Monthly Archives: November 2012

Susan Rice on the Hot Seat

The following story is from GOPUSA reporting on U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appearing before Senators in her role of the Benghazi cover-up. Liberal media sources in protecting Obama are trying to say there is no scandal here, but it sure is and big time as the article explains.

Everyone knew it was a terror attack from day one.The State Dept. watched it real time in the white house Situation Room and it was a seven hour attack. Messages were sent out for help before the attack and during but no help came save for the two brave Navy Seals that disobeyed the order to stand down and went in and saved 30 people before they were killed along with the ambassador. Gen.Petraeus said he knew it was a terror attack by AlQueda and members in the media knew also as did much of the public. Everyone knew except Obama who for two weeks wanted us to believe it was from this anti-muslim video before he admitted in the debate that he knew it was a terror attack. Can you imagine if this happened under George Bush? They’d have his head on a silver platter. Yes Obama lied and our ambassador and seals died. Incidentally the director of this video was a coptic christian in Egypt who came here to make the film so he could be free from death in his country,only to be thrown in jail for a year by the Obama administration without even a trial.

And No it is not being racist and sexist to disagree with her and question why she said what she did as her fellow supporters are suggesting.

On Tuesday, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice — a key figure in the political cover-up that resulted in the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya — met with GOP senators to discuss her original ill-worded statements. The senators came away with more questions than answers (go figure), and the American people are left wondering why a president of the United States would put politics ahead of the very lives he swore to defend.

As noted in a report on Fox News, following the meeting with Rice, Republican senators left “feeling more confused and ‘disturbed’ than before the meeting.”

“I’m significantly troubled by the answers we got and didn’t get,” said McCain, R-Ariz.

The lawmakers said the meeting covered questions about security at the U.S. Consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi before the Sept. 11 attacks, in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed, and about Rice’s comments afterward.

Rice, U.S. envoy to the United Nations, went on network television five days after the attacks to say the strikes were “spontaneous” and seemed to grow out of a protest of an anti-Islamic video.

However, reports later revealed no evidence of a protest outside the Consulate, and U.S. intelligence officials later said the strike appeared to be a pre-planned terrorist attack.

Rice has maintained that she was using talking points provided to her from unclassified intelligence reports based on the best available information.

Of course there was no protest. Of course the murders were not the result of anger of an Internet video. We all know this. But what the media has refused to cover is why was this said? Why did Barack Obama go for weeks saying that the attack was spontaneous when it wasn’t? Why did he send Susan Rice to the political shows to say it wasn’t an act of terror when it was?

Rice, U.S. envoy to the United Nations, went on network television five days after the attacks to say the strikes were “spontaneous” and seemed to grow out of a protest of an anti-Islamic video

However, reports later revealed no evidence of a protest outside the Consulate, and U.S. intelligence officials later said the strike appeared to be a pre-planned terrorist attack.

Rice has maintained that she was using talking points provided to her from unclassified intelligence reports based on the best available information.

So… she got some bad talking points. That’s their defense? In the presidential debate, Barack Obama implied (with the help of the moderator) that he said the Benghazi attack was terrorism from day 1. But for weeks afterward, he avoided the “terror” label, and instead pushed the Internet video story. If he “knew,” then why did he keep promoting a false story? If he “knew,” then did he have a different set of talking points than Rice? If so, why?

As noted on National Review, after the meeting with GOP senators, Susan Rice issued her own statement:

Rice: In the course of the meeting, we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key aspect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi. While, we certainly wish that we had had perfect information just days after the terrorist attack, as is often the case, the intelligence assessment has evolved. We stressed that neither I nor anyone else in the Administration intended to mislead the American people at any stage in this process, and the Administration updated Congress and the American people as our assessments evolved.

The report blasts the statement out of the water and includes facts such as a report by CBS News which states, ” Rice was privy to both the talking points and the original assessment. The original assessment referred to the attack as an act of terror linked to al-Qaeda, yet Rice made no mention of terrorism or al-Qaeda when she appeared on five national talk shows.”

The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama and his administration wanted the American people to think that they were all safe from terror. That Libya was now a peaceful country… that Obama had “gotten” bin Laden. A real act of terror, so close to the election, would surely not look good for the Obama team. So they covered it up. They put politics ahead of security, and four Americans died.

GOP’s Problems with Susan Rice Grow, Senators Threaten to Block Nomination

The Fallacies of Fairness

We hear it repeatedly from the left: so-and-so’s not paying his “fair share.” Or “that’s not fair!” Or the rich need to pay their fair share. Or fair trade, not free trade. And for good reason: the notion of fairness is so vague, it bears repeating in whatever context the left deems appropriate.

But what is fair? The left thinks it’s really unfair that people who don’t work, or do work that isn’t valued much in the labor market, aren’t given their fair share of the profits that rich folks receive by providing more demanded products in the marketplace.

Half the country doesn’t pay income taxes. Is that fairness? The government is billing each household over $200 in a single day, more than the median income salary, without their permission. Is that really “fair”? Imagine you opened your credit card bill and each day an unauthorized charged for $212 appears. That would make anyone peeved.

The top 10% of income earners pay 70% of the taxes. How is that not enough? While Democrats on news outlets like CNN insist that the only way to get the debt-to-GDP level down to 40% by 2035 is through tax increases, even if the so-called Bush tax-cuts expire and rates on the rich go up, we’ll generate $83 billion a year or a whole eight days of “revenue” annually. Whoopee.

How about we slash spending and live within our means? Government, through the inflation that comes from buying its own debt, jacks up gas prices, utility prices, and food prices, hitting the poor hardest. It thus creates the need for poorer people to turn to the government for food stamps. This Keynesian-created vicious cycle is somehow fair?

Government inflates education tuition rates with its student loan programs and then bails the indebted students out by subsidizing their loans’ interest rates. Meanwhile, the job market is thoroughly saturated with graduates with  low-demand liberal arts and humanities degrees that colleges offer and to the extent that more than half of new grads can’t find a relevant job. This doesn’t strike me as “fair.”

Perhaps it’s heartless to think this way, but it seems impossible that someone is entitled to things he has done little or nothing to contribute to making. Just because someone is born on earth, he is neither owned by society, nor does he own society. Mutual slavery is not the natural condition of man.

But capitalism is taken to mean exploitation. Property is theft, as the radical slogan goes. So who should control it? “People,” says the leftist. And who should control the people? “No one.”  So how should the equal distribution of property be governed? “Democracy.” Then people vote for politicians who will make it equal? “Yeah.” And politicians will always make things equal because… ‘blank out’ (to borrow a phrase of Ayn Rand’s).

Or alternatively: “We all just come together and share stuff.” But no one has any clue how a business or any organization can function that way. Maybe that’s the point – disorganization is freedom, ahem.

Let’s get to the heart of the matter. Wealthy people’s money did not come at other’s expense without government arm-twisting. If someone thinks work is inherently exploitation and willingly paying for a product is being gouged, then it’s hard not to feel embarrassed for him.

So, Bill Gates exploits people, because Windows Vista sucked and was overpriced? Touché. But people cannot profit in a marketplace unless they provide something that is valued by the people willingly buying it. And they cannot charge whatever price they want for their crap, unless they have some brand-capital to burn. Like Microsoft did. It had to revamp and offer a new OS upgrade incentive on Windows 8 or spook people that didn’t want to get burned again.

No one gets screwed over when he voluntarily plops down $200 for some computer software. Like Bill Whittle put it, “nobody trades down.” People either prefer parting with their cash or going without a new Operating System.

The flip side of all the progressives’ complaining about being exploited by rich people is that a lot of those nasty bastards mass produce or mass market things that improve people’s standard of living. Apple makes IPads that do things that boggle the mind for the price of a low-wage earner’s salary for a few weeks of stocking shelves. Is that really unfair? Or someone working at McDonald’s can earn enough in an hour to feed himself for a day. That is definitely not considered “unfair” in non-capitalist systems around the world.

There is a lot of hand-wringing about supposedly evil Wal-mart, which saves people on tight budgets a bunch of money (or else they wouldn’t shop there). Its employees make about as much in three days as it costs to buy a medium-sized flat screen TV. And for what? Certainly nothing comparable to the marvels of engineering it took to build and ship the televisions to the store.

That’s not a knock on Wal-mart workers; they have necessary and tough jobs. But let’s not pretend it’s unfair that they aren’t paid the same as people who got themselves into debt and invested the necessary time and effort to graduate from college —  at least with meaningful degrees (and let’s be honest, most colleges don’t exactly have rigorous standards).

But young people expect government to clear all obstacles in their path to success. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. No one can be great unless he overcomes adversity. Looking to government to remove all hardship from life is a fatal illusion. This misperception has aided government’s growth to dangerous proportions.

All politicians can really do is pass the buck to other people or to generations down the line. Not owning up to this basic TANSTAAFL economic reality is harmful to people’s integrity and also to the young folks who will pay the price for it.

Young people are now saddled with $200,000 in national debt for all the gifts government is giving out (yes, I did go there). Where is the money going to come from? A lot of people don’t know and don’t care.

What about rich people? They have so much and poor people have so little. If only there were so many truly poor people in this country! There are a lot of folks below the poverty line who are rich by world standards, and it isn’t because of perpetual-poverty creating entitlement programs. Many own cars and televisions and cell-phones… not exactly the picture of sub-Saharan Africa.

But let’s dispel the myth anyway that soaking the rich is going to pay for all of our stuff: the government could seize all the incomes and savings of the so-called 1% and run the country for about a year.

We’re turning into a nation of beggars, and Americans who are getting something for nothing should stop burdening society. There is nothing fair about subsidizing the takers and penalizing the makers.

Sarah Palin in 2016 Presidential Race is no laughing matter

With Sarah Palin America should be ready for a true conservative voice in the White House

The presidential campaign of 2016 was launched as soon as the last light dimmed on the stage after Mitt Romney gave his concession speech, in losing his presidential bid to Barack Obama. With the new battle now warming up amongst the GOP hierarchy there are many Republican leaders who want to point the party leftward, away from Ronald Reagan and his heir apparent Sarah Palin.

That is correct. There is no stuttering here. Sarah Palin may appear to liberals, leftwing pundits as well as GOP Washington leaders as yesterday’s news. Yet Mitt Romney’s loss was not due to conservative steel in his campaign. What is clear is that nearly two million conservatives did not embrace Romney’s attempt to skedaddle to the middle road by running away from conservative positions and values. They simply stayed home.

Consider the results of Palin’s steadfast 2012 primary season effort as she crisscrossed the nation campaigning on behalf of conservative congressional, senatorial officials. The results of Palin’s efforts are notable, beginning with backing Texas U.S. Senator-elect Ted Cruz. Combine that with eight congressional candidates being elected to congress out of 14, due to Palin’s endorsement.

Now examine Romney’s results. In a general election where Republicans were expected to be more competitive in U.S. Senate races. Republicans actually lost two U.S. Senate seats. There are many who have engaged in a lot of finger pointing in order to place blame for the loss. But the buck does stop at the top with Mitt Romney.

To refresh everyone’s memory, it was Romney and his Boston campaign brain-trust, who said to Palin back in July, “Thanks but no thanks.” They denied her a prime time speaking role before the GOP National Convention and the nation. Mitt was bound and determined to place both Palin and the Tea Party organization supporters on the sidelines and go it alone to seek more moderate political pastures.

Romney may have listened to comedians like Bill Maher and political pundits like Chris Matthew who found no end in skewering the non-candidate Palin during the campaign year. There is a lesson in Romney’s loss that reminds conservatives that Ronald Reagan was the 1976 version of Sarah Palin. He too had his many detractors as well as liberal and Republican pundits who scoffed at Reagan’s notion of a new conservative under current building in America.

Ronald Reagan was held at arm’s length by Washington GOP insiders and derided in liberal circles as a joke. Many in the mainstream media poked fun of his film character that played opposite a Chimpanzee in the 1951 “Bedtime for Bonzo” movie. While the democrats and the Washington insider pundits laughed, Reagan beat President Jimmy Carter with nearly 51 percent of the vote to Carter’s 41 percent in the 1980 presidential election.

Now no one is laughing, including President Barack Obama, who saddles up to Reagan-like comparisons when he’s feeling a little light in the accomplishment department.

It is far more important for Americans who are earnestly concerned about the direction of the nation and its drift away from conservative values. They want to support a true bona fide conservative leader like Reagan.

Sarah Palin like Ronald Reagan understands that presidential elections are won in the grassroots campaign trenches found in Ohio counties and Pennsylvania coal fields. Conservative leadership is nourished in the farmlands of Iowa, Indiana and Illinois and in the kitchens of homes in Nevada and Colorado. Presidential elections are solidified with the commitment of Reagan Democrats in Macomb County, Michigan and Tea Party patriot all over this nation!

It is the power and strength of conservative ideals that when fully embraced will see a repeat of the 2010 elections, where the Tea Party grass roots movement resulted in Republicans gaining 63 congressional seats. Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi loss the Speaker’s gavel to Sarah Palin’s tireless effort to create a new conservative history which is still being made in America.

The keys to the White House Oval Office do not lie in the hands of the political power elite in Washington. They instead belong squarely in the firm grasp of Americans in the Heartland. There, with conservative families in states all over this nation the fate of America will be determined.

In 1980 America no longer wanted to be trapped in what President Carter called a “crisis of confidence” in his now famous July 1979 “Malaise Speech,” Instead, Reagan determined that America wanted to be freed up from government. He firmly gripped the reins away from moderation and liberalism. He grabbed the American microphone and said, “I paid for this microphone.”

America’s conservatives know full well that Sarah Palin also knows how to use a microphone. Much like, Reagan, Palin is committed to let millions across the nation speak through it in 2016!

( Click – Let me know what you think )

Evangelicals Flying Blind

The NAE’s next project: Revising the Ten Commandments

Prominent on the list of things we didn’t know we needed is the new code of ethics for preachers released this year by the National Association of Evangelicals. It appears evangelical pastors have been flying blind, without any sort of guidance as to Christian behavior in the pulpit and church offices.

Leaving church ladies at the mercy of pastors gone wild.

The new code also means I’ve wasted hundreds of dollars on Bibles and commentaries that — judging by the NAE — provide no real structure for living a life that glorifies Christ.

Dang! Where did I put those receipts?

Until now I’d assumed external offenses are handled quite nicely by criminal law and internal offenses governed by the Bible. That’s what I get for practicing theology without a divinity degree.

Luder Whitlock, former president of the Reformed Theological Seminary, explained in a Christianity Today interview, “Clergy intend to do the right thing, but…when you have a world that’s swirling with change like ours and so few people know the Bible well, it’s all the more imperative to come up with something like this.”

In other words, the Bible might have been comprehensive enough for nomadic tribesmen who followed a smoke signal instead of a GPS signal, but not modern iPhone man. But if these people “don’t know the Bible well” what are they doing in the pulpit?

Helping God out when it comes to rules and regulations is nothing new in ecclesiastical circles. I belong to a church that was so strict Jesus couldn’t be a deacon. You see the Lord and Savior was also a drinker and it was forbidden to imbibe.

But even our canonical rule writers failed to stay current. So it came to pass that one could smoke crack with Mayor Barry and be a deacon in good standing, but one “easy pour” Miller and you’re out.

However, I remain convinced the Ten Commandments, Golden Rule and the New Testament will cover any modern eventuality. The NAE cites pastors involved in extramarital affairs (7th Commandment), sexual assault (7th & Golden Rule) and financial fraud (8th & 10th Commandment, Golden Rule). Expanding our search we find pastors guilty of homosexual abuse of minors (7th, 1st Corinthians 6:9, Luke 17:2), visiting prostitutes (7th and 1st Corinthians 5:1), tax fraud (8th & 9th Commandments), stealing babies (8th & 10th Commandments), assault (Golden Rule) and misrepresenting credentials (9th Commandment).

So where are the loopholes?

Pastor Joel Hunter, who signed the code, told the Washington Times: “There’s a need that we’re reminded of when we see pastors living unethical lives. We want to raise the level of accountability because apparently some pastors believe they’re a law unto themselves.”

A statement that sounds remarkably like the boastful Pharisee in Luke 18:10–11: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector.”

Pastors are already held to a higher standard. In James 3:1 it says, “My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.” Not a verse you hear too often from the pulpit since it puts a real damper on Sunday school teacher recruitment.

It just goes to show somewhere, someone is pouring the foundation on a new Tower of Babel every day. Codes like this were only a matter of time after churches started developing “mission statements.” If the Great Commission isn’t your mission, what is?

Too many Christian leaders are slightly embarrassed by the Bible. They’ve forgotten their apologetics and simply apologize when it comes to the eternal Truth.

No wonder people are leaving the church. If the religious leadership doesn’t have enough faith in the applicability of the Bible to modern life to live by it, why should the congregation pay attention? Meanwhile the morals and tone of the culture at large continue a precipitous decline as Christians and pagans alike make it up as they go along.

The earnest people at the NAE with their new “code” are unfortunately contributing to the erosion of confidence in the Bible among their own believers and certainly among the secular world. Where does this quest for relevance stop?

For example, NAE is currently holding firm on homosexual marriage, but for how much longer? Biblical marriage certainly doesn’t conform to modern mores. If you can revise and extend the commandments, what’s to stop you from joining the Unitarians and revising marriage?

Paul tells us — pastors and parishioners alike — to “put on the full armor of God.” He certainly felt that “armor” was up to the challenge. I wonder why the leaders of the NAE don’t feel the same?

Get Your Tricorder Here

Star Trek fans will love this. The tricorders from early episodes is closer to reality.

Scientific America: A team of students has designed a Star Trek-inspired sensing device that can beam environmental data to a smart phone.The tricorder device is the team’s response to a challenge from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: “Is there an effective way to integrate external sensors with smart phones and can we globalize this information?” Applications could range from data collection for research to educational hands-on activities to disaster-zone assessment.

Bones would be proud.

 

You Know You’re A Communist When

Here’s a simple question: At what point do you know you’re a communist?

As a strongly principled Conservative/Libertarian, I feel like I could easily recognize other strongly principled Conservatives and Libertarians because their views fall similar to mine.

Using this logic, shouldn’t one communist be able to identify another communist? Better yet, wouldn’t someone who lived through Communism be able to identify a communist leader?

I think the answer is yes, and there is some frightening (only if you haven’t realized it yet) proof.

Recently an opinion article appeared in Pravda, a Russian Newspaper, by a relatively unknown writer, Xavier Lerma.

Let me start out by saying that after doing a little research on Xavier, I have found that he is not a Communist, Socialist, or Marxist. He is a Conservative, but Russian standards of course, with a true love for Vladimir Putin. If you read the column, you would catch on quickly to his favorable bias towards Putin.

While the column contains extreme spin and favorability towards Putin, everything that Xavier said about American and Obama is true – well, mostly true.

“Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them. He gives speeches of peace and love in the world while he promotes wars as he did in Egypt, Libya and Syria. He plans his next war is with Iran as he fires or demotes his generals who get in the way.”

What about this isn’t true? Except for the ‘illiterate society’ comment, this paragraph expresses some of my feelings with the reelection of Obama to a tee.

Why do we study history?

We study history in attempt to learn from it, and to the best of our ability, not commit the same mistakes twice. However, we almost never learn from history and we always commit the same mistakes twice.

Xavier gets history though. He has learned from the past of the nation that he holds near and dear to his heart, and he is strongly against Russia committing those same mistakes twice.

Xavier knows that communism doesn’t work, nor does socialism. Xavier knows that low taxes are the way to go, and finally Xavier knows that faith, morals, and strong principles are the key to prosperity.

History tells us these things, and this is why Xavier is able to exploit all of Obamas mistakes. Not only is Obama and his administration not learning from history, but they are going in the direction of a “Soviet Plan”, something of which we know does not work. History tells us this.

The American media should be covering this story – its news. But they aren’t going to, that’s why you probably haven’t even heard about it, because American media doesn’t report the news anymore.

However, when Glenn Beck says something that is deemed to be “politically incorrect”, he is persecuted by the media.

What’s the difference between Beck’s thoughts on America and Xavier’s?

Nothing, and that’s why the media isn’t covering this story.

I suggestion you click on the link and read the column. It could do without all of the favorability towards Putin, but Xavier’s views about Obama and the current state of America are Right. On. Point.

Follow Chris On Twitter

 

 

U.N. to recognize Palestinian state despite Western opposition

United NationsThe Palestinian State is set to be implicitly recognized by the U.N. General Assembly on Thursday despite threats by the U.S. and Israel to hold back assistance to the Palestinian Authority.

Similar to the Kosovo, Taiwan and Vatacan City, the Palestinian State would be re-classified as a non-member observer state. Formerly, the Palestinian State was only recognized as an “entity”. The new classification will grant the West Bank government access to international criminal court and other international bodies.

The Palestinians unsuccessfully sought full recognition as a U.N. Member State last year mainly due to U.S. and Israeli opposition. The current effort will succeed despite threats from those same nations. Both the U.S. State department and Israel have warned that they would reduce economic assistance to the Palestinian Authority should they seek recognition by the U.N.

The United States and Israel oppose the U.N. move as they believe it will undermine the peace process. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that “The path to a two-state solution that fulfills the aspirations of the Palestinian people is through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not New York.”

The Palestinians have reportedly been working with the EU and Arab states to replace the lost funding should they agree to the new classification.

The Resolution only needs a simple majority in the U.N. General Assembly, 130 votes, which they are likely to get. Germany, the Czech Republic being the only two nations other than the United States and Israel to announce that they would be voting against the resolution. Thirteen European countries have already voiced support.

ObamaCare: MN Exchange Cost Greater than Expected

Kaiser Health News is reporting today that Minnesota’s portion of the state’s health care insurance exchange will cost far more than originally anticipated. The state estimated the cost to be between $30 and $40 million. Instead they are now looking at $54 million for 2015. In addition, the state has asked the federal government for $39 million to develop the exchange program.

Ouch.

More ObamaCare fallout.

Minnesota Facing Bigger Bill For State’s Health Insurance Exchange

By Elizabeth Stawicki, Minnesota Public Radio News

Nov 25, 2012

This story is part of a reporting partnership that includes Minnesota Public RadioNPR and Kaiser Health News.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Minnesota’s state health insurance exchange will cost $54 million in 2015 to operate, according to the Gov. Mark Dayton administration.

The cost comes in at greater than earlier estimates of $30 to $40 million. The state would not have to find the money until 2015, when the state exchanges are required to be financially self-sustaining. But the cost rises to a projected $64 million in 2016. State officials are still weighing how the exchange will pay for itself. Options include user fees, a sin tax, and selling ads.

The exchange, a cornerstone of the federal health care overhaul, will create an insurance marketplace where consumers and small businesses can comparison shop for health insurance policies starting in October of next year. Coverage would take effect in 2014.

The Dayton administration also announced it will seek an additional $39 million to fund development of the state’s exchange. If the federal government approve the additional grant, Minnesota will have received a total of about $110 million from the feds.

The new financial details emerged earlier this month when the state submitted its application for the exchange to the federal government.

Many states are behind in their plans for exchanges, and the Obama administration has already agreed to a request by Republican governors for more time to decide whether they’ll build their own state exchange or use the federal alternative. The federal government extended that deadline to Dec. 14.

This story is part of a reporting partnership that includes Minnesota Public RadioNPR and Kaiser Health News.

Reprinted with permission from Kaiser Health News.

This is Why I Homeschooled

When my son was young he was, as he is today, nonverbal. At that time he was also hyperactive and had difficulty focusing causing him to often be in trouble with the teaching staff. This was at a time when kids with significant special needs were still in self contained classes. Today, most children are integrated into regular classrooms, some with one on one aides, depending on their needs. If my son had been in this situation I know he would have caused his teachers great grief. Some of my son’s schoolmates also had difficulty controlling their emotions. Anger is particularly challenging with special needs children.

In our case, we decided we could do better at home and chose to homeschool.

Today as I watched this video of a padded room in the Seattle area I am reminded that most often moms do know best. Yes, sometimes our special needs kids need a time out, a chance to regroup. But I cannot believe putting a child into a padded room without well trained supervision can ever be the best choice.

“He Said She Said” with Demetrius & Stacy

 When: Wed, Nov 28, 10PM EST/7PM Pacific

What: Have you ever wondered what Black Conservatives think about the political issues of today? Well wonder no more, “He Said, She Said” with Demetrius and Stacy. brings you an inner peek into the mind of the conservative, bold, full strength, and unfiltered.

Tonight: Special guests: Rep. Tom Price (@RepTomPrice), chairman of House GOP Policy Committee and Bethany Bowra (@BethanyBowra), Founder of NextGenerationVoters, and blogger at Smart Girl Politics and RedState.com


Obama The King




WOW! Talk about “Do as I say, not as I do.” The use of foodstamps by Americans this past Thanksgiving was at an all-time high. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that almost two-thirds of the increase (almost $72 billion) in spending on foodstamps between 2007 and 2011 was caused by an increase in the number of participants. And the number of Americans receiving foodstamps (15 percent of the US population) also reached a record level in June 2012, with no relief in sight. The record number of Americans on food stamps is indicative of Democrats who that want to keep lower-income Americans dependent on foodstamps, and to have a constituency dependent on government services. The use of foodstamps has increased under Obama by about 20 million Americans (and non-Americans). By the way, the foodstamps program is now named the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

But did that fact cause President (King?) Barack Hussein Obama and his family to alter their Thanksgiving dinner plans? To quote (the late) John Belushi from SNL, “Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.” In fact, the Obama family ate “high on the hog.”

The Obama family had turkey, ham, cornbread stuffing, oyster stuffing, greens, macaroni and cheese, sweet potatoes, mashed potatoes, green bean casserole, and dinner rolls. For desert, they had a choice of banana cream pie, pumpkin pie, apple pie, sweet potato pie, huckleberry pie, or cherry pie. And guess who paid for all that food! That’s right: us taxpayers. Perhaps if taxes to pay for foodstamps weren’t so high, we lowly taxpayers could afford half of what the Obamas had, or even two kinds of pie.

To paraphrase Shakespeare, whether its called foodstamps or SNAP, its the same thing, and it still costs – period. What matters is not what the program is called, but what it actually costs. But does Obama care about what he is doing/has done to the country? Judging from his recent actions, the answer is “No.” He is truly the “Hypocrite-in-Chief.”

But that’s just my opinion.

Please visit RWNO, my personal web site.

ObamaCare: WI Hospital Cuts 140 Positions; Lays Off 50

A Madison, Wisconsin hospital has joined the ranks of employers directly affected by ObamaCare cuts. About 50 people face unemployment, as Meriter Hospital announces layoffs. These cuts are a direct result of the decreased in payments they will receive as a result of the Medicare cuts contained within ObamaCare.

WKOW: On Tuesday, Meriter spokesperson Mary Reinke said in a statement that about 4 percent of the hospital’s 3,500 positions would be eliminated. That’s 140 positions cut, but 50 employees affected, because many of those positions are currently vacant. Some of those 50 employees among various departments will be offered jobs elsewhere in the company.

Reinke says the layoffs are a pre-emptive move to offset cuts to Medicare reimbursements put in place by the federal Affordable Care Act.

While 140 positions will be cut only 50 employees will be directly affected because the hospital had already begun leave vacant positions open in expectation of the ObamaCare restrictions.

The decrease in Medicare reimbursement will affect all hospitals but the smaller, more rural hospitals, which have a higher Medicare population will feel a greater impact.

Reinke says the layoffs are a pre-emptive move to offset cuts to Medicare reimbursements put in place by the federal Affordable Care Act.

Meriter Spokesman: Changes are inevitable.
WKOW 27: Madison, WI Breaking News, Weather and Sports

Improving the GOP Message for 2016

In the final analysis, in those key swing states, Mitt Romney lost the election by about 300,000 votes. Not very many considering the size of the country and total number of voters. And yet, a loss…

Now as the GOP begins its look forward to 2014 and ’16 there are many in the party who think it’s time for change. And where best to look than from someone who did not vote Republican.

In that light here are excerpts from article I found by a man named Eric Garland. Is he famous? I don’t know. Is he right? Hmmm. That is more difficult. Will he ever vote Republican? Ha. I’ll let you decide. Still his comments represents a contingent of the voting population who have found too many issues with the Republican party.

Note: Reading the prelude of his article I felt Mr. Garland might never consciously choose to vote for a Republican. It might not be in his makeup. Actually, Mr. Garland comes across as rather egomaniacal. There seems to be a fair amount of bragging within his writing. Probably enough to turn many people off…

And yet…there is validity in some of his points. Enough that maybe we should consider at least clarifying the GOP ideals. One inferred point that Garland makes clear is that the Republicans are not getting their vision across as well as we should.

You can read his entire article here: Letter to a Future Republican Strategist Regarding White People. Here is the synopsis (I’m taking out much of the swear words and the finger pointing…and some of the bragging) and added my thoughts in red.

Key reasons the writer doesn’t like the GOP:

Eric Garland: Science - … my wife and I have a collective fifteen years of university education between us. I have a Masters degree in Science and Technology Policy, and my wife is a physician who holds degrees in medicine as well as cell and molecular biology. We are really quite unimpressed with Congressional representatives such as Todd Akin and Paul Broun who actually serve on the House science committee and who believe, respectively, that rape does not cause pregnancy and that evolution and astrophysics are lies straight from Satan’s butt cheeks.

…Please understand the unbearable tension this might create between us and your candidates.

When it comes to the theory of evolution and Biblical creationism there must be some way for the party to state a logical position. We all can agree that the church’s opposition to Galileo today seems  archaic and yet many are unwilling to accept scientific evidence. Can people of faith agree with the idea of God as Creator and accept that evolution still has many unproven theories? Can we, at the same time, accept that not all conservatives are people of faith?

Additionally, the GOP needs to come up with a prolife stand while acknowledging that currently abortion is legal. It is expected, no, encouraged, that all prolife candidates believe and fight for legislation that life begins at conception. Maybe it would also help to have women be the face of this stance?

EG: Climate – Within just the past 18 months the following events have come to our attention: a record-breaking drought that sent temperatures over 100 degrees for weeks, killing half the corn in the Midwest and half the TREES on our suburban property – AND – a hurricane that drowned not New Orleans or Tampa or North Carolina but my native state of VERMONT. As an encore, a second hurricane drowned lower Manhattan, New Jersey and Long Island. The shouted views of decrepit mental fossil Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma that this is a fraud perpetrated on the American people by evil, conspiring climate scientists is belied by such events and is looking irresponsible to even the most skeptical.

Oh right. I just read about Vermont’s Cow Power Electricity plan using methane produced from cow manure to run plants and the like. (This guy will never vote Republican.) But shouldn’t Republicans be able to say, “Yes, it looks like there are weather changes. We don’t know if they are just cyclical or if they are caused by man.” There are surely common sense recommendations that conservatives can make that aren’t crazy anti-development, anti-growth, and anti-Western civilization.

EG: Healthcare – My wife and I are quite familiar with America’s healthcare system due to our professions, and having lived abroad extensively, also very aware of comparable systems. Your party’s insistence on declaring the private U.S. healthcare system “the best in the world” fails nearly every factual measure available to any curious mind. We watch our country piss away 60% more expenditures than the next most expensive system (Switzerland) for health outcomes that rival former Soviet bloc nations. On a personal scale, my wife watches poor WORKING people show up in emergency rooms with fourth-stage cancer because they were unable to afford primary care visits. I have watched countless small businesses unable to attract talented workers because of the outrageous and climbing cost of private insurance…

Can we compare health care of a tiny country like Switzerland with less than 8 million residents and the broad expanse of the US? I think not. But he is right; we need to find a safety net for the working poor. And right now we are hearing that Obamacare is going to cost more than they can afford, unless somehow they change that sliding scale.

All who agree with our First Amendment rights will agree the Administration’s policy that religious institutions MUST offer healthcare that allows for contraception and abortions is a huge violation of religious freedom!

EG: Deficits and debt - Whenever the GOP is out of power, it immediately appeals to the imagination of voters who remember the Lyndon Baines Johnson (!) administration and claim that the Republican alternative is the party of “cutting spending” and “reducing the deficit… Egads – if you actually were the party of fiscal responsibility – you might win our votes despite your 13th century view of science!

Okay, we get it. Both parties have been guilty of spending more than we bring in. Democrats want to just keep spending and raise the debt ceiling but Republicans are looking at our future. We must slow the rate of spending and increase the revenues.

There was a lot of criticism that Romney did not present enough of a plan to fix the economy. He might have had one but we didn’t hear it. Maybe it’s time we stop trying to say “we have better ideas” and start talking facts until people get the message.  And when they say, “OK, we get it, now what?” then we will have their attention.

EG: Gay marriage - As the child of Baby Boomers who got divorced (as was the fashion!) in the 80s and 90s, and for whom 50% of my friends had their homes broken by divorce in the critical years before age 18 …

Yeah, I took out most of the comments here. (You can go read them if you want). But he is right, we claim sanctity of marriage, yet the divorce rate is very high. Let he who is without sin, etc., etc. Will gay marriage be acceptable? Maybe in another generation or two. In the meantime we should continue to promote marriage in the church as we define it but as people who want less government and certainly not government intrusion can we be tolerant of those who live an alternative lifestyle? We surely can promote the positives parents raising their children and focus particularly on the value of having dads take responsibility for their offspring.

EG: Meanness- Your party is really mean, mocking and demonizing everyone who does not follow you into the pits of hell. You constantly imply – as Mitt Romney did in his “47% speech” – that anybody who disagrees with you does so not by logic or moral conviction, but because they are shiftless, lazy parasites who want “free stuff” from “traditional Americans.” …

Talk about angry. Okay, so it’s obvious that this writer is never going to vote Republican. Still, there is something to take from his tirade.

The question should be, why does the GOP sound angry and wrong? Simple: the liberals took over the discussion, and we accepted the premise of their question. We aren’t anti-immigrant – we are PRO-immigration, but we’re also PRO-law-abiding. We aren’t anti-gay, we are PRO-family; we aren’t anti-women or anti-choice, we are PRO-holding-people-accountable-for-their-choices.

There are many who believed the fallacies of the Democrats this last election cycle. It’s up to us to get out the truth. And we need to start now.

We need to get a better, more refined, less antagonizing message out there. Conservatives are RIGHT, and the principles we stand for DESERVE to be presented in the best, most convincing way possible. The nation deserves that – our CHILDREN deserve that.