REPUBLICAN "CAP AND TRAITORS"

In the middle of the night as the country was emotionally distracted by the death of Michael Jackson last week, what better time would there be for Democrats to sneak an additional 300 pages into the "Cap and Trade" Bill that was passed last Friday.  Do you find it at all strange that when some members of the United States House of Representatives ASKED for a complete copy of the Bill they were told "No, it's not available" by the Democratic Leadership?  I don't.

Again our Congress passes a Bill no one has read.

What I do find appalling is that despite literally an endless barrage of e-mails and faxes to virtually every member of the House, NOT to support the Bill, it was passed anyway.  You can thank Nancy and her arm-twisting, bribe-distributing, extortionist  gang of hooligans (most often the ones wearing dresses -- whether they are female or not).

Just so you know, these Republicans voted for the Bill: Mack (CA), Kirk (CA), Lance (NJ), McHugh (NY), Reichert (WA), Smith (NJ) and Castle (DE).  Not only should everyone give them a call today, they have to find someone else to vote for in 2010.

In case you've been watching NBC, ABC or CBS News (where they did not report this), some of what went into the Cap and Trade Bill was a series of FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS that have already failed in California.  Just one?  Homeowners across the country would have to meet those standards that won't allow you to clear brush around your home so it's virtually guaranteed it will burn down when there is a fire.

Strangely enough, those codes are in direct conflict with the state funded campaigns in states like Florida (yes, they have fires too), where it is recommended homeowners remove excess brush.  But Californians like Nancy Pelosi and others do know what's "best for us", right?

Nationally, few people know that on July 1, 2008 California put into effect a new law that requires EVERYONE under the age of 13 to wear a life vest if they want to go swimming!  Try to tell that to even the PC crowd in the Northeast who routinely throw baby infants into swimming pools because "it's fascinating to watch them swim under water and then bob to the surface".  The rational in Sacramento?  They had too many illegal Mexican aliens (that they had 'welcomed' to the state), who didn't know how to yell "Help" in English!

This level of insanity and 'Nanny State' thinking is very much alive and well in Washington.

STOP AND WATCH THIS VIDEO RIGHT NOW

As of this date less than 400,000 people have watched this video clip.  There are over 300 million people in the United States and every single one of them needs to watch it.  Please link this page in a note to your friends.

This guy's video on You Tube has been so popular that (reportedly) Obama called him personally. He said that he was very disturbed with the video and invited him to the White House.  Obama also said he wanted the White House to handle the Press and not to talk about the video or the White House visit. 

Few know if that part of things is true.  What everyone who watches the video does know is that Americans have become complacent cowards in defending their own rights and the country they say they love.

This may be the best six minutes invested in your future ........     

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA 

GIVE NANCY A PIECE OF YOUR MIND

If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need: 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi 
http://speaker.house.gov/contact or http://www.speaker.gov/contact 

If the web contact form doesn't work, use this email address: 
AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov 

Office of the Speaker 
H-232, US Capitol 
Washington, DC 20515 
(202) 225-0100

NEWT GINGRICH, PLEASE DON'T SAY "INCLUSION"

Mr. Gingrich:

RE: Your use of the word "inclusion".

I am a 61 year-old, white male who, like yourself, has seen many changes in the America we live in.  As a young person I was the high school news reporter (AV geek) doing the End of Day Announcements in November, 1963.

As time unfolded there was Bobby, Martin and even Malcolm. I remember Ohio State, Oct.15th on the Mall and being told the hair that merely touched the top of my ears was "too long" by the President of the business college I graduated from in 1970.  When he saw my picture on the front page of a newspaper for a peace rally, he called for a school-wide assembly to tell students "war protests were none of our business".

Over the years I traveled throughout the U.S. following a 20 year career of my brother-in-law who was in the Air Force. (His last five with the Joint Chiefs of Staff in D.C.)

I relate this history to put into perspective a losing battle I had in New Hampshire with Liberalism and Feminism in the late 80's and early 90's as Bill and Jean Shaheen kidnapped the state for the Democrats.  It was a time when I learned first hand the "legal" concept:  "What a man says is taken as a neutral to a negative and what a woman says is taken as a neutral to a positive."  Again, I have seen a lot in life.

It was at this time that I first became personally aware of the term "inclusion".

As I made my recovery from a devastating time in my life, I attended a United Church of Christ parish for six years in the 90's.  The pastor was a former Irish Catholic, Vietnam chaplain and the standing joke in the community was that the church was a place for "recovering Catholics".  

I saw firsthand how forces within the church slowly and methodically took over the focus of the parish's direction, changing the tone of sermons, church hymnals and a variety of sponsored events.  The buzz phrase heard more often than not was "We want to be inclusionary."  It would have been more honest and much more accurate to say: "We want to throw away tradition and do it our way."

That sea change was not ignored by the senior members of the church as many went elsewhere to worship.  It was shameful that "their" church was appropriated by others and they felt too uncomfortable to stay.  Isn't that exactly what is happening to American society as traditional mores and beliefs are being thrown under the bus?  Powerful people in politics, the media and activist courts continue to kidnap the morals and conscience of our society and the label they use is "Inclusion".

The church experience brought focus to sharp feelings I have as I look back at the previous years in my life.  High schools that were filled with pride and tradition in the 60's are now filled with lonely, lost young people.  They are the victims of "progressive education" and the changes of the 70's.  

Repeated attempts at "New Math" (an effort so that parents could no longer teach their own children), the "Open Classroom" concept (which embarrassed many teachers and destroyed classroom discipline) and the most destructive modality, "Students have the right to fail", all were opening salvos in the NEA and the Liberal Left's war on education.  I know first hand because I taught high school at the time.

Hand in hand with the destruction of education was the Liberal movement to "enhance" the rights of minors so school administrators became afraid to hold young people accountable for any of their actions.  It's a sad joke today that young people are less afraid to go to a police station than we were to go to the Principal's Office.  

When you used the word "inclusion" in your speech Monday night I was crestfallen.  It is an ugly term, historically laden with Liberalism, true insensitivity and cruelty.  While it may be important to reach out to any voter in the country to support the Republican Party, there has to be a less offensive way.

Thank you for your consideration.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY MUST FIRE Dr. Marc Lamont Hill NOW!

Dr. Marc Lamont Hill --

In a shameful endorsement of mob violence during an interview with Bill O’Reilly on 6/8/09, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill -- an “Education” professor at Columbia University -- openly supported Anarchy in the streets of Philadelphia.   His comments were a disgusting diatribe of prejudice and Columbia University MUST FIRE Lamont now!

Professor Hill and O’Reilly were discussing the fact that an openly identified group of individuals -- some of whom where even interviewed on TV following their crime -- were not charged for ruthlessly beating a man on the streets of the city.  Their excuse was they “thought he was a child molester”.

O’Reilly pointed out that the man had not be charged or convicted of any crime and for a mob to attack him was clearly out of line and against the law.  Hill argued that his city was already in a state of anarchy and it was right for the mob to attack.  

Marc seems to think he wears a dress when he goes to work (or out in public) because he has to stand up for women as victims. What he doesn't know or even begin to understand is that females are the fastest growing demographic of the criminal base in America.

He also doesn't know that 86% of the victims of a sexual assault by a female are NOT BELIEVED by authorities when they report the crime.

He doesn't know that MORE MEN THAN WOMAN are raped each year in the United States when statistics from prison or jail assaults are rightfully included in overall discussions.

No mob violence should ever be accepted, encouraged or promoted, yet that is exactly what Marc did in his discussion with Bill.

An apology is NOT ENOUGH.  Columbia University must fire Lamont now!

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION USES OLD TACTICS TO LIE

All too often Americans are hearing from the Obama Administration that they are "saving or creating" hundreds of thousands of jobs. Anyone knows that is total BS and the ultimate kind of unprovable spin.

What many people haven't been told is just where this form of treachery came from.

SOME HISTORY --

Thirty years ago some of the bleeding heart liberals were looking around for new ways to tap into the "Evergreen Theory". In a brainstorming session one day (probably held at a Liberal Arts college in the Northeast), a group of hardcore Feminists decided that more of their graduating seniors could find work in Social Services if broader attention was brought to the Sexual Abuse of Children.

"What a fantastic idea!" the group proclaimed. "We can create a whole new kingdom, employ our brainwashed followers and eventually put ourselves into very high-paying positions as the rulers of all the new programs."

It sounded so good and it sounded so easy. Just scare the Hell out of people, appeal to their emotions and get their money. What was an added benefit for the Feminists was the established (false) perception that ONLY men abused children.

They began their campaign setting up "programs", "safe houses", "media blitzes" and the indoctrination of prosecutors by "helping" to interview children who were possibly victims. The Massachusetts case of the Fells Acre Day Care Center comes to mind. The CASA volunteers program is another.

In the Fells Acre Case interviews were done by Social Service workers (not experienced, licensed therapists) which years later were totally discredited as "leading" and "manipulative". Children repeatedly made up exaggerated stories that -- lacking the political firestorm the Feminists whipped up -- would not have been trusted or believed by any judge or jury in the country.

The CASA program to "help and support victims" was similarly discredited when leaders didn't disavow statements made by prosecutors that the program should be funded and expanded "because they help bring more convictions". They were also justifiably criticized because they routinely abandoned "victims" once criminal proceedings concluded. The more the organization was a tool for the government (not the victim), the more the focus and resources changed.

For years these realities were swept under the rug. But there was one immediate problem for those who had visions of both power and control as well as impressive salaries.

Based on available statistics, the numbers simply weren't high enough to create a landslide of support and additional funding. The "mother load" of getting donation support directly from the general public was not materializing.

"How can we fix this?" decried the masterminds. "How can we get more money?"

That's when "Abuse v2.0" was born.

"Let's take the existing (rather low) numbers of reported Childhood Sexual Abuse and concoct a way to dramatically expand them so people will really take notice and be afraid."

And then the stairway to the "Holy Grail" was created.

"We tried combining 'reported' case statistics with our imaginary 'unreported' estimates and the media and the public seemed to buy into that. Why not throw in "abuse" statistics -- again reported and unreported -- to send the numbers into the stratosphere?"

The groups understood that "abuse" was an extremely fluid category and everything from a raised voice to micro waving your children in an oven could be included. They also realized another term would be an additional catalyst: "neglect".

Even taken at reported face value, to add general abuse and neglect numbers to the sexual abuse of children, it would inflate the figures in an exponential manner. Suddenly the term "Sexual Abuse of Children" was replaced by the new terminology, "Abuse and Neglect of Children".

In a pre-planned, effective onslaught on people's fears, the groups kept pounding away on the sexual abuse of children within any discussion using the new "abuse and neglect" approach so in the mind of the public the two became synonymous. What was even more rewarding to the Feminists originators was that, even though as much as 90% of the newly included numbers were acts committed by females, the misperception retained by the general public was that all this abuse was primarily perpetrated by males. Women had discovered the first, true Nuclear Bomb of Feminism!

In this case, compared to the Obama jobs statistics, these are the same people intentionally misleading our entire society for their own political and financial gain. The "Abuse and Neglect" concept could easily have been revealed as a fraud but the media and others never even tried. Obama's claims are harder to disprove but no less distorted and laughable -- IF ONLY THE MEDIA AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC WOULD SIMPLY CALL THEM A LIE -- we would be so much better off.

SONIA SOTOMAYOR RULES 2nd AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS INVALID AT THE STATE LEVEL

Even Democrats are shocked at this opinion from Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor and it's sure to make her confirmation hearings heat up.  The question now is will President Obama's latest "let's rush this through" command hold enough weight that the growing backlash can overcome a biased, blessing press and a Marxist political takeover of the nation.  

People who have found out how deeply Sotomayor's beliefs counter traditional American philosophies are now openly against her nomination.

SOTOMAYOR RULED IN JANUARY 2009 THAT STATES DO NOT HAVE TO OBEY THE SECOND AMENDMENT'S COMMANDMENT THAT THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

In Maloney v. Cuomo, Sotomayor signed an opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that said the Second Amendment does not protect individuals from having their right to keep and bear arms restricted by state governments.

The opinion said that the Second Amendment only restricted the federal government from infringing on an individual's right to keep and bear arms. As justification for this position, the opinion cited the 1886 Supreme Court case of Presser v. Illinois.

Sotomayor's decision rejected the Fourteenth Amendment's incorporation doctrine as far as the Second Amendment was concerned and her ruling ran to the left of even the reliably liberal San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

They reviewed a similar rights question and ruled in the April 2009 case Nordyke v. King that the Second Amendment did, in fact, apply to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, heavily citing the Supreme Court in Heller.

Whenever you have a conflict like this, you’re likely to have it end up before the Supreme Court so they can decide the issue.  One question Sotomayor must be asked in Congressional hearings is whether she would recuse herself from any review of either of the cases involved -- if she was a member of the Supreme Court.

Already being questioned over blatant Feminist, Racist and joking remarks about "activist" Court practices and the Law, Sotomayor is now being defined as a "chip off the old (Obama) block" and a radical supporter of his agenda.  Her remark about "knowing better" rings arrogantly more true every day.

Read the full article here:  http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=48718

Select from over 100 slogans so you can "Speak your mind all the time" at http://www.SatireWorks.com. Bumper stickers, T-shirts, buttons, hats and more.  

PUTIN AND PRAVDA DECLARE OBAMA A MARXIST

Less then two months ago, Russian Prime Minister Putin  warned Obama and the UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster.  Apparently, even though Russia suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our 'wise' Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.

It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.

by: Stanislav Mishin

Read the full article on Pravda:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/

Select from over 100 slogans so you can "Speak your mind all the time" at http://www.SatireWorks.com. Bumper stickers, T-shirts, buttons, hats and more.

Thanks for the heads up on this article from Auntie Em  http://libertarianwoman.blogspot.com