’s only a matter of time before it’s an American mall (think Boston Marathon bombing).

Continue reading "Pamela Geller, WND Column: CAIR culpable in Muslim mall massacre" »

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 841 words, total size 6 kb.

How to Enrich or Impoverish a Nation

By Selwyn Duke

What has lifted more people out of poverty, charity or economic freedom? It’s not even close.
Charity is wonderful, and I’ll be the first to say we have an obligation to share our gifts, be they material, intellectual or talent oriented. Yet whether our redistributionist endeavor is charity — and charity is voluntary redistribution — or the less noble, coercive, outsourcing of charity known as government programs, there first must be wealth to redistribute. But where does wealth come from?
If we go back to biblical times and beyond, a man might be considered wealthy if he had 70 goats. In point of fact, the standard for wealth was so different that the US’s average middle-class person today — with his car, TVs, computer, refrigerator and many other luxuries — would have been considered wealthy for most of history. And our average "poor” man, who also usually has an old car and various creature comforts, likewise has a material lifestyle that would have been the envy of our forebears. The reason for this is simple: there is far, far more wealth in the world now than in ages past.

The first lesson this teaches is that wealth can be created. This happens when people find more efficient ways of raising livestock (so 70 goats becomes small potatoes) and growing crops, and when they extract raw materials from the Earth and use them to create the manifold necessities and luxuries we enjoy. In a word, it happens when people produce, which is why economists and businessmen will measure productivity. And how will people be encouraged to produce?

They must have an incentive, and this is where the profit motive comes into play. Ah, the much maligned profit motive. Let’s talk about that.

There are two extremes with respect to the profit motive. One is typified by some libertarian Ayn Rand acolytes who seem to treat it as the highest motivation; the other is far more prevalent today and is represented by another brand of "libs,” people who behave as if profit is something dirty (at least other people’s profit, anyway). But the balanced view is a bit different.

There is another kind of incentive. In America’s early Christian communes, for instance, residents’ belief that they were doing God’s will — and perhaps winning His favor — served as a great incentive to be productive; thus did the communal Oneida Colony create renowned flatware. And, truth be known, there’d be no need for profit if we lived in a sinless world, for there would be neither covetousness nor laziness. If there was an unfulfilled need — paper products, for example — people would readily volunteer to create them simply to serve others, and no one would be wasteful or undermine the system by taking more of anything than he needed. But in a sinless world we wouldn’t need a military, police or prisons, either.

Sane people live in the real world, however, where different rules apply. One of them is that since the spiritual/moral motive is the highest reason to serve your fellow man, it is also the rarest. And because of this, it cannot be relied upon to motivate people at the level of population. Enter the profit motive. To paraphrase economist Walter Williams, profit encourages your fellow man to serve you even if he doesn’t give a darn about you. After all, Domino’s didn’t start making pizza to relieve hunger; Ivory doesn’t make soap because "Cleanliness is next to godliness.” To have your needs and wants satisfied, would you rather rely on the charity of your fellow man or his profit-driven self-interest? For the answer, just look at all the wonders of science and medicine, all the luxuries around you, and ponder what percentage of them were created based on charitable motives versus the profit motive. Again, charity is wonderful — but it’s also relatively rare.

Of course, we should all strive to make it less rare in ourselves. But the lesson here is this: to minimize the profit motive personally is virtuous; to minimize it in public policy is vice. The motivation to serve others for a higher reason must come from within; a bureaucrat can decide to eliminate the profit motive via regulation, but he cannot replace it in the hearts and minds of the people with a more ethereal purpose. And this should be very easy for the bureaucrat to understand. Would he — or anyone else who sneers at profit — do his job for free? Precious few of us would. In fact,  HYPERLINK "" research has shown that those who protest the profit motive most are most driven by it (the likely explanation? Projection).

In fact, unnecessarily reducing the profit motive in civilization is evil. This is because productivity in a nation — which means wealth creation — will generally (at least) be proportional to the degree of profit to be had. Thus, a person who institutes unjust profit-reducers such as excessive taxes and regulations is a policy poverty pimp who can literally rob his society of billions in prosperity. A thief in an alley is less to be feared.

The fact that wealth is created teaches other lessons as well. For example, class-warfare demagogues encourage the notion that the poor have less because the rich have more. But unless the wealth has been stolen (which does happen; e.g., Bernie Madoff), this is utter nonsense. Consider: would it have made even one poor person richer if Microsoft’s Bill Gates hadn’t pursued his dreams and made his billions? It would in fact have made people poorer, as we wouldn’t have the jobs and productivity-enhancing products he created.

So how can nations become as prosperous as the culture and character of their people allow? There must be a powerful profit motive so that people produce as much wealth as possible. And there is a prerequisite for this: great economic freedom (most still call this "capitalism,” a grave mistake because the term was originated by socialists).

How important is this factor? In "Self-Inflicted Poverty,” Dr. Walter Williams  HYPERLINK "" points out that there is an extremely strong correlation between a nation’s level of economic freedom and its level of prosperity. He asks "Why is it that Egyptians do well in the U.S. but not Egypt?” After pointing out that the same could be said of others from poor nations who immigrate to the US, he points out that Egyptians are smothered with regulations and corruption. Providing one damning example, he writes, "To get legal title to a vacant piece of land would take more than 10 years of dealing with red tape. To do business in Egypt, an aspiring poor entrepreneur would have to deal with 56 government agencies and repetitive government inspections.” The result is that Egypt’s mummies have more life than its economy.

Given how important economic freedom is, we should note how it’s lost: through lack of appreciation. After all, cease to value something, and you may not preserve it — demonize it enough, and you’ll surely destroy it.

When appearing on a radio show some years ago on the heels of the financial crisis, the first question the host asked me was why economic freedom (she said "capitalism”) had failed. Her attitude was a staggering tribute to a lack of perspective, a spirit of entitlement and the tendency to count curses and not blessings.

Just walk into any American supermarket with the thousands of products from the world over available at affordable prices, and tell me economic freedom has failed. In fact, our whole modern world is a tribute to economic freedom. And what of the financial crisis? Well, people will talk about how it destroyed so many trillion dollars of wealth and place the blame on economic freedom. But remember the time when 70 goats made you wealthy? We only had trillions of dollars of wealth that could be destroyed to begin with because of economic freedom! In fact, economic freedom has provided a climate for such tremendous wealth creation that the trillions lost still represented only a small percentage of all the wealth in existence. Our "failure” is history’s raging success.

The problem here is that people tend to take what they have for granted and view wealth in relative terms. But returning to what I said about the poor, historically, being so meant that you didn’t have shoes on your feet or food on the table (if you had a table). In America today it generally means you have an older car, a TV, refrigerator, air conditioning and a host of other luxuries. The reality? Our government’s "poverty line” is a political ploy. In an absolute sense, there is very, very little poverty in the US — because of economic freedom.

Our great discoveries, inventions and innovations were not made by bureaucrats, nor generally at their direction. And while I encourage and support the charitable endeavors of my Catholic Church (the world’s largest private provider of aid to the poor), even its efforts to end poverty pale in comparison to economic freedom’s triumphs. This is no slight. Economic freedom unleashes the creative capacities of the common man, from border to border, transforming the populace into an army of wealth creators. And nothing can compete with that.

Without creation, there can be no distribution.

HYPERLINK ""Contact Selwyn Duke, HYPERLINK ""follow him on Twitter or log on to HYPERLINK ""

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1579 words, total size 10 kb.

Details on Upcoming "Take Back Our Schools" from Common Core Conference - KC- Saturday, Oct. 5th

A.J. Cameron

There are cracks in the dam of the damning curriculum, data mining and reporting packaged within Common Core. This will be drive another fissure in that dam! Be there and be part of the reclaiming of our classrooms and our republic!

If you have an email distribution list, please forward this alert onto them, too!

Make it a marvelous day!

A. J.

Would you PLEASE share this attached flyer and conference schedule with your group and/or organization and your friends? This conference is too important not to share with others, because it involves the futures of your children, your grandchildren, and the future of our country. This conference will provide you with the knowledge and teaching tools on the TRUTH of Common Core to share with your family, neighbors, co-workers, churches, schools, and communities. The issue of fighting Common Core is non-partisan, we must ALL come together as Americans to eliminate it.

Take Back Our Schools Conference
Saturday, October 5th from 1pm to 6pm
North Kansas City Community Center
1999 Iron Street, Kansas City, MO
Registration Fee - $25 (Go to: to register)
Organizers: Missourians Against Common Core (Kansans Against Common Core are also contributing)

General Topics include:
History; State Sovereignty; State Laws; Early Childhood Edu; Special Needs; Math & English Standards; Classroom Testing; Longitudinal Data; FERPA; Grassroots organizing;

Break Out Sessions include:
Non-Public Schools; School Board Members; Grassroots

I realize that this event is less than two weeks away, but we need as many parents, teachers, pastors, legislators, and school administrators as possible to be aware of, and attend the conference. The information that you will learn and the knowledge that you will take away with you is well worth the cost of the conference.

Thank You


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.

Jindal Speaks on Common Core

A.J. Cameron

Another leader speaks out against CC!

Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) finally made a statement on the Common Core State Standards during a recent press conference in Baton Rouge on Monday. The Advocate reports:

Wading into a national debate, Gov. Bobby Jindal said Monday that he is concerned Louisiana public school classrooms would be saddled with a "federalized curriculum” sparked by a series of tougher standards called Common Core.

Jindal, in his most expansive comments on the issue, also said he wants state Superintendent of Education John White and the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to answer questions raised by a state lawmaker, who said Monday he wants the state to drop the standards.

"We share those concerns,” the governor said in a prepared statement in response to a reporter’s question.

"We support rigor and high academic standards that help ensure Louisiana students are getting the best possible education,” Jindal said.

"What we do not support is a national or federalized curriculum,” the governor added. "We need Louisiana standards, not Washington, D.C., standards.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

To Conservatives across Texas

Joseph Leatherwood has some harsh words for the GOP:

To Conservatives across Texas

Senator Cornyn had effectively shut down his phones. He has turned his back on
the people of Texas. I stayed up with those fighting for us. So I emailed the

Sir you are a coward and a liar. I shall not mince words with a scalawag as low
as you. You are indeed a scroundel and we will vote you out of office next

You and your staff lied to me on Friday of last week - asking if you were going
to support the defunding of socialist "healthcare" - I was told you would vote
to defund only to find out you are a liar.

You will "vote to defund " but only as a procedural vote to CYA. You sir are
voting to strip the CR of its most important item - defunding - and empower
Harry Reid and YOUR fellow socialists in the Senate.

Only a slick Willie lawyer can reason as you people in Washington do. I am a
life long republican and conservative and I will never support you for public
office again.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you should be on the floor right now
providing aid to the cause of Liberty and the constitution! Sir you should be
standing with Senator Ted Cruz.

I am ashamed to call you my senator sir for you do not deserve that distinction.
You have destroyed your standing with me forever and next election you will reap
what you are sowing...

Joe Leatherwood
Republican precinct chairman 3181
San Antonio, Texas

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

September 25, 2013

How's that Hope and Change Working Out?

7lb Dave


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 02:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

Kelleigh Nelson -- Till Death Us Do Part

A.J. Cameron

I'm sure people ask you what can be done to thwart the evil attacks under which we currently suffer.

How about an examination of ourselves and seeking God's forgiveness, so that we can adorn ourselves with His protection as we go forward? With Him, all things are possible, even when, and, especially when, the situation is most dire.

Kelleigh has it right!

A. J.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:09 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

<< Page 68 of 481 >>
933kb generated in CPU 0.28, elapsed 0.462 seconds.
41 queries taking 0.2025 seconds, 221 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.