Monthly Archives: August 2012

New Video: The Frank Marshall Davis Story You Haven’t Heard – Until Now

Original Article at

AB Independent Productions, in collaboration with Veteran investigative journalist Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival, has released a new video that reveals in detail for the first time, the story of how communist and probable Soviet agent Frank Marshall Davis – arguably the most influential person in Obama’s life – was discovered, and how the national media attempted to cover this story up.

“Four years after we broke the story wide open with the release of a 600-page FBI file on Barack Obama’s communist mentor, we are still finding major elements of the media with their heads in the sand,” Kincaid said.

Davis was first exposed by noted researcher Trevor Loudon of NewZeal blog back in March 2007, a mere month after Obama announced his candidacy for president.  As is usually the case, Trevor’s source for this revelation was the communists themselves. Trevor quotes Communist Party USA member Gerald Horne who wrote in the CPUSA’s journal, Political Affairs, that Davis:

…spent a good deal of his adult life in Chicago, before decamping to Honolulu in 1948 at the suggestion of his good friend Paul Robeson (Ed: Robeson was staunch Stalinist).

Eventually, he befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu from Kansas and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who retracing the steps of Davis eventually decamped to Chicago.

Realizing this was a potentially explosive story, Kincaid sought to confirm it through independent sources. In the video, Kincaid quotes more of Horne’s revelations, including the following prophetic statement:

At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus, Barack’s memoir, and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’s equally affecting memoir, Livin’ the Blues. And when that day comes, I’m sure a future student will not only examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that U.S. imperialism created in order to subdue communist parties, but will also be moved to come to this historic and wonderful archive, [referring to the communist party archive] in order to gain insight on what has befallen this complex and breathing planet on which we reside.

Did Horne know back in March 2007 that Obama would be the next president? Seeking further verification, Kincaid located University of Hawaii professor, Kathryn Takara, who had written her dissertation about Davis. She confirmed via phone that Obama’s “Frank” was indeed Frank Marshall Davis and that they had a significant relationship.

Kincaid obtained Davis’s 601 page FBI file in August of 2008. It revealed that Davis was not only a high level communist party member (CPUSA # 47544), but very likely an active Soviet agent. He was under FBI surveillance for 19 years and was placed on the Bureau’s “Security Index.” This list identified people considered dangerous enough to be summarily arrested in case of war with the Soviet Union.

Author and historian Paul Kengor details many of Davis’s subversive activities in his book “The Communist.” He discussed his evidence that Davis was a Soviet propaganda agent at a recent Kincaid press conference, The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection. According to Kengor:

  • The Soviet goal was to create a separate “Negro Republic” in the American south
  • Later they would join the revolution to help create “Soviet America”
  • Davis joined the Communist Party about 1943, after the Hitler/Stalin Pact was signed
  • Davis founded and edited the CPUSA’s Chicago Star newspaper; regularly wrote virulently anti-American “Frank-ly Speaking” editorial
  • Davis had a “direct line to the Kremlin;” obtained exclusive interview for Star reporter with Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov
  • Soviet agents I.F. Stone and Lee Pressman wrote for the Star
  • Star editorial writer Howard Fast was a communist Hollywood screenwriter and winner of the Stalin Prize

Hawaii was not yet a state when Davis first relocated there in 1948. It had significant strategic importance and was thus the focal point of intense interest from the Soviets. Not coincidentally, it was swarming with communists. For example, Kincaid has uncovered a 1949 Saturday Evening Post article which described a 177 day-long communist inspired strike of the International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union (ILWU).

A disaffected former communist ILWU member provided much of the information for the Post article. He said the strike was launched in an attempt by the Communist Party to take over the island. If successful, it would have pulled Hawaii into the Soviet orbit.

At the time, Davis was editor of the ILWU newspaper, the Honolulu Record, and was being paid by the ILWU. According to Paul Kengor, this was a job created especially for Davis before he even arrived.  He resumed his “Frank-ly Speaking” column, begun during his tenure as editor of the Star, and continued  to faithfully spout the Soviet line. Also according to Kengor, Davis spent much of his time photographing the Hawaiian shoreline using a telephoto lens.

Is there any doubt? I will say what we are all thinking: Davis was a Soviet agent.

So now we can fully understand the relevance of both Hawaii and Chicago to Obama’s communist mentor. Hawaii was considered a potential prospect for Soviet takeover, and had a powerful communist presence. Chicago was the birthplace of the Communist Party USA and has remained a safe fortress for communist activity to this day.

Nothing to see here; move along now.

