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 August, 2008

Canada’s New Solution to Long Waiting Lists for Medical Care – Make Patients Draw Straws to Get a Doctor

Posted by iusbvision on August 18, 2008

When I took Dr. Zechowski’s class on film documentaries we watched Michael Moore’s movie “Sicko” and he claimed that Canada does not have a problem with waiting lists for health care.

MD uses lottery to cull patients

Not first such case as lack of doctors causes huge caseloads

Tom Blackwell, National Post Published: Wednesday, August 06, 2008

In the latest jarring illustration of the country’s doctor shortage, a family physician in Northern Ontario has used a lottery to determine which patients would be ejected from his overloaded practice.

Dr. Ken Runciman says he reluctantly eliminated about 100 patients in two separate draws to avoid having to provide assembly-line service or extend already onerous work hours, and admits the move has divided the community of Powassan.

Yet it was not the first time such methods have been employed to determine medical service. A new family practice in Newfoundland held a lottery last month to pick its caseload from among thousands of applicants. An Edmonton doctor selected names randomly earlier this year to pare 500 people from his heavy caseload. And in Ontario, regulators have heard reports of a number of other physicians also using draws to choose, or remove, patients.

The unusual practice seems to be a symptom of the times, said Jill Hefley, spokeswoman for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. A paucity of medical professionals has left an estimated five million Canadians without a family doctor.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=702588

Pierre Lemieux has an analysis of this situation here – http://libertyincanada.com/blog/index.php?blog=2&p=575&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Hat Tip to Dr. John Lott for the heads up on this article.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Health Law, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Democrats Have a Problem: Their Nominee is a Bold Faced Liar. Obama Reverses on Taking Soft Money from PAC’s and Special Interests

Posted by iusbvision on August 18, 2008

This is it everyone this is the last one. Obama campaign has now reversed itself on EVERY campaign funding limitation and promise it has ever made. He is taking money from energy companies, lobbyists, pharmaceuticals and everyone else he said that he would not take money from. Obama reversed himself on the public financing pledge. Now Obama has reversed himself on taking “soft money” from special interests and PAC’s.  (Hat Tip Hotair.com)

On the side of the page is a link to the category “Campaign 2008”. It has a list of articles filled with video and other evidence showing you every flip-flop down the line. Obama has reversed himself on almost every campaign promise that I am aware of that he has made. John Kerry, whose name has become a political epithet for flip-flopping, did not have nearly this many reversals in such a short period of time.

Here is the latest:

Obama: The Democratic National Committee will uphold the same standard: We will not take a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. … They will not fund my party!

Now the story has changed.

Barack Obama campaign soliciting ‘soft money’ for convention

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee has decried the practice and vowed to reform convention funding, but the Denver Host Committee was facing a budget shortfall.

By Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

August 16, 2008

WASHINGTON – Facing a large deficit in the Democratic National Convention budget, officials from Barack Obama’s campaign have begun personally soliciting labor unions and others for contributions of up to $1 million. In exchange, donors could get stadium skyboxes for Obama’s acceptance speech and other perks.

Obama has regularly criticized politicians seeking large donations outside the framework of campaign finance regulations — so-called soft money — while touting the virtues of relying on small donations.

Donations made to convention host committees are not covered by federal donation limits. As a result, corporations and wealthy individuals can donate unlimited sums under the premise that the committee is promoting civic pride and economic growth, not a political cause.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-demfunds16-2008aug16,0,5272946.story

Ed Morrissey summed it up flawlessly:

In addition, the Los Angeles Times reports that the move to Invesco Field may be more about hauling in soft money than creating great optics. Obama’s speech will allow the DNC to sell Invesco’s private boxes for a cool $1 million each, which they need to raise more money to cover the cost of the convention. The DNCC had already reserved the Pepsi Center’s luxury boxes for other purposes. Even with all of these new sell-out opportunities provided by Team Obama, the DNCC remains over $11 million short of their goals with nine days left.

The man who claims the reform mantle has not just repeatedly reneged on those promises, Obama has now commercialized his own acceptance speech to get money from the special interests and lobbyists against whom he inveighed in June. Barack Obama seems determined to redefine the term “hypocrite” in 2008.

Here are a couple of the entries on the campaign finance situation from this blog:

https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/06/22/factcheckorg-obama-is-lying-about-mccains-money-and-his-own/

https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/23/democrats-are-the-party-of-the-rich/

So why are so many corporations and special interests giving more money than ever to Obama and the Democrats? They know that McCain has always been the true blue hawk on reigning in spending. Government today is the biggest lender, biggest borrower, biggest insurer, biggest employer, biggest buyer, biggest spender etc. Do the math. The corporate structure has become addicted to government spending.  The higher taxes and regulation that typifies left of center administrations keeps small and medium sized business out of serious competition with the big boys.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Stay Tuned – More Info from IUPUI and Ivy Tech Scandals on the Way

Posted by iusbvision on August 13, 2008

The latest from IUPUI will be coming in detail in the next two weeks. Lately IUPUI has refused to cooperate with records requests in regards to the Sampson scandal. IUPUI set out on a slander campaign against one of it’s students. More details about the slander campaign have been discovered but we are holding that information with us until this next phase of the story becomes more clear. It will be soon.

Also, The Vision has been getting favorable correspondence from Ivy Tech faculty about our recent article about abuse of the faculty by the administration. The article is linked here.

Normally we write about how faculty and administration have abused students. However there are faculty out there who are just doing their best to be good educators. Those faculty will be defended here at The Vision when they have the facts on their side. We expect to have a follow up article on this situation within the coming weeks.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | 1 Comment »

Our Own Congressman Joe Donnelly Helped Rob Indiana Out of a 3 Billion Dollar Investment to Keep Gas Prices High

Posted by iusbvision on August 13, 2008

Our Own Congressman Joe Donnelly Helped Rob Indiana Out of a 3.8 Billion Dollar Investment to Make Sure that our Oil Refining Capacity Remained Low and Gas Prices Stayed High.

Sad, but true. Here are the details.

It is no secret that the United States is low on refinery capacity which is one of the primary reasons gas prices are so high. British Petroleum offered to put up a 3.8 billion dollar investment for a refinery here in Northern Indiana. The plan followed all federal clean air and water safety standards and would have actually returned water to the lake that was cleaner than much of the water that is pumped into it, but that wasn’t good enough for Joe Donnelly and his friends in Washington.

British Petroleum even agreed to lower its emissions to below that of the current legal standard imposed by the state – http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-23-092.asp.

Still not good enough…

Donnelly worked with the Democratic Leadership in the Congress to pass a resolution to condemn Indiana for trying to get more refining capacity and said that we are trying to pollute Lake Michigan.

You all will just love the way they worded it – “Final Vote Results for Roll Call 719 Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the dumping of industrial waste into the Great Lakes.” Don’t believe it – well here is the vote on the resolution right here – http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll719.xml.

Haw many jobs has this one cost Indiana Joe?

It has been all over the news and cataloged on this very site; the Democratic Leadership will not even allow votes for bills or amendments that would expand our domestic energy production. For decades the Democratic Leadership has stated that gas prices need to be higher and they have passed energy policy to guarantee it. Senator Obama has stated that he has no problem with current gas prices, he just wished that the change in price had been more gradual. Here he is on Youtube:

Thanks to fellow blogger Brian Sikma for the heads up on this issue. Brian just doesn’t talk the talk, he walks the walk. Sikma grew so tired of this Washington DC created mess that he took a job with the Luke Puckett campaign to replace Donnelly with someone who has some common sense. Way to go Brian.

Here is what Luke Puckett has to say:

British Petroleum is still trying to do the project but road blocks are in the way. This November we have an opportunity to do something about one of those roadblocks. Follow the link to the project summary and FAQ. http://whiting.bp.com/go/news/1550

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Department of Education Office of Civil Rights to Universities: Don’t Use Bogus Harassment Charges to Supress Free Speech

Posted by iusbvision on August 12, 2008

Excerpts from a letter from the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights on the clarification of the word “harassment” is posted below.

It is no secret that universities have been attempting to use “harassment” as a blunt instrument to silence political, religious, cultural and other speech the administration  doesn’t like. This has led to a series of confrontations and lawsuits (most of which the universities lose) that have cost the taxpayers great expense.

The policy clarification below was issued in 2003. It is obvious that university administrations, including administrators in the ‘diversity industry’, did not get the message. This obviously includes administrators in the IU system.

Once again I would like to thank our friends at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education for posting this valuable information on it’s web site in two places:

http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/5046_3487.pdf

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/5046.html

Any future attempts to do harm, discriminate against, or retaliate against those who engage in free speech or even offensive constitutionally protected speech or association should result in a complaint with not only the US Commission on Civil Rights, but also with the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. Of course great organizations such as FIRE, the Indiana ACLU, the Student Press Law Center, the Alliance Defense Fund and Students for Academic Freedom stand by to assist students to defend their freedom.

After the formerly proposed “Bulletin Board Policy”, the Robert Francis case and the Keith Sampson case at IUPUI, no one in the IU system can claim ignorance of what the constitution protects.

Dear Colleague:

I am writing to confirm the position of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education regarding a subject which is of central importance to our government, our heritage of freedom, and our way of life: the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

OCR has received inquiries regarding whether OCR’s regulations are intended to restrict speech activities that are protected under the First Amendment. I want to assure you in the clearest possible terms that OCR’s regulations are not intended to restrict the exercise of any expressive activities protected under the U.S. Constitution. OCR has consistently maintained that the statutes that it enforces are intended to protect students from invidious discrimination, not to regulate the content of speech. Harassment of students, which can include verbal or physical conduct, can be a form of discrimination prohibited by the statutes enforced by OCR. Thus, for example, in addressing harassment allegations, OCR has recognized that the offensiveness of a particular expression, standing alone, is not a legally sufficient basis to establish a hostile environment under the statutes enforced by OCR. In order to establish a hostile environment, harassment must be sufficiently serious (i.e., severe, persistent or pervasive) as to limit or deny a student’s ability to participate in or benefit from an educational program. OCR has consistently maintained that schools in regulating the conduct of students and faculty to prevent or redress discrimination must formulate, interpret, and apply their rules in a manner that respects the legal rights of students and faculty, including those court precedents interpreting the concept of free speech. OCR’s regulations and policies do not require or prescribe speech, conduct or harassment codes that impair the exercise of rights protected under the First Amendment. …

Some colleges and universities have interpreted OCR’s prohibition of “harassment” as encompassing all offensive speech regarding sex, disability, race or other classifications. Harassment, however, to be prohibited by the statutes within OCR’s jurisdiction, must include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols or thoughts that some person finds offensive. Under OCR’s standard, the conduct must also be considered sufficiently serious to deny or limit a student’s ability to participate in or benefit from the educational program.

In summary, OCR interprets its regulations consistent with the requirements of the First Amendment, and all actions taken by OCR must comport with First Amendment principles. No OCR regulation should be interpreted to impinge upon rights protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution or to require recipients to enact or enforce codes that punish the exercise of such rights. There is no conflict between the civil rights laws that this Office enforces and the civil liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment. With these principles in mind, we can, consistent with the requirements of the First Amendment, ensure a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for students that is conducive to learning and protects both the constitutional and civil rights of all students.

Sincerely,

Gerald A. Reynolds
Assistant Secretary
Office for Civil Rights
Department of Education

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Other Links | 2 Comments »

Citadel Student Uses Handgun in Self Defense

Posted by iusbvision on August 12, 2008

(Hat Tip Dr. John Lott)

Pistol trumps baseball bat in island driving confrontation
Published Saturday, August 9, 2008

Glock 23

Glock 23

Slow driving led to a confrontation between a 22-year-old Citadel student and an unidentified man involving a baseball bat and a pistol on Hilton Head Island on Thursday afternoon, according to a Beaufort County Sheriff’s Office incident report.

The student, who was lost, had been driving slowly on Beach City Road looking for a doctor’s office when he pulled into a parking lot to look at a map, according to the report.

A man driving a Porsche pulled in behind him and approached him carrying a baseball bat. The man was yelling about the student’s driving.

The student pulled a Glock 23 pistol from his glove box and got out of his car, the report stated.

The man with the bat put his hands up, returned to the Porsche and drove away.

The student called the sheriff’s office from his parents’ Hilton Head home. He was not charged in the incident.

http://www.islandpacket.com/news/local/story/572097.html

The Citadel is a military college in South Carolina. Perhaps there is a reason that school shootings and armed robberies happen at so called ‘gun free’ zones and not at places like the Citadel and Virginia Military Institute. This is good publicity for Citadel. One thing is for certain, a nutcase looking for an easy mark is much less likely to choose The Citadel to go out in some hate induced rampage.

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

Brilliant Black American Explains ‘Why I’m Conservative’

Posted by iusbvision on August 8, 2008

(Hat Tip Hotair.com)

This next video is one of the most brilliant refutations of every left wing talking point that I have ever scene.

“Living in the past, instead of learning from it, isn’t progressive and keeping people angry about the past doesn’t make for a better future.”

“If this really is a war for oil, than why don’t you get out of the way and let us drill for our own oil. If it’s really about war for oil than no one has more blood on his hands than you.”

Pay special attention to what he has to say about taxes, the minimum wage and charity.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | 4 Comments »

More Brown-Shirt Censorship Tactics from the Far Left

Posted by iusbvision on August 8, 2008

New York Times:

Group Plans Campaign Against G.O.P. Donors

By MICHAEL LUO
Published: August 7, 2008

Nearly 10,000 of the biggest donors to Republican candidates and causes across the country will probably receive a foreboding “warning” letter in the mail next week.

The letter is an opening shot across the bow from an unusual new outside political group on the left that is poised to engage in hardball tactics to prevent similar groups on the right from getting off the ground this fall.

Led by Tom Matzzie, a liberal political operative who has been involved with some prominent left-wing efforts in recent years, the newly formed nonprofit group, Accountable America, is planning to confront donors to conservative groups, hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.

“We want to stop the Swift Boating before it gets off the ground,” said Mr. Matzzie, who described his effort as “going for the jugular.”

The warning letter is intended as a first step, alerting donors who might be considering giving to right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/us/politics/08donate.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Kids learn this type of behavior in college. Kids do not leave high school with a lust to censor, intimidate, and engage in Stalinist or ‘brown-shirt’ tactics such as this when they leave high school. Such behavior is commonplace on campus as we have catalogued on this blog in detail.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Senator Joe Lieberman On Obama and Iraq

Posted by iusbvision on August 8, 2008

Senator Lieberman was the Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee in 2000. He opposed quitting on Iraq and was driven out of the party for it. Now Lieberman, an independent, speaks out on the issues.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Media Bias You Can Believe In II

Posted by iusbvision on August 8, 2008

AP, NBC, ABC, MSNBC ‘forgot’ to mention that Jailed Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick is a Democrat in its reporting. Kilpatrick is vice-president of the National Conference of Democratic Mayors and is a representative to the Democratic National Committee. After evidence of repeated abuses of power, obstruction of the courts, violation of court orders, sex scandals, perjury, and even assaulting the deputy’s who served papers on him, not only is the press not mentioning his party affiliation, of course there are few calls by partisan democrat groups for Kilpatrick to step down.

When Republican Larry Craig had legal trouble partisan’s on both sides asked him to step down, in spite of the fact that when the evidence was closely examined it appears that Craig was innocent of any wrong doing. Of course, the media went nuts with excessive coverage of the story and made sure that his party affiliation was prominent in that coverage.

The AP featured Crag’s party affiliation regularly:

Craig, a Republican who has represented Idaho in Congress for 27 years, announced Saturday that he intends to resign from the Senate on Sept. 30. But since then, he’s hired a prominent lawyer to investigate the possibility of reversing his plea, his spokesman said.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=5635193

Contrast this as well with the coverage of recently indicted Senator Ted Stevens. Examine the AP article here http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_go_co/stevens_indictment. Stevens party affiliation is mentioned in the headline and appears ELEVEN TIMES in the body of article.

For more, including transcripts of the television news coverage that lacks the party affiliation, please visit Newsbusters here  – http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/08/07/kilpatrick-leads-democratic-group-yet-all-cbs-fnc-refuse-id-him-d

It is not just the AP who is doing this in print news. Here are two more news stories where Kilpatrick’s party affiliation is conveniently left out.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080808/NEWS01/80808033

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/17120142/detail.html

Chuck Norton

UPDATE – we also reported on the party affiliation phenomenon with the elite media HERE and HERE and HERE.

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Luke Puckett Gets It

Posted by iusbvision on August 7, 2008

For more Luke Puckett videos please look at this post  – https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/

In 2007 Joe Donnelly [our current congressman] voted four times against increased domestic drilling. These votes were, in order, Roll Call 40, Roll Call 553, Roll Call 578 and Roll Call 1171. They may be accessed at: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/index.asp – Luke Puckett

Luke is right on. Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama say that expanding domestic energy production will not make prices go down in the near future. The evidence is in on just how wrong Pelosi and Obama are.

Dr. Morris Coats is the lead author of a study that shows how expanding production impacts futures markets to bring prices down because they know that more supply is on the way. This market impact lowers prices. The reason prices are falling now is because President Bush dropped executive road blocks to new drilling, and now it is time for Congress to do the same.

When Dr. Coats and his team submitted the study for peer review it was denied for publishing because the peer review committee said that it is so obvious that expected increases in supply will lower prices because of the effects on futures markets that this information is common knowledge and nothing new.

Read it for yourself right from the rejection letter:

I regret to say that we will not be able to publish this work. Basically, your main result (the present impact of an anticipated future supply change) is already known to economists (although perhaps not to the Democratic Policy Committee) . . . It is our policy to publish only original research that adds significantly to the body of received knowledge regarding energy markets and policy.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/newt/public/Newsletter072408_rejectionletter.pdf

Our friends at National Review have more details about this study and here is the link – http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzU1N2Q0MmQxMjNmOTMxZGZmODNiZGZhOWEzNzhlZTc=

UPDATE:  – The Detroit News isn’t buying Obama’s energy plan either:

But at the same time, he proposed taking away any incentive oil companies would have to expand drilling and increase supplies by pushing a windfall tax on Big Oil’s profits to fund the $1,000 rebate checks.

Perhaps the senator is hoping the checks will make Americans forget, as he apparently has, about what happened when Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter played the price and profit limiting game the 1970s.

As the pay-off for oil exploration dwindled, so did oil supplies, driving up fuel prices and creating long lines at the pump. There’s no reason to think Obama would be any more successful in executing this dubious redistribution strategy.

His plan also would give the state-owned oil companies in places like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela a huge advantage over domestic companies, since they’d be beyond the reach of Obama’s profits grab.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080805/OPINION01/808050306

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

University Administrators Imprisoned and Fined and It All Unravelled After They Violated the Free Speech of Students Who Fought Back

Posted by iusbvision on August 7, 2008

Taxes Southern University violated the free speech rights of three of its students. When it was all over the university CFO was in prison, the president was personally fined $130,000 and the Governor demanded the resignation of the universality board of regents and now the university is paying damages to the students. (Hat Tip FIRE)

Three members of the Texas Southern University student government found some payroll records that were suspicious and indicated possible corruption. The students were not getting satisfactory answers about them through the administration so the students went public by printing with fliers and talking with state legislators. This caught the attention of the FBI who hired one of the students to be a confidential informant to record conversations with administrators.

It wasn’t long before the authorities made arrests. The university president and university CEO were brought up on charges. Eventually the university President payed $130,000 and the university CFO is serving a ten year prison term.

Needless to say some were not happy that three mere students would dare accuse the high and mighty administration of impropriety, so the administration trumped up bogus charges of harassing and threatening speech against the students, had the campus police arrest them and expel them from campus.

So once again, as it was at IUPUI, Temple, Penn State, Wayne State, Georgia Tech, University of California and the list is just too long now; it was an obstinate administration who marched together in perfect lock step against the law and the rules of common decency. The university insisted to the very end that those same three students deserved to be arrested and expelled and insisted it had nothing to do with with the fact that the students helped expose the corruption that had brought down the university leadership. To the administrations great surprise, not one member of the jury bought the university’s preposterous allegations and awarded the students S200,000 in damages with punitive damages to be settled at a later date.

The real question to be asked is, how is it that so many people who are liars, racists, anti-religious bigots, enemies of free speech and other ethical peccadillo’s end up as administrators on college campuses with six figure incomes? How come in most of these cases where the university’s behavior is so outrageous that anyone with a lick of common sense can determine what is obvious; highly paid and highly educated university employees march in lock step along with the injustices that are right in front of their noses?

The Houston Chronicle covered this for the local press:

Texas Southern University officials kicked out three students and had them arrested in retaliation for their public criticism of administrators, a federal jury decided Friday.

The jury of nine women and three men deliberated for 12 hours Thursday and Friday before unanimously accepting all the claims of William G. Hudson, Justin R. Jordan and Oliver J. Brown, who in 2005 sued the TSU regents, then-President Priscilla Slade and other university officials.

The former students were seeking at least $150,000 each and also sued to have their student disciplinary records purged.

Jurors awarded actual damages totaling nearly $200,000 for all three. The jury returns next week to decide on punitive damages, unless the opposing sides settle on that matter.

“At least someone stood up for us, and the jury stood up for us,” said Brown.

The lawsuit claims TSU officials targeted the students after they distributed unflattering materials about Slade and other leaders.

In early testimony of the two-week trial, Brown said he was paid $5,000 as an FBI informant to tape conversations with college officials during a corruption investigation. The students have been credited with helping to expose a spending scandal that led to a plea bargain with Slade, who agreed to repay $130,000, and the criminal conviction of former chief financial officer Quintin Wiggins, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

The jury had to decide whether free speech rights of Hudson and Brown were violated when they were disciplined following their public protest. While Hudson was suspended and Brown was placed on probation, Jordan’s punishment was reversed on appeal.

Jurors also had to determine if Hudson and Jordan should be compensated for their allegations of malicious prosecution and false arrest.

Friday’s decision deemed that the individuals liable for violations against the students are Wiggins; Willie Marshall, TSU vice president and dean of students; police officer Deneen Ford; and Keefus Falls, the former director of human resources. The regents were not held liable for actual damages.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/east/news/5919635.html

Notice in so many of thee cases, the university just digs in it heals and wastes the taxpayers money in lawsuit after lawsuit that it has no chance of winning?

FIRE’s blog called The Torch covered this case in detail so be sure to click the link for more info.

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

Obama Flips Twice on Offshore Drilling…in 48 Hours…

Posted by iusbvision on August 6, 2008

This one is straight from our friends at Hotair.com who deserve a big hat tip for catching this one.

The Original Flip is here where he tells FLORIDIANS that he would compromise on offshore drilling.

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama said today he would be willing to open Florida’s coast for more oil drilling if it meant winning approval for broad energy changes.

“My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices,” Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.

“If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage – I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done,” Obama said.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/state/content/state/epaper/2008/08/01/0801obama1.html

Hours before in Springfield Missouri, Obama said this:

John Kerry eat your heart out.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

You Owned It – You Bailed It Out – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Gave $200 million of Your Money to Politicians and Partisan Orgs.

Posted by iusbvision on August 6, 2008

You Owned It – You Bailed It Out – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Gave $200 Million of Your Money to Politicians and Partisan Orgs.

Yahoo News/Politico:

Fannie, Freddie spent $200M to buy influence

Lisa Lerer Wed Jul 16, 5:44 AM ET

If you want to know how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have survived scandal and crisis, consider this: Over the past decade, they have spent nearly $200 million on lobbying and campaign contributions.

But the political tentacles of the mortgage giants extend far beyond their checkbooks.

The two government-chartered companies run a highly sophisticated lobbying operation, with deep-pocketed lobbyists in Washington and scores of local Fannie- and Freddie-sponsored homeowner groups ready to pressure lawmakers back home.

They’ve stacked their payrolls with top Washington power brokers of all political stripes, including Republican John McCain’s presidential campaign manager, Rick Davis [come to find out it was $15,000 to thje lobbying firm Davis worked for and none of it actually went to Davis. Fannie and Freddie bought up most of the lobbying firms to make sure that no one would lobby against them – Editor]; Democrat Barack Obama’s original vice presidential vetter, Jim Johnson; and scores of others now working for the two rivals for the White House.

Fannie and Freddie’s aggressive political maneuvering has helped stave off increased regulation and preserve special benefits such as exemption from state and local income taxes and the ability to borrow at low rates.

When their stock prices took a dive last week, their government allies extended another helping hand with a plan for the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and, possibly, Congress to shore up the companies.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080716/pl_politico/11781

The Wall Street Journal has more details:

And, oh, what a stream of political cash it is. First, there are Fannie and Freddie’s political action committees, which have already distributed roughly $800,000 to U.S. House and Senate Members this election cycle. Nearly half of the Senators have received funds and almost all of the money is directed to incumbents. Fannie gave $10,000 to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, $10,000 to third-ranking House Democrat Rahm Emanuel, $5,000 to Barney Frank, $10,000 to Republican House whip Roy Blunt, $8,500 to Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and $7,500 to Minority Leader John Boehner and . . . you get the picture.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121728651034091275.html

Fannie and Freddie have also given millions to partisan advocacy groups and think tanks, most of them among the far left.

Billions of your tax dollars went to bail Freedie Mac and Fannie Mae out. All the while they have been funneling money back to the political machine. It may be legal, but it is corruption that is obvious to anyone.

In the bail out bill that was passed by Congress, Republican Senator Jim DeMint from South Carolina tried to offer an amendment to prevent taxpayer subsidized quasi-corporations like Fannie and Freddie from abusing the public trust by slicking the palms of politicians. The Democratic Leader Harry Reid refused to allow the amendment up for a vote (Link).

UPDATE: HERE.

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Obama Flips on Iraq Again

Posted by iusbvision on August 5, 2008

How many times have we gone from unconditional immediate pullout, to timetable, to unconditional 16 month timetable, then conditions of the ground, then Moveon.org has a cow and just BEFORE Obama goes on his Iraq trip to learn “the facts” he is back to 16 month timetable (odd to make the policy before you go on the fact finding trip)….

Well now Obama tells Newsweek that he is  back on the ‘conditions on the ground’ scenario.

Is anyone else getting sick of Obama being on every side of every issue? In another reversal Obama now says he wants off shore drilling, but since he isn’t pressuring for it to happen it looks like more talk to be on both sides again. This is 2004 all over again. Why do the Democrats keep nominating people like this?

Newsweek: In Iraq, it’s not new that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has wanted to take control of his own country. But there’s always been this gap between his assessment of his abilities and American commanders’ saying he’s not up to it. As president, faced with that difference between what he says he can do and what the commanders say he can do, how would you choose between them?

Obama: Iraq is a sovereign country. Not just according to me, but according to George Bush and John McCain. So ultimately our presence there is at their invitation, and their policy decisions have to be taken into account. I also think that Maliki recognizes that they’re going to need our help for some time to come, as our commanders insist, but that the help is of the sort that is consistent with the kind of phased withdrawal that I have promoted. We’re going to have to provide them with logistical support, intelligence support. We’re going to have to have a very capable counterterrorism strike force. We’re going to have to continue to train their Army and police to make them more effective.

Newsweek: You’ve been talking about those limited missions for a long time. Having gone there and talked to both diplomatic and military folks, do you have a clearer idea of how big a force you’d need to leave behind to fulfill all those functions?

Obama: I do think that’s entirely conditions-based. It’s hard to anticipate where we may be six months from now, or a year from now, or a year and a half from now.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/148986/output/print

Ok so we are withdrawing but the size of force that remains for logistics, anti-terror forces, intelligence (and lets not for get security because that is always an issue) is entirely conditions based. This puts him on both sides of the issue rhetorically, but policy wise this is exactly the same position as McCain and Bush.

Obama has the most left wing and partisan voting record in the Senate, so as a traditional guy I had no intention of voting for him anyways, however this situation is so bad that the left is starting to say that Obama has damaged himself so badly that he is not likely to win.

Check Out what the Huffington Post had to say:

The Molten Core of Barack: Why Obama Can’t Win
Posted August 4, 2008

Barack Obama should not have to hit a three-pointer to win this election. It should be a lay-up. Yet if Senator Obama is doing so well, why is he doing so poorly? And if John McCain is doing so poorly, why is he doing so well?

The Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking has McCain down only 1%, 43% to Obama’s 44%. Real Clear Politics National Average of surveys pegs McCain less than 3% behind, with Gallup showing it tied, and USA Today actually placing McCain ahead of Obama, 49% to 45%. CNN reports McCain is in a better position in Colorado, Michigan, and Wisconsin than he was a month ago and they have moved Minnesota toward McCain into the toss-up category…

Despite the McCain campaign’s effectiveness, however, the best campaign against Barack Obama is not being run by his opponent, but by Barack Obama. It is Obama’s campaign that presents their candidate as an ever-changing work-in-progress. It is his own campaign that occludes our ability to know this man, depicting him as authentic as a pair of designer jeans.

To earn the Democratic nomination, as Fred Thompson points out, Obama ran as George McGovern without the experience, a left-of-center politician who would meet unconditionally with Iran, pull us precipitously out of Iraq, prohibit new drilling for oil, and grow big government in Washington by all but a trillion dollars. In his general election TV ad debut, however, Obama pirouetted like Baryshnikov. With a commercial Mike Huckabee could have run in a Republican primary, Obama now emphasizes his commitment to strong families and heartland values, “Accountability and self-reliance. Love of country. Working hard without making excuses.” In this yet unwritten chapter of his next autobiography, Obama tells us he is the candidate of “welfare to work” who supports our troops and “cut taxes for working families.” The shift in his political personae has been startling. Obama has moved right so far and so fast, he could end up McCain’s Vice-Presidential pick.

General-election Obama now billboards his doubts about affirmative action. He has embraced the Bush Doctrine of pre-emption saying, “I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon…everything.” He tells his party “Democrats are not for a bigger government.” Oil drilling is a consideration. His FISA vote and abandonment of public campaign finance introduce us to an Obama of recent invention. And as he abandons his old identity for the new, breeding disenchantment among his formerly passionate left-of-center supporters and, equally, doubts among the center he courts, he risks becoming nothing at all, a candidate who is everything and nothing in the same moment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-castellanos/the-molten-core-of-barack_b_116904.html

I rarely agree with the Huffington Post, but facts are facts and numbers are numbers and Obama’s numbers have been dropping since February. He lost the popular vote to Hillary in the primary and holds on to the nomination by super delegates. He has already lost the bump he got from the Euro-tour and most importantly, Obama has lost two very important demographics, women over 40 and women over 50, which for a Democrat is unheard of in the last 20 years. Former Clinton Whitehouse political guru Dick Morris says that these numbers do not reflect racism, but reflect the fact that older women know a smooth talker who lacks substance when they hear one.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | 1 Comment »

Pelosi Won’t Allow Vote on Domestic Energy Production – Orders C-Span to Stop Covering Speeches from the House Floor (so you can’t see them)

Posted by iusbvision on August 5, 2008

…and then puts the House out of session for 5 weeks with no energy policy fix.

Hat Tip HotAir.com and the Heritage Foundation.

Democratic House Speaker Nacy Pelosi gets shredded by the George on ABC’s This Week Without David Brinkley

Heritage: Speaker Nancy Pelosi won’t allow C-SPAN show what happened on the House floor on Friday, but thanks to YouTube you can catch a clip here:

The Democrats voted to take a 5 week vacation rather than change our self defeating energy policy. Gas is $4.00 a gallon, out food prices are skyrocketing, unemployment claims are going up, 70% of the American people want more drilling, more nuclear and wind power etc and the Democratic leadership in Congress won’t even allow a VOTE. People are suffering (I know I am) and they order a vacation. It is no wonder that this new Democrat controlled Congress has a 9% approval rating. They don’t care about us. Throw them out.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Lillian Charleston and the IUPUI Affirmative Action Office: I Have an Assignment for You

Posted by iusbvision on August 2, 2008

Lillian Charleston and the IUPUI Affirmative Action Office: I Have an Assignment for You.

Many commentators have pointed out how you found a student guilty of racial harassment based not on any supportable facts, but found him guilty based on who he was (an older white male). The student was found guilty of racial harassment because he was reading a book about how Notre Dame University fought off Klan attacks in the early 20th century. I have commented that people like Lillian Charleston and her assistant Marguerite Watkins, are stuck in a 1960’s mentality and ideological bubble that taints their perception of reality. No reasonable person could have supported IUPUI’s finding of guilt against the student. In spite of the fact that the charge of racial harassment was preposterous on its face, the administration and IUPUI’s Black Faculty & Staff Council were happy to go along with it. It took the Indiana ACLU, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, media coverage and the original investigative reporting of this blog to begin to bring this injustice to an end and it still isn’t over fully. The administration lost all good judgment in decision after decision in the case. Mind you these people are paid six figure incomes by the state to exercise good judgment. To say that they failed repeatedly is an understatement to put it mildly.

For detailed coverage of the events at IUPUI read here and here.

Now lets talk about the assignment – it is so simple even a PhD could do it. All they have to do is watch a screen for an hour and listen carefully. Of course, to benefit from this exercise, it has a prerequisite of a residue of introspective, so that can rule out many college administrators on the spot. What can I say, I can present the information in simple terms, but I can’t comprehend it for them.

But I digress…

I have never ceased to be amazed by Star Trek’s ability to take complex philosophical and social concepts and explore them in a fictional narrative. The Star Trek Voyager episode 23 of season four entitled “Living Witness” is the story of two peoples who had a great war and the Voyager’s crew had inadvertently gotten involved in the conflict. Seven hundred years later the crew’s medical officer (an artificial life form) is activated to find out that “history’s” version of events was propaganda and that propaganda paints him to be a war criminal.

The now unified worlds (after the war) use a three judge panel to examine the medical officers claims. One of the judges is a female from the losing side of their great war (and who still suffers from some discrimination as a result) and is convinced that Voyager’s medical officer is guilty because of who he is; after all they have been told from the time they were children that Voyager’s crew was guilty (ring a bell in race relations does it?). The more evidence gathered that shows the real facts that exonerate Voyager’s crew, the more that the female judge is convinced the medical officer is guilty and invents conspiracies to ignore or argue against the evidence. After being told it is about the facts and not about race she states in a snap of anger, “its always about race”. Those who think like her even engage in violence to stop the facts from getting out and wish to punish the medical officer and put him on trial for war crimes from 700 years before. Of course to them the trial was a mere formality because there was no need to prove him guilty, he was just guilty. Eventually it took outside cooler heads to prevail.

The woman who said, “It’s always about race” in the story displays the same attitudes seen in Charleston, Watkins and many radicalized university affirmative action officers. Some people just can’t move on and carry with them a hostility and a will to “get even” that makes good judgment impossible. My compliments to the writers for the brilliance in which they tackled this complex issue.

This episode was was the directorial debut for Tim Russ. Russ is a famed actor and is also a musician.

Tim Russ (right) with Tristan

Tim Russ (right) with Tristan (click to enlarge)

How do you feel about “Star Trek’s” ethical and moral questions?

“It is those questions that separate us from other shows, like ‘Dukes of Hazard’ or ‘Baywatch’. It’s the message received on Star Trek that distinguishes us from even other science fiction shows.” – Tim Russ

Chuck Norton

Posted in Other Links | 2 Comments »

Indiana Daily Student Does the Right Thing

Posted by iusbvision on August 1, 2008

Indiana Daily Student Does the Right Thing (Hat Tip theFIRE.org)

The IU Bloomington newspaper has published an editorial all but calling for the IUPUI to compensate a student falsely persecuted, mistreated, and slandered in the national press corps by the IUPUI administration. The administration refused to obey its own rules, or the rules of common decency until forced to by the Indiana ACLU, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the media including several blogs.

From the Indiana Daily Student:

The case isn’t closed

WE SAY: IUPUI’s treatment of Keith Sampson merits more than a letter to make things right.

IDS | July 30, 2008
In less than 10 seconds, with the aid of Google, you can find a full description of the controversy surrounding Keith Sampson. If you are Sampson, this will prove to be exceedingly detrimental to your job prospects in a world where 77 percent of employers now run Internet searches on prospective employees. Of course, these online sources are in addition to the publicity that resulted from the accusations and countless newsprint stories regarding the incident that circulated for months, tarnishing Sampson’s name and reputation.

You may recall that Sampson was the IUPUI student and employee who, according to Affirmative Action Officer Lillian Charleston, “demonstrated disdain and insensitivity” for reading Todd Tucker’s “Notre Dame Vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan,” in a break room at IUPUI in front of black co-workers.

IUPUI needs to do more than apologize in their attempt to correct the problem they caused. In a nation built on the ideology of “innocent until proven guilty,” their wrongful yet enduring accusations must be remedied by much more than a simple letter. For Sampson and for affirmative action, the behavior of IUPUI with respect to this controversy will have long-term repercussions.

What [IUPUI Chancellor] Bantz has seemingly failed to understand is that his closure of Sampson’s case has a truly negligible impact in the areas where his university’s actions have been the most damaging. Further antidotal undertakings are necessary. While Charleston’s replacement is a start, the Office of Affirmative Action must make significant changes and reevaluate their procedures for addressing complaints and problems. Additionally, IUPUI should offer more aid to Sampson, who remains confused and uncertain in how to proceed with his education and how to go about finding a new job.

http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=62032&comview=1

I would like to address one statement made by the Indiana Daily Student. While the Affirmative Action Office should reevaluate its own procedures, in this case, as in the Robert Francis case, no reasonable attempt to follow the IU Code of Conduct, federal law, or IU due process procedures was even made by the administration. To make issues worse, court documents show that the new director appointed by Chancellor Bantz has a history of brazenly violating her last employers due process rules.

Chancellor Bantz, I have come to learn something about Keith Sampson. He is a humble, courageous and honorable man that I have come to admire. The Indiana Daily Student (IDS) is correct in its assertion that Sampson should be compensated.

For a moment Chancellor Bantz, think of yourself, and your legacy. The IDS was correct that your letter only contained a trace amount of remorse. When future Chancellors, students, faculty, and even your grandchildren and great grandchildren type your name into a  search engine, the information on this web site and others will pop up as it has been cached in search engines forever. Your legacy will now be dominated and headlined with how a group of people led by you, wielding the power of the state and six figure incomes, attacked and violated a student who worked as a janitor.

Chancellor Bantz, I am not just pleading for Keith Sampson’s legacy, I am pleading for yours.

FIRE has great coverage of this story here –  http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/9567.html?PHPSESSID=0b880e7a9f7aa88c743f12f992e2221d

Chuck Norton

By the way, Sampson could really use a decent attorney who isn’t afraid to take on a university. He is a student and a janitor and can’t afford a big fee. Someone needs to step up. You can contact me using the contact page and I can get you in touch with Mr. Sampson. Of course if IUPUI would just do the right thing and give a more sincere apology and compensate him it would not need to go that far.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | 1 Comment »

Video: Dems won’t act even at $10 per gallon

Posted by iusbvision on August 1, 2008

Hat Tip Hotair.com

This video says it all. Democrats on the Senate floor make it clear that they will not vote to expand domestic oil production even if gas hits $10.00 a gallon. Had enough of Democrat Party lies about our energy policy? Lies like our oil companies are sitting on leases they don’t want to use, Factcheck.org blew that one out of the water and so did the WSJ… and so did we.. here and here.

Not only has the Democratic Party Leadership  become like so many in American academia, they are so far to the left they are becoming Marxist. They oppose capitalism and the production of wealth and they know affordable energy is the key to creating wealth. What is the opposite of wealth?

The Democrat Leadership knows that the vast majority of Democratic Party voters want expanded production of oil and other forms of energy the Democrat Leadership opposes such as nuclear power. They just don’t care.

Remember what this is doing to our food prices as well.

If you want something done about it, we need a Republican House and Senate in a big majority in the fall and I mean new Republican blood because some of the current ones have proven to be a disappointment.

Here is the video.

Chuck Norton

Posted in Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »