The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for March, 2009

Roundup of News You Missed Because of the AIG Media Distraction

Posted by iusbvision on March 19, 2009

It is just like we told you and Shep says in this video; this AIG story is a BS distraction.

Obama took half a million dollars for a book deal a few days before the inauguration. – LINK. Remember how upset the Democrats and the media got over Newt Gingrich’s book deal? –

Rush Limbaugh is polling higher than Nancy Pelosi  – LINK.

More babies were born in the United States in 2007 than any year in the nation’s history, topping the peak during the baby boom 50 years earlier, federal researchers reported Wednesday. 40% out of wedlock. – LINK
[I think that once you are married you should have lots of babies. This leftist population control stuff is nonsense. If you want to fight about it bring it on in comments. - Editor]

Karl Rove: The Obama Administration’s actions are giving the GOP an opening. – LINK

DEBATE: Is Bush the worst president in the last 50 years? Karl Rove and Bill Kristol debate two lefties on NPR in front of an audience who votes for the winner. Rove and Kristol win the vote. The audio, which is VERY enlightening is here – LINK

Video: Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that enforcing immigration laws is “un-American” – LINK

SEIU union is firing union employees and replacing them with temps from a staffing agency. – LINK

The Huffington Post calls on the FCC to censor media they consider to be conservative. Of course MSNBC is right down the middle…. – LINK. Like all too many college administrators and other far left Democrats the First Amendment only counts for speech they like.

MSNBC questions Karl Rove’s manhood and claims that VP Cheney was the mastermind of an assassination ring. LINK and LINK. Yup stright down the middle….

Secularists trying to get St. Patrick’s day renamed to “Shamrock Day” – LINK. Haven’t people had enough of these God-O-phobes yet?

Good video of some of the local Tea Party coverage that is being ignored by the national elite media.

Richard Cohen at the Washington Post has a great column defending Jim Cramer. While Jon Stewart attacked Cramer for believing that Bear Stearns and AIG were good buys before the collapse, so did 80% of the rest of the profession. – LINK

As NewsBusters reported Sunday, “with the exception of Fox News and CNN, no major television outlet has covered even one of these events except the original proposed by Santelli on February 19.” – LINK.

Good Morning America tosses softballs to Michelle Obama, yet lectured and grilled Laura Bush. – LINK.

This guy is a bit upset –

ACORN is taking more heat for …..well these guys are a pinata of illegal and thuggish activity. – LINK.

Explorers On Global Warming Expedition Stranded by Cold Weather – LINK.

Joe the Plumber sues Democrat public officials and the State of Ohio for illegally leaking his private information. – Link. This is the party that wants your medical records online for them to look over. The same party that obtained and leaked Michael Steele’s credit report. The same party that leaked Linda Tripp’s Department of Defense file. The same party that used private investigators as a secret police force. The same party that obtained 900 secret FBI files and used them illegally. The same party that wants control of your health care. Yup, you can trust them.

Congressman Maxine Waters and her own little culture of corruption? –  Link

“My Imam father came after me with an axe” – LINK

General Dr. David Petraeus for president? – LINK

Our best ally in Latin-America says that the Democrats slapped them in the face – LINK

Social Workers in England helping to make sure that Muslim women who are beaten by their fathers/husbands are beaten again by notifying the community Sharia Law pseudo authorities in the Muslim communities…… oh its true… – LINK

Its here. The automated mosquito hunter-killer laser gun. No this is not a joke. – LINK

The deficit may be up to a trillion more then current projections.  – LINK

Obama made $2.5 million in book royalties last year. – LINK

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Elite Media Fails to Mention Party Affiliation for Jailed Democrat (Again)

Posted by iusbvision on March 19, 2009

This is always fun to report. It happens so often that we don’t even report them all.

It goes like this, if a Republican gets in trouble or even something that can be made to look like trouble, the ‘Republican’ party affiliation is mentioned many times in the article. But if said person on trouble is a Democrat, the party affiliation is usually left out.

We have reported on this phenomenon HERE and HERE and HERE.

News Busters has a little fun with this story:

Name That Party: Top NM Dem Sentenced, Party Affiliation Deep Sixed

By Warner Todd Huston
March 19, 2009 – 02:59 ET

Manny Aragon was one of New Mexico’s most powerful law makers and power brokers. A former Senate president, Aragon was this week convicted and given a 67 month sentence for lining his pockets and that of his co-conspirators with millions in fraudulently billed state contracting money.

While his “iconic” status is mentioned and his long standing position as a “Senate leader” is dutifully chronicled, his status as a Democrat doesn’t seem to make the cut of a large portion of the stories on his sentencing.

The Associated Press misses the fact in two versions of the story (here and here), so does the New Mexico Independent. KRQE News 13 doesn’t mention the party of Agagonor his co-conspirator Raul Parra. McClatchy’s Albuquerque Journal also skips party mention in this story of reactions to the sentencing.

And, in an amusing side note, the supposedly non-partisan Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) also do not mention Aragon’s party affiliation. This, of course, is hardly surprising because the folks that run CREW are a little less “non-partisan” than they claim with board members and operations staff rich with Democrat Party activism, ACLU experience and one with a past job history with the left-wing group Media Matters — a group funded in part by George Soros. One of its board members is well-known left-wing legal activist, law school dean and radio guest Erwin Chemerinsky. There isn’t a single Republican oriented member of this “non-partisan” group to be found.

In any case, we have one of New Mexico’s most powerful Democrat lawmakers headed for the hooskow, yet his party seems to go un-indicted by the Old Media. Imagine that?

News Busters is a site you should visit every day.

 

UPDATE: Speaking of News Busters….

Jack Murtha, who is the king of trading earmark pork in exchange for campaign contributions was the subject of a report by CBS news where they failed to mention his party identification – LINK.

PA Senator Fumo found guilty on 137 counts. NBC fails to mention he is a Democrat. – LINK.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Democrats to AIG: Give back the bonus money or we will release your personal information.

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2009

We first reported on the AIG bonus story HERE.

While AIG is getting death threats by the dozens and they read some of those threats at a congressional hearing today including one to wrap piano wire around their throats and killing their children. On the Neil Cavuto show on Fox News a member of the Democratic leadership (Gary Ackerman) when asked if releasing their names and public information is a responsible thing in light of these threats the copngressman said , “Well all they have to do to avoid this is get back the money.”

Folks that is very next to a physical threat of violence. We have said several times that with these new laws undermining ethics procedures that they have sneaked into the Stimulus Bill and other actions, that recent Democrat actions are the things that banana republics are made of.

Republicans are starting to call for Tim Geithner to resign. This is a political play, they should be calling for Chris Dodd to resign and besides, Geithner is a bumbling boob and for the Republicans is the gift that keeps on giving.

Ultimately this is a distraction. Republicans are getting bold enough to hit the Democrats and Democrats who have an unbalanced share in this whole crisis and who are getting enriched by it with campaign kickbacks need some outrage that takes the heat off of themselves. As has been shown in other posts the Democrats knew these bonuses were coming because they stripped out language in the Stimulus Bill to stop them and adden an amendment behind closed doors while locking Republicans out to specifically allow them for companies who took the stimulus funds.

UPDATE – 3/19 Thanks to Hotair for posting the video link.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

OUTRAGE: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give 611k bonuses each to execs.

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2009

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ignored the warnings of their own regulator since 2001. The slicked the palms of partisans and politicians to the tune of $200 million with Chris Dodd and Obama getting the most in order to keep those Democrats blocking any reform. They hired almost every lobby firm in DC to keep other lobby firms from lobbying against them. The people who ran Fannie Mae, Raines, Johnson, Gorelic, are all former Clinton appointees who paid themselves tens of millions of dollars. For decades this was the perfect corruption ring.

For details see our Mortgage Crisis category for our complete coverage on this story since the beginning.

Yahoo/AP News:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Fannie Mae plans to pay retention bonuses of as much as $611,000 each to key executives this year as part of a plan to keep hundreds of employees from leaving the government-controlled company.

Rival mortgage finance company Freddie Mac is planning similar awards, but has not yet reported on which executives will benefit.

The two companies, which together own or back more than half of the home mortgages in the country, have been hobbled by skyrocketing loan defaults. Fannie recently requested $15 billion in federal aid, while Freddie has sought a total of almost $45 billion.

Fannie Mae disclosed its “broad-based” retention program in a recent regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company was only required to disclose the amounts for the top-paid executives, who will pocket at least $470,000 on top of their base salaries. The bonuses are more than double last year’s, which ranged from $200,000 to $260,000.

A company spokesman declined further comment.

Wall Street Journal is all over it

Ed Morrissey at hotair.com comments HERE (and folks, we link to Ed Morrissey probably more than any other blogger, we do that because among political bloggers Ed is among the very best and brightest).

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Loophole Allows Rich to Get Food Stamps

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2009

CNN reporting:

Don’t you love it when government runs things?

UPDATE - News Busters has an awesome piece reporting about how this happened and the media coverage of it. It is a must see. – LINK.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Obama Administration Targets Armed Pilots for Harassment.

Posted by iusbvision on March 17, 2009

The question is, is this from the top or is this a nutty anti-gun ideologue who he appointed? Answer: Now that it was the editorial in the Washington Times the White House knows about it and if this doesn’t end The One is responsible.

Eiether way, this speaks volumes about the judgement at the top to either target pilots like this, appoint people who would do this (at at least another case of very poor vetting) AND/OR allow the problem to get so bad that it had to hit the editorial page of the Washington Times. Is this the change you voted for?

Washington Times excerpt:

After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal-safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings.

Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti-gun ideology.

The Obama administration this past week diverted some $2 million from the pilot training program to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots.

This looks like completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots. The 12,000 Federal Flight Deck Officers, the pilots who have been approved to carry guns, are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency. There are no cases where any of them has improperly brandished or used a gun. There are just a few cases where officers have improperly used their IDs.

Fewer than one percent of the officers have any administrative actions brought against them and, we are told, virtually all of those cases “are trumped up.”

Take a case against one flight officer who had visited the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles within the last few weeks. While there, the pilot noticed that federal law enforcement officers can, with the approval of a superior, obtain a license plate that cannot be traced, a key safety feature for law enforcement personnel. So the pilot asked if, as a member of the federal program, he was eligible. The DMV staffer checked and said “no.” The next day administrative actions were brought against the pilot for “misrepresenting himself.” These are the kinds of cases that President Obama wants to investigate.

Since Mr. Obama’s election, pilots have told us that the approval process for letting pilots carry guns on planes slowed significantly. Last week the problem went from bad to worse. Federal Flight Deck Officers – the pilots who have been approved to carry guns – indicate that the approval process has stalled out.

Pilots cannot openly speak about the changing policies for fear of retaliation from the Transportation Security Administration.

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Democrats put language in the ‘Stimulus Bill’ to protect AIG executive bonuses. Dodd and Obama were the number one recipients of money from AIG. Distraction in full swing & Congress’ plan to tax the bonuses at 100% wont pass constitutional muster. – UPDATE: Shep Smith goes off on Congress.

Posted by iusbvision on March 17, 2009

[Before we get in to the goods one thought; what would be the reaction by the Democrats and the elite media be if Bush was still president. - Editor]

This issue is a big distraction and being milked by both sides; but before we get to that lets get to the big news.

Chris Dodd was for the executive bonuses before he was against them.

Senator Chriss Dodd, who was also the number one recipient of campaign cash the corrupt mortgage industry and the member of Congress most responsible for blocking mortgage industry reform since 2001, is also the number one recipient of cash from AIG taking in $103,100 in the 2008 election cycle alone with Barack Obama taking in $101, 332. Like the defunct mortgage industry, AIG gave over three times the donations to Democrats than to Republicans  - LINK.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Senator Dodd’s chances for reelection is in jeopardy.

Democrats inserted the language specifically allowing this in the ’Stimulus Bill” while Republicans were locked out of conference negotiations, it was called the Dodd Amendment; he first denied this and now admits it and now is trying to spin his way out of it.

Fox Business News:

While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called “the Dodd Amendment” by the Obama Administration, provides an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009” — which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.

Ok so they sneaked it in and got caught, so the outrage and threats to tax those bonuses at 100% is a show for the press and for you and me. Why?

1. The bonuses are a part of legal contracts so if AIG doesn’t pay them they will be taken to court and forced to pay the bonuses as well as punitive damages and other fees.

2. The Constitution of the United States prohibits the government from interfering with a legal contract. The argument can be made that taxing those bonuses at 100% or a very high rate is an effort to get around that constitutional restriction and they would be right.

3. The Constitution prohibits what are called “Bills of Attainder”. A bill of attainder is a law passsed by congress to punish an individual or a group of people are an imagined crime or wrong doing. This violates a right to a trial and due process of law. Making a special tax for those bonuses now is a bill of attainder and the courts are not going to stand for it.

4. The only way to really solve this is to make new laws for the future or for the industry to reform itself.

Those bonuses are likely to stick and any attempt by Congress to take that money is almost certainly doomed to fail in court. Congress knows this, but like the Rush Limbaugh smear story, the Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer smear stories, these cat fights are distractions that keep the real news from getting to you.

Now both sides are trying to “out outrage the other”. Republicans are talking up outrage against AIG when they should be outraging at Democrats who helped to make sure this could happen with the language in the Stimulus Bill. The mortgage industry scandal shows us that much of the Democratic Party leadership is in Wall Street’s back pocket and this scandal is just more reason to come to that conclusion.

Michelle Malkin comments HERE.

UPDATE – Video: Shep Smith goes OFF on this pure show and deception & tells you what we have told you from minute one.

As we told you this AIG media and political frenzy is about two things, a distractions that the Democrats screwed up, and a distraction from the fact that Democrats have been getting money funneled back to their campaigns from AIG, Wall Street firms and the mortgage industry. The video:

UPDATE II - CBS news decided not to mention the Dodd Amendment in its coverage…is anyone surprised? – LINK

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis | 2 Comments »

Breaking: Obama Appoints Indiana Judge Who Banned “Christ” from Prayers in the Indiana House

Posted by iusbvision on March 17, 2009

Folks, this is a judge who gets overturned for making outrageous politically motivated rulings.

Washington Times:

President Obama sent the Senate his first judicial nomination Tuesday, announcing that Indiana Judge David Hamilton is his choice for the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge Hamilton has served as a federal district judge for 14 years and was named chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana in January 2008, the White House said.

We have all heard judges gone wild stories; judges who make outrageous and outrageously unconstitutional political rulings form the bench for the purpose of a partisan axe to grind, social engineering, or other personal peccadilloes.

One such judge is Southern District of Indiana federal Judge David Hamilton.

Hamilton ruled, in one of those nutty ACLU lawsuits that attempt to ban Christianity from public discourse, that the word “Christ” could not be used in the prayer that opens the session of the Indiana State House.

Judge Upholds Prayer Limits in Indiana State House

Some in Both Parties Vow to Fight Ruling

By Peter SlevinWashington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 1, 2006; Page A03

CHICAGO, Dec. 31 — In a spirited duel over prayer, members of the Indiana state House are at odds with a federal judge who ruled that the daily invocation appeals too often to Jesus Christ and a Christian god.

The “systematically sectarian” prayers, U.S. District Judge David F. Hamilton concluded, are barred by the Constitution, which forbids the government to show preference for any religious denomination. He ordered the House to avoid mentioning Christ in the formal benedictions.

As the House prepares to open its 2006 session on Wednesday, a number of politicians have vowed to defy Hamilton, whom they accuse of undermining a 188-year Indiana tradition and interfering in legislative branch affairs.

Terry Goodin, a Democrat who rejects Hamilton’s order, is among at least two dozen House members who have asked to give Wednesday’s prayer. He said he would “absolutely” speak Christ’s name if given the chance.

“Really, who do you pray to? If you’re offering up a prayer, you’re praying to a deity. You don’t offer prayers to just an open space,” Goodin said. “I will give the same type of prayer that’s been given for 100 years. I won’t change my words because of someone in the judicial branch who tells me I must.”

Hamilton expects House leaders, including Speaker Brian Bosma (R), who is appealing the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Chicago, to honor the injunction. If they do not, the judge said, he intends “to take appropriate steps to insure compliance.”

…Unlike on some fronts in the culture wars, elected Democrats and Republicans have come together to criticize Hamilton’s ruling.

“I see where religions were forbidden in other countries. In communist countries. In totalitarian countries. I think this smacks of that,” said Rep. B. Patrick Bauer (D), the House minority leader and former speaker. “We need a clarification or we need a correction.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/31/AR2005123100723.html

Apparently Judge Hamilton never took a good constitutional law course (this writer took constitutional law from a sitting federal judge who is also a master historian). Prayer opens the House of Representatives in Washington DC and in the State Houses at the beginning of each day’s session. Since 95% of religious people in the United States are Christians and our law is based off of the Christian Philosophy of John Locke and others it is only reasonable that a majority of prayers will be Christian.

When the Indiana House asked Judge Hamilton to stay the ruling until an appeal could be heard he denied it.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Judge Hamilton’s ruling:

The 2-1 decision by the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals is a victory for social conservatives, although the justices avoided dealing directly with whether the prayers violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, as the lower court had ruled.

Instead, the majority ruled that the four Indiana residents who brought the lawsuit lacked standing because they had “not shown that the legislature has extracted from them tax dollars for the establishment and implantation” of a program that supposedly violates the Establishment Clause.

Glen Lavy, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, applauded the ruling. ADF filed a friend-of-the-court brief asking the judges to reinstate the prayer practice

“Those who oppose Christian invocations are essentially saying that the Founders were violating the Constitution as they were writing it,” Lavy said in a statement. “People of all religions have always had an equal opportunity to offer prayer before Indiana legislative sessions, and this ruling ensures that those who offer prayers in the name of Jesus will not lose that opportunity either.”

The lawsuit was brought against the speaker of the state House of Representatives by the Indiana affiliate of the ACLU, which won the initial round in November 2005 when U.S. District Judge David F. Hamilton ruled prayers must be “non-sectarian” and must not mention “Christ’s name or title or any other denominational appeal.” Later, Hamilton clarified the ruling and said it applied to all sectarian prayers, not just those mentioning Christ.

Mathew D. Staver, founder of the religious liberty organization Liberty Counsel, filed a friend-of-the-court brief asking that the prayer practice be left alone:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision handed down earlier this year is already beginning to close the door on lawsuits that seek to eliminate public acknowledgment of God and religion,” Staver said in a statement. “Mere offense at the mention of God does not give the right to file a lawsuit. … Prayers offered at legislative sessions are permissible acknowledgements of God and do not establish a religion. Legislative prayer predates the First Amendment and was present when our nation was birthed in the delivery room of the Constitutional Convention.

Courts often examine a case using ‘juristiction’ as the first criteria and ‘standing’ as the second. If either of those conditions cannot be met there is no reason to continue the case.  With that said, the Founders crystal clearly never intend for “separation of church & state” to be interpreted in the manner the ACLU wishes. Judge Hamilton’s ruling also took the entire notion of ‘separation of powers’ and tossed it out the window. The very idea that the judicial branch can dictate to a legislature its procedural customs flies in the face of limited constitutional government.

 

UPDATE - The Washington Post, the day after this article was published, printed an article explaing that some are pointing out how Hamilton is a far left judicial activist who is being falsely portrayed as a moderate.

The Judicial Confirmation Network, a group that supports conservative judicial nominees, painted Hamilton as a liberal whom the Obama administration was attempting to disguise as a moderate. Pointing to what the White House says was Hamilton’s work raising contributions door-to-door for the advocacy group ACORN for one month after college, and his work on the board of the ACLU, the JCN called Hamilton “an ultra-liberal.”

National Review points out that Hamilton was chastised by the 7th Circuit Appeals Court for being the ONLY judge in the country to rule as he has. Abuse of position anyone?…:

It’s far from clear what justifies the article’s characterization of Hamilton as a “moderate” (or, as the article oddly puts it, as “represent[ing] some of his state’s traditionally moderate strain”—how does one represent some of a strain?).  Was it perhaps Hamilton’s service as vice president for litigation, and as a board member, of the Indiana branch of the ACLU?  Or maybe Hamilton’s extraordinary seven-year-long series of rulings obstructing Indiana’s implementation of its law providing for informed consent on abortion?  That obstruction elicited this strong statement (emphasis added) from the Seventh Circuit panel majority that overturned Hamilton:

 

For seven years Indiana has been prevented from enforcing a statute materially identical to a law held valid by the Supreme Court in Casey, by this court in Karlin, and by the fifth circuit in Barnes. No court anywhere in the country (other than one district judge in Indiana [i.e., Hamilton]) has held any similar law invalid in the years since Casey. Although Salerno does not foreclose all pre-enforcement challenges to abortion laws, it is an abuse of discretion for a district judge to issue a pre-enforcement injunction while the effects of the law (and reasons for those effects) are open to debate.

 

Or perhaps Hamilton’s inventive invocation of substantive due process to suppress evidence of a criminal defendant’s possession of cocaine marijuana,* a ruling that, alas, was unanimously reversed by the Seventh Circuit?

 

With “moderates” like Hamilton, imagine what Obama’s “liberal” nominees will look like.

Update II – Ed Morrissey at Hotair.com has a great post on this issue as well. Definately worth the read.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

Study: Media Acts as Ideological Gatekeepers to Censor News

Posted by iusbvision on March 17, 2009

I know this is going to sound dreadfully dry, but reading academic journals is sort of becoming a hobby of mine. Every once in a while I find a real gem of a statement. Here is one I found today.

Bias in TV News Study by C. A. Tuggle 1998:

One research contended that what is news is determined by Journalists’ own experiences, values and attitudes (Willis 1991). Willis wrote that journalists, like most people, tend to stereotype people, issues, and situations. These stereotypes, in turn, affect the gatekeeping process, in which journalists decide what is news and in what form the news should be presented. Sowell (1992) argued that subjects or positions that do not fit the ideological preconceptions of the media never become news.

…and to think that one of my journalism professors told me that she never saw anything like this happen in her career. I see it happen every day, just open the New York Times, or take a look at how the L.A. Times thought that a Tea Party Protest that attracted between 8000 – 15000 people (depending on whose numbers you listen to) was just not newsworthy; yet the LA Times writes about upcoming far left ANSWER protests in advance to help inflate them – LINK.

What is not in the study but what is clearly obvious, is that the bias in Academia and college text books works exactly the same way.  Look at how universities refuse to bring conservative speakers to campus, or try to charge outrageous “security” fees to bring them in. Look at what Amherst College did to Justice Scalia recently – LINK.

There is little to no serious study, of the Roman and Greek classics, John Locke, Adam Smith,  or American Studies in the general education curriculum at most universities today.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Amherst Faculty Boycotts Justice Scalia’s Lecture on Persuading Judges.

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

What academic bias so many professors tell me, THIS academic bias. Isn’t it about time that academia started showing some ability for introspective?

Peter Robinson from National Review Reports (Hat Tip RWSparkle):

The Shame of Amherst College   [Peter Robinson]

On Uncommon Knowledge this week, Mr. Justice Antonin Scalia.

With Bryan Garner, Justice Scalia recently published Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges, and today we discuss the importance of logic and concision, the place of oral arguments, and the current state of debate—of true and rigorous debate—in our courts, in the media, and in the academy.

“My youngest child went to Amherst.  I went to graduation there, and while I was there I gave a lecture.  The lecture was boycotted by all of the faculty members at Amherst.  It’s no skin off my nose…but it shows a closed-mindedness that should certainly not exist in the academy.”

To watch the discussion in full, click here (video).

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTYxMmFjNmEzZjg2M2Y2NzViZmZiMTJjZGNkNjc5NjQ=

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Obama Camp: Yes we are spinning you, but we won the spin war and that is why we are here.

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

They are dishonest and in your face.

Remember when McCain said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound and defined aspects of it that were? The Obama camp went nuts. Now the Obama camp is saying it and the economy was a WHOLE lot better when McCain said it. Well here is their explanation.

Here is the Obama ad slamming McCain for saying the same thing Obama is now.

Chutzpah.

UPDATE - Glenn Beck had some fun with this story complete with the Obama Administration non-denial denial.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Government Blows Your Money to Make Ammunition More Expensive

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

The military does not or rarely buys reloaded ammunition cases for small arms. The brass used in military owned guns is virgin brass.

Those brass shell casings still work fine once fired. All they have to do is be reloaded so ammunition manufacturers buy the used brass form the military which saves the taxpayers millions of dollars and helps keep the cost of ammunition to civilians down.

The Obama administration, in what is likely a response to firearm and ammunition sales that are at record levels, has ordered that all military brass is to be shredded and sold as scrap.

The Shootist blog has the rest of the details.

(Hat Tip Instapundit.)

UPDATE – the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre has told Glenn Beck that the Obama Administration has reversed this policy.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Indiana Legislators Listen Up: Two More States Move to Limit Red Light Cameras

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

Missouri News Leader:

Missouri Senate looks to regulate red-light cameras

Chad Livengood • News-Leader • March 11, 2009

Jefferson City — The Missouri Senate revived an effort Tuesday to regulate red-light cameras.

The Senate tacked onto a transportation bill an amendment that would require cities to positively identify the driver of a car running a red light in order to issue a ticket.

KBTX – Texas:

Bill Would Outlaw TX Red-Light Cameras, CS Man Volunteers to Testify

As College Station is expanding its red light camera program, a state representative is trying to stop it.

A Lubbock legislator has filed a bill that would end red-light cameras in Texas, and a local driver is offering help.

Lubbock did away with its red-light cameras last year when the citizen group that oversaw the cameras, determined the cameras hadn’t made Lubbock’s streets any safer.

At that time, the cameras also hadn’t made Lubbock any money. A College Station man is supporting that Lubbock legislator; he says money is what the cameras are all about.

Jim Ash has been fighting College Station’s red-light cameras in court, through a website, and with his G-P-S, since being issued a citation last fall.

Now he may be taking his case all the way to the Texas capitol.

State Representative Carl Isett, of Lubbock has filed a bill to outlaw red-light cameras.

(Hat Tip Instapundit.)

Posted in Camera Fraud, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

15,000 People Protest at California Tea Party – LA Times Refuses to Cover the Story

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

What media bias – THIS media bias….

Patterico:

L.A. Times: We Didn’t Cover the John and Ken Rally Because Those Guys Are Idiots Rallies of 15,000 People Aren’t Newsworthy. Oh REALLY?!

— Patterico @ 11:42 pm

Radio personalities John and Ken recently hosted a “taxpayer revolt” in Fullerton with a crowd of between 8,000 and 15,000 — and the L.A. Times wasn’t there to cover it. At the Readers’ Representative blog is a letter that editor David Lauter mass-mailed to “dozens” of readers who had written to complain about the lack of coverage.

Thanks to each of you for writing. I appreciate hearing from all of you — even the ones who called me a moron.

——————————————————————————————–

Michelle Malkin reports today, the LA Times is reporting on upcoming far left ANSWER protests before they even happen:

This is why Old Media is dying. The Los Angeles Times today recycles press releases from left-wing A.N.S.W.E.R. announcing a protest of AIG this afternoon and an anti-war rally next weekend. The paper has no problem serving as advance publicity team for radical Left groups:

Demonstrators plan to rally outside the AIG building today in downtown Los Angeles to protest the giant insurer’s decision to pay $165 million in bonuses to key employees. American International Group Inc. recently received the first part of $180 billion in federal bailout funds.

“We’re going to be down there with whoever we can get,” said Ian Thompson of the Los Angeles chapter of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (A.N.S.W.E.R.) coalition. “We’re going to be expressing anger and outrage about the new bonuses that were announced, that will be given to the very same folks who helped cause the financial meltdown.”

UPDATE – Related Story – Study says that elite media acts as ideological gatekeepers to censor news LINK …ya think?

Posted in Click & Learn, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Going Galt – Atlas Shrugged # 27 on Amazon! Producers and small business working to reduce earnings to below the $250 mark to protest Obama’s tax plan.

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

atlas-shrugged-3-15-2009

Click to Enlarge

Atlas Shrugged is number 27 on Amazon.com. Tea Party protests are popping up all over and the press is reporting that producers and small businesses are trying to lower earnings to below the $250k level to protest this administrations big government economic policies.

Via Michelle Malkin:

Going Galt: Tax hikes have consequences

By Michelle Malkin  •  March 2, 2009 06:22 PM

atlaswillshrug
(Photo credit: Free Colorado)

There’s a new report on ABCNews.com about how upper-income business owners are looking for ways to reduce their earnings to deny the government their tax dollars. This is exactly what Dr. Helen was talking about in October and on our PJTV panel this weekend– the producers of this country choosing to “Go Galt.” It’s the sentiment you saw in the “Atlas Will Shrug” sign at the Denver anti-pork rally two weeks ago and at many of the Tea Party protests. And it’s the sentiment you see in the rise of Ayn Rand novel sales.

Tax hikes have consequences. Incentives matter. Only self-deluded wealth redistributors living in la-la-land believe otherwise.

ABC News Reports:

President Barack Obama’s tax proposal, which promises to increase taxes for those families with incomes of $250,000 or more — has some Americans brainstorming ways to decrease their pay, even if it’s just by a dollar.

A 63-year-old attorney based in Lafayette, La., who asked not to be named, told ABCNews.com that she plans to cut back on her business to get her annual income under the quarter million mark should the Obama tax plan be passed by Congress and become law.

So far, Obama’s tax plan is being looked at skeptically by both Democrats and Republicans and therefore may not pass at all.

“We are going to try to figure out how to make our income $249,999.00,” she said.

“We have to find a way out where we can make just what we need to just under the line so we can benefit from Obama’s tax plan,” she added. “Why kill yourself working if you’re going to give it all away to people who aren’t working as hard?”

Here is another installment on this story from Michelle Malkin. Be sure to follow the link and give it a read:

Going Galt, continued

By Michelle Malkin  •  March 10, 2009 06:49 PM

galt3

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

VP Cheney & Karl Rove: Chris Dodd & Barney Frank Prevented Mortgage Reform – UPDATE: AP Misreports Story

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2009

VP Cheney –

Karl Rove tells the world what we all already know about Frank and Dodd.

UPDATE – The Associated Press – in the tank as they usually are make no mention of what Cheney and Rove had to say about Frank & Dodd. What a surprise they left out the lead of the story…. 

Cheney: Don’t blame Bush team for economic woes
Sunday March 15, 9:13 am ET

Cheney says economic woes are not Bush team’s fault, cites global financial problem

WASHINGTON (AP) — Don’t blame the Bush administration for all the country’s economic problems.That’s the message from former Vice President Dick Cheney.

President Barack Obama constantly talks about the enormous economic troubles that he inherited when he took office in January. Cheney agrees that Obama did indeed came into power amid very difficult economic circumstances.

But Cheney says he doesn’t think the Bush administration can be blamed for creating the economic woes. Cheney says it’s a global financial problem. He says the idea that fault can assigned to the previous administration is “interesting rhetoric” but he doesn’t think people care about that.

Cheney spoke on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090315/cheney_economic_woes.html

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis | Leave a Comment »

Ron Silver Dead at 62

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

Actor and activist Ron Silver has died at the age of 62 from cancer.

Ron Silver was the best debater that this writer has ever seen. When Silver took the time to learn an issue he was unbeatable in rhetorical combat.

Via Ace of Spades HQ:

ron-silver

Ron Silver at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York, enthusiastically backing a second term for President Bush.

And speaking of, does anybody have video of that? It was very short, but one of the best speeches of the convention. All I can find is the text here.

Posted in Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Elite Media Ignoring Tea Party Protests Across the Nation

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

UPDATE III - Associated Press covered a small anti-war protest today LINK- but ignored Tea Parties across the nation. I did a search at www.ap.org for “Tea Party” and got nothing (LINK) on this weekends Tea Party protests. This verifies News Busters and what we shared with you HERE.

UPDATE II- 3/21. News Busters has done a story on the elite media ignoring new Tea Party protests across the nation. LINK

UPDATE- The lovely, brilliant, and tenacious Michelle Malkin covers this story HERE (Editor’s Note – The editor is not bashful about his respect for Michelle Malkin. For more ionformation on upcoming Tea Parties please visit http://www.taxdayteaparty.com/ ).

I was going to write a story up this evening, but I see NewsBusters has reported the story flawlessly:

Since CNBC’s Rick Santelli first suggesteda Chicago Tea Party to protest President Obama’s plans to “stimulate” the economy and bailout homeowners through unrestrained government spending, organized demonstrations have been occurring across the fruited plain.

In fact, as Glenn Reynolds reported moments ago, there’s one happening today in Cincinnati. 

Unfortunately, unless you frequent conservative websites, you’d have no idea that such events were being staged. 

Did you know there have been that many? If you didn’t, don’t feel embarrassed for these have gone almost totally ignored.

For instance, with the exception of Fox News and CNN, no major television outlet has covered even one of these events except the original proposed by Santelli on February 19.

Compare that to how these networks practically fell all over themselves to report war protests after the public’s opinion changed concerning Iraq in late 2003. 

As for print, Tea Parties have been completely ignored by the Washington Post, USA Today, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herald, and the San Francisco Chronicle.

I guess Americans protesting the president’s policies just isn’t newsworthy when there’s a Democrat in the White House. [The photo below is from today's Cincinatti protest. Protests around the country are scheduled for April 15th - editor]

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | 3 Comments »

If Bush Had Done What Obama Is Doing . . .

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

ROSS MACKENZIE in the TIMES-DISPATCH

Published: March 15, 2009

Herewith some questions about contrasts and double standards — and how the leftists comprising the nameless “they” who rule the world would react to what Barack Obama is doing if Obama were George Bush.

For instance . . .

If Obama were Bush, what would their reaction be to the president’s failure — even now — to submit a plan to salvage the nation’s banks?

What would they think of their president if he and his acolytes took out after the other party’s leading entertainer — Oprah Winfrey — declaring her not only de facto head of the Democratic Party but the foremost embodiment of that party’s ideological excesses?

Would they be lamenting a flawed vetting process related to the embarrassing tax problems and quirky (dis)qualifications — and withdrawals from consideration — of nominees to top administration posts?

How would they react to polls giving the president a 60 percent job-approval rating, yet finding 44 percent groaning that the nation is “off on the wrong track”?

Speaking of polls, would they be responding sarcastically to a president named Bush — as Obama has — talking up price-earnings ratios and ruminating that the stock market “is sort of like a tracking poll in politics. It bobs up and down every day . . . .If you spend your time worrying about that, you’re probably going to get the long-term strategy wrong”?

WOULD THEY ridicule the president for urging Americans to go out and buy stocks, just as they ridiculed his predecessor following 9/11 (and properly so), for urging Americans to conduct their lives as though nothing had happened — and to go out and shop?

If Obama were Bush, what would they be saying about how his ascendancy has affected a Dow Jones Industrial Average that has declined more than 30 percent since Election Day?

Would they be arguing — shouting? — about the implicit lessons of, e.g., Citibank at $1.03 per share, of General Motors at $1.45, of General Electric at $7.06?

Would there be outrage when the new attorney general termed this a “nation of cowards” on the subject of race?

Would there be anything positive cited about a secretary of state who journeyed to China — a country still overseen by communists and building its military at light-speed — where she (a) declined even to mention China’s human rights abuses while (b) begging it to buy greatly more American debt?

Oh, and on the subject of debt, how would they react to an incumbent president named Bush, suddenly positioned insistently before star-spangled backdrops, mimicking failed New Deal policies wherein FDR warred on the corporate class and sought to spend the nation out of the Depression? (Consider this, from FDR’s Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau in 1939 — a decade after the crash: We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. We have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot!)

Having ripped his predecessor (as they and Obama repeatedly have ripped Bush), what would they have to say about a new president offering record-setting deficits (as Obama has) that will double the national debt in five years, triple it in 10 years, and exceed his predecessor’s total eight-year deficit in his first 20 months?

How many among them would have the courage, as The New York Times’ Obamaphile columnist David Brooks did the other day, to write that the new president “is not who we thought he was”?

IF A PRESIDENT named Bush were doing what Obama has done, in the citadels of the left (Hollywood, the academy, and the remains of mainline churches and the establishment press) what would the take be on presidential proposals to compel small businesses to pony up for employee health care and retirement plans?

Would they make any cynical remarks about the extent to which the reversal of policies (a) to tap oil shale deposits in the West, (b) to drill offshore, and (c) to encourage nuclear power will increase our dependence on tinpot oil despots who detest us?

Would they still maintain an adamant silence on the sharply higher consumer costs for goods and services flowing from caps imposed on manufacturers’ carbon emissions, and consequently making life in tough economic times tougher not merely for some businesses — but all?

How would they spin the signature of a president who campaigned against pork-barrel earmarks, on a measure containing not just an earmark here and there — but (please sit down for this) nearly 9,000? Not to mention a $787 billion stimulus package marking the nation’s largest spending increase ever? Nor that such spending measures are intended less to strengthen the economy than to advance his social agenda (health care, education, alternative fuels, global warming) — and fast?

And, if the incumbent were Bush, would they voice any wrath at an unemployment rate now breaching 8 percent and headed toward the wild blue yonder?

Would they routinely blame today’s dismal economy on the Neanderthal policies and practices of yesterday’s president?

Would they eviscerate the incumbent president and his congressional footmen for declaiming time and again, “We won!”

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Obama Below Bush’s 2001 Approval – Newsweek Explains Why.

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

Obama’s poll numbers are sinking fast in spite of a media who is being pretty kind to him considering the chain of blunders that has come since January 20 [folks thats not me being partisan - we can list them].

It is so bad that Newsweek Magazine, which has decided to go hard left by decided to do less hard news and team with Air America has been pretty tough on the admisnistration and explained why.

Read what Scott Rasmussen  has to say carefully.

Scott Rasmussen in WSJ:

It is simply wrong for commentators to continue to focus on President Barack Obama’s high levels of popularity, and to conclude that these are indicative of high levels of public confidence in the work of his administration. Indeed, a detailed look at recent survey data shows that the opposite is most likely true. The American people are coming to express increasingly significant doubts about his initiatives, and most likely support a different agenda and different policies from those that the Obama administration has advanced.

Polling data show that Mr. Obama’s approval rating is dropping and is below where George W. Bush was in an analogous period in 2001. Rasmussen Reports data shows that Mr. Obama’s net presidential approval rating — which is calculated by subtracting the number who strongly disapprove from the number who strongly approve — is just six, his lowest rating to date.

Overall, Rasmussen Reports shows a 56%-43% approval, with a third strongly disapproving of the president’s performance. This is a substantial degree of polarization so early in the administration. Mr. Obama has lost virtually all of his Republican support and a good part of his Independent support, and the trend is decidedly negative.

A detailed examination of presidential popularity after 50 days on the job similarly demonstrates a substantial drop in presidential approval relative to other elected presidents in the 20th and 21st centuries. The reason for this decline most likely has to do with doubts about the administration’s policies and their impact on peoples’ lives.

There is also a clear sense in the polling that taxes will increase for all Americans because of the stimulus, notwithstanding what the president has said about taxes going down for 95% of Americans. Close to three-quarters expect that government spending will grow under this administration.

Recent Gallup data echo these concerns. That polling shows that there are deep-seated, underlying economic concerns. Eighty-three percent say they are worried that the steps Mr. Obama is taking to fix the economy may not work and the economy will get worse. Eighty-two percent say they are worried about the amount of money being added to the deficit. Seventy-eight percent are worried about inflation growing, and 69% say they are worried about the increasing role of the government in the U.S. economy.

When Gallup asked whether we should be spending more or less in the economic stimulus, by close to 3-to-1 margin voters said it is better to have spent less than to have spent more. When asked whether we are adding too much to the deficit or spending too little to improve the economy, by close to a 3-to-2 margin voters said that we are adding too much to the deficit.

Support for the stimulus package is dropping from narrow majority support to below that. There is no sense that the stimulus package itself will work quickly, and according to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, close to 60% said it would make only a marginal difference in the next two to four years. Rasmussen data shows that people now actually oppose Mr. Obama’s budget, 46% to 41%. Three-quarters take this position because it will lead to too much spending. And by 2-to-1, voters reject House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s call for a second stimulus package.

This news is simply devastating for a new administration, but as Newsweek will explain below, they really have made their own bed to sleep in. Expect Obama to ramp up his campaign machine to sell his new budget which will push Obama’s spending in the first two years of his presidency to greater than that of every administration before him combined. It is likely that this upcemong campaign to sell the budget will be just a sdeceptive as his campaign to sell the porkulus but I believe people are getting wise. Shoprtly after Obama’s speech to the nation in front of Congress he pragged about how there was no earmarks (it had tons of pork they jsut appropriated the earmark spending in a different way to it technically wasn’t an earmark) then a few days later he signed another $411 billion spending bill with almost 9,000 earmarks. While not all earmarks are bad, most are unnecessary and the earmark system invites corruption.

 

Read what Newsweek has to say carefully. Notice it is from five days ago and they saw this coming:

A Turning Tide?

Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.

  • The $787 billion stimulus, gargantuan as it was, was in fact too small and not aimed clearly enough at only immediate job-creation.
  • The $275 billion home-mortgage-refinancing plan, assembled by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, is too complex and indirect.
  • The president gave up the moral high ground on spending not so much with the “stim” but with the $400 billion supplemental spending bill, larded as it was with 9,000 earmarks.
  • The administration is throwing good money after bad in at least two cases-the sinkhole that is Citigroup (there are many healthy banks) and General Motors (they deserve what they get).
  • The failure to call for genuine sacrifice on the part of all Americans, despite the rhetorical claim that everyone would have to “give up” something.
  • A willingness to give too much leeway to Congress to handle crucial details, from the stim to the vague promise to “reform” medical care without stating what costs could be cut.
  • A 2010 budget that tries to do far too much, with way too rosy predictions on future revenues and growth of the economy. This led those who fear we are about to go over Niagara Falls to deride Obama as a paddler who’d rather redesign the canoe.
  • A treasury secretary who has been ridiculed on “Saturday Night Live” and compared to Doogie Howser, Barney Fife and Macaulay Culkin in “Home Alone”-and those are the nice ones.
  • A seeming paralysis in the face of the banking crisis: unwilling to nationalize banks, yet unable to figure out how to handle toxic assets in another way-by, say, setting up a “bad bank” catch basin.
  • A seeming reluctance to seek punishing prosecutions of the malefactors of the last 15 years-and even considering a plea bargain for Bernie Madoff, the poster thief who stole from charities and Nobel laureates and all the grandparents of Boca. Yes, prosecutors are in charge, but the president is entitled-some would say required-to demand harsh justice.
  • The president, known for his eloquence and attention to detail, seemingly unwilling or unable to patiently, carefully explain how the world works-or more important, how it failed. Using FDR’s fireside chats as a model, Obama needs to explain the banking system in laymen’s terms. An ongoing seminar would be great.
  • Obama is no socialist, but critics argue that now is not the time for costly, upfront spending on social engineering in health care, energy or education.

Other than all that, in the eyes of the big shots, he is doing fine.

 Ouch.. and that is from a source that is heavily biased towards him. Now just imagine what the elite media would be saying about President Bush if he had amassed a two month record that included this list. Would it lead the evening news, would all the talking heads on the news show be repeating the same talking points verbatim, would the message be delivered over and over and over again…. or would it just be printed in one small column in Newsweek and all but ignored afterwards?

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

THE ELITE MEDIA LOVES ‘CONSERVATIVES’, BUT ONLY WHEN THEY HATE REPUBLICANS

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

Kyle Smith has this great column in the New York Post today. It very cleverly makes the same point that we did earlier today.

WITH REPUBLICAN FRIENDS LIKE THESE …

THE MEDIA LOVES CONSERVATIVES, BUT ONLY IF THEY HATE REPUBLICANS

March 15, 2009

Dear Mainstream Media:

I’m a conservative who believes that other conservatives are fat, drug-stuffed, money-grubbing warthogs like Rush Limbaugh, or scary inbred backwoods retards like Sarah Palin.

So can I please be your go-to guy whenever you need a conservative viewpoint?

When you assemble an op-ed page or a panel discussion that has three or four liberal commentators – plus a liberal moderator (if this is TV) or a liberal news section (if this is print) – I volunteer to be the one voice you allow to speak for the loyal opposition.

I am available to write cover stories for Newsweek, hold down the other side of the New York Times op-ed seesaw against Paul Krugman and Co., or fill in whenever David Gergen is unavailable to supply analysis of President Obama’s next magnifiquent speech for CNN.

I promise that the only conservatives I will ever praise will be safely dead (Churchill, Reagan, or, if this is PBS, Edmund Burke).

Sample phrases with which I plan to begin my columns:

“As a conservative, I am deeply troubled by the comments of (name of conservative), who just this week said (conservative things).”

Or try this one: “I’m a conservative, but nationalization is starting to look like the only viable option. I don’t mean just banks. It’s time for FedEx to be taken over by the postal service.”

Or: “It breaks my heart to see what my party has become – jingoistic, hysterical, intolerant. Also, Ann Coulter should be gagged with my sweaty undershorts.”

David Brooks and David Frum get it. The Republican Party is a fossil in pleated khakis and penny loafers. As Meghan McCain said: It’s unhip. It is to Washington what Donny Osmond is to the Billboard charts. It has won but seven of the last 11 presidential elections and only six of the last eight Congressional elections.

All that remains of the Griping Old Party is a tattered remnant, an embittered rump faction of 46%. I have devised a simple one-step solution to reversing our losing position in the last election: Move to the side that won.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Limbaugh | 1 Comment »

Corrupt PMA Group Has Over 1/4th of the House on Their Payroll

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

For the list of who is taking money form PMA group, and the earmarks they have gotten for PMA clients, and PMA’s client list follow the link

Associated Content.com:

Rod Blagojevich may have been taken down for alleged “Pay to Play,” but how far away were his actions from, as he asserted, “Politics as Usual”?

The PMA Group, one of Washington D.C.’s biggest and most influential lobbyist firms, has ties to more than one-fourth of the House of Representatives, members who appropriated $300 Million for the firm in the fiscal year 2008 Defense Spending Bill alone.

The eye of the storm is centered on the relationship between Rep. John Murtha and his former aide on the House Appropriates Committee, Paul Magliocchetti, who went on to found PMA in 1989.

SInce 1989 the PMA Group has established itself as a force on Capitol Hill, lobbying for 131 different companies and organizations ranging in everything from defense contractors to municipalities and universities. In 2007, when the $300 Million in one bill (PL 110-116) took place, PMA Group earned $16,470,132 in lobbying income.

The PMA Group was raided in November by the FBI as they investigate allegations of fraud and bribery, including reimbursing employees for campaign contributions made to congressional members who supported PMA Group interests. Since then the PMA Group has announced that they will be shutting down operations by the end of March, 2009.

While lobbying efforts by PMA Group were bi-partisan, one common feature of their highest donated to congressional members were their Membership in the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, including all five of their top contributed-to lawmakers.

Senator Tom Coburn introduced an amendment into Senate debate today barring any earmarks from going to current or former PMA Group clients, of which there is an estimated $10 million of more in the current Omnibus Spending Bill (HR 1105), which is in debate. The $410 Billion spending bill is a collection of all departmental spending and appropriations for the remained of Fiscal Year 2009, which has been operating under a Continuing Resolution that runs out March 6, 2009.

The Coburn Amendment was defeated 38-57.

 

Posted in Blagojevich, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Republicans who sold out.

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

Our friend Debbie Buckley, who is an IUSB alumni by the way, would like to remind you who in the GOP voted for that shameful $411 Billion earmark bill. This was very large and very bad spending bill that was designed to bloat government that had already been bloated by the previous porkulus.

This bill had very few good things in it and as we mentioned before, this bill contained what can only be described as a dispicable and racist provision to undermine the education of inner city minorities in Washington DC. Anyone who voted for this bill could be labaled as a racist. We know that Democrats are happy to continue its long record of keeping inner city minorities down, when Republicans do it such behavior should not be tolerated; we are the party of Lincoln and need to bahave that way. Evan Bayh made a big deal of voting against this bill, but he voted to preserve that racist provision when Republicans tried to have it stripped from the bill.

Debbie Buckley: 

Republicans who voted Yes for Earmark Bill

Alabama
Shelby (R) Yes
Alaska
Murkowski (R) Yes
Maine
Snowe (R) Yes
Mississippi
Cochran (R) Yes
Wicker (R) Yes
Missouri
Bond (R) Yes
Pennsylvania
Specter (R) Yes
Tennessee
Alexander (R) Yes

Posted in Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

David Frum is having delusions of grandeur

Posted by iusbvision on March 15, 2009

David Frum is one of the leftist elite media’s favorite Republicans. Why? Because they they can always count on him to launch personal attacks against other Republicans in the Reagan wing of the party.  He attacks Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin and others and much like the elite media left, his attacks are often generated from elitism, ignorance of the nuance of some issues and in some cases classism.

David Frum, for now, is basking in the glory of all of the attention he has gotten by behaving this way. The elite media used to shine its spotlight on John McCain and presented him as “the only Republican anyone who enjoys the elite media should listen to” and usually only when he is attacking the largest wing of the party; which by the way, includes Reagan Democrats when the GOP actually decides it is going to govern as they promise they will.

Of course when McCain challenged The One, the spotlight and glowing accolades came to a screeching halt after the elite media’s favorite Republican won the primary. Within hours the New York Times falsely accused John McCain of having an affair with a 40 year old lobbyist and stopped printing his oped letters. The elite media who John McCain had once called “his base” was now out to destroy him.

The result of Frum’s sophistry has been to get some attention from those who want to bash Republicans and claim the moral high road by declaring themselves as “moderates” and to get some temporary attention from Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh who have some fun poking at Frum. Of course, Frum lacks the introspective to ask himself, if he is so moderate why is it that the Reagan wing of the party, when they govern like the Reagan wing, is so effective at attracting cross pressured voters like the Reagan Democrats and why is it that (as clever youtubers have proved) Barack Obama burrowed much of  his rhetoric from Ronald Reagan?

Frum posted on his web site an article thanking all of his new readers who have come to his web site, as if they are really there to consume the product of his great intellect…..

A NOTE TO READERS – AND ESPECIALLY TO COMMENTERS

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:36 AM

It’s been an exciting week here at NewMajority. It was just Feb. 27 that Rush Limbaugh declared in his speech at CPAC that would-be Republican reformers must be stamped out. Since then, we’ve had some exciting exchanges with Rush and his many, many admirers, supporters and dependents. The issues at stake could not be more important. Shall conservatives and Republicans subside into a movement of cultural protest? Or shall we restore ourselves as a grand national governing coalition?

This discussion has now reached close to 300,000 unique visitors here at NewMajority. We’re very excited by the continuing improvement in our various wonky web metrics: average duration of a visit to the site, number of pages read, that kind of thing. Above all, we are all of us here at NM gratified by our array of new writers and valued independent commenters.

 http://www.newmajority.com/ShowScroll.aspx?ID=9b0b8a53-9863-4d81-942d-614a6e034627

Most of the critical comments have been routinely cleansed from the page, even ones that weren’t nasty. Of course the far left went in there and had a ball as well and most of that was removed. One comment was left behind that demonstrated my point exactly.

Frum, my #1 suggestion for improvement is to avoid personally attacking other Republicans in your articles. Constructive criticism of one’s policies or viewpoints are fine…personal attacks will not bring about a NewMajority.

It is likely that David Frum will see this post eventually. David, you will only be in the spotlight as long as you continue to act as John McCain once did before he was mugged into a hard learned lesson. The time may come when you oppose The One, or the elite media on a matter of substance with some effectiveness. When/if that time comes you will go from being spotlighted to ignored, and if you are too effectivethey will try and destroy you too (you will notice that Barney Frank did not get the Jon Stewart treatment and Jim Cramer did). Right now the elite media is moving its “favorite and officially endorsed Republican spotlight” form you to Meghan McCain because she is a whole lot prettier than you and she is willing to make baseless accusations of anti-semitism against people, but all is not lost maybe if you say something like “Ann Coulter hates all Hispanics” or something you can get some of the spotlight back.

UPDATE – Awesome update in this story HERE.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship | 1 Comment »

Gov. Granholm Trying to Raise Taxes Again. Will She Ever learn?

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

Undeniable fact of life: capital goes where it is treated well.

Tax this tax that, raise taxes more more more has been the governing philosophy of Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and when it started to put the breaks on economic growth and capital started leaving the state the answer was to raise even more taxes and put a new tax on business to pay for commercials to ask business to come to Michigan….. ya I know …….and they are baffled as to why it doesn’t work.

Why is it that so many on the far left continue to believe that they can tax us all into prosperity? Anyone can see that since former Governor Engler has left office Michigan has been run into the ground. Michigan was in recession when the rest of the country was still experiencing growth. This brings us to Quinn’s Law of Leftism # 10 “Leftists never think what they are doing is wrong, they only think they haven’t done enough of it yet or it is underfunded.”

While you read ahead keep in mind that unemployment is Michigan is more severe than in most states.

So what is the latest?

Granholm Supports Raising Gas Tax

Wednesday, 04 Mar 2009

By KATHY BARKS HOFFMAN
The Associated Press

LANSING, Mich. (AP) – Noting that state roads are “the pits,” Gov. Jennifer Granholm said Wednesday that she supports changing the state gasoline tax to raise more money as gas prices rise.

Granholm told reporters that the state’s current 19-cent-per-gallon tax doesn’t raise enough money to repair Michigan’s aging roads.

“The roads are the pits. We have no long-term funding source to make sure the roads are smooth,” she said.

The Transportation Funding Task Force that Granholm appointed last year has suggested converting the per-gallon gasoline tax to a tax on the wholesale price of gas and raising vehicle registration fees. Granholm said Wednesday she supports both.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/Granholm_Supports_Raising_Gas_Tax

More More More!!!

LANSING — It could cost more to smoke cigars, visit state parks and make international phone calls starting Oct. 1 under Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s budget proposal.

But don’t worry yet. It’s unlikely most of the tax and fee increases will become law this year.

Past attempts to end tax breaks for international calls and tractor-trailer sales, for example, died after hitting tough resistance in the Legislature.

So did the governor’s 2007 proposal to double the tax on cigars, snuff and tobacco used to roll your own cigarettes.

That didn’t stop her from floating the idea again this year or from trying once again to double liquor license fees. But the Democratic governor probably shouldn’t hold her breath waiting for a different result.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, opposes tax and fee hikes to help balance the budget. Since Republicans control the Senate, he’s positioned to kill most of her ideas.

 “I don’t know why they’ve been proposed,” he said. “I have not seen one that makes any sense.”

 

http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/article/20090225/NEWS01/302250014

Senator Cameron Brown has a different idea:

The average vehicle registration fee nationally is $61. Many states – such as Louisiana ($18), Arizona ($15), and Virginia ($9)- are substantially below this average. The average Michigander, meanwhile, pays $101. Michigan residents pay the sixth highest vehicle registration fees in the country. Neighboring states such as Ohio ($54), Indiana ($42) and Wisconsin ($73) all charge less than Michigan does on average.

Before Michigan jumps to the top of the list for vehicle registration costs, perhaps we should explore real reform of our transporation system. Money saved administratively and through competitive bidding is money that can be put into repairs. The Mackinac Center has proposed some common sense reforms that will result in significant savings, including:

- Making changes in state trunk line maintenance, including requiring state work in each county to be competitively bid.

- Consistently requiring design and build warranties so contractors are responsible for keeping roads in the desired condition.

- Increasing the use of scorecards to measure performance by state and local units of government against transportation standards.

- Improving the state’s control over the type, length and cost of environmental impact statement studies, which would reduce regulatory red tape in the road building process.

http://senatorcameronbrown.blogspot.com/2009/01/raise-vehicle-registration-fees-to-pay.html

Posted in Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Government Gone Wild | 1 Comment »

Scandal: High school faculty changes grades to get students in colleges

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

WCBS-TV:

Grade-Fixing Scandal Rocks N.J. High School

Fort Lee High Principal, Guidance Counselors May Be Behind Scheme To Get Students Into Competitive Colleges

A New Jersey principal was suspended and guidance counselors were put on the hot seat over a grade-fixing scandal at Fort Lee High School. The school district’s superintendent confirmed to CBS 2 HD that grades were changed and transcripts tainted, all without the knowledge of students, parents and teachers.

The deception appears to go back at least six years and was the focus of an emergency meeting of the school board on Wednesday night. Hardest hit by the scandal are Fort Lee Highs most academically gifted students.

As few as 10 of them had their grades improved or bad grades deleted. Stephanie Kim, an honors student at Fort Lee High, was at the meeting with her parents. She has applications pending at 10 top notch universities.

“My biggest fear is not getting into college,” Kim said. “Truthfully, just the fact that this happened in the administration and students didnt even know about it.”

The cheating was discovered by the school’s new director of guidance, who told Superintendent Raymond Bandlow about it on Tuesday. Bandlow suspended Fort Lee High School Principal Jay Berman, although his role in the scandal was not made clear.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Indiana Congressman’s Ties to Currupt Lobby Firm Run Deep

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

Pay to play and worse…..

Chicago Tribune:

WASHINGTON – He represents an area known for its rampant corruption, but Rep. Pete Visclosky has always had a reputation for staying above the fray.

That consensus is being challenged by revelations about the northwest Indiana Democrat’s ties to a troubled defense lobbying firm.

PMA Group was once one of the biggest lobbying firms in Washington, specializing in securing defense earmarks for its clients. Now, the firm is disintegrating amid a federal investigation into allegations that its founder, Paul Magliochetti, a former top aide to Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., steered donations to lawmakers through sham donors.

PMA Group’s top beneficiaries include Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds defense programs, and Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., who also sits on the defense appropriations subcommittee.

But few lawmakers have stronger ties to the firm than Visclosky. His former congressional chief of staff worked as a lobbyist for the firm, and he received at least $100,000 in contributions from donors tied to PMA Group between 2006 and 2008, according to Federal Election Commission reports. PMA Group was the top donor to Visclosky’s 2008 re-election campaign.

From his seat on the House Appropriations Committee and its defense funding subcommittee, Visclosky has also reciprocated – helping to secure more than $23 million in earmarks in 2008 for clients of PMA Group.

“It’s pretty clear that Visclosky has deep ties to PMA Group,” said Sheila Krumholz, executive president of the Center for Responsive Politics.

“It’s also clear that (campaign funds) are being delivered to him on a targeted basis, based on his committee assignments. He’s been in a position to help them from his perch,” she said.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Numbers on Homelessness Artificially Inflated

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

This is how these groups and the government scare you into accepting more taxes and central control.

Fox News:

What’s In a Number? That Depends on How You Define ‘Homeless’

Friday, March 13, 2009
By Joshua Rhett Miller

A well publicized report this week that an estimated 1.5 million American children experienced homelessness in 2005-06 did not use the federal definition of homelessness. Instead, it used a different definition that grossly inflated the actual number.

The report — released Tuesday by the National Center on Family Homelessness and reported by numerous news organizations, including FOXNews.com — estimated that one out of every 50 children in America experienced “homelessness” during that two-year span.

But rather than using the definition of homelessness established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Massachusetts-based organization used a standard adopted by the Department of Education that includes children who are “doubled up,” or children who share housing with other persons due to economic hardship or similar reason.

 

The difference? About 1,170,000 children.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Illinois Income Tax May Jump 50 Percent

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

Great idea guys, tax the wealth so much that even more of if leaves the state. Blago said that part of his impeachment was because he refused to raise income taxes. Could it be there is some truth to that?

CBS 2 Chicago

Mar 13, 2009 1:44 pm US/Central

Illinois Income Tax May Jump 50 Percent

Gov. Pat Quinn Says Tax Hike Is Needed To Fight Deficit

Gov. Pat Quinn confirmed Friday that he plans to raise taxes on some Illinois residents to combat deficits in a difficult state budget, and called for broader tax reform.

Quinn said Friday that he plans to hike taxes for families that make more than $56,000 a year.

But Quinn contends his income tax proposal would amount to a tax cut for millions of Illinoisans by increasing the personal exemption to let them shield more income from being taxed.

“It’s very important that we raise taxes in a fair way for the people of Illinois in order to pay for important core priorities – whether it be safety, health, education, transportation, and so on,” Quinn said at a news conference at the James R. Thompson Center Friday.

He did not say exactly how much taxes would go up, but the Chicago Tribune reported Friday that he was looking for a hike of 50 percent, from a rate of from 3 percent to 4.5 percent.

Posted in Blagojevich, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes | Leave a Comment »

Steven Crowder on Planned Parenthood

Posted by iusbvision on March 14, 2009

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

Democrats move to tax health benefits – Flashback Obama, “If McCain is elected your health benefits will be taxed for the first time in history.”

Posted by iusbvision on March 13, 2009

Remember this from the campaign? USA Today:

McCain’s health plan was distorted, in turn, by Obama.

“Your health care benefits will get taxed for the first time in history,” Obama warned voters in attacking it. He often leads voters to think that’s the full story. Hardly.

Today:

Workers’ Health Benefits Eyed for Taxation
Revenue Would Fund Expansion of Coverage

By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 12, 2009; Page D01

With President Obama’s plan to tax the rich to pay for health care facing deep skepticism on Capitol Hill, key lawmakers are pressing a different way to raise money: taxing the health benefits workers receive from their employers.

Since companies began offering group health insurance on a large scale during World War II, the value of that benefit has never been counted as income, reducing workers’ taxable earnings by an average of $9,000 a year for family coverage.

In recent weeks, however, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, has repeatedly advocated changing tax laws to include employer benefits, arguing that it makes sense to fund the health-care changes by sucking cash out of the existing system. Meanwhile, 13 other senators — from both sides of the aisle — have signed on to a plan for universal coverage that includes a tax on employer-provided benefits.

UPDATE – The obligitory Sunday morning talk show non-denial denial. 

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

ABC’s Jake Tapper Not Giving the Full Story on Alaska Earmarks – Update Tapper lied.

Posted by iusbvision on March 13, 2009

Jake Tapper had this to say this morning (its ok Jake I know its early and you haven’t had your coffee yet ;-) :

Palin’s Back to Lovin’ Her Some Earmarks

March 12, 2009 9:55 PM

Not only are earmarks a bipartisan affliction, but the double-talk and hypocrisy surrounding them are as well.

After spending sigificant (SIC) time and airspace bashing the earmark process as the running mate of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin requested an unspecified number of earmarks in the omnibus spending bill, Jonathan Stein and David Corn report at Mother Jones.

One hundred earmarks worth $144 million are headed for Alaska, Taxpayers for Common Sense says. That works out to $209.71 per state resident — more money, per capita, than any other state.

“We have drastically, drastically reduced our earmark request since I came into office,” Palin told ABC News’ Charles Gibson last year after he pointed out that Alaska received $231 per person in earmarks in 2008.

“The abuse of earmarks, it’s un-American, it’s undemocratic, and it’s not going to be accepted in a McCain-Palin administration,” she said. “Earmark abuse will stop.”

Hey Jake, here is the Alaska Daily News Sept. 8, 2008:

For the 2007 federal budget year, the administration of former Gov. Frank Murkowski submitted 63 earmark requests totaling $350 million, Palin’s staff said. That slid to 52 earmarks valued at $256 million in Palin’s first year. This year, the governor’s office asked the delegation to help them land 31 earmarks valued at $197 million. http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/516743.html

And this year according to what you have there $144 million this year. Another reduction. I have seen Governor Palin say that she wanted to lower the amount of earmark requests to avoid abuse. It seems like she is weening the state off of them. Looks like promise made promise kept. [This is 4 years in a row where earmarks dropped.]

Chuck Norton, Editor

UPDATE -

The Governor’s press release on this issue is HERE.

Jake Tapper knew he was being deceptive in today’s Palin reporting. This is another example of how the media lies and creates false and misleading narratives. They give you some of the facts and present them with a false spin or attitude, in this case to try and make Gov. Palin out to be a liar when in fact she has always been consistent on this issue and 10 minutes worth of fact checking would have given him the truth. I used to think that Jake Tapper was different, now we know he is just another lying member of the drive by media. If Jake Tapper had a residue of integrity when shown the truth he would have retracted and apologized and not posted this immature comment. Tapper is ABC’s White House correspondednt and there is no excuse for this.

If Gov. Palin runs for office again, reporters who lie to us in order to destroy her need to be treated as if they are a political opponent. There are ways to do this effectively.

Here is what happened this morning.

Jake tapper put out a tweet this morning saying that “Forgot to mention palin back to pro-earmark”

So I sent him a tweet back saying:

As you can see the number of earmarks used by Alaska has dropped four years in a row. Literally this is a Palin promise made and a Palin promise kept.

So Jake Tapper is reporting this evening:

Palin v. Political Punch

March 13, 2009 6:43 PM

A very irate aide to Gov. Sarah Palin contacted ABC News today to explain why his boss’s 31 requests for earmarks in the fiscal year 2009 budget, totaling $197 million, represent a victory for fiscally conservative values.

“I am disturbed by this item,” wrote Bill McAllister, director of communications for Gov. Palin, referencing a blog entry from last night in which we referred to an article in the liberal magazine Mother Jones noting that Palin — after what seemed like a campaign against earmark abuse — was back at the proverbial trough.

“The headline doesn’t seem very dignified for a major news organization,” said the spokesman for the governor who repeatedly referred to then-Senator, now-President Obama as “palling around with terrorists.” He also quibbled with our referencing Mother Jones. (We also reference conservative publications here. But anyway.)

“Let’s start with the overwhelming mischaracterization of Gov. Palin’s stance on earmarks that has been repeated and repeated since Aug. 29,” McAllister wrote. “The governor never said that earmarks should be abolished or that the State of Alaska wouldn’t seek or accept any. Didn’t happen. What she said well before she was a national candidate (going back at least to October of 2007) was that earmark reform was necessary and the state would need to rely less on federal money than it had been.”

McAllister then pointed out that Palin made 51 earmark requests for the FY 2008 budget, totaling $256 million; and 31 requests totaling $197 million, for the FY 2009 budget.

McAllister said that for next year’s budget, Gov. Palin will only make eight requests, totaling $69 million, which will include “six ongoing federal appropriations and just two new projects: an upgrade at the Kodiak Missile Defense Facility, which is relevant to national security, and a bridge replacement critical to construction of the pending Alaska natural gas pipeline, also in the national interest.”

Than Tapper posted this smart ass comment:

Alarmed, I asked McAllister how Palin was “literally” injured. Was she okay? Was she infirm?

“I didn’t say physically injured,” he wrote back. “Certainly her reputation was injured by the erroneous reporting.”

Ah.

Update II - Hotair.com comments HERE.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Jake Tapper, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

An Open Letter to Meghan McCain

Posted by iusbvision on March 13, 2009

Dear Meghan,

I have been watching what you have been saying over the last few days and while I think that you are a nice girl, It has become clear \ that you are a nice girl who has been making some mistakes.

To quote you:

I straight up don’t understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time. But no matter how much you or I disagree with her, the cult that follows Coulter cannot be denied.

With all due respect, when you do not understand someone or something would it not be wise to take the time to find out instead of just making allegations that just happened to look very much like the nonsense you see in the leftist elite media? Instead of taking the time to get informed you decided to trash Ann Coulter (and the people who read her books) based on the ignorance which you fully admitted to.

I am very concerned that you have leveled an ugly charge of anti-semitism against Ann Coulter when ten minutes of fact checking shows you to be demonstrably false. Lets toss aside the fact that Ann has always been a supporter of Israel and examine what Ann said, essentially that Christians believe that Christianity is the perfection of Judaism. The truth is that this is long ago established Christian doctrine and here is the proof:

The Catholic Encyclopedia from its entry on the New Testament:

Other doctrines, specifically Christian, are not added on to Judaism to develop, but rather to supersede it. In reality, between the New and Old Testaments there is a direct but not revolutionary succession as a superficial observer might be inclined to believe; just as in living beings, the imperfect state of yesterday must give way before the perfection of today although the one has normally prepared the other. If the mystery of the Trinity and the spiritual character of the Messianic Kingdom are ranked among the peculiarly Christian dogmas, it is because the Old Testament was of itself insufficient to establish the doctrine of the New Testament on this subject; and still more because, at the time of Jesus, the opinions current among the Jews went decidedly in the opposite direction.

The Oxford University Guide To the New Testament makes this same point in Paul’s letter to the Hebrews:

The Epistle to the Hebrews asserts the superiority of Christ to the prophets, the angels, Moses, Joshua, and the Jewish priesthood. Christ brings a superior covenant, a superior tabernacle, and makes a superior sacrifice. Like many other authors whose task is Christian self-definition, this author uses the Hebrew Scriptures to illustrate the authenticity of his claims. For example, several Old Testament prophets mention a new covenant that God will make with the Jews. Drawing on Platonic thought, this author argues that the old covenant was a foreshadowing of the new, an imperfect reflection of a perfect reality.

Scholars do not know when or where this book was written. It is clear, though, that the author was concerned to define group boundaries. He argued that Christianity represented the perfection of Judaism. Christianity was the religion foretold by the prophets. Those who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah, moreover, were not the true people of God.

With all due respect, if that doesn’t satisfy you here are what some prominent Rabbi’s had to say about Coulter’s remarks:

Rabbi Levin, a spokesman for the Rabbinical Alliance for America and the Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada, commented to LifeSiteNews.com on the matter saying: “It is a fact that millions of Christians believe in evangelizing and preaching the gospel and it is their belief for a Jew to accept the tenets of Christianity and accept the divinity somehow completes them and brings them to perfection.”

Levin stressed, “That’s obviously not our belief; that’s not the traditional Jewish belief at all.”

“But the fact that Miss Coulter was asked to try to say that this is now anti-semitism, I believe is off the mark, is even sad and dangerous in certain ways,” continued Rabbi Levin. “Because I’m concerned that many Christians out there will hear her merely saying what they have been taught in their religion and having that referred to as anti-semitism could put a strain on relations. People will say, ‘I’m not entitled to have my religious opinions on the subject of evangelizing and what’s considered to be perfect’.”

The spokesman for some thousand orthodox rabbis concluded, “So, I very strongly feel it’s important to say that saying things like this does not an anti-Semite make.”

http://catholicexchange.com/2007/10/16/86631/

One of the most revered and respected rabbi’s among conservatives is Dennis Prager. Prager insists that there is not an anti-semitic bone in Ann Coulter. Read his words carefully:

Those who label Ann Coulter an anti-Semite do damage to the battle against anti-Semitism.

I say this as a committed Jew, a religious Jew, a Jewish writer and lecturer, a past college instructor in Jewish history, co-author of a widely read book on anti-Semitism, recipient of the American Jewish Press Association’s Prize for Excellence in Jewish Commentary, instructor in Torah at the American Jewish University, and a man who has fought anti-Semitism all his life.

There is nothing in what Ann Coulter said to a Jewish interviewer on CNBC that indicates she hates Jews or wishes them ill, or does damage to the Jewish people or the Jewish state. And if none of those criteria is present, how can someone be labeled anti-Semitic?

What damage has she ever done to Jews? What is wrong with a person believing that it would be better if another person adopted their faith? Is there one liberal who doesn’t believe that a conservative would be better — “perfected,” if you will — by embracing liberal beliefs and values? Why is it laudable for a liberal to hope that conservatives convert to liberalism, but dangerous and hate-filled when a Christian hopes that Jews or anyone else will go to heaven (that is, after all, Ann Coulter’s and most other Christians’ primary concern) by believing in Jesus?

I have read Jewish and non-Jewish writers who argue that Ann Coulter’s words will lead to another Auschwitz. How does one respond to irrationality? How does one respond to hysteria?

There is also a move to boycott Ann Coulter, so dangerous are her words. Of course, there is no such Jewish or liberal boycott of former President Jimmy Carter, who has done real damage to the Jewish people by describing Israel as an “apartheid” state in the very title of his anti-Israel book. In fact, Carter was invited to speak on his loathsome book at Brandeis University, an ostensibly Jewish university. But for many Jews and liberals, real hatred, real damage to Jewish security can only come from the right, especially from Christians on the right. So Ann Coulter, who has done nothing in her life to compromise Jewish welfare, is to be boycotted, but Jimmy Carter is worthy of invitations to speak. Jewish groups even invite John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, the authors of “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” which is essentially a tempered modern-day version of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” But Ann Coulter is beyond the pale. And she said nothing to harm Jews.

She said she believes that Jews who accept Jesus as their savior are “perfected.” I fail to see why this is some form of hate-speech, let alone the basis of anti-Semitism, as stated by Abe Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, which often defames conservative Christians, whom he and his organization hold to be the greatest domestic threats to America.

As a practicing Jew, I do not agree with Ann Coulter’s theology any more than those attacking her do. But I am neither offended by her nor frightened by her or her beliefs. She believes that Christianity is better than Judaism. So what? Why is that in any way different from liberals thinking that liberalism is truer and morally superior to conservatism? Or conservatives thinking that their values are superior to liberal values?

Liberals not only believe that conservatives are philosophically imperfect, but they often believe that conservatives are bad human beings (something in no way implied by Coulter about Jews). 

http://townhall.com/Columnists/DennisPrager/2007/10/16/ann_coulter_wants_jews_to_become_christian_–_so_what

Prager is stating what is obvious; Muslims believe people should me Muslim, Jews believe people should convert and Christians believe people should accept Jesus Christ and His teachings. With all due respect, you have shown a great deal of ignorance by acting like one should be surprised by such a concept. As a result, by calling Coulter an anti-semite you have helped create a false narrative that Reagan wing conservatives such as Coulter are against Israel, when in fact most hostility against Israel is from the left and most of the support for Israel comes from the right.

I have experienced this truth first hand because as someone who is finishing a new degree at a university, I have taken heat from the left for standing up against anti-semitism among some of the far left faculty.

You have stated that you do not understand Ann Coulter or why she does what she does and then proceeded to call her names and this had made you popular on the morning TV shows. Smearing someone to get the approval of the Andrea Mitchell’s of the world is a sign of bad character.

Again with all due respect, I would like to help you understand.

Ann Coulter is a political satirist and likely the sharpest tongued satirist alive. Satirists use metaphor, humor, use absurdity to demonstrate absurdity, and use rhetorical sting as literary devices to make a point. The whole idea is that the person reading the satire is supposed to be smart enough to see the intellectual substance behind the satire.

Satire is a literary tradition in politics dating back to the ancient Greeks and truth be told; Coulter’s satire is positively mild compared to what was done in this country in the first 150 years of its history and considered to come with the territory of politics. Face it, political discourse gets mighty dry by always couching it in straight laced policy debates.

The millions of people who read Ann Coulter are not a part of a “cult” as you put it. They are very smart people who appreciate effective satire. Ann Coulter has a stack of number one best sellers on her resume for that very reason.

Before I conclude there is something else that you need to understand.

The elite media can and will be happy to use you, manipulate you, and kiss up to you as long as you are bashing other Republicans and calling them names, but you should keep in mind that Ann Coulter is a part of the very large Reagan wing of the party and even if you do not consider yourself a part of the Reagan wing; on the majority of individual policy issues you, me, your father, Rudy Giuliani, Ann Coulter and most of those people who attended CPAC by and large do agree. So when you call Ann Coulter names, that allows the far left and the elite media to take any policy position taken by her and portray it as extreme even if it happens to be a policy issue that you and her agree on and why???……because Meghan McCain said so.

Always remember that your father was the elite media’s favorite Republican. They wanted him on whenever he had a fight with members of his own party. When your father took a stand against Barack Obama look at what the New York Times did; they accused your father of having an affair with a 40 year old lobbyist and stopped printing his op-ed letters. The rest of the elite media launched unfair attacks against him, they attacked your mother, and look at what the lies and smears they did to Sarah Palin.

Two months later it is now clear that your father was right about Barack Obama on many things. Where is the elite media begging to have him on now…. no wait, they can have his daughter on because she is bashing Republicans and smearing them with ugly charges of anti-semitism.  

The elite media will be happy to use you and manipulate you for this purpose for now, but the time will come when you take a stand based on a conservative principle in opposition to an elite media favorite like Obama and when that happens the elite media will stop being interested in your opinion and they will use any excuse to smear and destroy you. If you don’t think that these elite media people who are showing you so much attention would do that to a young woman, just ask Bristol Palin.

And when you are done talking with her ask Clearence Thomas, Robert Bork and Miguel Estrada what it is like to have every manufactured, politically motivated, far left allegation against you presented as fact.

With all due respect, you should apologize to Ann Coulter and be grateful she has (so far) decided to show restraint and not turn her sharp tongue on you. It may make you less popular with the Today Show, but it is the honorable thing to do.

Chuck Norton, Editor

UPDATE – You can see video of one of Meghan’s elite media appearances at Hotair.com.

UPDATE II – Tammy Bruce has comments on this issue HERE.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | 5 Comments »

AWESOME VIDEO: Steven Crowder on US “Torture” of Detainees

Posted by iusbvision on March 13, 2009

Posted in Alarmism, Chuck Norton | 2 Comments »

The First of the Obama Political Persecutions Begin

Posted by iusbvision on March 13, 2009

Sheriff Joe Arpaio is the victim. What is his “crime”? He enforces state and federal immigration laws and the far left doesn’t like it. Former Arizona Governor Napolitano doesn’t like it either and now she is the Homeland Security Secretary.

Attorney General Eric Holder showed us the kind of man he was when he worked to have former terrorists pardoned and have the greatest tax evader of all time pardoned while he was still a fugitive from justice all while his ex-wife was giving large donations to the Clinton Library.

Instead of dealing with a border that is out of control with Mexican drug gangs, they are doing this. These kinds of actions are what banana republics are made of.

CNS News:

Justice Dept. Investigates Arizona Sheriff for Enforcing Immigration Law
Thursday, March 12, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office in Arizona following requests by congressional Democrats and allegations by liberal activists that the department has violated the civil rights of illegal aliens.

Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), and Robert Scott (D-Va.) requested the investigation, and activists groups such as National Day Laborer Organizer Network and ACORN launched petition drives and rallies in support of the probe.

The investigation focuses on Sheriff Joe Arpaio and dozens of officers under his command who were trained through the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ACCESS), which partners federal and local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws. (The Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement division is known popularly as ICE.)

In a letter dated March 10, 2009, Loretta Smith, acting assistant attorney general at the DOJ, detailed what her department would be investigating:

“This is to inform you that the United States Department of Justice is commencing an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (”MCSO”) pursuant to the pattern or practice provisions of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994,42 U.S.C. §14141 (“Section 14141″) and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,42 U.S.C. § 3789d (“Safe Streets Act”), and pursuant to the prohibitions against national origin discrimination in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7 (“Title Yr’) and the Safe Streets Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c).”  
 
The letter continues:  ”The investigation will focus on alleged patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures conducted by the MCSO, and on allegations of national origin discrimination, including failure to provide meaningful access to MCSO services for limited English proficient (LEP) individuals.”

“In conducting the investigation, we will seek to determine whether there are violations of the above laws by the MCSO,” the letter says.

Sheriff Arpaio’s efforts to enforce immigration laws have been the focus of previous criticism, but Arpaio has defended his department and the results his ICE-trained officers have netted.
 
Concerning the DOJ’s investigation, Arpaio told CNSNews.com:  “I will not back down. What I am doing is upholding the laws of the state of Arizona, and I will not be persuaded to turn my back on my oath of office as sheriff of this county.”

In an August 2008 press release, Arpaio’s office detailed those results.

“While the Sheriff’s illegal immigration and human smuggling operations conducted on the streets and roadways here have netted nearly 2,300 arrests, another very successful effort to locate illegal aliens has been quietly happening inside Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s jails,” the release said.

It continues: “Despite the growing criticism of the Sheriff’s illegal immigration fight by some valley politicians and activists, Sheriff Arpaio says 60 detention officers trained by ICE officials have conducted over 106,000 interviews and investigations of inmates booked into jail since April of 2007.

“In those 18 months, 16,000 inmates were determined to be illegal aliens. Either they have already been deported or will be deported after being tried and/or serving their sentences for crimes committed in the valley. The work being done be Arpaio’s detention staff is a likely contributor to the recent reduction in crime in the valley,” the press release added..

“That number of 16,000 represents a full one-third (1/3) of all inmates in the United States who have had holds placed on them after being identified by jail or prison officials as illegal aliens.”

The press release goes on to say that 20 percent of inmates in the Maricopa County Jail are illegal aliens and that of those, 2,000 illegal aliens – 70 percent – were arrested for felony crimes

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers