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 May, 2011

STONED TO DEATH…

Posted by iusbvision on May 31, 2011

…by those professing “the religion of peace”.

 

UK Daily Mail

A teenage Muslim girl was stoned to death under ‘Sharia law’ after taking part in a beauty contest in Ukraine.

Katya Koren, 19, was found dead in a village in the Crimea region near her home.

Her battered body was buried in a forest and was found a week after she disappeared.

Police have opened a murder investigation and are looking into claims that three Muslim youths killed her, claiming her death was justified under Islam.

One of the three – named as 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev – is under arrest and told police that Katya had ‘violated the laws of Sharia’. Gaziev has said he has no regrets about her death.

Related:

Video at Socialist Conference: Work with Hezbollah and other jihadists to oppose the US, Britain, Israel…

These Girls from Texas Were Shot Dead by Their Father for Not Dating Muslim Boys

 

Buffalo Man Starts TV Network to Show Muslims in a Positive Light Beheads Wife in Honor Killing – National Media Mum

Elite Media Mum on Honor Killings, NBC Gave Killer a Positive Puff Piece

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Swiss ban on minarets was a vote for tolerance and inclusion

 

Christian convert from Ohio faces honor killing from father

 

Swiss ban on minarets was a vote for tolerance and inclusion

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

Video at Socialist Conference: Work with Hezbollah and other jihadists to oppose the US, Britain, Israel…

Posted by iusbvision on May 31, 2011

We have seen leftist groups coordinate with the Muslim Brotherhood backed Muslim Students Association on campus. David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes, and Robert Spencer have been talking about it for years. Glenn Beck has also highlighted this issue on his program. Leftist groups in coordination with MSA have joined forces to disrupt campus speeches made by traditionalists, Israeli’s, Republicans etc.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Israel, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

David Horowitz at UCLA – Palestinian Wall of Lies

Posted by iusbvision on May 31, 2011

Wall of Lies:

Horowitz at UCLA: 

Part 2 

David Horowitz Q&A:

 

 

 

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

Top 11 reasons to blame Democrats for soaring gasoline prices

Posted by iusbvision on May 30, 2011

<# 11 Via American Thinker
In June of 2008, Congressman Roy Blunt released the following information about how the House members voted on energy issues. During this time Democrats were the majority party in both the House and Senate.

ANWR Exploration:
House Republicans: 91% Supported
House Democrats:   86% Opposed

Coal-to-Liquid:
House Republicans 97% Supported
House Democrats:  78% Opposed

Oil Shale Exploration:
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats:   86% Opposed

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration:
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats:    83% Opposed

Refinery-Increased Capacity:
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats:    96% Opposed

Summary:

91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas, while 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.

In 2009, the United States still imported 51% of all its petroleum requirements, both crude and refined. This continues to be an unacceptably high number in our quest for energy independence. Gas prices remain hostage to the increasing hostile regimes that sell us oil. Our own Department of Energy has proudly halted off shore drilling. With the political unrest in so many oil producing nations, and the long-term obstruction of Democrats to domestic oil exploration and production, American families have begun to pay the steep price for our failed national energy policies.  This current Administration has wasted tens of billions of stimulus dollars on solar panel factories and windmills rather than building new oil refineries and using new technologies to recover the oil buried in our own back yard.

Number 1-10 via American Thinker<

10) ANWR  If Bill Clinton had signed into law the Republican Congress’s 1995 bill to allow drilling of ANWR instead of vetoing it, ANWR could be producing a million barrels of (non-Opec) oil a day–5% of the nation’s consumption. Although speaking in another context, even Democrat Senator Charles Schumer, no proponent of ANWR drilling, admits that “one million barrels per day,” would cause the price of gasoline to fall “50 cents a gallon almost immediately,” according to a recent George Will column.

9) Coastal Drilling (i.e., not in my backyard) Democrats have consistently fought efforts to drill off the U.S. coast, as evidenced by Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s preotestation against a failed 2005 bill: “Not only does this legislation dismantle the bi-partisan ban on offshore drilling, but it provides a financial incentive for states to do so.”

A financial incentive? With the Chinese now slant drilling for oil just 50 miles off the Florida coast, wouldn’t that have been a good thing?8) Insistence on alternative fuels  One of the first acts of the new Democrat-controlled congress in 2007 was an energy bill that “calls for a huge increase in the use of ethanol as a motor fuel and requires new appliance efficiency standards.”  By focusing on alternative fuels such as ethanol, and not more drilling, Democrats have added to the cost of food, worsening starvation problems around the word and increasing inflationary pressures in the U.S., including prices at the pump.

7) Nuclear power   Even the French, who sometimes seem to lack the backbone to stand up for anything other than soft cheese, faced down their environmentalists over the need for nuclear power. France now generates 79% of its electricity from nuclear plants, mitigating the need for imported oil. The French have so much cheap energy that France has become the world’s largest exporter of electric power. They have plans in place to build more reactors, including an experimental fusion reactor.

The last nuclear reactor built in the United States, according to the US Dept of Energy, was the “River Bend” plant in Louisiana. Its construction began in March of 1977.  Need I say more?

6) Coal   “The liquid hydrocarbon fuel available from American coal reserves exceeds the crude oil reserves of the entire world,” writes Dr. Arthur Robinson in an article on humanevents.com. The U.S. has approximately one-fourth of the world’s known, proven coal reserves. Coal would be a proven, and increasingly clean, source of electric power and–at current prices–a liquified fuel that would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Yet Dems and their enviro friends have fought, and continue to fight, both coal-mining and coal plants.

5) Refinery capacity  “High oil prices are still being propped up by a shortage of refinery capacity and there is little sign of the bottleneck easing until 2010,” according to Peak Oil News.  And, while voters in South Dakota have approved zoning for what could become the first new oil refinery in the United States in 30 years,  the Dems’ environmentalist constituency vows to oppose it, just like environmentalists opposed the floodgates that could have saved New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina.

4) Reduced competition  With consolidation in the oil industry, has come reduced competition. Remember, most of the major oil company mergers — Shell-Texaco, BP-Amoco, Exxon-Mobil, BP-ARCO, and Chevron-Texaco — happened on Clinton’s watch.  The number of oil refiners dropped from 28 to 19 companies during Clinton’s two terms.

3) The Global Warming Myth  At a Group of 8 meeting this week, host and Japanese Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Akira Amari “described the issues of climate change and energy as two sides of the same coin and proposed united solutions … to address both issues simultaneously”.   As a result of Global Warming hysteria, the Al Gore-negotiated Kyoto Protocol created a worldwide market in carbon-emissions trading. Both 2005  –the year that trading  was initiated–and this year  –when the trading expanded dramatically — saw substantial and unexpected price spikes in the cost of oil, leading us to reason Number…

2) Speculation  “Given the unchanged equilibrium in global oil supply and demand over recent months amid the explosive rise in oil futures prices … it is more likely that as much as 60% of the today oil price is pure speculation,” writes F. William Engdahl, an Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.  According to a June 2006 US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report, US energy futures historically “were traded exclusively on regulated exchanges within the United States… The trading of energy commodities by large firms on OTC electronic exchanges was exempted from (federal) oversight by a provision inserted at the behest of Enron and other large energy traders into the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.” The bill was signed into law by Bill Clinton, in one of his last acts in office.

1) Defeat of President Bush’s 2001 energy package   According to the BBC, “Key points of Bush(‘s 2001) plan were to:
Promote new oil and gas drilling
Build new nuclear plants
Improve electricity grid and build new pipelines -$10bn in tax breaks to promote energy efficiency and alternative fuels

A New York Times article, dated May 18, 2001, explained:

“President Bush began an intensive effort today to sell his plan for developing new sources of energy to Congress and the American people, arguing that the country had a future of ‘energy abundance if it could break free of the traditional antagonism between energy producers and environmental advocates.
Mr. Bush’s plea for a new dialogue came as his administration published the report of an energy task force containing scores of specific proposals… for finding new sources of power and encouraging a range of new energy technologies.”[The Bush plan] “mentions about a dozen areas including land-use restrictions in the Rockies, lease stipulations on offshore areas attractive to oil companies, the vetting of locations for nuclear plants, environmental reviews to upgrade power plants and refineries that could be streamlined or eliminated to help industry find more oil and gas and produce more electricity and gasoline.” The article went on to quote some rather prescient words from the President, “this great country could face a darker future, a future that is, unfortunately, being previewed in rising prices at the gas pump and rolling blackouts in the great state of California” if his plan was not adopted in 2001.
The Times account continued:

“Mr. Bush talked not only of blackouts but of blackmail, raising the specter of a future in which the United States is increasingly vulnerable to foreign oil suppliers…Mr. Bush was praised by many groups for laying out a long-term energy policy. His report contained 105 initiatives…”

Just as President Bush’s predictions have been born out, the article quoted from that most sage of Democrats, former President Jimmy Carter:

“World supplies are adequate and reasonably stable, price fluctuations are cyclical, reserves are plentiful,” he (Carter) argued. Mr. Carter said “exaggerated claims seem designed to promote some long-frustrated ambitions of the oil industry at the expense of environmental quality.”

But, as a later Times article notes, “the president’s ambitious policy quickly became a casualty of energy politics and, notably, harsh criticism from Democrats enraged by the way the White House had created the plan.”

In other words, Democrats refused the President’s plea to “break free of the traditional antagonism between energy producers and environmental advocates.”
Remember that the next time you pull up to the pump … or the voter’s booth.

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

Attention Journalism Students Do Not Make a Mistake Like This

Posted by iusbvision on May 29, 2011

Always remember to double check the spellings of names and be SURE to double check all stats and numbers with a second source. Remember figures don’t lie but liars figure as they say. If you just take a single sources word for a key statistic in the story you may end up with egg on your face.

Washington Post:

Moonlighting blamed for air controller fatigue

By Ashley Halsey III, Published: May 24

Young air traffic controllers who make up almost a third of the workforce have had to work two or three jobs to compensate for a 30 percent wage cut imposed during the Bush administration, the head of their union told a Senate committee Tuesday.

Paul Rinaldi, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, told the subcommittee on aviation that wages have improved under a new contract signed 18 months ago, but many young controllers continue to hold more than one job.

“That’s asking for trouble,” Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) responded. “How do you make the case that that doesn’t cause fatigue and poor judgment?”

NATCA spokesman Doug Church said entry-level wages were cut to about $30,000 in some parts of the country in 2006. He said some local controllers began waiting tables at the Leesburg Applebee’s near Dulles International Airport. Under the new contract, he said new controllers start at about $45,000.

The number of recorded controller errors spiked by 53 percent in fiscal 2010, and after an overnight controller supervisor was caught sleeping in the tower at Reagan National Airport this year the Federal Aviation Administration was stung by an embarrassing series of sleeping controller incidents.

The subcommittee Tuesday sought explanations from Rinaldi, FAA administrator Randy Babbitt, U.S. Department of Transportation Inspector General Calvin L. Scovel III and Greg Belenky, a sleep expert from Washington State University.

They got sharply different perspectives from Babbitt and Scovel, who has been asked by the committee to investigate problems in the air traffic control system.

Babbitt expressed determination to reduce errors while underscoring the unparalleled air safety record in the past decade, which has not seen a single major commercial airline crash. He pointed out that the vast majority of controller errors posed little genuine risk to passengers, and said the increase in recorded errors was largely due to more accurate technology and a system that encourages controllers to report their mistakes in return for a promise they will not be punished.

Did you read that very carefully? Good work. What is the narrative of this story? The story is that the union believes that there are more air traffic controller errors because they are paid so poorly (30-45K) that they must take second jobs to make ends meet. The FAA Committee says that errors are just being reported more accurately because of the new error reporting system that is in place.

Now let us look at the story critically. We know that most readers will not get passed the 5th or 6th paragraph in a story unless it greatly interests them. With that said the narrative becomes more clear “Government employees are underpaid and the union is struggling to help them and as a result of the inferior pay lives may be lost.”

The prudent reporter in Washington DC would know that the government union is not so weak as to not be able to negotiate a decent wage. Washington in general does not work that way for government employees which tend to be paid rather well. You can see that we only have one source for the 30-45k pay figure. What would we learn by checking that number from official sources?

Here is a government job posting to hire a citizen to become an air traffic controller which was found in mere moments on the internet. This is an official government web site:

http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=99420536&JobTitle=Air+Traffic+Control+Specialist&jbf574=TD

As you can see the pay range starts at $113,000. Now that we have a rather glaring discrepancy we should look further. A trip to the Bureau of Labor Statistics will tell us what most any government employee makes:

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos108.htm

Air traffic controllers earn relatively high pay and have good benefits. Median annual wages of air traffic controllers in May 2008 were $111,870. The middle 50 percent earned between $71,050 and $143,780. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $45,020, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $161,010. The average annual salary, excluding overtime earnings, for air traffic controllers in the Federal Government—which employs 90 percent of all controllers—was $109,218 in March 2009.

They also receive vacations, sick days, and insurance.

The average salary is 109K plus benefits and according to the BLS web site the bigger the airport the larger the pay. Only 10% make near the $45k number mentioned and as the pay scale explains, this would be the most out of the way airports that only occasionally see traffic. No where is 30K even mentioned.

It is safe to conclude that the union representative gave the Washington Post reporter a sizable dose of spin. It is certainly safe to say that a false picture was created. Anyone with access to the internet could see that the story has a major problem in mere moments. The “Line Editor” at the Washington Post should have checked this number as well, as that is a primary responsibility of a “Line Editor”. Now the paper as an institution is starting to look pretty flimsy.

This reporter, Ashley Halsey III, compounded his mistake with a rather large blunder. A long time respected Washington intellectual noticed this discrepency and was kind enough to drop the reporter a note about the error. In response to an official source showing the air traffic controller pay scale the reporter wrote back:

“Why do you assume the website is correct?”

The real question is, why did the reporter assume the union representative gave a number that was representative of most air traffic controllers in the face of a .gov official source? It seems clear that the reporter responded with a rather flippant and elitist attitude.

Unfortunately for the reporter the Washington intellectual is a committee  member of an important press organization. The Washington intellectual pointed out that this is not the first time Ashley Halsey III had a problem.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn | Leave a Comment »

City of Charlotte fines church $1400 for pruning their own trees – UPDATE: Fine may be as high as $4,000

Posted by iusbvision on May 29, 2011

Add Charlotte N.C. on the list of towns I will go out of my way not to spend a penny in. This is why once Obama and these Alinsky Democrats are put out of power the TEA Party need to turn it’s focus on local government.

Originally it was reported that the fine was $1400, now it may be as high as $4,000.

Charlotte Observer:

Every two to three years, Eddie Sales trims and prunes the crape myrtles at his church, Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church.

But this year, the city of Charlotte cited the church for improperly pruning its trees.

“We always keep our trees trimmed back because you don’t want to worry about them hanging down in the way,” said Sales, a church member.

The church was fined $100 per branch cut for excessive pruning, bringing the violation to $4,000.

“I just couldn’t believe it when I heard about it,” Sales said. “We trim our trees back every three years all over our property, and this is the first time we have been fined.”

The fine will be dropped if the church replaces each of the improperly pruned trees, said Tom Johnson, senior urban forester for city of Charlotte Land Development Division.

“When they are nonrepairable, when they have been pruned beyond repair, we will ask them to be replaced,” Johnson said. “We do that for a number of reasons but mainly because they are going to come back unhealthy and create a dangerous situation down the road.”

Except these trees are not unhealthy and are pruned very nicely as evidenced by the picture:

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Is the cost of government high enough yet? | Leave a Comment »

Bigoted, Unhinged School Administrators in Plano Texas Get Themselves Sued

Posted by iusbvision on May 29, 2011

Via National Review:

It’s known as the candy-cane case. And it’s all about religious discrimination.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments today in Morgan v. Swanson. The case demonstrates just how badly political correctness has corrupted our public schools and illustrates the extremes to which radical school administrators will go to impose their ideological, anti-religious views on our children.

The lawsuit was filed by the families of several elementary-school students in Plano, Texas. The suit states that, although the schools hold birthday and “winter break” parties, no Christmas parties are allowed. Moreover, the schools ban all “references to and symbols of the Christian religion and the celebration of the Christian religious holiday, Christmas,” at the winter-break parties. Even “red and green Christmas colors” are banned. And students were explicitly instructed “not to write ‘Merry Christmas’ on greeting cards sent to United States soldiers [or to retirement homes] because that phrase might be offensive.”

Apparently the schools never considered that such rigorous censorship might be offensive. Indeed, they went further. Students were allowed to exchange gift bags at the winter-break parties. However, the suit alleges, “students and parents [were] interrogated by school officials . . . as to whether or not the contents of their gift or ‘goodie’ bags . . . contain any religious viewpoint, religious references or religious message.” If they did, the bags were confiscated by school officials.

One student’s bags were seized because they contained pencils inscribed with the phrase “Jesus is the Reason for the Season.” Another student was banned from giving his friends candy-cane-shaped pens with a laminated card entitled the “Legend of the Candy Cane,” which explained the Christian origin of candy canes. Another student, “during noncurriculum times and with no material and substantial disruption to the operations of the school,” was giving her friends tickets to a free Christian drama production at her church. Principal Jackie Bomchill ordered the tickets confiscated and destroyed because they “expressed a ‘religious’ viewpoint.”

One student’s mother asked for a meeting with Bomchill to get prior approval for her daughter to give her friends two pencils at her own birthday party during lunch recess, one inscribed with the word “moon” and the other with the phrase “Jesus loves me this I know for the Bible tells me so.” Instead of engaging in a calm discussion, the principal handed the mother a letter threatening that “law enforcement officials” would be called to arrest her and told her that the Jesus pencils could only be distributed “outside of the school building.” However, when the daughter attempted to do just that, outside of the school building, Bomchill grabbed her, took the pencils, and berated her. Bomchill told the mother her daughter would be “kicked out of school” if she made any further attempts to distribute religious items. School officials even called the police, who pulled over the mother on her way home.

Since these events, the school district and the principals have only compounded their errors. Rather than acknowledge that they made a mistake, apologize, and change their discriminatory policies, they have spent over a million taxpayer dollars fighting this lawsuit all the way up to the federal appeals court. In fact, they claim that they did nothing wrong and should be granted “qualified immunity” because “the First Amendment does not apply to elementary school students” and the “Constitution does not prohibit viewpoint discrimination against religious speech in elementary schools.” And these are the people teaching civics to our children!

As a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit wrote in its review of the case, “It has been clear for over half a century that the First Amendment protects elementary school students from religious-viewpoint discrimination.” This issue was decided in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, a 1943 decision of the Supreme Court. The Court recognized that school officials are subject to the Constitution and that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment is no exception. Students do not “shed their constitutional right to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” As the Court pointed out in Barnette, the fact that school officials “are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes.”

The Texas school district has tried to argue that the Barnette decision really doesn’t say what it says, or that it doesn’t really apply to elementary schools because supposedly there is no evidence that the plaintiffs in that case were elementary-school students. In a delicious irony, former U.S. solicitor general Ken Starr has filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Barnette sisters, the plaintiffs in the 1943 case.

The two sisters, now in their seventies, were elementary-school students in West Virginia at the time. As practicing Jehovah’s Witnesses, they believed that pledging allegiance to the flag was a form of prohibited idol worship. After declining to participate in that ceremony, they were expelled from school. The sisters’ family took their challenge all the way to the Supreme Court and won. As their amicus brief says, the Plano school district is trying to “unravel decades of clearly established law” and to “unwisely turn back the clock to an era in this nation’s history when religious bigotry was often tolerated in the public schools.”

What is worrisome about this case is that the Fifth Circuit granted en banc review after its own three-judge panel clearly reached the correct decision when it ruled against the school district and these intolerant principals. We may hope that the entire court will not overturn this panel decision or grant immunity to the school officials for their biased and inequitable behavior. This case is a clear example of how the extreme liberal view that nothing may be said or done that could somehow, possibly “offend” anyone leads to gutting the First Amendment and destroying our free-speech rights.

Posted in Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Leftist Hate in Action, Stuck on Stupid | Leave a Comment »

Secularist on “Let’s Blame the Jews” Nonsense

Posted by iusbvision on May 29, 2011

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

Middle East History – How Lebanon Was Destroyed From Within By Islamists

Posted by iusbvision on May 28, 2011

Brigitte Gabriel on her story growing up in Lebanon.

How the Islamists used Christian tolerance to wipe the Christians out and destroy the country. The Christian leftists who marched with the Islamists and helped them take power because they were the “underdog” were the first ones that the Islamists killed.

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

Attention Police: Use restraint, pick your battles….

Posted by iusbvision on May 28, 2011

There are times when you need to pick your battles, even when you are a police officer. These people were not even causing a disturbance. Now there is this video which has done more damage to the Park Police and Washington DC than letting three couples silently slow dance together ever would. What jury in a civil suit is going to look at this and side with the police?

By the way, notice the RT sign in the video, that is Russia Today. RT is not huge with the USA, but internationally it is very popular. Fair or not, now the world sees that the “Home of the Free” just isn’t.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Stuck on Stupid | 1 Comment »

Michelle Rhee Talks About Her Support for School Vouchers

Posted by iusbvision on May 28, 2011

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

Heritage on Obama’s Expensive and Job Killing Energy Policy

Posted by iusbvision on May 28, 2011

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

Leftist hate parade from Moveon.org

Posted by iusbvision on May 28, 2011

This is quite a spectacle.

Warning bad language and incredible stupidity …

Posted in Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »

Gerald Celente: American Journalism is a Disgrace

Posted by iusbvision on May 27, 2011

Now before you watch this video there are a few caveats.

Gerald Celente is a smart guy and he leads the Trends Research Institute. They look at history and at patters and extrapolate predictions based on trends and their track record has been pretty decent. They are not the end all be all but they are far from stupid.

The network he is on is RT – AKA Russia Today. Russia Today does some pretty good journalism compared to the American Elite Media (which isn’t saying much). RT’s agenda is to make America look bad in front of a Russian and international audience so they often bring on people who have some kind of critique. Anyone who goes on that network needs to keep this in mind. RT is not huge in the states but it is very big around the world and on the internet.

I am presenting this video because Celente makes some good points; especially about why the American Elite Media has not covered the details of what is in the Wiki-leaks memo’s worth a darn.

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

America’s Founders Your School Will Never Tell You About: Black, Jewish, and Women Founders and War Heroes. Women Voted in the 1770’s. What Happened?

Posted by iusbvision on May 27, 2011

Plus, the most recognizable man of the revolution was NOT George Washington, who was he, and why has he been erased from America’s school books? [Hint he was the first evangelical preacher – Editor]

Watch this video, even if you are not a fan of Glenn Beck, what you are about to see will change you forever.

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

Israel Part III

Posted by iusbvision on May 27, 2011

Be sure to see Israel part I and II

U.S. President Barack Obama’s Palestinian Authority-Israel peace plan is a ”formula for war,” writes Bret Stephens, foreign affairs editor and deputy editorial page editor of The Wall St. Journal. – LINK

Just to give you an idea of just who it is Israel is asked to “negotiate with”…

She is referring to the Hebron massacre of 1929.

Read the smaller headline on the right.

“The Middle East Problem” from Prager University: 

Just how bad is campus antisemitism from radicalized professors?

VIDEO: David Horowitz outs genocidal Muslim Student Association member

And homeland security is letting these people in and not only that they are encouraged by college faculty.

Via David Horowitz:

MSA member: If I support Hamas, because your question forces me to condemn Hamas.  If I support Hamas, I look really bad.

Horowitz: If you don’t condemn Hamas, obviously you support it.  Case closed.  I have had this experience at UC Santa Barbara, where there were 50 members of the Muslim Students Association sitting right in the rows there.  And throughout my hour talk I kept asking them, will you condemn Hizbollah and Hamas. And none of them would.  And then when the question period came, the president of the Muslim Students Association was the first person to ask a question. And I said, ‘Before you start, will you condemn Hizbollah?’ And he said, ‘Well, that question is too complicated for a yes or no answer.’  So I said, ‘Okay, I’ll put it to you this way.  I am a Jew.  The head of Hizbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn’t have to hunt us down globally.  For or Against it?

MSA member: For it.

Horowitz: Thank you for coming and showing everybody what’s here.

David Horowitz talks about his experiences on college campus’ with Sean Hannity

Posted in Chuck Norton, Israel | Leave a Comment »

One Month’s Food Stamps – Lobster, Steak, and Five Cases of Diet Mountain Dew

Posted by iusbvision on May 27, 2011

Just when you thought the story of the lottery millionaire who was still legally allowed to receive food stamps was bad enough. A friend found this receipt in the parking lot of a store in Michigan.

UPDATE: This story has gone viral which we are glad to see.

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/Menominee-man-arrested-for-welfare-fraud

The reader sent this to me is from Menominee, Michigan. The link says that a person found the receipt near the store, which matches what our reader in Menominee told us exactly. Notice that we wrote this before this story went viral and the email he sent me was sitting in my inbox for several days before I opened it. Of course I have no way of knowing in my acquaintance was the original person from Menominee, but it really doesn’t matter.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet? | 2 Comments »

Israel Part II

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

Continued from Israel Part I

So let us examine the Obama administrations record when it comes to Israel so far, much of this list we have already reported.  This list is from the Canada Free Press.

  • In May 2009 Obama announced he will be addressing the Arab and Muslim world from a mosque in the city of Al-Azhar in Egypt—a location writer Ruth S. King has described as “the locus of Koranic-inspired Jihad.” Indeed, this Sunni bastion supports suicide-bombingsAnd only last week, according to JihadWatch.org, Sheikh Ali Osman of the Egyptian government said “Pigs are Jews cursed by Allah, and thus can be lawfully slaughtered.”
  • In May of 2009, by Executive Order, Obama directed the expenditure of $20.3 million—of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars—in “migration assistance” to the Palestinian refugees and “conflict victims” in Gaza, which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas and its Islamic Resistance Movement to resettle in the United States. Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27, 2009 was recorded in the Federal Register on February 4.
  • Also in May 2009, Obama submitted a budget to Congress that while increasing military aid to Israel for the Arrow 3, cut in half aid for the Arrow 2 and significantly reduced aid for short-range missile interceptors, just as Iran is strengthening its conventional ballistic missile force.
  • Also in May 2009, Obama refused to meet with Netanyahu for the P.M.‘s planned visit to address the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Conference in D.C. [As if Obama did these things to send Netanyahu a message – Editor]
  • At the same AIPAC meeting Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel reportedly told donors that America’s ability to face Iran depended on Israel’s ability to make progress with the Palestinians, once again echoing the tired Leftist canard that all conflicts in the Middle East are the result not of the jihadist mentality, but rather the failure of Israel to accept their virulently anti-Semitic propaganda (in the media and in schools), non-stop homicide bombings, and relentless rocket attacks…
  • In numerous Obama-sanctioned public statements, his henchmen have, in the common vernacular, put the screws to Israel, among them Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who threatened: “For Israel to get the kind of strong support it’s looking for vis-a-vis Iran, it can’t stay on the sideline with respect to the Palestinians and the peace efforts … they go hand in hand,” and National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones who recently told a European foreign minister that the U.S. is planning to build an anti-Israel coalition with the Arabs and Europe to compel Israel to surrender Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem to the Palestinians.
  • Obama let it be known that his plan for a “two-state solution” was perfectly in-sync with the wipe-Israel-off-the-map crowd, including terrorist-sponsoring Syria and Saudi Arabia, among others. And what sweet nothings do you suppose Obama whispered into the ears of Iran’s Ahmadinejad that just prompted the sudden release from jail of the Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi?
  • Obama let it be known that his plan for a “two-state solution” was perfectly in-sync with the wipe-Israel-off-the-map crowd, including terrorist-sponsoring Syria and Saudi Arabia, among others. And what sweet nothings do you suppose Obama whispered into the ears of Iran’s Ahmadinejad that just prompted the sudden release from jail of the Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi?
  • And let’s not forget that Obama’s first phone call to a head of state was to Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Fatah party in the Palestinian territory, and who also wrote his doctoral thesis denying the Holocaust. Did I mention Abbas’ loyal second-in-command fealty to “the father of terrorism,” Yasir Arafat?
  • Obama gave his first TV interview to Al Arabia television.
  • Obama summarily dismissed all charges against the Muslim murderers of 17 American sailors on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2001.
  • Obama, according to David Patten at Newsmax.com, “is preparing to reinstate a fraud-riddled immigration program that has brought over 36,000 Somalis into the United States under questionable circumstances.”
  • Obama bowed so repugnantly on his recent European trip to the Saudi Arabian potentate.

Also look who the President has surrounded himself with, again fronm the Canada Free Press:

  • Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who according to Dick Morris has had “relationships with terrorists [that] began in the mid-1980s when she served on the Board of the New World Foundation, which gave funds to the Palestine Liberation Organization [when] the PLO was officially recognized by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization.”
  • Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, who has advocated ending all U.S. military aid to Israel and has inspired dozens of articles with titles like these in Commentary: Susan Rice Is Doing Something at the UN: Targeting Israel and What Was Susan Rice’s Embarrassing Anti-Israel Tirade Supposed to Accomplish?
  • Lee Hamilton, who Ed Lasky calls the eminence grise of Obama’s Mideast policy and who has suggested that the U.S. should pressure Israel to surrender the Golan Heights and leave the West Bank—but not a word about dismantling Hamas or Hezbollah!
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski, longtime Israel loather, who suggested that the Obama administration should tell Israel that the U.S. will attack Israeli jets if they try to attack Iran.
  • John Brennan, Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security,suggests, among other egregious things, that Obama & Co. “reach out” to Hezbollah.
  • Samantha Power, now on Obama’s National Security Council, has advocated ending all U.S. military aid to Israel and written of her willingness to “alienate a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import [American Jews]…” She has also advocated, Ed Lasky writes, “that America send armed military forces,” “a mammoth protection force” and an “external intervention” to” impose a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.”
  • Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s Senior Advisor. According to Ulsterman, the by-now infamous Washington Insider, “weeks after widespread Middle East chaos first erupted, and with a growing number of nations now poised to join the likes of Egypt and Libya into all out rebellion, some are finally questioning the role played by the Obama White House in helping to hasten these events. Of primary concern is the reasoning behind Barack Obama’s quick repudiation of Egypt’s Mubarak, and near silence regarding Libya’s Gaddafi.  Why such a disparity in tone between one uprising vs another? …Perhaps the answer to this disparity can be found with President Obama’s closest and most powerful adviser—[Iranian-born Muslim] Valerie Jarrett

Senator Marco Rubio:

Reaffirming the Bond Between America and Israel
May 23, 2011

The United States and Israel stand at a crossroads in our historic special relationship. Since recognizing Israel’s independence in 1948, we have stood by her as a beacon of political and economic freedom in the midst of tyrannical regimes and terrorists determined to destroy her. American support has been crucial to Israel’s continued existence and must be part of its future.

Today, the “Arab Spring” that toppled authoritarian rulers in Tunisia and Egypt now threatens tyrants in Libya and Syria. America should be working to ensure that these transitions do not come at the expense of security, especially Israel’s. But instead, our bond with Israel is unconscionably being torn apart by the Obama administration’s policies and its bizarre adversarial treatment of a long-standing friend.

Relations have been strained since President Obama came into office in 2009, but they reached an absurdly low level last week as, without warning, he called for Israel to return to its 1967 borders as a pre-condition for peace negotiations. In both style and substance, this is a dangerous innovation in U.S. policy that undermines the entire peace process by insisting on an unworkable goal that ignores what has transpired over the past 44 years and jeopardizes Israel’s security.

The U.S. must not predetermine the outcome of direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. Our focus should be on encouraging direct and meaningful negotiations between the sides and continuing to serve as a security guarantor in the region.

America’s role in this effort should be guided by a set of key principles that would ultimately resolve fundamental disagreements, end the conflict, and result in two democratic states living in peace and with security.

First, we must recognize that the safety of the Israeli people is first and foremost in the mind of every Israeli decision-maker. Decades of tough negotiations demonstrate Israel’s record of making enormous sacrifices to achieve peace with its neighbors when its people are reassured of their safety. Instead of pressuring Israel to accept demands we would never tolerate if we were in their shoes, we should do everything possible to assure Israeli safety and security.

Second, Israel should not be compelled to negotiate with any entity that openly denies its right to exist, refuses to reject terrorism, and refuses to honor previous agreements made with Israel and international organizations. Israel could only achieve lasting peace with a Palestinian state based on democratic values and with functioning institutions. The U.S. should actively support pragmatic efforts to build Palestinian institutions in Samaria, so that Palestinian self-rule becomes possible. However, implementation of the recently announced Fatah-Hamas agreement will compel Congress to cut off direct U.S. assistance to such a Palestinian governing authority and further delay the dream of Palestinian self-rule.

Third, any agreements on borders between Israel and a future Palestinian state should be the outcome of direct negotiations between the sides. After more than six decades of the modern state of Israel, it is unrealistic to believe that such negotiations will not be based on the defensibility of Israel’s borders as well as the demographic changes that have taken place. To ignore these realities would be a disservice to the Palestinian people who are in desperate need of strong leadership. On the refugee question, the right of return of Palestinians should mark a return to the eventual Palestinian state negotiated by both parties.

Fourth, in working towards a solution, we must secure verifiable commitments from the Arab nations to take meaningful steps to normalize relations with Israel and actively eradicate terrorist organizations that threaten the security not only of Israelis, but ultimately of the region as a whole. This is especially important during this period of transition in the Middle East.

Fifth, although the president failed to address the status of Jerusalem, we must make clear that it is Israel’s capital, as the U.S. Congress has repeatedly recognized. Jerusalem should never be divided again. Any eventual recognition of a Palestinian state should be accompanied by America’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state by finally relocating our embassy there.

And sixth, a legitimate agreement must include a Palestinian commitment to reject violence and live in peace with Israel and their neighbors. To date, the Palestinians have not been prepared to commit to this. The recently announced Fatah-Hamas coalition imperils this non-negotiable requirement for a final agreement and lasting peace. But no two-state solution is acceptable if it allows for perpetual conflict.

In the end, a two-state solution is only worth pursuing if it enhances Israel’s security and serves as a foundation for long-lasting peace in the region. This is more likely to be achieved if America reaffirms its unshakable commitment to the security of the democratic Jewish state of Israel.

At this moment of uncertainty and transition in the Middle East, with the threats from Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah as grave as ever, America must make clear to the world that we stand by our most loyal ally in the world and that, if Israel is left with only one friend in the world, that will be the United States.

Impact on the 2012 election?

Via American Thinker:

Haim Saban, a billionaire Israeli-American donor to the Democrats has announced he won’t be donating to President Obama’s re-election effort. Michelle Caruso-Cabrera of CNBC reports:

The most prominent Israeli-Americanbusiness leader in the United States, Haim Saban, says President Obama needs to do more to show his support of Israel in light of the President’s comments last week suggesting Israel needs to return to its pre-1967 borders to achieve peace with the Palestinians.
In an exclusive interview with CNBC, Saban, one of the biggest individual supporters to the Democratic Party and chairman of Saban Capital Group, said Obama needs to visit Israel as he has done with other countries in the Middle East.
Saban will continue to donate to other Democrats and Democrat causes. But for every entertainment industry billionaire alienated by Obama last week, there are many more Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Israel alienated by Obama’s speech last Thursday.

Democrats realize that Obama blundered big time. Debbie Wassserman-Schultz, chair of the DNC, even tried to use PM Netanyahu to urge Jewish Republicans to put Israel off the table in themcoming elections. Fat chance. It is a genuine policy difference, and the American people overwhelmingly reject Obama’s philo-Palestinian approach.

In key swing states Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, Jews are more numerous than in most of the country, and a swing of 10 percent or more of the Jewish vote could make a big difference. [Emphasis ours – with that said, these states already swung massively to the Republicans/TEA Party in the 2009 and 2010 elections. In Pennsylvania and Florida the move to the Republicans was 18 points – Editor]

Obama is already trying to walk back his comments on the ‘67 borders, but the words still hang there in the air, unforgettable to all who care about Israel’s survival.

mm

Posted in Chuck Norton, Israel | 2 Comments »

NEWSBUSTED: Why do Israelis want the US to go back to 1958 borders?!

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

Posted in Chuck Norton, Israel | Leave a Comment »

Proposed California education law would ban most any critical statement of fact in history classes

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

Hat Tip Dr. Clare Spark.

As if the old law wasn’t an interpretive mess before. The proposed California law is preposterous because any critique, or even statement of fact can be interpreted/deliberately misinterpreted as discriminatory. In Europe people who make accurate stateswomen about Islamic history or what is in their texts are at times prosecuted for “hate crimes”. Sometimes the prosecutors say that “the truth is no defense.” Well if the truth is no defense to history, than we have no history at all and it is all predetermined propaganda.

I will give just a couple of examples. The headline we all saw as kids form the New York Daily News,  “JAPS BOMB HAWAII” would be banned.

 

The story in the Hadith of the murder of the Jewish Merchant would be banned. Any critique about how women are treated in many Islamic countries would be out. Any WWII film that had the word “Nips” or “Krauts” would be banned.

No matter what some group will/can always cry “discriminatory”. This is a mess as it would not stop. The British Conquered – “So all British are murderers out to take your land huh why how dare you make such an ethnic slur…”  /shakes head.

No one wants overt racism for the sake of racism in any history book, but what publisher is going to make such a book and try to market it to schools anyways? What state would adopt such a book? The answer is obvious, so this is not about racism at all, this is about group politics at the expense of teaching real history, which isn’t always politically correct.

SB 48 (Leno)

Instruction: prohibition of discriminatory content

Existing law requires instruction in social sciences to include a study of the role and contributions of both men and women to the development of California and the United States.

This bill would require instruction in social sciences to also include a study of the role and contributions of Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and other ethnic and cultural groups, to the development of California and the United States.

Existing law prohibits instruction or school sponsored activities that reflect adversely upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry. Existing law prohibits the State Board of Education and the governing board of any school district from adopting textbooks or other instructional materials that contain any matter that reflects adversely upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry.

This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in these provisions by referring to race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, and sexual orientation, or other characteristic listed as specified.

Existing law prohibits a governing board from adopting instructional materials that contain any matter reflecting adversely upon persons because of their race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, handicap, or occupation, or that contain any sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda contrary to law.

This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in this provision to include race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, sexual orientation, and occupation, or other characteristic listed as specified.

Existing law requires that when adopting instructional materials for use in the schools, governing boards shall include materials that accurately portray the role and contribution of culturally and racially diverse groups including Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, and European Americans to the total development of California and the United States.

This bill would revise the list of culturally and racially diverse groups to also include Pacific Islanders, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and other ethnic and cultural groups.

Existing law provides that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of specified characteristics in any operation of alternative schools or charter schools.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that alternative and charter schools take notice of the provisions of this bill in light of provisions of existing law that prohibit discrimination in any aspect of their operation.

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

Obama using the EPA to ignore Congress and enact new energy taxes with the stroke of a pen

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

FreedomWorks

End the Regulatory ‘Train Wreck’ at the EPA!

You already know how the Obama Administration’s EPA has been working to enact a backdoor cap and trade scheme through greenhouse gas regulationthat would further drive up already sky-high energy costs.

Conservative, limited government activists like YOU from all over the country have helped us deliver a powerful message to Congress on this issue. So far,FreedomWorks members have sent over 153,000 letters and emails and made over 2,300 phone calls urging targeted lawmakers to pass legislation that would put a halt to EPA’s cap and trade nightmare. This groundswell of grassroots pressure has helped push the House to pass H.R. 910 — The Energy TaxPrevention Act of 2011; legislation that would strip EPA of its ability to use theClean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases.

As this bill awaits action in the Senate, FreedomWorks will continue to ramp up activity and aggressively push for a vote. Unfortunately however, EPA has a host of other regulatory abuses on its agenda and we need Congress to act fast in order to keep this “train wreck” from further spiking energy costs and devastating America’s economic recovery.

Take Action Button

Specifically, it is important that conservative leaders in Congress come forward to address the following actions that EPA has undertaken and that threaten to cost millions of American jobs and billions of dollars in lost GDP:

1. New taxes that will impact thousands of businesses—large and small…By increasing complicated regulatory standards, the EPA is hitting American businesses with a brand new tax. Facilities ranging from factories to churches that can’t afford to upgrade their equipment would be forced to close!

2. Massive new regulatory taxes on electricity…Expensive new standards targeting coal fired power plants—the source of most of the nation’s electricity—would raise costs for consumers and businesses. Billions in new costs would be passed on to energy consumers and the energy security of millions of Americans would be put in serious jeopardy!

3. Costly new regulations on cement plants…Our nation’s cement plants are perhaps in the most precarious position due to the EPA’s aggressive new regulatory agenda. A recent Southern Methodist University study estimated in excess of 15% of plants would be forced to close, costing thousands of jobs, raising costs, and dramatically hurting investments in U.S. infrastructure!

4. New restrictions effecting common household products and materials…The EPA wants to re-define coal ash as a hazardous material. In doing so, they will eliminate the use of this product in the making of many thing s we rely on including building materials like cement and drywall — in turn, driving up the cost of these products!

5. New regulations on emissions that would force many communities to impose costly new restrictions on consumers and small businesses…New ozone standards would put many out of reach, triggering extensive new regulations that would have sweeping and devastating new economic consequences affecting virtually all consumers and businesses, with new standards for everything from car tailpipes to factory smokestacks—and everything in between!

If steps are not taken to prevent EPA from pursuing this agenda, the Obama EPA nightmare will become a reality for American consumers, businesses, and the economy as a whole.

CLICK HERE to contact you legislators and urge them to support legislation aimed at stopping the EPA’s regulatory train wreck!

Sincerely,

Armey Signature
Dick Armey
Chairman, FreedomWorks

P.S. As anyone knows, a train wreck is devastating, and also very costly to clean up. Unfortunately, the same is true of cleaning up the EPA’s regulatory “train wreck.” If you can, please chip in $25 or more here to help FreedomWorks foot the bill to undo the damage.

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Smart Girl Politics

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

Are you a lady who is looking to learn more about politics and how it affects you and your family?

Are you looking to become more active in protecting yourself and those you love from the problems of government over reach and fiscal crisis at both the local and national level?

If this appeals you you than Smart Girl Politics is perhaps the best place to meet and coordinate with other women such as yourself!

Visit their web site today!

Smart Girl Politics!

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

When the best teachers like Christine Simo get let go because of bad union policies, students lose.

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

http://studentsfirst.org/christines-story

Michelle Rhee has more:

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

NBC’s Ed Schultz calls Laura Ingraham a slut on the air…

Posted by iusbvision on May 26, 2011

A prime time host on NBC’s cable brand MSNBC called radio host and Fox News Contributor Laura Ingraham a “slut” on the air.

Ed Shultz

Laura Ingraham

I must admit that I was surprised that NBC suspended him. MSNBC calls Republicans violent, racist, hateful, out to kill children and old people etc almost every day. They even blamed Sarah Palin for the left wing activist turned schizophrenic Jarrod Loughner who shot Gabrielle Giffords, a member of Congress.  Apparently falsely accusing people of being an accessory to murder is OK, but “slut” goes too far.

Here is the clip…

Laura Ingraham had a short reaction because Ed Schult’s ratings are so low that it hardly merited a significant response:

The crude comments made about me by Ed Schultz on his radio program: First, I was surprised to learn that Ed Schultz actually hosted a radio show.  Is it only available online?  Second, I have to get back to recording the audio edition of my new book “Of Thee I Zing.” Now I’m tempted to insert one additional zing–about men who preach civility but practice misogyny.

Ed Shultz made a reasonably impressive apology. You can see the video HERE.

Laura on the apology:

Posted in Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Code Pink and Ron Paul: Leftist Bedfellows (via Lisa Richards)

Posted by iusbvision on May 23, 2011

I was at CPAC and saw this first hand from the “ronbots”. I have also seen this first hand in countless discussions with Ron Paul supporters who use as evidence the worst antisemetic posts from extremist web sites and neo marxist progressive conspiracy sites.

Code Pink and Ron Paul: Leftist Bedfellows That loud-mouthed, radical left-wing brigade of hippie Jew-haters, Code Pink, says they are on the same page with Ron Paul: they support and defend Israel's enemies.  This is certainly not a surprise.  Ron Paul and Code Pink blame Israel for Palestinian deaths, both sided with the flotilla that illegally bypassed Israel and entered Gaza.  Both called Israel’s military involvement an invasion against Palestinians, both excused the bloody violence … Read More

via Lisa Richards

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Israel – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on May 21, 2011

IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton:

Normally I do not get riled up easily, but as a rule one does not write when angered. So I gave myself some time before posting on this further because even the possibility of genocide is very serious.

Yes I said genocide… “But Chuck, going back to the 67 borders doesn’t mean Genocide” … Anyone who tells you that, even if it is a President, is either lying to you or simply has not studied the issue and/or been to Israel. That is not extremist talk, that is not a theory, it is the reality on the ground. We understand that many people reading this do not understand or could even fathom such a reality. The following short video shows exactly the how and why of  what we have told you, and what the Israeli government has maintained for many years.

Let us keep a few thoughts in mind that President Obama went to that “church” in Chicago which preached caustic antisemitism for many years. Antisemitic comments from Rev. Wright and Louis Farakhan are nothing new (Farrakhan was a frequent visitor) . Antisemitism is also in high fashion among the academic left which the other of Obama’s peer circles.

What I found amusing is that lie that came from the far left immediately after Obama’s speech is that “1967 borders have always been the policy of the United States so Obama isn’t saying anything new (so you must be racist because you are criticizing him for saying it)”. The truth must be put to this lie right now:

 

What Real Presidents, and their Secretaries of State, had to say about pre 1967 borders.

Obama’s speech today took the peace process backward, instead of forward. Back when the USA had an adult in the White House, here is what they had to say about the Pre-1967 “Borders”

In an address delivered on September 1, 1982 President Ronald Reagan said:

In the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point. The bulk of Israel’s population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again… So the  United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel. There is, however, another way to peace. The final status of these lands must, of course, be reached through the give-and-take of negotiations; but it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gazain association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just and lasting peace. It is the United States’ position that – in return for peace – the withdrawal provision of Resolution 242 applies to all fronts, including the West Bank and Gaza. When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization and the security arrangements offered in return. Finally, we remain convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but its final status should be decided through negotiations

Meanwhile Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told the U.N. Security Council: “We simply do not support the description of the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 as ‘Occupied Palestinian Territory’. In the view of my Government, this language could be taken to indicate sovereignty, a matter which both Israel and the PLO have agreed must be decided in negotiations on the final status of the territories. “Had this language appeared in the operative paragraphs of the resolution, let me be clear: we would have exercised our veto. In fact, we are today voting against a resolution in the Commission on the Status of Women precisely because it implies that Jerusalem is “occupied Palestinian territory”.

U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger recalled the first time he heard someone invoke “the sacramental language of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, mumbling about the need for a just and lasting peace within secure and recognized borders”. He said the phrase was so platitudinous that he thought the speaker was pulling his leg. Kissinger said that, at that time, he did not appreciate how the flood of words used to justify the various demands obscured rather than illuminated the fundamental positions. Kissinger said those “clashing perspectives” prevented any real bargaining and explained: “Jordan’s acquiescence in Resolution 242 had been obtained in 1967 by the promise of our United Nations Ambassador Arthur Goldberg that under its terms we would work for the return of the West Bank of Jordan with minor boundary rectifications and that we were prepared to use our influence to obtain a role for Jordan in Jerusalem.”

However, speaking to Henry Kissinger, President Richard Nixon said “You and I both know they can’t go back to the other [1967] borders. But we must not, on the other hand, say that because the Israelis win this war, as they won the ’67 War, that we just go on with status quo. It can’t be done.” Kissinger replied “I couldn’t agree more”

Moreover, President Gerald Ford said: “TheU.S. further supports the position that a just and lasting peace, which remains our objective, must be acceptable to both sides.

So this is what adults, from both political parties, have had to say about UN 242, and pulling back to 1967 borders. Of all the Presidents, Gerald Ford said it best: it must be acceptable to both sides. Trying to jam a dead UN Agreement down the throats of Israel, sets the stage for another blood bath.

Mini-Update: The spin several days later is that the Obama proposal was similar to the former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert peace proposal. What the administration forgot to say is that when Olmert made this proposal the Israeli population was not pleased as it made a border that was completely indefensible; when Olmert made his proposal to the Palestinian Authority they did not even answer diplomatically, they attacked with mortar fire and rockets [keep in mind that this was the old “more moderate” pre-Hamas Palestinian Authority]. Prime Minister Olmert had to step down because he was indicted for corruption.

The Escape Hatch

Of course, as in most speeches made by politicians an out word or phrase is always inserted so as to make it easier to be securely on both sides of the issue in case backtracking becomes a political necessity [Note: always look for the escape hatch phrase in any political speech].  In the case of Obama’s speech it was 1967 borders “with mutually agreed swaps”. That sounds so good doesn’t it? Tell me, after watching that video how can Israel give up any land West of the large valley between Israel and Jordan, or the Golan Heights etc? To do so would leave Israel with borders that are structurally indefensible. It has only been by the bravery of the Israeli people and the overwhelming technical superiority of American military hardware that has prevented a second holocaust.

With the escape hatch phrase Obama can say “I wanted borders based on the 1967 lines” which resulted in an invasion, while at the same time saying “I said that we cannot just go back to the 1967 borders”. There are few politicians who speak that do not include these escape hatch phrases [Gov. Christie of New Jersey does not use them and even made a speech against their use.]

So Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu made use of Obama’s escape hatch phrase and wiped his feet on it saying “President Obama says that we cannot go back to the 1967 borders”. Of course the Prime Minister knows full well this was not Obama’s intent, but graciously gave him an out. One thing is strikingly obvious, President Obama was shocked by the push-back he received from some in his own party. Not only did almost every Republican condemn Obama’s remarks, but so did many Democrats. The simple truth is that most Democrats are not antisemites in spite of the fact that the racist “liberation theology” types and many on the academic left are.

Congressman Allen West (Florida-22) gave  a response that was representative of most Republicans:

Today’s endorsement by President Barack Obama of the creation of a Hamas-led Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, signals the most egregious foreign policy decision his administration has made to date, and could be the beginning of the end as we know it for the Jewish state.

From the moment the modern day state of Israel declared statehood in 1948, to the end of the 1967 Six Day War, Jews were forbidden access to their holiest site, the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, controlled by Jordan’s Arab army.

The pre-1967 borders endorsed by President Obama would deny millions of the world’s Jews access to their holiest site and force Israel to return the strategically important Golan Heights to Syria, a known state-sponsor of terrorism.

Resorting to the pre-1967 borders would mean a full withdrawal by the Israelis from the West Bank and the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. Make no mistake, there has always been a Nation of Israel and Jerusalem has been and must always be recognized as its rightful capital.

In short, the Hamas-run Palestinian state envisioned by President Obama would be devastating to Israel and the world’s 13.3 million Jews. It would be a Pavlovian style reward to a declared Islamic terrorist organization, and an unacceptable policy initiative.

America should never negotiate with the Palestinian Authority – which has aligned itself with Hamas. Palestine is a region, not a people or a modern state. Based upon Roman Emperor Hadrian’s declaration in 73 AD, the original Palestinian people are the Jewish people.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid rebuked Obama on national televisionvideo

Legendary musician, KISS lead, and actor Gene Simmons did not mince words either. Warning this IS Gene Simmons so you know what to expect. Simmons is an Israeli by the way.

Prime Minister Netanyahu came to the White House and in a most unusual happenstance, he took President Obama to school right in front of the press. Aside from the substance of the video, we are privy to watch a master diplomat at work.

“Everybody knows this (1967 borders) isn’t going to happen.” “Peace based on an illusion will crash upon rocks of reality.”

Everyone is beating up on President Obama, but in fairness to the President, he has been inundated with antisemitic propaganda much of his life. His father was a communist, his mother was a radical academic leftist, his mentor was Frank Marshall Davis who was also a communist. Obama wrote in his book that he  sought out the Marxists in college. Campus leftists and antisemitism are like bacon and eggs. Obama’s preacher. Rev. Wright, is as hateful an antisemite as they come.  This may be the first time the President was exposed to a realistic appraisal of this issue. I hope that his time with Prime Minister Netanyahu will have an impact, but if it didn’t this did…

This was not Israel’s message to Obama in the video above; rather in standing ovation after standing ovation the message was clear, this was a unified Congress’ message to the President and his administration. I am grateful for it because the world became much more unstable for a few days until this message was sent to the world.

My Thoughts – This is just conjecture so take it as such. What the Obama Administration has been doing to Israel is exactly what Joe Biden promised would not happen in the campaign. So I would like to know what is going on with him. It is no secret that Valerie Jarret and her crew are hostile to Israel and that they are the closest to Obama and have been since Chicago. Advisors Samantha Power and Cass Sunstien are very hostile towards Israel. While I have many critiques of Joe Biden, wavering on support for Israel is something I never thought I would see from him. It is clear by the video that Biden is thrilled to see this reaction from Congress I wonder if he helped to orchestrate it and protect Obama from himself by undermining his 1967 proposal.

UPDATE – Egypt to permanently open border with Gaza – LINK.

This is important because Iran has been sending arms to Hamas, including anti-ship missiles. Israel has been inspecting ships coming to Gaza and confiscating heavy weapons. Now Syria and Iran can send weapons to Egypt and they will gto to Gaza and be used against Israeli civilians. So much for the “Arab Spring” for democracy that Obama has been talking about. The result of Obama not helping Mubarak is that the Christians in Egypt are under even attack worse than before, the Muslim Brotherhood is taking over the country and they have promised to end the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. They have also banned any new mass protests in Egypt and the few that were serious about “democracy” have vanished (VIDEO – LINKLINK). We seem to be also be helping the Muslim Brotherhood take over Libya, but in Iran, when REAL pro-democracy and freedom protesters were rising up against the regime Obama let them get slaughtered with no serious support.

See Israel Part II HERE

Posted in Israel | 2 Comments »

Social Security now in permanent deficit, Medicare Trustees admit the system is in trouble, liberal ‘Think Tank’ fails at statistics in deficit denial…

Posted by iusbvision on May 18, 2011

The system is not sustainable. The bureaucracy is huge and government employees earn 30-300% higher than their private sector counterparts and have gold plated benefits. Every dollar that goes to a bureaucrat who is not accountable to you and has no incentive to be efficient is another dollar that is not used for someones good care.

Government programs should not be “unionized job programs to get union dues to the Democrats” first, and programs people use second.  We cannot afford to carry on the status quo any more if we want to deliver on promised benefits. Unless we have reform such as the Paul Ryan plan, the system will blow up and the government reports show it.

Social Security

Heritage:

The debate about whether Social Security faces a problem and needs to be fixed is over. The 2011 trustees report, which was released this afternoon, shows that the program already faces massive permanent annual deficits. In 2010, Social Security spent $49 billion more in benefits that it took in from its payroll tax. This year, that deficit will be approximately $46 billion.

Now is the time to focus on solutions. Instead of just blindly defending the current program, both Congress and the Obama Administration should propose comprehensive programs that permanently fix Social Security. It is one thing to oppose a solution; it is another to come up with a plan and fix the problem.

Social Security Problem $1.2 Trillion and One Year Worse

In net present value terms, Social Security owes $9.1 trillion more in benefits than it will receive in taxes. The 2011 number consists of $2.6 trillion to repay the special issue bonds in the trust fund and $6. 5 trillion to pay benefits after the trust fund is exhausted in 2036—a year earlier. This is an increase of $1.2 trillion from last year’s report, which also reflects several changes to assumptions and methodology.

A key change in this year’s report is that Social Security is predicted to run cash-flow deficits from now on. The immediate cash-flow deficits are largely due to the effects of the recession on its finances. The recession increased the amount of benefits paid out by Social Security as older workers who have lost their jobs choose to file for benefits earlier than they might have otherwise. Meanwhile, younger unemployed workers are unable to pay Social Security taxes, while workers who suffer a drop in their income pay lower amounts.

Net present value measures the amount of money that would have to be invested today in order to have enough money on hand to pay deficits in the future. In other words, Congress would have to invest $9.1 trillion today in order to have enough money to pay all of Social Security’s promised benefits through 2085. This money would be in addition to what Social Security receives during those years from its payroll taxes.

Medicare

Heritage:

The just released 2011 Medicare trustees report does not contain any big surprises. Much of what the trustees say in this report they have said before: Medicare poses enormous challenges for patients and taxpayers alike, and its financial condition continues a downward slide. Some key findings:

  • Medicare’s unfunded obligations increased by $2 trillion. A key indicator of the true cost of the program is the cost of the promised benefits that are not financed by dedicated revenues. Using their standard 75-year projection (2011–2085), the trustees estimate this year that Medicare benefits promised that are not paid for amount to $24.6 trillion, compared to their projection of $22.5 trillion last year. These and other projections in the report are based on current law, including the official assumption that the estimated $575 billion in savings from Medicare provider cuts under Obamacare will be sustained, as well as the 29 percent reduction in Medicare physician payments in 2012. The Medicare trustees concede the point: “Although the long-term viability of some of these provisions is debatable, the annual report to Congress on the financial status of Medicare must be based on current law” (emphasis added). Different assessment and different accounting techniques, of course, can yield different estimates of these long-term costs. Based on an alternative scenario of projected costs and spending that many analysts considered more realistic, the Medicare actuary in 2010 estimated the long-term Medicare debt at $34.8 trillion. The Medicare actuary has yet to offer his alternative assessment for 2011.
  • The financial condition of the Medicare Part A trust fund is worse. The Hospitalization Trust Fund—the part of the program that pays seniors’ hospital bills—is in worse shape than reported last year. The Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is going to be exhausted in 2024 rather than 2029. While the fund has started running big annual deficits ($32 billion in 2010 and $34 billion in 2011), the five-year acceleration of the fund’s exhaustion has been aggravated by a combination of higher hospital spending and the consequent reduction in the payroll tax receipts resulting from the economic downturn. When the HI fund is exhausted, obviously it cannot pay benefits. Congress would have to replenish it with higher taxes. One more point: It should be noted that the most recent Congressional Budget Office assessment of the trust fund (March 2011) is more pessimistic and projects an exhaustion in 2020.
  • The “Medicare Funding Warning” has been issued again. Under current law, the Medicare trustees are required to issue a Medicare Funding Warning. This means that general revenues will account for more than 45 percent of Medicare’s total outlays. The 45 percent threshold for such funding, in contrast to dedicated revenues, is officially “excessive” under current law. In this year’s report, the statutory threshold has been reached again this year, as it was last year, and the President is required to develop a proposal to transmit to Congress to deal with the problem.

This year’s trustees report only confirms the seriousness of the financial challenge posed by an unreformed Medicare program. Over the full 75-year budget window for the entitlements, about 90 percent of the growth of Medicare and Social Security is going to occur by 2035. The baby boom generation, to be supported by a relatively smaller workforce, will drive costs to new levels. That is indeed why The Heritage Foundation’s comprehensive reform proposal, Saving the American Dream, takes on an even greater urgency.

Leftists in Deficit Denial

Heritage:

Liberal Think Tank Fails Statistics

A chart created by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has been circulating among liberal bloggers such as Ezra Klein, James Fallows, and Andrew Sullivan.

The chart, seen to the right, purports to show that the next decade’s deficits are entirely the result of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, wars, bailouts, recession, and stimulus.

Their methodology fails statistics 101.

Imagine a basketball team that loses 100-98. It would make no sense to cherry pick one single basket by their opponent and blame it for 100 percent of the loss – letting all other baskets scored off the hook. Yet that is essentially what CBPP is doing.

See the rest of the story with charts and evidence HERE.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Obama Administration to Honor ‘Green’ Schools That Teach ‘Environmental Literacy’

Posted by iusbvision on May 17, 2011

Oh no, the government and the activists and teachers unions don’t try to indoctrinate out kids do they….

In many public schools today a student can literally go through k-12 and never hear one good thing about capitalism and the American Way. Most parents assume that school is the same as when they went to school, it is not.

CNS News Service:

(CNSNews.com) – Next year on Earth Day, the Obama administration plans to announce which U.S. schools have been selected as “Green Ribbon Schools,” a designation that will “honor” schools for “creating healthy and sustainable learning environments” and for “teaching environmental literacy.”

The Green Ribbon Schools program was announced in late April, but details on how schools will be picked or what the honor entails have not been released.

Jo Ann Webb, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Education, told CNSNews.com that the program is still under development.

“The criteria have not been developed yet,” Webb said. “The plan is for the U.S. Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Council for Environmental Quality to develop the criteria this spring and summer and to issue the call for applications early this fall.

Webb said the program would recognize schools for “engaging students on environmental issues and producing environmentally literate students; increasing energy efficiency and using renewable energy technologies; and creating healthy learning environments by addressing environmental issues in the schools.”

Webb said approximately 50 Green Ribbon schools could be named on Earth Day 2012. In announcing the program, Obama administration officials touted the importance of environmentalism as part of a good education.

“Preparing our children to be good environmental citizens is some of the most important work any of us can do,” U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said when he announced the new program last month. “It’s work that will serve future generations and quite literally sustain our world.”

“Each day, we ask students across the nation to demonstrate excellence, integrity and leadership in the classroom, and in return, the federal government must do the same,” said Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

“The Green Ribbon Schools program will recognize healthy learning spaces that promote environmental literacy and prepare our leaders of tomorrow to win a clean energy future.”

What is meant by “environmental literacy” varies, depending on the source, but in general, it includes a belief that human actions are contributing to climate change.

In announcing the Green Ribbon Schools program, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said that schools taking part in the program “will help kids connect what they’re learning in science class with the world around them, allowing them to envision solutions to tomorrow’s challenges while living healthier lives today.

“By making green living a part of everyday learning, Green Ribbon Schools will prepare our children to win the future by leading our global green energy economy,” Jackson said.

‘Energy literacy’

The Education Department and EPA aren’t the only federal agencies reaching out to young people.

Separately, the U.S. Energy Department — in its 2011 Strategic Plan — says it intends to “promote energy literacy” to achieve the Obama administration’s national energy goals.

“Because today’s young generation are tomorrow’s world leaders, we will champion outreach through competitions, project-based learning, interactive gaming, and social media,” the report says on page 21.

The Energy Department says its energy literacy effort will aim for a “modest understanding of energy sources, generation, use and conservation strategies” to allow “informed decisions on topics from home energy use to international energy policy.”

The Energy Department plans to “leverage relationships with academic institutions” and other public/private groups “to improve awareness and understanding of energy issues.”

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

Government Motors Sponsors Chinese Communist Propaganda Film.

Posted by iusbvision on May 17, 2011

Washington Times:

In late 2010, General Motors agreed to sponsor a propaganda film celebrating the 90th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The CCP made film titled (translated to English) “The Birth of a Party” or “The Great Achievement of Founding the Party” is set to premiere all over the Communist nation on June 15 reported China AutoWeb last September. The auto website adds:

“According to an announcement posted on Shanghai GM’s official web site yesterday, whose title reads “joining hands with China Film Group, Cadillac whole-heartedly supports the making of the Birth of a Party…”

The report goes further:

“As the CCP marries totalitarianism with capitalism and fools the people with entertainment, only the “politically correct” or stupid–or those who pretend to be so–can get rich. And GM seems to know this very well. While Audi, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and Volvo have all rushed to please China’s rich and powerful through physical enlargement (offering models of extended wheelbases), Cadillac gratifies the party orally, singing praises through a film.”

According to the above report, the film will discuss events that led up to the formation of the CCP following the 1917 Russian Revolution. When the movie first went into production GM signed up Cadillac as the “chief business partner” with the Communist Party, stating: “Cadillac whole-heartedly supports the making of the Birth of a Party.”

Wow, how much suffering has the Chinese Communist Party caused, how many of it’s own has it murdered, how many dissidents jailed, how many Christians persecuted?

I have an older Chevy Caprice and an older Chevy Blazer and I have been satisfied with those vehicles so I am happy to keep fixing them up.  My family bought a Chevy Trailblazer but it started falling apart right after the warranty expired.

The bailout was bad, the way they stripped Republican dealership owners of their businesses was bad, the commercial that painted a false picture about the bailout money being returned was really bad, no one likes being lied to. Combined with this I am beyond the last straw. I do not see how I could ever buy another GM vehicle again in good conscience.

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

Patriot Act Warrants That Let Agents Enter Homes Without Owner Knowing Triple Under Obama

Posted by iusbvision on May 17, 2011

This is exactly the opposite of what Obama promised.

KOAT News:

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A special type of government search warrant that allows authorities to search homes without informing the owner for months is becoming more common, Target 7 has learned.Imagine someone walking through your neighborhood, coming into your home and rifling through your intimate belongings.“(They) search through your home, your dresser drawers, your computer files,” Peter Simonson, with ACLU New Mexico, said.These search warrants don’t involve knocking on doors or any type of warning at all. Delayed-notice search warrants, or “sneak-and-peek” warrants, allow federal agents to enter your home without telling you they’ve been there until months later.

The warrants have always been around, but their use has spiked since the revamped Patriot Act in 2005. The number of delayed-notice search warrants spiked nationally from nearly 700 in fiscal year 2007 to close to 2,000 in 2009.Upwards of 200 approved during that same three-year stretch came out of the 10th Circuit Court, which covers a handful of states including New Mexico. The majority of those delayed search warrants aren’t even for terrorism-related cases. According to the U.S. Department of Justice’s figures, the majority of the warrants are for drug cases.“While billed as an anti-terror tool, (a sneak-and-peek warrant) had no requirements on it that it precluded it from being used in standard criminal investigations,” Simonson said.The warrants are so secret that the New Mexico U.S. Attorney’s Office wouldn’t go on record with Target 7 about them.The ACLU said it expects delayed-notice warrant numbers to keep growing each year as long as certain parts of the Patriot Act remain on the books.

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

On Oil Obama Says One Thing & Does Another

Posted by iusbvision on May 17, 2011

Polling shows that like Jimmy Carter, Obama’s energy policy is going to send him packing in 2012. So what is the new strategy, tell people you are expanding domestic oil production and just not do it.

But expanding leases does nothing because often it is discovered that a lease cannot be trilled upon for technical reasons. Also, the government and environmental groups are not allowing companies to drill on leases they have paid for. The lease is just the first step of a process that takes years and the government can halt it any step of the way, and has as you will see below.

Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu said after he was confirmed by the Senate that we have to find a way to get the price of gas to European levels (around $8 dollars a gallon). Even the new Democrats National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman just went on the record with a repeat of the Democrats energy policy, less domestic production, and more deficit spending for Chinese made solar panels.

Obama’s illegal offshore drilling moratorium explained. This will infuriate you. UPDATE – Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Confirms: Democrat Energy Policy is To Push For Less Energy and More Deficit Spending

This is a no miss short film explaining how the government can stop all drilling with the stroke of a pen….

On top of that Obama’s energy policy is now threatening to shut down the Alaska pipeline.

Heritage:

Obama Oil Policy Threatens Alaska Pipeline’s Existence

The invaluable Alaskan oil pipeline isn’t doing well these days. A remedy to help fix this precious resource is available but overzealous environmentalists and over-regulatory politicians are standing in the way.  The ever-decreasing amount of oil flowing through the pipeline is disrupting its effective operation — and threatening its very existence.

This problem could easily be solved by opening up more domestic drilling in Alaska. This would allow more oil to flow through the pipeline, maintain the correct temperature (which falls to dangerous levels with insufficient supply). But access to drilling permits has been severely reduced. With gas prices hovering around $4 a gallon, it is inconceivable that the Obama administration would continue to hinder production and add regulations that could eliminate yet another standard domestic source of oil. Yet that is what is occurring.

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, Russell Gold writes about the threat to kill the pipeline:

Shell earlier this year canceled plans to drill in the Beaufort Sea this summer because, after five years, it couldn’t get a federal air-emission permit for an offshore drilling rig. Its plans for drilling in the Chukchi Sea on Alaska’s northwest coast are also held up by a legal dispute. Exxon Mobil is also waiting for federal environmental approval, and in February, the federal government denied ConocoPhillips a permit the company had been working on for five years.

…Shutting the pipeline would force refineries to find new and more expensive supplies of crude oil. And President Barack Obama’s efforts to decrease oil imports would suffer a major setback.

While opening more drilling in Alaska would help significantly, there are even more places where permits and environmental regulations are causing problems. Heritage’s Nick Loris writes:

We can’t drill off the Pacific Coast, Atlantic Coast, or the eastern Gulf of Mexico. The U.S. Environmental Appeals Board withheld air quality permits preventing Shell from moving forward to develop 27 billion barrels of oil off the coasts of Alaska. The Environmental Protection Agency already issued two air permits, but Earthjustice filed a petition to review the permits, causing the Appeals Board to act.

Environmental activists within the Obama administration are literally halting the much needed domestic oil exploration America needs to improve our economic well being and reduce gas prices for hurting consumers. Saving the pipeline should be top priority right now.

What If Oil Producers Actually Received Subsidies Like Wind Energy Producers? – LINK

Related:

Obama: If you’re complaining about the price of gas get a trade in….

GAO – Government Shut Down Yucca Facility for Political Reasons, Not Scientific Ones

Press Grilled Bush When Gas Hit $3.00 – Nada for Obama… UPDATED!

The latest lie from the left: Two-thirds of oil and gas leases in Gulf inactive – UPDATED!

Sarah Palin: What We Were Saying One Year Ago About Obama’s Failed Energy Policy

Obama pushed Brazil to drill more, promises aid to Brazil to help drill. While at home imposes drilling ban.

Obama Administration Held in Contempt for Violating Court Order

API: Recent Studies Show Obama Drilling Moratorium Will Cost 50,000 Jobs; 160,000 by 2032.

Heritage: Anti-Drilling Policies Costing Federal Government Billions in Lost Revenue

Now Russia, along with Mexico, Spain, Cuba, and China are building oil wells just miles off our shores while Obama keeps Americans out. UPDATE – Steve Forbes: Obama repeating Carter’s mistakes.

If You Ever Needed Proof that Democrats Want Higher Gas Prices…

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Dirty Tricks, Energy & Taxes, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Fairfax teacher still suffering from false molestation allegations. Police officer admits to lying…

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2011

You can read the story HERE at the Washington Post:

Sean Lanigan’s nightmare began in January 2010, when the principal at Centre Ridge Elementary School pulled him out of the physical education class he was teaching and quietly walked him into an interrogation with two Fairfax County police detectives.

He had no warning that a 12-year-old girl at the Centreville school had accused him of groping and molesting her in the gym.

The girl, angry at Lanigan about something else entirely, had made the whole thing up. But her accusations launched a soul-sapping rollercoaster ride that still hasn’t ended.

“Emotionally, a part of me has died inside,” Lanigan said in a recent interview. “I’m physically and mentally exhausted all the time, how the whole process has been dragged out to this date. It certainly has affected the quality of life for me and my family at home.”

Lanigan remains in limbo, nearly a year after a jury’s acquittal. The Fairfax School District transferred him from Centre Ridge in a move that ultimately forced his wife to quit her job. School officials are now transferring him again. And the district has refused to pay his $125,000 in legal fees, even though Virginia law allows reimbursement for employees who are cleared of wrongdoing on the job.

~snip

A jury found him not guilty after just 47 minutes of deliberation — virtually unheard of in a child sex abuse case. Jurors were outraged by the lack of evidence, with one weeping in sympathy during closing arguments.
~snip
But this is the part that really rubs me bad…

Police declined to allow Nicole Christian, the lead detective on the case, to be interviewed for this article. Several months after Lanigan was acquitted, Fairfax prosecutors dismissed another of Christian’s child abuse cases in the middle of trial, a rarity, when the detective acknowledged that she had “misstated” some key facts in her sworn testimony.

This kind of nonsense happens just too often. Be sure to go to the Washington Post’s web site to read the entire piece and be sure to watch the video. It is not every day that I get to commend the Post on a solid piece of journalism, I just wish it would become a trend.

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

Over Half of All Obamacare Waivers Given to Union Members

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2011

Mark Hemingway at The Weekly Standard:

In what is fast becoming a weekly event, the Obama administration granted 200 more companies aivers from the Democrats’ sweeping health care law in the Friday night news dump. That brings the number of companies receiving waivers to 1,372. (You can get a full list of the companies exempted here.)

Not surprisingly, it helps to be a Democratic ally when seeking a waiver. The Republican Policy Committee reports that over half of the workers that have been exempted so far belong to unions:

The plans newly approved for waivers cover more than 160,000 people, bringing to nearly 3.1 million the number of individuals in plans exempted from the health law’s requirements.  Of the participants receiving waivers, more than half – over 1.55 million – are in union plans, raising questions of why such a disproportionate share of union members are receiving waivers from the law’s requirements.  The percentage of participants receiving waivers that come from unions also continues to rise – the number was 48% in April, and 45% in March.

Unions already received a generous concession in the health care bill. Their generous “cadilac” insurance plans were exempted from being taxed until 2018, adding about $120 billion to the bill’s cost over ten years. For more on how the administration has helped unions, see my story in THE WEEKLY STANDARD from a few weeks ago.

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

Reagan at Notre Dame 30 Years Ago. A Speech that Changed the Direction of History.

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2011

Reagan has always been close to South Bend as the film that launched his career was shot right here.

Dr. Paul Kengor at National Review:

Reagan at Notre Dame

A call to transcendence and duty

or those of us fascinated by Cold War history, the last few months have been a treat, with recognition of two 20th-century giants who played a huge role in peacefully taking down an Evil Empire and ending the longest-running conflict of a bloody century. In February, Americans marked the centennial of the birth of Pres. Ronald Reagan. This May, Catholics marked the beatification of Pope John Paul II.

Even then, that’s just the tip of the historical iceberg. We’re at the 30-year mark of a bunch of events that conservatives in particular should reflect on, instead of just hopping from news cycle to news cycle. The founders of our movement, with the founding editor of National Review among them, would want us to stand athwart history yelling “Stop”; that is, to pause and pay recognition.

In January 1981, Ronald Reagan was inaugurated president. Mere weeks later, on March 30, he was shot. On May 13, John Paul II likewise was shot. Both men, we learned only later, came perilously close to bleeding to death during emergency surgery. Those events would convince the president and the pope that God had spared them for a special — indeed, historical — purpose.

Some of this has been acknowledged in retrospectives in recent weeks. What will not get its due, however, was a special speech given by President Reagan on May 17, 1981, at Notre Dame. And here, I encourage conservatives to listen up and take notes.

The occasion was Notre Dame’s commencement, and Reagan gave the assembled undergrads a lesson to remember, including one of his first presidential predictions on the demise of Communism:

The years ahead are great ones for this country, for the cause of freedom and the spread of civilization. The West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism. . . . It will dismiss it as some bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written.

The visionary quality of Reagan’s words is evident only in retrospect. Though no one else was making such audacious predictions, and though many scoffed at Reagan, those last pages were indeed being written. Unbeknownst to the world, Communism’s grip on Eastern Europe would not survive the decade. Even the USSR would disintegrate peacefully. On Dec. 25, 1991, a helpless Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as leader of the USSR, formally turning out the lights.

For Reagan, that process was aided by an indispensable ally, John Paul II, who had been shot only four days before the Notre Dame speech. Reagan asked the Notre Dame faithful to pray for John Paul, and commended him for his recent encyclical attacking Communism.

The Notre Dame speech was crafted by chief speechwriter Tony Dolan, with a few edits from the president, as can be seen in a marked-up draft at the Reagan Presidential Library (“Presidential Speeches,” Box 1, Folder 7). As Dolan is always quick to acknowledge, the speech is “Reagan’s,” as it was written quintessentially for Reagan alone, based on his ideas, his voice, and with phrases he himself had used. Dolan could not have written such a speech for anyone but Reagan, nor would anyone but Reagan have signed off on it.

In fact, the speech as delivered was highly personal, begun with lengthy extemporaneous remarks by Reagan. It wove together quotes and anecdotes, impromptu and prewritten, establishing Reagan’s theme of a larger cause and challenge — a challenge for all of America. It was a complex, enigmatic speech that can only be fully understood today, long after Reagan’s presidency and with current knowledge of what Reagan was secretly pursuing behind the scenes. Reagan telegraphed its unorthodox nature in these opening lines:

The temptation is great to use this forum as an address on a great international or national issue. . . . Indeed, this is somewhat traditional. So, I wasn’t surprised when I read in several reputable journals that I was going to deliver an address on foreign policy and the economy. I’m not going to talk about either.

This wasn’t quite true. Or maybe it was. Reagan’s objective was much larger — yes, untraditional — as if transcending the economy and foreign policy. Reagan drew upon dramatic remarks by Winston Churchill: “When great causes are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits, not animals, and that something is going on in space and time, and beyond space and time, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

As Dolan knew, Reagan had first employed that Churchill quote back in the classic 1964 speech “A Time for Choosing,” the speech that launched his career and his crusade against the USSR. To Reagan, the obligation Americans must meet was their duty to fight expansionist, atheistic Soviet Marxism. Was America worthy of that challenge? He responded in the affirmative, citing a protracted history of Americans meeting tests.

Reagan then followed the Churchill passage with a personal story from his movie Knute Rockne, All-American. The film was always seen as a celebration of Notre Dame football, but Reagan was about to make it much more. He provided a most instructive parable, one that I’ve never seen elsewhere from Reagan. The president stated:

Now, today I hear very often, “Win one for the Gipper.” . . . But let’s look at the significance of that story. [Coach Knute] Rockne could have used Gipp’s dying words to win a game any time. But eight years went by following the death of George Gipp before Rock revealed those dying words, his deathbed wish.

And then he told the story at halftime to a team that was losing, and one of the only teams he had ever coached that was torn by dissension and jealousy and factionalism. The seniors on that team were about to close out their football careers without learning or experiencing any of the real values that a game has to impart. None of them had known George Gipp. They were children when he played for Notre Dame. It was to this team that Rockne told the story and so inspired them that they rose above their personal animosities. For someone they had never known, they joined together in a common cause and attained the unattainable.

We were told when we were making the picture of one line that was spoken by a player during that game. We were actually afraid to put it in the picture. The man who carried the ball over for the winning touchdown was actually injured on the play. We were told that as he was lifted on the stretcher and carried off the field he was heard to say, “That’s the last one I can get for you, Gipper.”

Now, it’s only a game. And maybe to hear it now, afterward — and this is what we feared — it might sound maudlin and not the way it was intended. But is there anything wrong with young people having an experience, feeling something so deeply, thinking of someone else to the point that they can give so completely of themselves? There will come times in the lives of all of us when we’ll be faced with causes bigger than ourselves, and they won’t be on a playing field.

Why this story in this speech? Reagan, of course, had played George Gipp in this movie; it was his character who uttered the unforgettable deathbed line, “Go out there and win one for the Gipper.” Throughout his political life he used that line as a kind of signature, often referring to himself as “the Gipper,” as did others. Yet here, in applying the story to a larger cause, Reagan appeared to be linking himself to Rockne, not Gipp.

Just as Coach Rockne rallied a team torn apart by “dissension and jealousy and factionalism,” Coach Reagan seemed to be rallying a team. He wanted this group to join “someone they had never known” — apparently himself, as a political leader — to “attain the unattainable,” just as that particular Notre Dame team had for a George Gipp they had never met.

This was not the first time Reagan had used a commencement address to rally a group of students to the cause. The challenge at Notre Dame was eerily similar to one he had made to the female students of tiny William Woods College way back in June 1952, whom he asked to join him in the battle, the grand ideological struggle, to “push back the darkness over the stadium of humanity.” That darkness was Soviet Communism.

Reagan was bent on motivating his young countrymen to rise above their personal animosities. A country divided and factionalized could not meet the Cold War challenge with confidence.

From the Gipp story, Reagan cast his gaze in a loftier direction:

When it’s written, the history of our time won’t dwell long on the hardships of the recent past. But history will ask . . . Did a people forged by courage find courage wanting? Did a generation steeled by hard war and a harsh peace forsake honor at the moment of great climactic struggle for the human spirit? . . . [T]he answers are to be found in the heritage left by generations of Americans before us. They stand in silent witness to what the world will soon know and history someday record: that in its third century, the American Nation came of age, affirmed its leadership of free men and women serving selflessly a vision of man with God, government for people, and humanity at peace.

Someday, Reagan believed, history would judge that America reached maturity by affirming “its leadership of free men and women serving selflessly a vision of man with God.” This was an implicit recognition and rejection of the atheistic Soviet vision. Only four paragraphs earlier in the speech, he had predicted that Communism was nearing its final days; the next three paragraphs continued that theme. Reagan concluded:

For the West, for America, the time has come to dare to show to the world that our civilized ideas, our traditions, our values, are not — like the ideology and war machine of totalitarian societies — just a façade of strength. It is time for the world to know our intellectual and spiritual values are rooted in the source of all strength, a belief in a Supreme Being, and a law higher than our own.

“The time has come.” Those values, which America should dare to show to the world, said Reagan, derive from the greatest of strengths: from God, from belief in God, and from the wisdom of God’s law.

It is interesting to note how Reagan himself viewed these remarks. Seven years later, in March 1988, he returned to Notre Dame for a final rally. He mentioned that in 1981 he had come to give “one of the first major addresses of my presidency,” and that his remarks included his prediction that the West would transcend Communism. He said America could achieve that objective because its spiritual values and inner strength were so great.

In sum, the May 1981 Notre Dame address ought to be recognized as one of Reagan’s finest and most revealing, one that conservatives especially should know and appreciate. It’s really a quite profound, poignant speech that captures the essence of Reagan’s presidency, his faith, his attack on the USSR, and his view of an exceptional America.

It is indeed, as Reagan put it, about all of us Americans — from our homes to the halls of Congress to the White House — understanding that “when great causes are on the move in the world,” as they are today as well, we learn that we’re spirits, not animals. We sense and know that there’s something going on in space and time, and beyond space and time, which, “whether we like it or not,” spells duty.

— Paul Kengor is professor of political science at Grove City College. His books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and the newly released Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.

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

Obama back to old tricks: Pushing banks to give high risk loans again…

Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2011

… all because this policy worked out so well the last time right?

[LINK – start at the bottom of the linked page and start reading to get a great education on the mortgage crisis. It started with the abuse and deliberate misapplication of redlining regulations to accomplish political goals and economic social engineering. When the OFHEO regulator tried to warn Congress Democrats like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd insisted that the regulator was lying and even used the race card against them, of course the worst economy since the Great Depression has shown us that everything wasn’t fine – Editor]

Via Weasel Zappers and Business Week:

(Business Week) — Community activists in St. Louis became concerned a couple of years ago that local banks weren’t offering credit to the city’s poor and African American residents. So they formed a group called the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance and began writing complaint letters to federal regulators.

Apparently, someone in Washington took notice. The Federal Reserve has cited one of the group’s targets, Midwest BankCentre, a small bank that has been operating in St. Louis’s predominantly white, middle-class suburbs for over a century, for failing to issue home mortgages or open branches in disadvantaged areas. Although executives at the bank say they don’t discriminate, Midwest BankCentre’s latest annual report says it is in the process of negotiating a settlement with the U.S. Justice Dept. over its lending practices.

Lawyers and bank consultants say regulators and the Obama Administration are scrutinizing financial institutions for a practice that last drew attention before the rise of subprime lending: redlining. The term dates from the 1930s, when the Federal Housing Administration drew up maps using red ink to delineate inner-city neighborhoods considered too risky for lending. Congress later passed laws banning lending discrimination on the basis of race and other characteristics. “The agencies have refocused on redlining because, in the wake of the subprime explosion and sudden implosion, they are looking at these disadvantaged neighborhoods and not seeing any credit access,” says Jo Ann Barefoot, co-chair at Treliant Risk Advisors in Washington, D.C., which consults with banks on regulatory issues.

The 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requires banks to make loans in all the areas they serve, not just the wealthy ones. A Bloomberg analysis found the percentage of banks earning negative ratings from regulators on CRA exams has risen from 1.45 percent in 2007 to more than 6 percent in the first quarter of this year.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Stuck on Stupid | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers