Write your Congressmen

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Empire State Building Goes Red for Communist China, Sparking Protest

I wonder... This having never happened before...

...is it an Obama effect?

Empire State Building Goes Red for Communist China, Sparking Protest - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com:
"Tourists were squirming as the city's 102-story landmark — which gained a special significance for New Yorker's after 9/11, when it again became Manhattan's tallest building — was being converted into a shining red beacon for Chinese communism.

'I think it's a bad idea,' said Dick Paasch, 69, from Billings, Montana. 'The Chinese Revolution ... in the years 1958-1960, there were something like 26 million people starved to death. Why would we want to celebrate something like that?"

Monday, September 28, 2009

More school: Obama would curtail summer vacation - wtop.com

Once again, on a different topic that enters the intimate lives of people, Obama wants control. This time he reveals that he knows nothing about child development.

Obama wants longer school days and no or limited summer vacations. However, children need playtime. One learns this just about anywhere: through life, but especially in any health science-related discipline. Play develops the brain and all manner of emotive qualities. But once again, Obama doesn't know this.

What a dumbass we have elected.

More school: Obama would curtail summer vacation - wtop.com: "
WASHINGTON (AP) - Students beware: The summer vacation you just enjoyed could be sharply curtailed if President Barack Obama gets his way.

Obama says American kids spend too little time in school, putting them at a disadvantage with other students around the globe.

'Now, I know longer school days and school years are not wildly popular ideas,' the president said earlier this year. 'Not with Malia and Sasha, not in my family, and probably not in yours. But the challenges of a new century demand more time in the classroom.'"

Friday, September 25, 2009

Moore: The Hypocrite



I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this fool.

But I think it's interesting (and good) when the media finally challenges one of its liberal own.

Moore has become a millionaire many times over, not just thanks to capitalism, but most importantly on the backs of the "little people" he claims to want to help.

Nowhere has it been said, even by Moore himself, that he ever donates to charity. Nor is it known anywhere that Moore shares his film profits with the "downtrodden and oppressed" people that Moore uses in his films to gain his notoriety.

Lies and hypocrisy, plain and simple.


Dissecting the facts in Michael Moore's new film 'Capitalism: A Love Story' - Zap2it:
"Moore was unapologetic when asked how his beat-down on capitalism squares with the benefits he earns by teaming with big names in the entertainment industry including Paramount, the Weinstein Co. and Overture Films, which is part of John Malone's Liberty Media.

Moore says his life has greater purpose now that he has found success, and he doesn't mind paying more in taxes. 'It is not right, if you get through the door and get to enjoy the good life, when everyone else struggles and lives paycheck to paycheck,' Moore said.

His passion is to convince moviegoers that the game is rigged against most Americans, while Wall Street, big business and the wealthy keep coming out ahead. Moore says the taxpayer-funded banking bailout amounted to a 'double robbery' because average people lost money in the market and then were asked to prop up the same companies that lost it for them.

Instead of laying all the blame on banks, Moore could have made the message of 'Capitalism: A Love Story' even more powerful with a more nuanced approach. He does note how some individuals unwisely used their home equity like personal piggybanks, but there isn't much discussion about how some of the people facing foreclosure got to that point. That would have bolstered his arguments and shown how damaging it is when greed is everywhere."

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

US Government is Corrupt

The corruption is so complete that they make so attempt to hide it, anymore.

Massachusetts Governor Says White House Pressing for Quick Kennedy Replacement - Political News - FOXNews.com:
"RICHMOND, Mass. -- Gov. Deval Patrick said Friday that President Barack Obama had personally talked to him about changing the Senate succession law in Massachusetts, and White House aides were pushing for him to gain the power to temporarily replace the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy amid the administration's health care push."

Monday, September 21, 2009

Control through Seduction


Seduction; we go there willingly. But the name of the game is control, and in the article below we see it well-versed for the first time.

The more citizens become dependent on the government, the more the government can control our lives. This was no secret to Karl Marx, Lenin, Louis Althusser and other communists, who talked at length about the role the Ideological State Apparatus - as opposed to the State Apparatus, like the police - can play in controlling a people.

Take schools for example. British Cultural Studies and Louis Althusser talked about the ideological role institutions like church and school play in determining what people think. Religious speech is hard to control, what with the written document of the Bible and all that, so places like the USSR simply did away with religion. That won't happen here, but the schools, and now health care, are ripe for the taking - and in fact have been infected to a large extent already.

Does anyone think the public school system is even good? Does anyone think that, even if it was good, that it's even-handed, politically speaking? It's not, because the liberals of the 1960s, understanding the subversive power of the Ideological State Apparatus, infected the schools in large numbers to the point where they now control universities. The same is true for the elementary and secondary schools, particularly through the the school boards who determine the curriculum. Remember, there were some districts which reduced discussion of George Washington to a footnote. This is why they're not even good; they spend too much time on ideology and not enough on facts. But schools exist now as an Ideological State Apparatus, and for better or worse we're dependent on the system.

Apply this to health care, if Obama gets his way. Imagine a people (us) dependent on the State for their health. How much dissent are you going to make if you need treatment to save your life?

The stakes are pretty high. For the individual, as high as it can get.


Romney rips Obama's domestic policies - Washington Times:
"Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said more Americans are being seduced into relying on the government instead of on themselves, thanks to the policies of President Obama and his fellow Democrats.

Mr. Obama's policies encourage 'a growing sense of dependency and entitlements,' and are making some Americans 'less apt to create new businesses, to strike out on new adventures and pursue opportunities that have always been the source of America's vitality economically,' he said."

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Obama Used Faulty Anecdote in Speech to Congress - Political News - FOXNews.com

Obama Used Faulty Anecdote in Speech to Congress - Political News - FOXNews.com:
"WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama, seeking to make a case for health-insurance regulation, told a poignant story to a joint session of Congress last week. An Illinois man getting chemotherapy was dropped from his insurance plan when his insurer discovered an unreported gallstone the patient hadn't known about.

'They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it,' the president said in the nationally televised address.

In fact, the man, Otto S. Raddatz, didn't die because the insurance company rescinded his coverage once he became ill, an act known as recission. The efforts of his sister and the office of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan got Raddatz's policy reinstated within three weeks of his April 2005 rescission and secured a life-extending stem-cell transplant for him. Raddatz died this year, nearly four years after the insurance showdown."

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

White House Lobbies for Interim Kennedy Seat Appointment

I'm so upset by this I can't think straight. It means there is no government devoid of party politics, but rather a government by the party. That very different from what America is supposed to be. The government of the Nazis and the Communists ran this way, and still do to this day - everything is done at the behest of the political party, not the people.

It seems to me that once one is elected to the presidency, then that is supposed to rise above party politics. The President is the president of the people, not the Democratic Party President of the people.

This bad, bad, bad. It ushers in a new era in American government where power is lopsided, deaf and uncontrolled.

White House Lobbies for Interim Kennedy Seat Appointment - Political News - FOXNews.com:
"The Obama White House has left the sidelines and jumped in with both feet as Massachusetts lawmakers debate whether to change current law and appoint an interim U.S. Senator to replace the deceased Edward M. Kennedy.

FOX News has learned Senior White House adviser David Axelrod called the president of the Massachusetts Senate on Monday to lobby for the law change to fill Kennedy's Senate seat until the Jan. 19 special election is held."

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

News Outlets Largely Ignoring ACORN Scandal, Critics Say

The picture to the left is a screen shot of the front page of the ABC News.com site. Notice - no mention of the action taken in Congress to eliminate federal funding for ACORN.

News Outlets Largely Ignoring ACORN Scandal, Critics Say - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com:
"'A major national scandal and none of the broadcast networks is covering it,' said Dan Gainor, vice president for business and culture at the Media Research Center. 'This is the news media in the era of Van Jones and President Obama. The major outlets cover what they want and create the themes they want.'"

Friday, September 11, 2009

news: China considering restrictions on rare earths exports

news: China considering restrictions on rare earths exports
China is planning to further restrict or prohibit exports of rare earth metals, according to British press reports.

Rare earths—some of which are mined exclusively in China—play a crucial role in emission control catalysts and in a number of other technologically advanced products including electronics, electric motors, superconductors or magnets.

In a draft report titled ‘Rare Earths Industry Development Plan 2009-2015’, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has reportedly called for a total ban on foreign shipments of terbium, dysprosium, yttrium, thulium, and lutetium. A number of other metals including cerium, lanthanum, neodymium, and europium would be restricted to a combined export quota of 35,000 tonnes a year.

An estimated 95% of the world’s rare earth supplies are mined in China, mostly in Inner Mongolia. The proposal reflects the growing competition for diminishing resources, as the global usage of rare earths increases. The proposed export quota is insufficient to cover the global needs.

A number of the materials to be restricted are used in emission control catalysts.

Ourageous - when the whistleblower is at fault

2 ACORN Employees Fired, Could Face Criminal Charges - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com:
"Whether or not prosecutors charge any ACORN officials in Baltimore, the filmmaker himself could be in hot water.

A Maryland state statute requires consent from all parties whenever a conversation is taped, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Violations of the law are punishable by a maximum of five years in jail and a fine up to $10,000.

But that statute does not apply to videotape recordings — only to phone calls or other electronic 'communications,' Napolitano argued — meaning the filmmaker is likely in the clear."

I've never been comfortable with this law in Maryland - that one can be prosecuted for taping a conversation without the consent of all parties.

I believe that if one is on the up-and-up. then he will always act the same way. So if he's acting illegally in public, he'll do so in private; the latter just makes him easier to catch. As they say, it's what's in the heart that counts.

So when 2 student interns walk into an office open to the public, an office operated with federal public tax dollars (ACORN offices in Baltimore), it seems to me that that anything done there is done especially in public and should be subject to any form of recording. The expectation of privacy should be very low, making it legal to record anything that happens there, video, audio or otherwise.

Journalists should be free to record whatever they like in public. It's the expectation of privacy that's the issue. Only a fool has that expectation on a phone or anywhere outside his home.

Especially in light of the collapse of law enforcement in Baltimore, we need more people willing to do what these young filmmakers have done.

There's a special irony here: ACORN's core has as part of its "mission" to enhance communities. How does prostitution, especially child prostitution, and tax evasion do that? Is it an entrepreneurial opportunity for the unemployed? In the end, they'll argue that it's somehow Bush's fault.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

The Democratic Right to Dissent

The Gaggle : A Defense of Joe Wilson: The Democratic Right to Dissent

So when does our head of government answer to questioning by the legislature? Unless he’s impeached, the answer is never. (The only real questioning the president ever faces is when he chooses to call a White House press conference. Even these have become such stage-managed events that their inquisitorial value is close to zero.) Increasingly, the president’s most powerful officials are similarly aloof from inquiry. Consider Obama’s bevy of "czars" and "presidential envoys" to handle multiple areas of domestic and foreign policy. As White House officials, they are beyond the reach of Congressional questioning. But why? What purpose is served by grilling some cabinet secretary, when the administration has already made it clear that real power lies with the czar above them? To adapt an old and vulgar proverb: why question the monkey if the organ grinder remains out of reach?

The debacles of the past decade surely show how damaging is this inability to require America’s head of government to explain and defend his actions, at the time, to the legislature. Suppose President Bush had been forced to answer tough questions back in spring 2003 about his arguments for invading Iraq? Or his decision to set up Guantánamo and fill it with detainees scarfed up from faraway battlefields? Or his decision to allow the methods of interrogation that he did? The questions he never had seriously to address quickly mount up. Had President Bush been required to come before Congress, on regular and frequent occasions, to explain and defend his decisions, the outcomes might have been no different. I suspect they would have been. What’s certain is that national debate would have been more informed, more searching, more inclusive—more democratic.

So, back to last night’s address to Congress. The debate over President Obama’s desire to change America’s health-care system would surely have been less beset by angry fantasies, less in thrall to paranoid conspiracy theories about "death panels," if the head of government had been required, over these past months, to face Congress at intervals and answer questions about what he had in mind? It’s an axiom of American civic life that open government is the best government. In an age when the frenzies of cable-TV and talk-radio demagogues command the audiences they do, it's time to wonder whether open government—the chief executive forced to explain and defend what he intends, and why he intends it—might be our best hope of keeping our national debates within the bounds of rationality and, yes, civility that the Founding Fathers hoped.