At the same conference, movie producer Joel Gilbert exposed Davis’s seedy side in his new film, “Dreams from My Real Father – A Story of Reds and Deception.” He revealed that Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, posed nude for a series of photographs taken by Davis, and was one month pregnant with Obama at the time. Gilbert’s thesis is that the child carried by Dunham was in fact Davis’s son. The evidence Gilbert presented in this film makes a very strong case for his thesis. It also provides a compelling explanation for Obama’s obsession with hiding his birth certificate, and the document’s riddle of inconsistencies discovered by Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s cold case posse.


In 2008, Kincaid sought to get this story exposed in major media but they ignored it, calling Kincaid’s efforts to expose the truth “McCarthyism.” Later, when the story got too big to dismiss, the media glorified Davis and ignored or downplayed his communist past:

  • Newsweek’s Jon Meacham characterized Davis as “a strong voice for racial justice” who was victim of a “McCarthyite denunciation” by the House Un-American Activities Committee.
  • Time Magazine’s David Von Drehle wrote “Like his friend Paul Robeson and others, Davis perceived the Soviet Union as a ‘staunch foe of racism’ …”
  • The Washington Post wrote a 10,000 word article in 2008 about Obama’s Hawaii years, without once mentioning Davis.

A Washington Post reporter attended one of Kincaid’s conferences, calling it “a UFO convention.”

Even the Drudge Report refused to run Kincaid’s ads about Davis as “too controversial.”

Joel Gilbert publicly lambasted print and broadcast media, including some conservative media, for suppressing information about Obama. In promoting his “Dreams” film, Gilbert related how Talking Points Memo (TPM Muckraker) requested a review copy, illegally edited it and posted parts of the edited version on Youtube. TPM then informed the public “now they don’t need to buy the film.” Gilbert said that even Newsmax pulled his advertisements at the last minute, claiming to want to “move to the center.”

Gilbert’s reflections on the media are fitting here, because he spells out the danger:

All evidence indicates that Barack Obama was raised and indoctrinated by Frank Marshall Davis, Communist Party propagandist, during his formative years. And all evidence indicates that Barack Obama, his entire life, pursued the dreams from his real father. And what are those dreams? They are the dreams of a forced imposition of a classic Stalinist/Marxist agenda upon America at home and abroad. And what is the history of Marxism? …Marxism leads to economic ruin and the biological destruction of populations and societies…

American journalists have a key role to play in revealing the truth, and they must do so immediately, without further delay.

Would Obama have been elected in 2008 had Americans known the full story? Almost certainly not. The national media organs have actively suppressed this major story. If you don’t read Accuracy in Media, Breitbart, Right Side News, American Thinker, or one of the other conservative sites, it is likely you have never even heard of Frank Marshall Davis. This information needs to become common knowledge for voters prior to the 2012 election. It simply must get around.

James Simpson is a businessman, media consultant and investigative journalist. His articles have been published at American Thinker, Accuracy in Media, Breitbart, Washington Times, WorldNetDaily, and others. His regular column is DC Independent Examiner. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebook

Code Pink Female Anatomy Protest in Tampa – May be inappropriate for children!

The foul weather did not keep dozens of protesters from “Code Pink” and “Occupy” from showing up in Tampa to oppose the GOP.

Dressed like parts of the female anatomy, many protesters voiced their opinion in support of on demand abortion. Some parts of the attached video may be offensive and not appropriate for children.

Close The Book Forever on the Failed “progressive” Experiment

The current White House occupant, in a calculated, targeted attack against Republican rival Mitt Romney, attempted to dismiss a key Romney rationale for his presidential candidacy by saying: “When you’re president, as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits. Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot.”

It is quite obvious that occupy Oval Office is shockingly unfamiliar with the concept that jobs are downstream from profits, not the other way around. With the exception of the original staff, which is hired to launch a company via startup capital (notice that here too, private capital comes before hiring), businesses only become financially capable of hiring more workers after they have made profits. Being profitable gives them the capital needed to pay for expansion, which then creates the need to hire additional employees. This is especially true of small businesses, most of which are decidedly not over funded with start-up capital.

According to “progressives”, the rich are somehow preventing the middle class from having a fair shot because the rich are depriving the middle class by not paying “their fair share” of taxes. The “progressive” concept of the middle class having a fair shot is stealing money from those who have earned it through initiative, hard work, risk and sacrifice within the free market capitalist system through “progressive” taxation and use that money, acquired through legal extortion, to hire unionized government sector workers. Workers who will not only be paid more than their counterparts who are doing the same job in the private sector, but who will enjoy Cadillac healthcare and pension benefits provided to them by a taxpayer funded job from which, thanks to union demands, being fired will be a virtual impossibility.

Still wonder why “progressives” love government sector unions?

Such an arrangement is perfectly suited to “progressives”, who are huge proponents of centrally planned big government. Workers dependent upon government for their livelihood are reliably more likely to re-elect big government candidates. They are also far more likely to pay little concern to how much the rich are taxed, since the taxes of unionized government workers won’t be affected.  That is, if they’re even required to pay taxes. Their big government big brothers take care of them.

Winston Smith, where are you?

Of course, the “they don’t pay their fair share” rhetoric is a complete sham, a straw-man argument. Truth be known, the “they don’t pay their fair share” rhetoric is a bold faced lie. The top 10% earners in America pay 70% of the income taxes while 47% of Americans pay no income tax. They pay zero.

How much of a tax on the rich would be enough to satisfy “progressives”? How much of someone else’s money does the Oval Office need to take for the middle class to have “a fair shot”? The 100% rate Barrack Obama Sr. sought to impose on Kenya’s rich after he seized power?

Can you say redistributive dreams from my Marxist father?

This clearly demonstrates how clueless Barrack Hussein Obama is about the way America was designed by its Founding Fathers. Having a fair shot in America has never been about big government stealing from the rich to finance hiring unionized government sector workers.

Having a fair shot has always been about a constitutionally limited government not interfering with the private sector free market’s ability to afford equal opportunity to everyone, regardless of their starting point in life. In America, government’s job is not to “take care of us”. In America, a centrally planned big government can never replace the initiative, creativity, hard work, sacrifice, risk, and reward of free, private Citizens working to provide for their own needs through the pursuit of happiness within the private sector.

If it ever does, America will have ceased to exist.

Instead of digging the United States into an ever-deepening hole by reducing available free market capital through higher tax rates, how about creating some certainty for investors by making permanent changes to America’s needlessly complicated tax code? How about creating a simplified tax code that provides incentives for investment? How about creating a tax code that’s doesn’t punish small businesses by forcing them  each year to divert limited precious capital to pay the cost of hiring accountants and attorneys to decipher an ever “evolving”, increasingly complicated tax code? How about creating an economic environment where the rich, middle class and poor alike all feel it’s worth the risk to invest in a start-up business? Thanks to existing, unnecessarily high “progressive” tax rates and expanding, restrictive, needlessly expensive regulatory oppression, starting up a new business today is practically impossible.

Better still, how about “progressives” going back to school to learn what America is really all about? In the meantime, they should leave running America to Americans.

Obama has had four years.  He got his fair shot, and he blew it.

After 100 years of progressively expanding government intrusion into the God given Rights and Liberties of free people, it is now time to forever close the book on the failed “progressive” experiment.

GOP Adopts 95% of the ‘Freedom Platform’

While the Republican Party and the Tea Party are still two vastly different factions, the Republicans Party is beginning to accept some of the grassroots ideals of the Tea Party. For the first time the Republican Party is accepting official party planks from grassroots organizations.RNC 2012

Last week, it was released that the GOP had accepted 11.5 of 12 planks which were part of the Freedom Platform, a platform developed straight from the people and the grassroots organization, FreedomWorks. The Freedom Platform embraces all forms of Conservatism and limited-government.

FreedomWorks asked their activists to go online and participate in a survey. In that survey they were asked to choose between two randomly selected policy-based questions. From the selections of close to 1.2 million people, and town-hall meetings with activists across the country, the Freedom Platform was developed. This ensured that the platform would include all of the policies that represented the grassroots.

Matt Kibbe, President and CEO of FreedomWorks, in a recent FoxNews column:

The GOP platform will include almost every plank of the crowd-sourced Freedom Platform. In
other words, 95 percent of the grassroots’ top priorities are being adopted as priorities for the
Republican Party.

Thanks to the efforts of an engaged fiscal conservative constituency, Republicans have
committed to repeal ObamaCare and pursue patient-centered reforms that return the decision-
making power from the government back to doctors and patients. The Republicans are
also committed to stopping the impending tax hikes, reversing the Obama spending spree,
implementing accountability for balancing the budget, and restoring fairness to our tax system
by pursuing a flatter tax.

Mirroring the Freedom Platform, the GOP platform strongly rejects cap-and-trade, protects
small businesses from the Environmental Protection Agency’s costly over-regulation, and
commits to unleashing America’s vast domestic energy potential. The Republican platform also
pledges to institute an annual audit of the Federal Reserve.

The only element of the Freedom Platform the GOP didn’t accept was the proposal to eliminate
the Department of Education. This proposal was actually a major plank of the Republican
platform from 1980 to 2000, until then-Gov. George W. Bush had it removed. Even so, the 2012 platform contains good language on the need for local control of education, as well as a very strong endorsement of school choice, both of which are key reforms supported by grassroots conservatives nationwide.

The 2012 GOP platform isn’t perfect by any means, but it represents significant progress within
the Republican Party in recognizing the importance of embracing bold, fiscal conservative
solutions for our nation’s myriad problems. While the Republican Party’s new platform reflects
well on its willingness to take a stand for principled policies, it also says a lot about how the Tea
Party has grown in lasting political influence.

No longer “just” a massive protest movement or even a well-oiled “Get out the Vote” machine,
the Tea Party has matured into a strong, focused policy powerhouse. The success of the Freedom Platform should forever put to rest the ridiculous notion that Tea Party conservatives
are incapable of engaging in the mainstream political arena without compromising their
principles. Grassroots conservatives stood firmly behind principled policies, and the Republican
Party listened.

This victory doesn’t mean the bottom-up campaign of individuals for sound economic policy
is over. Tea Partiers are still wary of the establishment, and no political party can ease the
grassroots into complacency with platform promises.

Finally the time has come that the Republican Party, a party which by all accounts in full of Progressive-lites, has finally taken a major step toward true fiscal and social Conservatism by adopting 95% of the Freedom Platform. While we should be excited that the GOP has adopted these planks, we shouldn’t let our guard down. We must make sure that the GOP and the Republican leaders follow through.

Follow Chris on Twitter

America Needs the Tea Party More Than America Needs the GOP

Explaining his endorsement of the current White House occupant on the administration’s infrastructure spending, healthcare reform, and position on abortion, Florida’s former Republican Governor Charlie Crist endorsed him on the eve of the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa.

Crist has betrayed American taxpayers before.  He supported the $787 billion “stimulus” boondoggle, which did little to fund shovel ready infrastructure projects but went a long way towards rewarding big “progressive” 2008 presidential campaign bundlers who “just happened” to run “green energy” companies with lucrative loan guarantees and grants.  It also bailed out state and local governments guilty of practicing irresponsible fiscal policies for decades, especially where spending on government sector union contracts was concerned.  It was no accident that the lion’s share of “stimulus” spending “just happened” to have gone to “blue states”.   Crist’s decision to support the highly partisan, pork stuffed “stimulus” bill helped get the monstrous waste of money through Congress.

“Moderate Republican” go-along to get-along me-first career politicians who, like Crist are so willing to compromise with the institutionalized “progressive” left cannot be trusted.

Tea Party principles are America’s principles.  To an intolerable degree, “Moderate Republicans” do not believe in or follow Tea Party principles. Quite often they appear to be completely devoid of principles.  They game the political system to gain power and prestige for themselves and themselves alone. They will turn on Americans faster than you can say Specter.

Conservative Tea Party Americans like Allen West, Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint, Pat Toomy, Rand Paul, Ron Johnson Michele Bachmann, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have the guts to stand against the institutionalized “progressive” left.  They have the willingness, backbone and fortitude to preserve individual liberties, restore the U.S. Constitution, and a return to constitutionally limited government, a balanced budget, equal opportunity and equal protection under the law for all Americans.

Today’s Democratic Party is not your father’s Democratic Party.  They keep insisting that Tea Party Republicans and their affiliates are “extreme”.  Since when are protecting individual liberties, following the U.S. Constitution, having constitutionally limited government and a balanced budget extreme?

The Tea Party’s positions are extreme only when seen as standing in the way of establishing an all-powerful, centrally planned big government controlled by a self-appointed oligarchy of self-imagined “intellectual elites” i.e. a Communist state.

The institutionalized “progressive” left in 2012 America is acting exactly like every other Communist power grab in history.  They lie, cheat and steal to win elections.  Then they will lie, cheat, steal and kill to consolidate and strengthen their grip on unrestrained power.

The institutionalized “progressive” left complains about how “extreme” Tea Party Republicans refuse to compromise.  The Tea Party knows that Communists have no interest in compromising with anyone.  The institutionalized “progressive” left’s negotiating position has been, is, and will continue to be: What’s Yours is Negotiable, What’s Mine is Not.  Those who hold this negotiating position, when they do finally obtain an iron grip on unrestrained power, do not compromise with their political opposition.  They eliminate them…permanently.

America is at an historic crossroads.  The 2012 election will determine what life in America will be like for the next and following generations.

In the words of Ronald W. Reagan, 40th President of the United States of America:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

2016: Obama’s America Delivers A Unique Perspective on Obama’s World View

Dinesh D’Souza’s look at Barack Obama’s life growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia offers unique insight into the perspective of the nation’s 44th president. In the recently released movie “2016: Obama’s America”, the President of King’s College in NY City chronicles the life of a young man who was raised in an anti-colonialist environment.

Influenced by tails of a father he met only once, and a step father who saw Indonesia finally free itself from Dutch colonial rule in 1949, D’Souza shows his audience the anti-colonial influence that so impressed Barack Obama in his early years. This influence continued when back in Hawaii, he was mentored by the notorious communist Frank Marshall Davis.

When juxtaposed with a traditional American upbringing, the film makes clear the differences in world view between Barack Obama and the historical American perspective. It explains his animosity toward long time American allies, Great Britain and Israel, and asserts a possible motive for downsizing not only the country’s strategic defenses, but the economy as well.

In the end, D’Souza asks each viewer to look within themselves and ask the question which world view would they choose for the future of America.

The film, released in only a few markets last month and expanded nationwide over the weekend, has grossed $9.2 million, and become the top earning documentary of the year (excluding nature films).

WaPo Uncovers ‘Vast White Wing Conspiracy’

If you’re a conservative poll watcher on Election Day, you’re probably a racist! That’s essentially the charge leveled in an August 25 Washington Post-published article by AJ Vicens and Natasha Kahn of the News21 Carnegie-Knight Initiative.  Entitled, “True the Vote and other poll watchers motives questioned,” Kahn and Vicens opened their article by noting the paranoia of a Milwaukee voter creeped out at the fact that there were three white poll watchers at her mostly-black polling precinct on the recall election day a few months back:

 As Jamila Gatlin waited in line at a northside Milwaukee elementary school to cast her ballot June 5 in the proposed recall of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, she noticed three people in the back of the room. They were watching, taking notes. Officially called ‘election observers,’ they were white. Gatlin, and almost everyone else in line, was black. That’s pretty harassing right there, if you ask me, Gatlin said in the hall outside the gym. Why do we have to be watched while we vote?

Two of the observers were from a Houston-based group called True the Vote, an offshoot of the Houston tea party known as the King Street Patriots. Their stated goal is to prevent voter fraud, which the group and founder Catherine Engelbrecht claims is undermining free and fair elections.

Did I miss the conspiracy here?  What is so evil about poll watching?  It’s perfectly legal and it’s designed to insure confidence in our electoral process. For example, poll watchers could play a crucial role in preventing and combating the sort of voter intimidation that occurred in Pennsylvania during the 2008 election at the behest of the Black Panther Party.

No, with the legality of poll watching unquestionable, Vicens and Kahn turned to liberal academics to make that case that “white poll watchers in minority areas can have a disenfranchising impact even if there’s no direct interaction.”

“In a community where voter participation is not very high and where folks are not as politically active, any barrier that prevents you from getting to the polls or that discourages you from getting to the polls is potentially a problem,” Vicens and Kahn quoted Nic Riley of New York University’s Brennan Center.

Given that the News21 program’s media partners are the Washington Post, NPR, MSNBC, and the Center for Public Integrity, you can see where they stand on this issue.  As a result, it comes to no surprise that Vicens and Kahn close by insinuating that the Tea Party is out to get black people and other minorities, even though investigations by Harris County [Texas] and the Obama/Holder Department of Justice turned up no evidence of “voter intimidation” in the 2010 elections:

[Douglas] Ray, of the Harris County Attorney’s Office, has talked with the King Street Patriots about rules governing poll watchers, and has heard complaints about the poll watchers from the community. He said there’s no problem if Engelbrecht and her groups follow the law and respect people’s right to vote. But, Ray said, the way True the Vote goes about its mission creates tension. If you listen to all their rhetoric, it’s clear what their intent is, Ray said. Their intent is to try to act out on this belief . . . they have that the only reason Barack Obama got elected is because a bunch of ‘those’ people cheated on their ballot.

Hillary Clinton saw a “vast, right-wing conspiracy” at play in persecuting her faithless husband. News21 sees a vast, white-wing conspiracy to “disenfranchise” voters.

P.S. I am an Asian-American and almost always in places dominated by white folks.  I have yet to be harassed and don’t mind poll watchers — of any skin tone — observing polling places for irregularities and/or criminal malfeasance.


The Inverse Political Ratio Between National Prominence and Life.


When Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell ran in 2009 the Washington Post spent the campaign trying to persuade the FTC to penalize him for false advertising since his campaign was not built around social issues.

Any time a “conservative Republican,” does not make the three A’s (abortion, abstinence & alternative lifestyles) the centerpiece of his campaign; the Posties are convinced he’s misleading voters.

McDonnell didn’t have to discuss social issues because at that time conservative Virginia felt he was solid on those points. Instead, McDonnell focused on jobs and economic development.

(For what happens during a campaign when the base no longer trusts the candidate see Obama 2012.)

Now social conservatives may have to re–evaluate McDonnell. In sharp contrast to Gov. Scott Walker (R–WI) who remained conservative during nationwide controversy, McDonnell appears to be avoiding controversy at the expense of his commitment to social conservatives. Initially in hopes of becoming the Romney VP pick, now for a spot in the administration.

The differing outcomes of June’s three controversies illustrate my point.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority controls construction of Metro’s Silver Line rail route to Dulles Airport. MWAA has an appointed board of directors, but only a minority is appointed by Virginia’s governor. And only one of the Virginia appointees was McDonnell’s, the other three having been appointed by his Democrat predecessor.

The board initially required a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) specifying only union contractors — or contractors paying union wages with union work rules — could bid on Phase II of the Silver Line.

McDonnell and the legislature objected and the board responded by giving construction firms with a “voluntary” PLA a higher rating during bid evaluation.

McDonnell forcefully responded by reiterating no additional Virginia taxpayer dollars would be forthcoming unless the PLA was eliminated. Then he took advantage of a recently passed federal law and made two new appointments to the MWAA board, even though the existing board refused to seat them.

McDonnell did not budge an inch during the controversy even though there was a danger Phase II would never be built. The MWAA board finally decided completing the line was more important than scratching union backs and it eliminated the PLA requirement.

The governor decisively employed financial and public pressure to bend the board to his will and score a victory for Virginia taxpayers.

The second example is the firing of the University of Virginia’s first female president, Teresa Sullivan, on June 10th.

Rector Helen Dragas, a McDonnell appointee, lobbied other members of the Board of Visitors until she had enough votes to fire Sullivan. Then Dragas confronted Sullivan with the tally and demanded her resignation, without doing so at a formal board meeting.

Although legal, the maneuvering ruffled more than one set of university feathers and it lacked the transparency and ritual hand–wringing demanded of most academic decisions.

Uproar ensued. There were board resignations, “superstar” professors threatened to leave and large donors put a clamp on their wallets.

McDonnell had no role in the ouster and was out of the country when it happened, but the bad publicity was on his watch. Twelve days later he delivered an ultimatum: if the board did not make a final decision on Sullivan by Tuesday the 26th, McDonnell would demand the entire board’s resignation on Wednesday the 27th.

The Board reinstated Sullivan. McDonnell again was decisive and swift.

Compare those two instances with the third. In 2011 McDonnell signed a bill regulating abortion clinics the same way out–patient surgical centers are regulated. This resulted in two outcomes: first veterinary clinics no longer had more regulations than abortion clinics. And second, Democrats finally discovered a small business burdened by unnecessary regulation.

Step two was implementation by the Virginia Board of Health — completely dominated by McDonnell appointees. But McDonnell’s board voted to grandfather existing abortion mills, exempting them and effectively gutting the new law. The decision surprised abortion cheerleaders and stunned pro–life advocates.

Representatives from the Attorney General’s office advised the board it was improper to amend a law passed by the General Assembly, but the board refused to change its decision.

So what did the governor do when his board acted willfully, shocked his pro–life base and affronted the General Assembly? He did nothing. His spokesman said, ““The governor will review the final regulations when the board submits them for his review.”

It’s now over two months later and the governor is evidently “reviewing” up a storm. This gains him nothing from abortion promoters, who will never support him, and erodes the trust of the life community. The delay only serves to avoid MSM negative publicity.

I’m sorry to say it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion Gov. McDonnell is proving to be another Republican who “grows in office” but not in stature.

Obama And Biden Talk About The Unemployment Rate


Those of us that are old enough to remember Abbott and Costello will remember their famous comedy routine “Who’s On First.” Have you ever wondered what Obama and Biden sound like when they are discussing the unemployment problem we have in this country today? Well I think that it might sound something like this.

Are you old enough to remember Abbott and Costello?

BIDEN: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

OBAMA:  Good Subject Terrible Times It’s 8.3%.

BIDEN: That many people are out of work?

OBAMA: No, that’s 16%.

BIDEN: You just said 8.3%.

OBAMA: 8.3% Unemployed.

BIDEN:  Right 8.3%  out of work.

OBAMA: No, that’s 16%.

BIDEN: Okay, so it’s 16% unemployed.

OBAMA: No, that’s 8.3% . . .

BIDEN: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 8.3% or 16%?

OBAMA: 8.3% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

BIDEN: IF you are out of work you are unemployed.

OBAMA: No, you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.


OBAMA: No, you miss my point.

BIDEN: What point?

OBAMA: Someone who doesn’t look for work, can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.

BIDEN:  To whom?

OBAMA:  The unemployed.

BIDEN: But they are ALL out of work.

OBAMA: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. Moreover, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

BIDEN: So if you’re off the unemployment rolls, that would count as less unemployment?

OBAMA: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

BIDEN: The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work?

OBAMA: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how you get to 8.3%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don’t want to read about 16% unemployment, do ya?

BIDEN: That would be frightening.

OBAMA:  Absolutely.

BIDEN: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

OBAMA: Two ways is correct.

BIDEN: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

OBAMA: Correct.

BIDEN: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

OBAMA:  Bingo.

BIDEN: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.

OBAMA: Now you’re thinking like an economist.

BIDEN: I don’t even know what the hell I just said!

OBAMA: Now you’re thinking like a politician.

You know what amazes me? How the left went on and on about Sarah Palin, how she was too dumb to be the Vice President, but they are silent about Joe Biden, the man who makes one asinine statement after another. Just think about this for a second, if Obama died, Biden would be President, if nothing else that alone should prevent you from voting for Obama. However, as we know, there are plenty of other reasons not to vote for Obama, you can just add that one to the list.

                                                                       Obama  &  Biden


This is one man’s opinion.


Romney/Ryan Medicare Plan Would Cost Seniors $6400: Debunked

Per Politico, here’s the analysis of the latest Obama campaign attack ad towards Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan on Medicare:


“It’s a promise that was made long ago: you work hard, pay in, your Medicare benefits are guaranteed. But Mitt Romney would break that promise,” the ad says. “Replace your benefits with a voucher. Insurance companies could just keep raising rates. Instead of a guarantee, seniors could pay $6,400 more a year.”

The claim that the Romney/Ryan plan would cost seniors $6400 is completely false and based on an outdated and questionable Medicare reform plan from Rep. Paul Ryan – the plan that Romney and Ryan actually support does not include any cost increases for seniors. Ramesh Ponnuru explained all of this in a Bloomberg column, the day that it was announced Ryan would be Romney’s running mate.

Under the original Ryan plan, retirees would have chosen a private health plan and the government would have contributed money toward the cost. The amount of money would have depended on the beneficiary’s age and health status. Over time the average amount of money would have risen with inflation.

Critics pointed out that health-care costs have risen faster than inflation for a long time. If competition failed to change this trend, senior citizens would indeed have been left paying more.

The new version of the plan cleverly fixes the problem. Insurers would submit competitive bids to see who could cover Medicare’s traditional benefits for the lowest premium. The average amount of financial assistance would be equal to the second-lowest bid. So seniors will always have an option that leaves them with no higher costs than now. If they pick something even cheaper, they will come out ahead.

Ryan’s budget includes a failsafe to make sure the plan saves money even if competition doesn’t lead to restraint in premium growth: Total spending on Medicare would be limited to the growth of the economy plus inflation plus 0.5 percent.

That failsafe doesn’t rescue the Democratic attack, however, because the Obama administration caps Medicare spending at the same level. There is no scenario under which Medicare recipients have to pay more under the Romney-Ryan plan than they have to pay under the Democratic plan. The Obama campaign is, in short, responding to new thinking with stale talking points.

If that isn’t enough to convince you, then read this recent memo released by the Romney campaign debunking the claim.

Follow Chris on Twitter

9/11 Again? Saudi Arabian Students Are Here

There are currently 65,000 students from Saudi Arabia in the US. That may or may not be well and good. Even if the vast majority of them are, in fact, students, then some number of terrorists, recent history teaches us, have entered this country. For perspective, there are now four times as many Saudi Arabian “students” in the US as there were in September 2001.

So, with that number of students and perspective in mind, let’s examine three factors that had a effect upon the 9/11 terrorist attack:

  • “9/11 Terrorists” – Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. All the terrorists were affiliated with al-Qaeda. Osama bin Laden recruitedtwelve of the fifteen Saudi Arabian 9/11 terrorists on highway 15, which runs from Mecca to the Saudi Arabian border with Yemen.
  • “Students” – The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) notified the Huffman Aviation flight school of Venice, Florida, that Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi had been approvedfor student visas. They were the terrorists who flew planes into the World Trade Center. The approvals came exactly six months after 9/11 happened. But that occurred eleven years ago. What’s going on now?Saudi Arabia paid $6.5 billion for the 65,000 students to come to the US. Saudi Arabian King Abdullah assumed the throne in 2005, and initiated its international scholarship program. He convinced President George W. Bush, to reopen the student visa service after 9/11, saying that the education program was crucial for the two countries’ long-term relationship. But even though Bush approved the student visa program, admitting over 30,000 students, President Barack Hussein “kill list” Obama has exploited it. Since Obama took office, the number of Saudi Arabian students has risen by 46.1 percent.The 65,000 students are more than there are Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Do you really think all of them, or even some of them, are being watched?

    The reason always given is that is that if the students are exposed to us, it will make them like us. But that never seems to work with hard-core, committed terrorists like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or Sayyid Qutb, both of whom studied in the US.

  • “Madrassas” – A madrassa is an Islamic religious school that teaches Wahhabism, a very austere and rigid form of extreme Islam which comes from Saudi Arabia. They are financedprimarily by Saudi Arabia and are located primarily in Pakistan. There was a growth of madrassas during the Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan (1979-1989) that focused not on Islam, but on making war on infidels. Now the US the target of the madrassas teachings of making war on infidels. Saudi Arabia officials strenuously deny these allegations.Now we learn that Saudi Arabia financed madrassas are being built in previously moderate regions of Pakistan, where recruitment has become intense. One recruiting tool is “martyrdom.” The recruit’s family is promised that if their son(s) are “martyred” both the sons and the family will attain “salvation” and the family will obtain God’s favor. The family usually receives about $6,500 per son. The sons, usually aged eight to twelve, are sent to extremist madrassas in southern or western Punjab, Pakistan. There they are taught sectarian extremism and hatred for non-Muslims.

And let’s not forget the first NY Trade Center bombing in 1993, led by Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheikh. He was squired around NY in the early 1990s by Siraj Wahhaj. Guess who is leading a DNC activity and speaking at the DNC. That’s correct: Siraj Wahhaj. Wahhaj has said that the US will fall unless it “accepts the Islamic agenda.”

Will the US and its politicians never learn? Or will an event similar to 9/11 have to occur before they wake up from their eleven year induced sleep?

But that’s just my opinion.

Please visit RWNO, my personal web site.

Romney’s Media Fostered Distractions

For the umpteen zillionth time since the presumptive GOP nominee’s identity became apparent, the “progressive” Party Pravda and their occupy Oval Office idol are attempting to define GOP challenger Mitt Romney in an utterly disingenuous light.

In an article entitled “Romney Turns to Ohio Amidst Distractions” published by staunch “progressive” Pravda propagandists the Associated Press and Yahoo News, Phillip Elliot and Steve Peoples waste little time in asserting their misrepresentations.

The article goes negative three times in the first five paragraphs:

“…as the former Massachusetts governor tried to shrug off a series of unwanted distractions…

…as Republicans face difficult questions about the party’s position on abortion after a Missouri Senate candidate’s recent suggestion that women’s bodies can prevent pregnancy in cases of “legitimate rape.”

…It also comes less than 24 hours after Romney raising the discredited rumor that Obama wasn’t born in the United States.”

First of all, the “series of unwanted distractions” exist thanks to the ongoing efforts of the “progressive” Party Pravda, including their continuous attempts to tie Romney to Todd Akin’s remark, in spite of the fact that Romney spoke out immediately, publically criticizing Akin for the remark while prompting him to drop out of Missouri’s U.S. Senate contest.  The only reason Akin’s remark is tied to Romney is because people such as Elliot and Peoples continue to lie about it, and organizations like the AP and Yahoo News that employ them are complicit in repeating those lies.

The joke Romney made about where he was born, that was obviously a joke, that was never intended to be anything other than a joke, has been blown completely out of proportion and given a sinister intent that is, to put it politely, entirely fictitious in nature.

Instead of inventing faux issues with which to assail Romney, why don’t Elliot, Peoples, the AP and Yahoo News write about how the current White House occupant has fulfilled his campaign promises to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, close Guantanamo Bay, and unite the Red States and Blue States into the United States?

Why are they not talking about how the politics of “Hope and Change” has become the politics of “Envy and Division”?

Why are they not reporting the true story that their anointed savior is neither the great uniter nor problem solver he portrayed himself to be in 2008?

Meanwhile the “progressive” Party Pravda willfully ignores the lies being spread by the White House re-election campaign and their “progressive” co-conspirators.  The White House, in a new 30-second TV ad states that Romney’s plan will break the Medicare promise and replace it with a voucher system.

That is a lie.  The Romney plan takes the $716 billion in savings found through the elimination of waste fraud and abuse and applies it to Medicare.  The White House falsely claims they are applying those savings to Medicare while in reality they are double counting them.  Out of one side of their mouth the White House is saying they are saving Medicare with that money, and then out of the other side saying they are using that money to pay for the government takeover of America’s healthcare.  The voucher system will be an option, not a dictate.  Anyone wishing to remain on the current Medicare system will have the option to do so.

The divisive, inflammatory, racist, class warfare rhetoric coming from the institutionalized “progressive” left is aptly explained by one of America’s most distinguished, honorable Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin in Emblematical Representations, circa 1774:

“History affords us many instances of the ruin of states, by the prosecution of measures ill-suited to the temper and genius of their people. The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy… These measures never fail to create great and violent jealousies and animosities between the people favored and the people oppressed; whence a total separation of affections, interests, political obligations, and all manner of connections, by which the whole state is weakened.”

For centuries, Americans have been warned about the storm clouds that now darken America’s sky.  For America to return to blue skies and brighter days, for America to experience a new dawn, the proponents of jealousy and animosity, who seek nothing more than the perpetuation of their own privileges and advantages, must be defeated once and for all.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »