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 April, 2009

Tammy Bruce on why modern ‘Feminism’ doesn’t look out for women. – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on April 9, 2009

Anyone who cares about academic freedom should join FIRE’s Campus Freedom Network. Click HERE to take a look and please join!

Former L.A. National Organization for Women President Tammy Bruce.

UPDATE – David Horowitz on how major university ‘women’s studies’ programs are designed by out of the closet communists.

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

Norton’s First Law in Action: How Philip Morris benefits from new tobacco regulation & taxes.

Posted by iusbvision on April 9, 2009

Tim Carney at the Washington Examiner has a very informative column on why it is that the biggest players in an industry like more regulation and taxes.

Philip Morris, openly and without qualification, backs Kennedy’s and Waxman’s bills to heighten regulation of tobacco.

Philip Morris stands to benefit from this regulation in many ways. First, all regulation adds to overhead, and thus falls more heavily on smaller firms. Second, restrictions on advertising help Philip Morris’ Marlboro, a brand everyone already knows, by keeping lesser-known brands in the shadows. (Existing restrictions on advertising have already helped Philip Morris in this regard, with an added benefit spelled out in Altria’s annual report: “Marketing and selling expenses were lower, reflecting regulatory restrictions on advertising and promotion activities. … ”)

Finally, if the bill passes and the FDA gets added control over the industry, Philip Morris, more than any of its competitors, will have access to those bureaucrats and agency heads making the decisions. For all these reasons, RJ Reynolds and other tobacco companies oppose the bills Kennedy and Waxman are pushing.

This is exactly why ‘Corporatism’ and ‘POLITICAL MARKET ECONOMICS’ is hardest on the poor and middle class consumer.

For those of you who don’t know, corporatism is political market economics on steroids. Political market economics is not like regular market economics which is a meritocracy (where you make the best product at the best price for consumers), in political market economics the goal is to manipulate and lobby regulators and politicians to tilt the rules in your favor, which in turn enriches politicians by donations.

This brings us to Norton’s First Law:

Big business loves big government, which is why big business loves domestic taxes and regulation because it keeps the small and medium sized competition out of the competition. It also causes inflation, so ultimately it is you who pays and the poor who are hardest hit. (Big business often gets loopholes written in the laws for themselves such as Nancy Pelosi trying to get a part of the tuna industry exempted from the minimum wage law).

Posted in Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Paglia: Something very ugly has surfaced in contemporary American liberalism

Posted by iusbvision on April 9, 2009

Camille Paglia is an old school liberal professor; you know back when liberal actually meant liberal and not leftist.

Yes, something very ugly has surfaced in contemporary American liberalism, as evidenced by the irrational and sometimes infantile abuse directed toward anyone who strays from a strict party line. Liberalism, like second-wave feminism, seems to have become a new religion for those who profess contempt for religion. It has been reduced to an elitist set of rhetorical formulas, which posit the working class as passive, mindless victims in desperate need of salvation by the state. Individual rights and free expression, which used to be liberal values, are being gradually subsumed to worship of government power.

The problems on the American left were already manifest by the late 1960s, as college-educated liberals began to lose contact with the working class for whom they claimed to speak. (A superb 1990 documentary, “Berkeley in the Sixties,” chronicles the arguments and misjudgments about tactics that alienated the national electorate and led to the election of Richard Nixon.) For the past 25 years, liberalism has gradually sunk into a soft, soggy, white upper-middle-class style that I often find preposterous and repellent. The nut cases on the right are on the uneducated fringe, but on the left they sport Ivy League degrees. I’m not kidding — there are some real fruitcakes out there, and some of them are writing for major magazines. It’s a comfortable, urban, messianic liberalism befogged by psychiatric pharmaceuticals. Conservatives these days are more geared to facts than emotions, and as individuals they seem to have a more ethical, perhaps sports-based sense of fair play.

Fair play and facts… like how the press had a cow over President Bush holding the Saudi King’s hand and has almost ignored president Obama giving the guy a full hip bow.

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

Amazing: MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann Turns on Obama

Posted by iusbvision on April 8, 2009

Now be warned, much of the stuff in this video is mischaracterized and highly spun, but there is SOME truth to it.

Could this just be an attempt to generate conflict hype for ratings? I would not try to get into the mind of a bonified nut-job like Olby. So watch the video and decide for yourself.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

IUSB Vision’s Answer to Piracy: Do what Jefferson Did. Kill Them.

Posted by iusbvision on April 8, 2009

For the first time in nearly 200 years an ship flying an American Flag has been boarded by pirates. There is a reason that pirates have stayed clear of American ships for so long. The reason is just this simple. When pirates got out of control the policy of the United States has been to deal with them where ever we find them. In 1802 Thomas Jefferson sent the Navy and the Marines to make an example of the Islamic Barbary Pirates.

Now the good part, the American crew overpowered the armed pirates and retook the ship, unfortunately the pirates have the captain in a lifeboat and are negotiating for ransom.

Now the bad part. News reports say international law prohibits merchant vessels from carrying guns…..HOW STUPID IS THAT?

This is a test for this administration that showed so much weakness in the European tour. The United States needs to announce that we are going to arm our merchant vessels with .30 and .50 caliber guns and when one of these little pirate boats tries to run up on one of ours on the high seas they need to be gunned down and sunk. 

Weakness in this matter will only result in more piracy.

Maybe the administration can find some “moderate pirates” to talk to, which may prove almost as successful as their efforts to find “moderate Taliban”.

Posted in Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Daughter of laid-off worker: Obama where is the help you promised in the campaign?

Posted by iusbvision on April 8, 2009


The biggest problem is the United States right now is the housing and mortgage industry. The government promised with the first bailout to buy up troubled mortgages so they could renegotiate with home owners and buy them some time. As soon as the government got the money from Congress they decided not to help the people and used the money to take control of the banks. Now between Treasury, Congress and the Federal Reserve we have spent 12.8 trillion buying bank stock to get control of the banks, in the meantime it is April and people have still received no help at all.


SPOKANE, Wash. – Two Washington state girls took their plea straight to President Obama after their dad was laid off from his job.

The two mailed a letter to the president at the White House after watching their father, Henry, struggle to find a new job. Now they’re about to lose their home.

It’s a simple letter – asking for help.

“My name is Lilian Deck and my sister and I live in Spokane,” the girls’ letter begins. “We would like to ask you a question – where is the help you promised in your campaign?”

The letter is signed by Lilian, 13, and her 10-year-old sister Daleen.

“My father doesn’t want a handout, he wants a job,” the letter says. “He has sent out over 300 resumes with no luck.”

Then Lilian adds, “And we know that because we’ve had to lick the envelopes.”

Henry Deck lost his job a year ago, and on Sunday he’ll lose his home to foreclosure.

“Tomorrow my house goes up on the auction block,” said Henry Deck.

So his daughters, in desperation, sent their letter to the president.

“Why do you and the Congress keep failing this country over and over?” says the girls’ letter, which rips Obama’s stimulus plan for helping banks and big business – before helping families like theirs.

“We didn’t have a subprime mortgage – we had a regular mortgage,” says Henry Deck. “When we went and asked for help, there is none. We don’t fall in the guidelines.”

“I made too much money two years ago – I don’t make enough now. We just fell through the cracks,” he says.

Now his two girls are living the reality of the recession.

“I’m most worried about where we’re going to live – where we will live and how will we,” says Henry Deck. “If I lose my house I may lose my children, too.”

Henry Deck says he is most frustrated by potential employers who say they can’t afford him because he’s overqualified.

Now Deck is praying for a last-minute miracle.

“I don’t know – they may be living out of our car,” he says.

The girls are hoping their letter will bring some kind of help.

“Mr. President – may God bless you and the United States and help you do the right things for this country,” their letter says.

So far the Decks haven’t gotten a response to their letter.


Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

Military Vets – This is what the Penn State University Administration thinks of you. – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on April 8, 2009

Be sure to scroll down for the latest update!!!!!

Anyone who cares about academic freedom should join FIRE’s Campus Freedom Network. Click HERE to take a look and please join!

A sickening example of arrogant, ignorant, elitism.

What is interesting is that she admits that she voices her personal feelings on the war in her class. Now unless this is a political science class how is that for professional partisan detachment? Lack the discipline and control to stay on the subject matter professor?

Mini-Update – a reader sent a link with the following update:

Penn State’s HR 64 regulation states:

“It is not the function of a faculty member in a democracy to indoctrinate his/her students with ready-made conclusions on controversial subjects. The faculty member is expected to train students to think for themselves, and to provide them access to those materials which they need if they are to think intelligently. Hence in giving instruction upon controversial matters the faculty member is expected to be of a fair and judicial mind, and to set forth justly, without supersession or innuendo, the divergent opinions of other investigators.”

The policy goes on to add:

“No faculty member may claim as a right the privilege of discussing in the classroom controversial topics outside his/her own field of study. The faculty member is normally bound not to take advantage of his/her position by introducing into the classroom provocative discussions of irrelevant subjects not within the field of his/her study.”

I have been watching far left academics voice their opinions on things that have nothing to do with the class material for five years now; the vast majority just parrot far left talking points on the war. When they are challenged by someone who has done some serious study of the issue (like this very writer) the vast majority demonstrate they lack the ability to effectively defend their point of view with substance.

Via Penn State CR’s:

Penn State University’s Office of Student Affairs, in partnership with President Graham Spanier, produced this vignette on “worrisome student behaviors” featuring a stereotypical “aggressive” veteran who threatens his professors.

Faculty and administrators again prove they care more about poisonous “progressivism” than intellectual pluralism.

This video was originally online @…

Penn State removed the video from the website on Fri., Feb. 27, but left the others online — all but declaring their awareness of its inappropriateness.

Just an isolated incident?? No real “academics” think that way you say?? …

I knew in that moment that this was what the future of teaching about justice would include: teaching war criminals who sit glaring at me with hatred for daring to speak the truth of their atrocities and who, if paid to, would disappear, torture and kill me. I wondered that night how long I really have in this so called “free” country to teach my students and to be with my children and grandchildren.  – Dr. June Scorza Terpstra on having Marines in her classroom

And how can we forget this piece of idiocy, who by the way, got lower grades than President Bush in college:

We should not forget Paula Anderson, the professor at UCONN who called the police on a student for making a speech about the Second Amendment during a speech class. And shall we not forget the 88 professors at Duke University who signed the advertisement saying the the (now exonerated) Duke lacrosse players had to be guilty of rape because they were rich, white, and male?

There are plenty of good professors out there and while this is not really a problem in business & economics or the medical schools, in liberal arts this attitude is a problem. In regards to this issue an anonymous professor commented at The Chronicle:

What bothers me about the Academic attitudes towards the military is that they have not changed much over time.  Like the military, that is becoming a separate culture, somewhat out of touch.  There is a certain amount of group think and the same kind of intellectual curiosity that Bush was so often accused of.  Too many things are assumed! 

Indeed! This writer has made similar observations about leftist academia for years.

Here is another comment I found regarding the issue:

Let me give you a more recent example of how academics get this wrong:  About ten years ago I took a few courses for fun at a local community college.  One of the Deans there was very proud of their special program for Veterans Day.  They showed “Apocalypse Now”, one of the better Vietnam era anti-war films. (It has a very distorted and pejorative view of military service.)  As I said to this Dean at the time, in a letter, this was akin to having a minstrel show for Black History Month. Note that no veterans were actually involved in that program.  There was one veteran I met who actually taught there and he’d learned to keep his head down and not say anything about his service.  Not career enhancing and he was up for tenure.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that I see so much of among academia. They just assume that their politically motivated premises about things are the baseline academic truth, when in reality they are baseline far left propaganda. You can bet that professors and staffers and the technical people at Penn State all watched the video they put up many times and thought to themselves, “Oh yes this is so typical…” It took people complaining from the outside that motivated them to take the video down without an apology.

One less egregious and somewhat amusing example of this kind of thinking here at IUSB is the American Democracy Project.

When I first came to the university I sat in some of the ADP events and even participated in a few. I noticed a pattern to the events; they would show a film or present something that was based on a series of far left premises and then they would have a chat about it. The chat would often include several leftists and maybe one guy who would try to give the other side or a moderate view in the few moments he was allowed to speak, but there was no real demonstration of two sides of the issue with well informed and articulate people on both sides getting equal time.

For once how about a screening of the film, The Great Global Warming Swindle with two or three of the IPCC authors at a round table discussion who say that the IPCC summary report was politically motivated nonsense. To leftist academia, having the event weighted the other way around seems just unthinkable. While I am confident a few of the events were structured more equitably, they were not the pattern.

So after a while I stopped attending the events, because there was no way they would allow me enough time to try and balance the event and to be honest, most of the people attending them seemed to only want to have their far left point of view reinforced. Ken Smith, the moderator of the ADP blog, made it pretty clear that he did not appreciate my participation and made several attempts to censor me in what became a series of small battles about it. In a recent ADP event Angela Faulkner was there to participate. I noticed on her facebook page that she was not pleased that several people at the event made some unpleasant cracks to her about being a Republican. Faulkner is more than capable of defending her point of view, but she decided to be nice (whereas I would have challenged the offenders to a public debate).

One of the people involved with ADP is a friend of mine and some of the people who participate do so with good intentions, but their normative ideological premises run so deep that for many of them they just can’t help themselves. There comes a time where it becomes pointless to cast your seeds upon stone.

This was one of the reasons the IUSB Vision was created, and we are happy to enjoy a large number of hits for a college blog. Not that there haven’t been attempts to shut us down, because there have been, but you will have to wait for the editor’s book to get the details :-). comments HERE. Pat Dollard comments HERE. National Review commented on John Kerry’s comment HERE.

UPDATE– Video of radicalized SFSU students and professors who tried to drive military recruiters off campus. The recruiters were surrounded by College Republicans who stood their ground and kept these maniac protesters at bay. Let there be no doubt that kids do not get this deranged in high school. It is professors who teach them this garbage.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Other Links | 3 Comments »

Media Bias You Can Believe in IV: MSNBC and the “All Pro-Gunners Are ‘Dangerous’ and Freaky Angle.” – NEW UPDATE!

Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2009

After watching the video and reading the post please see below for an update to this story!!

Please watch this video carefully and continue reading below.

Watch how the “objective news man” is allowed the far left guy to make a nuanced points yet when Allen Gottlieb will not allow the “objective news guy” to couch his answer in the “objective news guy’s” premise he is interrupted, talked over and badgered.

The  “objective news guy” says give me an exact quote from an elected official of the administration that they want to ban ALL guns. This is a false choice because the problem is that many anti-gun advocates want to ban everything but low powered single shot rifles for example:

Ban handguns, ban semi-autos because they mischaracterize them as machine guns, hunting rifles become ‘sniper rifles’ ..ban them, .22 long rifle is too hard to check ballistics on ban it, and shotguns are just like machine guns because they shoot more than one projectile with each pull of the trigger, large bore rifles become “elephant guns that no legitimate hunter needs” and that would ban most old style lever action guns etc. With just these provisions that seem so ‘reasonable’ you would have banned almost every gun except low power single shot rifles.

So no…. not ALL guns. So the  “objective news guy” tries to push a false choice argument on Gottlieb; false choice creates the situation ‘its either THIS extreme or your all wrong or a liar’.

When Gottlieb tries to point out that Attorney General Eric Holder authored a Supreme Court brief saying that no one has a right to bear arms (LINK) the “objective news guy” speaks over him.

Even though the clip above is from MSNBC – this clip from the same network shows Obama to have lied about the issue. Maybe this is why MSNBC got rid of Dan Abrams’ show in spite of the fact that his show was going up in ratings.

This video shows Obama lying about the recently struck down DC handgun ban he previously supported.  

Of course, the elitism and condescension that Obama has voiced towards gun owners became more clear with this …

So while the “objective news guy” tried to make a false picture that the administration is not hostile to gun ownership, he is also aware of this, which he didn’t want you to know:

Fact :Obama voted to allow the prosecution of citizens who use a firearm for self-defense in the home.
Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165. 3/25/04

Fact :Obama has supported banning hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes, 10 / 21 / 0 4

Fact :Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to put the firearms industry out of business.
S.397, vote 219, 7/ 29/ 05

Fact :Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.
S.397, vote 217, 7/29/05

How about Glenn Beck, who MSNBC did a nice editing smear job on in the clip? MSNBC frequently takes a snippet and creates a context around it that is not an accurate portrayal of the editing victims’ point.

When the clip is viewed in full, you see that Beck’s primary point is that he was wrong when he said that Obama was pushing socialism, what Obama is pushing is Corporatism. Corporatism is when private business keeps the form and structure of capitalism, but through regulation and fear of government reprisal it is the government who calls the shots in those businesses, as a result three things happen:

1. Instead of running the best business with the best products and services, the goal becomes lobbying, manipulating, buying the politicians and regulators to make decisions that favor that business over others. In essence the government pics winners and losers.

2. What ever the government or a politician wants to do, big business pretends to be all for it because bucking the government can lead to reprisal can lead to your stock price tanking.

3. Government assumes the power to interfere in established legal contracts outside of the bankruptcy process which the government has asked Congress for the power to do, in spite of a strict constitutional provision banning such a law.

What is going on now with the banks, GM, and the other powers that the Administration is asking Congress for are near textbook examples of Corporatism. It is not a widely studied subject but Corporatism is the economic model used by Mussolini and Hitler and that is why Glenn Beck was using that snippet of video and he explained all of this in some detail.

Imagine the impression a layman might have after watching that MSNBC clip above. Is the narrative  and feelings generated by that video an accurate representation of reality. This is a perfect case of propaganda strategy called “attitude change propaganda theory” and what that means is that the propagandist does not give you all of the facts, he gives you only some of the facts and those facts are delivered with an attitude or spin. The propagandist than uses that to create a false narrative over the highly spun partial facts you have been given to generate the desired response by the person viewing the propaganda. Most journalism schools teach how this type of propaganda works and MSNBC uses it to polarize the electorate in an attempt to gain economically from one side of that electorate.

UPDATE – CNN tries the exact same tactic on Allen Gottlieb the next day – but this time Gottlieb was ready for it. Mr. “objective news guy” sets up the narrative that conservatives and everyone it FNC is a frothing at the mouth hate monger and when the “objective news guy” launches into Allen Gottlieb and demands with great indignation that he show the evidence, Gottlieb starts out with Obama’s voting record and begins to list that evidence. When Mr. “objective news guy” realizes he was about to get served he blares in with….wait for it….this is priceless……

CNN to Conservative: Is that all the proof you have, the (voting) record?  

More from News Busters HERE.

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

Watch Barney Frank bully a college student and lie through his teeth about his role in the mortgage crisis.

Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2009

Our friend Michelle Malkin has a post today about a college student who challenges Frank on his role in the mortgage crisis. The student was not as well prepared as he should have been, but it is interesting to watch Frank become unhinged and launch into a litany of lies about his history on the matter.

In the video link by Malkin, Frank says that it was the Bush Administration that was resisting re-regulation and policing of the mortgage industry. As we have proved with evidence, this was just not the case.

Go see Michelle Malkin’s post HERE and be sure to watch the video.

Also, Malkin quotes Judicial Watch who just received new documents from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulator that amount to yet another mountain of evidence of barney Frank’s corruption and guilt in this matter:

…the FOIA records that Judicial Watch obtained and released yesterday, which I linked yesterday. A reminder for Barney Frank (and ammunition for the next time a brave student wants to take him on again):

Judicial Watch obtained the documents from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request dated December 4, 2008. Judicial Watch requested records related to members of Congress activity regarding the policy of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase lending to individuals with poor credit risk, as well as correspondence and records about contacts between FHFA and Fannie and Freddie. Among the important documents:

FHFA letter, dated March 26, 2007, from the director of the Office of Housing Enterprise Oversight (OHFEO), James B. Lockhart, to U.S. Senators Elizabeth Dole, Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez and John Sununu: “This is a very serious issue. Freddie Mac’s inadequate systems and controls make it a significant supervisory concern. Furthermore, its lack of timely public disclosures deny market participants the essential financial information made available by all other publicly traded companies so that investors may make informed judgments.” The letter also mentions, “…Fannie Mae still has not filed financial statements for 2005 and 2006 and thus, they are not timely filers either.”

FHFA letter, dated December 3, 2004, to Congressman Barney Frank: “On November 15, 2004 Fannie Mae filed a Form 12b-25 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Fannie Mae indicated that its external auditors could not complete their reviews of its financial statements and noted the possibility of up to a $9 billion loss dating back to 2001. As a result, OHFEO has determined it will not provide a monthly capital classification at this time.”

Letter dated June 16, 2006, from OHFEO Director Lockhart to Senator Chuck Hagel: “…In January 1999, Chairman and CEO Franklin Raines approved a recommendation made by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) (Tom Howard) and the Controller (Leanne Spencer) to defer recognition of $200 million in amortization expense. This deferral, along with other accounting decisions made at that time relating to provisions for loan losses and the recognition of low-income housing tax credits, allowed management to meet the EPS threshold for maximum bonuses.”
Overall, these documents show that Congress was made aware of the massive problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the last six years. Yet liberals, led by Congressman Barney Frank, repeatedly blocked attempts to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: “I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two government sponsored enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury.

Senators Hagel, Dole and Sununu (all Republicans) are mentioned in OFHEO’s correspondence because those three Senators worked the hardest, year after year to try and fix this problem since 2001 and Democrats like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were successful at getting such reforms blocked because Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were spending hundreds of millions in partisan activities and lobbying of which Democrats were the greatest beneficiaries.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Mortgage Crisis | 2 Comments »

Sense of Entitlement Euro Style: 45% of French say its ok to kidnap your boss to make him pay

Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2009

Most parents and teachers have had to deal with children who fully believe that they are entitled to wealth or the fruits of other people’s labor. The leftist attitudes of entitlement, envy and “getevenwithemism” (make those rich pay cause it makes me feel better!) that are reinforced by public schools and the elite media can have consequences. A once great French culture of  liberty, self reliance, and hard work, has been changed to one of sucking at the national tit and treating businesses like they are social programs.

If we don’t act to change now, this attitude will grow in America, and the results will be a loss of wealth, productivity and eventually the kind of violent unrest that is so often the scene in socialist Western European nations.

PARIS (Reuters) – Almost half of French people believe it is acceptable for workers facing layoffs to lock up their bosses, according to an opinion poll published on Tuesday.

Staff at French plants run by Sony, 3M and Caterpillar have held managers inside the factories overnight, in three separate incidents, to demand better layoff terms — a new form of labor action dubbed “bossnapping” by the media.

A poll by the CSA institute for Le Parisien newspaper found 50 percent of French people surveyed disapproved of such acts, but 45 percent thought they were acceptable.

“They are not in the majority … but 45 percent is an enormous percentage and it demonstrates the extent of exasperation among the public at this time of economic crisis,” Le Parisien said.

On March 31, billionaire Francois-Henri Pinault was trapped in a taxi in Paris for an hour by staff from his PPR luxury and retail group who were angry about layoffs. Riot police intervened to free him.

Le Parisien found that 56 percent of blue-collar workers polled approved of bossnappings while 41 percent disapproved. Among white-collar workers, 59 percent were against the practice while 40 percent thought it was acceptable.

“These hostage takings, we know how it starts but no one knows how far it can go,” said Xavier Bertrand, a former labor minister now secretary-general of the ruling UMP party.

“Our country must avoid entering a spiral of violence,” he said in reaction to the opinion poll, adding that bossnappings “cannot be tolerated.”

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

Newt Gingrich, Charles Krauthammer and Dennis Prager on Obama’s Fantasy Foreign Policy

Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2009

Folks, these video’s give you a brililiant analysis of the current foreign nuclear situation. Newt and Charles give you the two minute version and Dennis gives you a more detailed analysis.




Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Tony Orlando leaves Bob Beckel speechless.

Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2009

Oh this is fun :-)

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton | 1 Comment »

Obama gives Saudi King a full bow as if he is a subject. FLASHBACK: NY Times Scolded Clinton for Almost Bowing in 1994. – Update Obama Lying About Bow!

Posted by iusbvision on April 6, 2009

UPDATEPolitico reportsthat Obama is denying he bowed. The video is crystal clear. This is one more on a long series of bold face whoppers from this administration. While on his trip Obama said that president Bush didn’t believe in global warming, which is another bold faced lie. President Bush as far back as 2001 started initiatives to fund alternative energy and cited climate change as one of the reasons for it.



As far as I am concerned I bow for no one less than the Deity Himself. It is certainly not the place of POTUS to bow to any monarch period….well unless your name is Obama. Here is the video. You may wish to take some Pepto-Bismal before watching.

Here is the New York Times link from 1994 –

It wasn’t a bow, exactly. But Mr. Clinton came close. He inclined his head and shoulders forward, he pressed his hands together. It lasted no longer than a snapshot, but the image on the South Lawn was indelible: an obsequent President, and the Emperor of Japan.

Canadians still bow to England’s Queen; so do Australians. Americans shake hands. If not to stand eye-to-eye with royalty, what else were 1776 and all that about?  …

Guests invited to a white-tie state dinner at the White House (a Clinton Administration first) were instructed to address the Emperor as “Your Majesty,” not “Your Highness” or, worse, “King.” And in what one Administration aide called “some emperor thing,” an Army general was cautioned that he should not address the Emperor Akihito at all as he escorted him to the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery.

But the “thou need not bow” commandment from the State Department’s protocol office maintained a constancy of more than 200 years. Administration officials scurried to insist that the eager-to-please President had not really done the unthinkable.

You can bet the NYT will not hold The One to the same standard.

Special thanks to and the amazing Anchoress for finding this gem.

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

Wall Street Journal catches up with IUSB Vision: Obama wants to control the banks & that is why he is refusing to take back TARP funds.

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

We told you this was the plan HERE. We gave you the evidence and then with updates the evidence piled on. Now the Wall Street Journal has finally said it. This is serious impeachment territory we are entering folks and that is not something this writer says lightly. Why is this impeachment territory? The president and willing members of his party are using this crisis to entrench and extend their power while the American people are suffering. What a violation of  the public trust:

Obama Wants to Control the Banks

There’s a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.


I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn’t much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street’s black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell ’em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration’s thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash — which was often forced on them in the first place — the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That’s what’s happening right now.

Here’s a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He’s been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with “adverse” consequences if its chairman persists. That’s politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can’t a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can’t special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit — until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I’m an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration’s goal of controlling the financial system.

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can’t quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.


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

The Democrats Were Right

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

By unknown author via email:

I hate to admit it. My Democrat liberal friends were right. They told me if I voted for McCain, all sorts of bad things would happen. Well, I voted for McCain anyway . . . and they were right.They told me if I voted for McCain, the nation’s hope would deteriorate, and sure enough there has been a 20 point drop in the Consumer Confidence Index since the election, reaching a lower point than any time during the Bush administration.

They told me if I voted for McCain the US would become more deeply embroiled in the Middle East, and sure enough tens of thousands of additional troops are scheduled to be deployed into Afghanistan

They told me if I voted for McCain, that the economy would get worse and sure enough, unemployment is approaching 8.8% and the President’s many gloom and doom announcements and the new stimulus packages have sent the stock market lower than at any time since 9-11.

They told me if I voted for McCain, we would see more “crooks” in high ranking positions in Federal government and sure enough, several recent cabinet nominees revealed resumes of bribery, immigration violations and tax fraud or tax evasion.

They told me if I voted for McCain, our relations with foreign countries would be worse, and sure enough China has questioned investing in more US treasuries, France and Germany have rejected our President’s suggestions that they spend more money to save the world economy, Russia has apparently forced us to abandon our defense missile programs in Poland and Czech Republic, we snubbed Great Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown when he visited Washington (and sent him packing with a bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office), the State Department shuffled the visit of the president of Brazil to avoid a conflict with St. Patrick’s Day (and spelled his name wrong in the official announcement), the President scuttled the pending free trade agreement with Colombia (an important ally next to Chavez’s Venezuela), Mexico imposed tariffs on $2.4 billion of American products in retaliation for our breach of the North America Free Trade Agreement, and Iran is getting ever close to making a nuclear bomb. It’s a good thing we’re chumming up to Syria.

They told me if I voted for McCain, that the moguls of industry would increase their salaries and bonuses at the expense of the little people. And sure enough, companies like Merrill Lynch and AIG and Fannie Mae have used the bailout money to pay record bonuses to the very executives who drove those companies into the ground.

They told me if I voted for McCain that innocent children would die, and sure enough, the President has lifted the ban on federal funding of abortion and the ban on using federal funds for research on embryonic stem cells, so many more innocent children will die.

They told me if I voted for McCain, the civil rights of Americans would be put in jeopardy. And sure enough, the Congress is about to pass the misnamed “Employee Free Choice Act” which will deprive workers of the secret ballot in union elections and the President wants to institute a civilian national security force to spy on Americans.

Well, I ignored my Democrat friends, voted for McCain, and they were right . . . all of their predictions have come true.

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

Iowa finds a right to gay marriage in the Constitution that eluded everyone else for 150 years.

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

Brian Sikma at Hoosier Access:

When traditional marriage supporters advocated for a state marriage amendment in 2008, Speaker Pat Bauer argued that such a constitutional amendment was unnecessary and redundant in light of Indiana’s existing state law.  Proponents of the amendment responded by saying that the same judicial reasoning that allowed courts in Massachusetts and elsewhere to challenge the constitutionality of marriage laws could be used by Indiana courts.  The Iowa Supreme Court’s decision to create a constitutional right to same-sex marriage and impose that new definition on the state proves the Speaker wrong, and marriage supporters right.


Although this session of the General Assembly failed to act on a marriage amendment, with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard Bray (R) being responsible for his committee’s failure to hear the matter in the Senate, the Iowa ruling will hopefully spur legislative leaders to action next session.

We posted a brilliant legal argument against this when activist Connecticut judges decided to change the law just because they wanted to HERE; it is a great read.

This problem goes way beyond marriage and this kind of activity has consequences that those who support activist rulings could soon regret. So a simple majority of judges on one court changed the legal definition of marriage over that of the legislature and the people. If actions like this can go unanswered, a simple majority of judges can do anything; they could even redefine murder as “picking your left nostril on a Tuesday”.

How is this bad for the left? Well what if conservative judges decide to abandon their usual philosophy of judicial restraint and become conservative activist judges who will invent law at a whim? Imagine all of the fun they could have with your agenda? This is why judicial activism is bad, because it progresses and progresses to the point where we have judicial tyranny. Now activist judges are ruling to over rule legal treaties and other laws. Some are even butting into presidential war powers. Eventually the other two branches are going to have to push back by stripping the lower courts jurisdiction.

As far as gay marraige is concerned, thiswriter is opposed to creating group constotutional rights out of this air. The Founders never intended or approved of such things so no case can be made that the Iowa or Federal Constitutions framers ever intended this.

To put it in simple terms, there is no right to marriage period, heterosexual or otherwise and there never has been. Rulings like this cloud the very nature of rights and makes them easier to violate in the future.

As this writer has stated before:

Rights are not in reference to groups, they are in reference to individuals. For Example – if I have a right to get married, if no one will marry me than my right to be married has been violated.

What is the contemporary meaning of marriage? It is a CONTRACT between a man and a woman and the State, and in some circumstances with the said couples deity.

That contract involves a marriage license. What is a licence? A license represents the sanction of the people of that state, or that states legislative majority if you will.

The simple fact is that the legislative majority decides by majority vote who gets their sanction and who does not and under what circumstances. There have been many such instances where a marriage license has been denied to straight white couples by states, so where were all of you saying that their constitutional rights were violated?

Would you FORCE the majority to give consent and sanction against their will? That seems to be what many are advocating. So much for Democracy and informed consent.

There is no more a right to marry than their is a right to have a Class-A drivers licence.

There is no genuine equal protection issue, because a straight man may get a state marriage license under most circumstances to marry a female and so may a gay man. A straight man can no more get a marriage license to marry another man than a gay man can. The law treats the gay man and the straight man exactly the same.


Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Government Gone Wild | 5 Comments »

WSJ: Obama’s top advisors earned millions from companies with government business.

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

I am so sure it is alllllll just a total coincidence and I am SO sure that the millions Obama’s advisors received had no sway on their judgment at all.


WASHINGTON — Top White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers received about $5.2 million over the past year in compensation from hedge fund D.E. Shaw, and also received hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from major financial institutions.

A financial disclosure form released by the White House Friday afternoon shows that Mr. Summers made frequent appearances before Wall Street firms including J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers. He also received significant income from Harvard University and from investments, the form shows.

In total, Mr. Summers made a total of about 40 speaking appearances to financial sector firms and other places, with fees totaling about $2.77 million. Fees ranged from $10,000 for a Yale University speech to $135,000 for an appearance paid for by Goldman Sachs & Co.

So when the government chooses winners and loosers as far as who to help and who to blow off, who do you think will get a lil extra monetary, regulatory or legislative help??

Now look at this list. How long are we going to take this folks? When they aren’t in power they are lobbying the government and vice versa:

In addition to the Summers form, the White House released financial disclosure material for other top aides.

David Axelrod, the president’s top political advisor, reported in his form that he will get $3 million over the next five years from the sale of his two media consulting firms, ASK Public Strategies, LLC and AKP&D Message and Media. In addition, Mr. Axelrod took a salary of $896,776 last year from AKP&D and reported $651,914 in partnership income from the two companies.

In total, Mr. Axelrod reported assets valued between $6.9 million and $9.5 million. Mr. Axelrod’s clients were mostly political campaigns, including those of Rep. Patrick Kennedy, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley. He also reported receiving money from large corporations such as AT&T Inc., Comcast Corp. and the nuclear energy company Exelon Corp.

National Security Adviser James Jones reported $900,000 in salary and bonus from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as well as director fees from a number of corporations. He received, for example, $330,000 from Boeing Corp. and $290,000 from Chevron Corp.

Gregory Craig, White House Counsel, reported receiving a salary of $1.7 million last year from Williams & Connolly, the high-powered Washington law firm where he had been a partner since 1999.

White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers collected a $350,000 salary from Allstate Financial as president of the social networking division, as well as $150,000 in board fees from Equity Residential, a real estate investment trust in which she also holds at least $250,000 in stock. She also collected $20,000 in board fees from Blue Cross Blue Shield. Other assets reported in her checking account, stock investments, and mutual funds total at least $2 million.

Valerie Jarrett, assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs, lists a $300,000 salary and $550,000 in deferred compensation from The Habitat Executive Services, Inc., in Chicago.

Ms. Jarrett also disclosed payments of more than $346,000 for service on boards of directors that reflect her political ties, and work in Chicago real estate and community development.

She was paid $76,000 last year for service as a director of Navigant Consulting, Inc. a Chicago-based global consulting group with governmental clients. She received $146,600 for service on the board of USG Corporation, a building materials manufacturer, and $58,000 to serve on the board of Rreef American REIT II, a real estate investment trust based in San Francisco. The Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., paid her $34,444 to serve on its board.

Deputy National Security Advisor Tom Donilon earned $3.9 million as a partner at the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where his clients include Citigroup, Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co., and Obama fundraiser and heiress Penny Pritzker.

Carol Browner, assistant to the president for energy and climate change, disclosed earnings of between $1 million and $5 million from lobbying firm Downey McGrath Group, Inc., where her husband, Thomas Downey, is a principal. She states $450,000 in “member distribution” income, plus retirement and other benefits from The Albright Group, a lobbying firm whose principals include former Secretary of State Madeline Albright.

Some White House aides received considerably more modest compensation.

Director of Domestic Policy Council Melody Barnes reported modest retirement investments and $88,000 in income from her work on the Obama campaign and transition team, including $30,000 in consulting fees from Washington, D.C.-based firm The Raben Group.

Director of the White House Office of Urban Affairs Adolfo Carrion reported no assets outside of his $160,000 salary earned as borough president of the Bronx and retirement funds for him and his wife.

Patrick Gaspard, Director of the Office of Political Affairs, reported no assets aside from income of $198,000 combined from the SEIU International Union and Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign. His listed liabilities are $10,000 to $15,000 in credit-card debt and $15,000 to $20,000 in student loan debt.

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

The story of the Nigerian teacher who moved to America only to have her black students call her an “OREO”

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

Quinn & Rose: The story of the teacher who moved to America from Nigeria only to be called an “OREO” by her black students. This story reveals the myth of leftist white privilege. And the story of the Czech doctor who fled Europe to escape socialism and is very worried about America’s charge toward socialism.

Remember how we told you that capital goes where it is treated better? The Nigerian family has a teacher and a doctor. They left to come to America. The Czech family did the same thing. If we socialize capital will flee the country in much the same way.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Britain’s Dan Hannan, “Nationalized healthcare has made us iller”. Speaks out on G20 and Stimulus

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

Hannan on the British National Health Service: “Nationalized healthcare has made us iller”

This is a brilliant and accurate explanation of the causes of the current crisis and the solutions are hurting us more.

Hannan with heavy sarcasm:

Just what we need to stimulate growth then, eh? More dirigisme, more red tape, more state control, more centralisation. And the markets have risen. Will you never learn, boys?

Recent history in Europe and the US has shown that doing nothing would have been better than what we have done, but smart people came up with ideas such as lowering the corporate income tax, buying up bad mortgage loans to renegotiate them with home owners, forgiving one years worth of student loan payments, forgiving the federal income tax for 9 months etc. These are ideas that would have injected big cash into the economy now. Only 23% of the stimulus was even designed to be spent before the end of 2010. The government spends money for political reasons, whereas citizens and families spend money and pay off debt for economic reasons.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

Dan Hannan on BBC Media Bias

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

After American television, the BBC’s bellicosity is quite a shock

By: Daniel Hannan at Apr 3, 2009

I suppose this is what it must feel like to be a Leftie on the BBC. You’re listened to politely, you’re allowed to develop your arguments, your assertions are not automatically greeted by incredulous leers.

For the past week, I’ve been doing radio and television interviews in numerous Anglosphere countries. The presenters aren’t sycophantic (well, alright, some of the ones on Fox News seem pretty pleased to see me); but neither are they belligerent. They start from the premise that, if you’ve bothered to have someone on your show, you might as well let him make his point. They don’t ask a question and then interrupt before you’ve started answering.

You start getting used to it after a while, and going back to the Beeb is quite a shock. My local BBC television news in the South East asked me such questions as “aren’t you just a nasty old Tory” and “Haven’t you got anything positive to say?”

On balance, I think I prefer the BBC approach: undeferential, savage, Swiftian – in keeping, in short, with our national character. But it would be nice if, just occasionally, they treated Lib Dems and Euro-integrationists this way.

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

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

…bacause Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac kick back huge amounts of money to lobbyists and Democrats its silly.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two corrupt government sponsored mortgage enterprises that were the lion share cause of the global economic meltdown will pay out $210 million in bonuses with your money.

As we reported earlier, Fannie and Freddie were used to launder hundreds of millions of dollars back to mostly partisan Democratic groups and politicians which is why the Democrats blocked any meaningful mortgage reform since 2001.

Posted in 2012, Big Bizz Loves Big Govt, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Journalism Is Dead, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

Krauthammer: Obama’s European Comments “Disgraceful”

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

This is one reason why our presidents need to have a keen understanding of history. When he doesn’t mistakes like this happen.

Krauthammer in Friday’s Washington Post:

Five minutes of explanation to James Madison, and he’ll have a pretty good idea what a motorcar is (basically a steamboat on wheels; the internal combustion engine might take a few minutes more). Then try to explain to Madison how the Constitution he fathered allows the president to unilaterally guarantee the repair or replacement of every component of millions of such contraptions sold in the several states, and you will leave him slack-jawed.

In fact, we are now so deep into government intervention that constitutional objections are summarily swept aside. The last Treasury secretary brought the nine largest banks into his office and informed them that henceforth he was their partner. His successor is seeking the power to seize any financial institution at his own discretion.

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

Levi Johnston goes on Tyra Banks show. Reveals intimate sexual details about Bristol.

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

Talk about sleaze. Levi Johnston has gone from “just another teen who used bad judgement” to full blown scumbag. Not a word we like to use, but in this case it is warranted.

Levi went on national television and Tyra Banks had him talking about details that no one with half a brain would say on television. It is obvious in the video that Levi is not very bright even for an 18 year old. Of course, while most of the blame goes to Levi for letting Tyra Banks pay him to come on the show, it does show what a bottom feeder Tyra Banks is. Levi’s mother has been arrested for illegal drugs. Did Levi’s mother put him up to going on the show for money?

People Magazine had this to day with the Governor’s reaction:

After taking about sex on The Tyra Banks Show, Johnston – the 18-year-old father of Bristol Palin’s baby – was hit with a blistering response from Bristol’s mother, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

“Bristol did not even know Levi was going on the show. We’re disappointed that Levi and his family, in a quest for fame, attention, and fortune, are engaging in flat-out lies, gross exaggeration, and even distortion of their relationship,” says the statement from the Palin family rep.

“Bristol’s focus will remain on raising Tripp, completing her education, and advocating abstinence,” the statement continues. “It is unfortunate that Levi finds it more appealing to exploit his previous relationship with Bristol than to contribute to the well being of the child.”

The statement ends, saying, “Bristol realizes now that she made a mistake in her relationship and is the one taking responsibility for their actions.”


I an confident that speaks for millions on this one:

If I were her, I’d be at the courthouse on Monday filing for child support to get whatever piece she can of the dirty money Tyra Banks paid this kid to tell her things like whether Palin knew they were having sex or not. Stay classy, dad.

The child should get every dime.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Other Links, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »

Phoenix Police Raid Homes of Blogger & Officer who Spoke Out.

Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2009

Dirty cops is never a fun thing to report about, but it has to be done because police are usually sources for reporters and reporters do not want to burn those sources even if the cops are bad. That is one of the reason who we report on these stories.

The Phoenix Police Department raided the homes of a blogger and an officer of the department who spoke out. They took all of their computers and equipment and in an effort to find out who is leaking apparently accurate information and documents to them that the police department has found highly embarrassing. One of the documents obtained by Channel 5 News is an email from a high ranking police officer saying that they need to give some payback against the officer who spoke out against them.

The blogger is filing a civil rights lawsuit against the police department.

Channel 5 Pheonix Video Link HERE:

Police Raid Homes Of Department Critics

Peter Busch
  PHOENIX — They spoke out against the city’s top cops. Now, two Phoenix men have been slapped with simultaneous search warrants.

One of them is a 13-year veteran of the police department..

Officer Dave Barnes helped shine a light on cases where the crime lab either chose not to test, or delayed testing of key pieces of evidence.

E-mails show that for the past year and a half, department officials have threatened to retaliate.

“Mark my words, if Dave is dealt with, others will think twice about lab bashing,” wrote Assistant Chief Tracy Montgomery in an e-mail dated Oct. 16, 2007.

A Phoenix police representative declined to comment on why Barnes’ home was searched by a team of detectives last week.   …   The other search warrant was on the house of a Valley man who runs a Web site critical of the Phoenix Public Safety Manager Jack Harris.

“They’re looking for any and all information about cops, good cops in Phoenix who give us information about the wrongdoings of Jack Harris and people in his management team,” said the man who asked to be identified only as Jeff.

Jeff says almost all the tips for his Web site,, come from anonymous sources, and he doesn’t know if Dave Barnes is one of those sources.

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

FIRE Video: Thought Control at University of Delaware – Think what we think or else.

Posted by iusbvision on April 3, 2009

Anyone who cares about academic freedom should join FIRE’s Campus Freedom Network. Click HERE to take a look and please join!

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

Lobbyists Find Plenty of Work as Clients Contend for Stimulus Package’s Billions

Posted by iusbvision on April 3, 2009

Hmmm, it is the exact opposite thing that Obama said would happen during his administration.

Lobbyists will get money for the politicians campaigns and give them what ever goodies that can get away with and politicians will spend money and generate pork earmarks back to the lobbyists clients. Once again, as with many things in the Obama administration, the change we got was just more of the same, but on steroids.

Washington Post:

Last month, just before Valentine’s Day, business at Holland & Knight was so slow that the law firm laid off more than 240 lawyers and staff, victims of the economic downturn that has dented Washington’s reputation for being recession-proof.

But one area of the multi-service firm was thriving. Rich Gold, head of the firm’s public policy and regulation practice, was hiring more than a dozen lobbyists, bringing his federal lobbying team to about 70, every one of them scrambling to stay on top of provisions and changes in the mammoth economic recovery package that was barreling through Congress. They were handling about 240 clients, including 50 new ones, all eager to win a portion of the stimulus that President Obama wanted passed.

“On the legal side of things, we’ve done our share of downsizing because of the economy, because of reduced demand,” said Gold, the firm’s chief lobbyist. “But on the policy side . . . we’re picking up a couple clients a week at this point.”

Put another way, Main Street’s gloom has been K Street’s boon.

The $787 billion stimulus package — along with an ambitious new federal budget, bank bailouts and the beginning of a regulatory overhaul — has succeeded in stimulating the economy along Washington’s avenue of influence. In the months since the November election, more than 2,000 cities, companies and associations have hired lobbyists to help them push their agendas on Capitol Hill and at the White House, easily outpacing such numbers after the previous two elections, according to disclosure records.

Nearly every industry and every corner of the country has an issue, especially with so much money at stake.

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

Who is going to pay off Obama’s budget?

Posted by iusbvision on April 3, 2009

bush-v-obama-debtCBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post – March 21, 2009

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

There are no tough choices in this budget…….

Posted by iusbvision on April 3, 2009

bush-v-obama-debtCBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post – March 21, 2009

For more click HERE.

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

AWESOME: New triple play from Daniel Hannan

Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2009

The EU is not safeguarding Democracy it is undermining it. It should deeply worry us when anyone (like the EU) claims that its own ideology is too important to be subject to the ballot box.

EU anti-discrimination laws are discriminatory and we are depending on courts to selectively misapply the law –

Culture cannot be created by bureaucratic fiat. The electorate cannot be won over by subsides for folk dancing.

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

Who Says That Fox News Isn’t Fair & Balanced?

Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2009

Its the Alan Colmes Show! ;-)

Posted in Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

New York Times burying and rigging stories for Democrats. Caught on tape.

Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2009

The NY Times is the worst…. we told ya.

Dick Morris with Bill O’reilly.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Political Litmus Test: Virginia Tech mandates “diversity-related accomplishments” for tenure and faculty performance reports. FIRE launches massive PR offensive.

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2009

Diversity and multiculturalism, we get buried in it at universities these days, yet in spite of that, college faculty as a group, remains among the most intolerant of any I have encountered. The anti-semitism, hostility to traditional Americana, capitalism and intellectual diversity are such huge problems at universities these days that I am authoring a book on the subject.

For those of you who are not on campus and aren’t familiar with “diversity and multiculturalism”, in short it is a focus on our differences, the devaluation of and a propagandized attack against Western Civilization, an attack on capitalism, the tribalization of many foreign cultures, and the preaching of cultural and political Marxism. The far left will not describe it that way, but after years of exposure to it the goals become crystal clear.

It is no secret that there are ideological litmus tests used in the tenure process. There are respected studies that demonstrate this. One of the more famous cases is the example of Dr. Mike Adams at UNC, who was the teacher of the year and the darling of his department, until he converted to Christianity and announced that he was going to vote Republican and all of the sudden he was not fit to keep his position. We have many cases of similar illegal and unfair intolerance in our category:

Our friends at FIRE have countless examples if this behavior. What makes this story so unusual is that instead of the laughable denials that are so often given by administrators and faculty of such illegal and discriminatory practices, Virginia Tech has written their illegal political/cultural litmus test right into their official policy! In a way I have a strange respect for Virginia Tech for putting this in writing instead of continuing to have this as the unwritten rule that is so often the case at too many universities.

Without further delay, here are the goods straight from FIRE:

Here are some more documents that show the requirements to be ingrained at Virginia Tech, not just aspirational. At the very least, these are far from viewpoint-neutral bases for faculty assessment: — dossier section X.D.: “Contributions to diversity initiatives.” — VII.C.: “Contributions to diversity.” — even nominations for appointments to the rank of Distinguished Professor are, in section VII, to “Highlight contributions to diversity.” — a resolution “that diversity-related accomplishments be reported as part of the annual faculty activity reports (FAR) beginning with the next annual evaluation cycle which ends spring 2007; and [t]hat during fall 2006, colleges and vice presidential areas develop formats for the FAR that embed diversity accomplishments and goals as appropriate for the university’s mission; and [t]hat personnel committees and department heads give consistent attention to these activities in the evaluation process and provide appropriate feedback to faculty members concerning their diversity contributions and goals…”

Bauerlein is absolutely right: “What else would a junior faculty [member] think when looking at those guidelines but, “Hey, I better get a couple of diversity activities on my CV this year”?

Here is More:

NAS reports today, a May 29, 2008 memorandumto Virginia Tech’s department heads basically demands “diversity accomplishments”:

Diversity accomplishments: Diversity accomplishments are a meaningful part of the faculty review process. Candidates must do a better job of participating in and documenting their involvement in diversity initiatives. Diversity accomplishments are especially important for candidates seeking promotion to full professor.Please use the categories developed by the Commission on Equal Opportunity and Diversity to prompt and organize diversity-related contributions. The categories may be found at section VII. C. 1. – 8. of the promotion and tenure guidelines. They are also available at Committees are asked to develop working expectations for department members, perhaps sharing good examples, and to review diversity contributions included in the dossier with those expectations in mind. (Emphasis added.)

When questioned about this, Provost McNamee issued the standard non-denial denial that is par for the course out of college administrators and he says that none of these guidelines are a requirement.

After looking at the published guidelines FIRE says, just as we at IUSB Vision say, it seems like a requirement to us. Which is it, Provost McNamee? This writer has long ago ceased to be amazed when a college administrator issues a denial in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Let us digress for a moment and bring you the letter that FIRE’s Adam Kissel sent to Virginia Tech. This letter is a MUST read for anyone interested in academics. It is highly educational and we cannot help but comment on the letter’s sheer entertainment value as a legal nasty-gram in which Adam has shown unswerving ability at penning.

We encourage you to read the entire letter. Here are our favorite parts (excerpted):

If Virginia Tech truly believes in tolerance (leaving aside issues of academic freedom) it simply cannot require professors to incorporate a political orthodoxy into their courses, no matter how much the university may believe in the tenets of that orthodoxy and wish others to embrace those tenets. Presumably, faculty are employed by Virginia Tech for the purpose of “discovery and dissemination of new knowledge” (quoting Virginia Tech’s “Statement of Mission and Purpose”), not to demonstrate fealty to an abstract and ill-defined participatory ideal. Their prospects for promotion and tenure should be evaluated accordingly.

As a public institution, Virginia Tech is legally and morally bound by the First Amendment and the decisions of the Supreme Court concerning academic freedom at public colleges and universities. In Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603 (1967) the Supreme Court noted that “[o]ur Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” This being the case, the Court further explained that the First Amendment “does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom . . . [which] is peculiarly the ‘marketplace of ideas.'” In the landmark case of West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943) the Court made clear the importance of freedom of conscience in our liberal democracy: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” The Court concluded that “the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution” was precisely to protect “from all official control” the domain that was “the sphere of intellect and spirit.”

Your policy, in short, requires professors to affirm that their classes incorporate assumptions about bias, race, gender, other group identities, and cultural differences. This is no different from requiring that instructors demonstrate their belief in Americanism, empiricism, biological determinism, or creationism. These may be perfectly valid intellectual viewpoints, but viewpoints may not be imposed at a public institution (and should not be imposed by any institution devoted to academic freedom) by fiat through official requirements.

It is a human failing common to us all that we rarely see our own abuses of power, and no one, right, left, or center, is innocent of that failing. Once these abuses are called to consciousness, however, it becomes a moral imperative to restrain ourselves and to grant to others the academic freedom that we would demand for ourselves. The sad days of “loyalty oaths” to political ideologies have already once darkened the academy. Let us not revive them ourselves or tolerate their resurrection by others.

We ask that Virginia Tech’s existing and proposed evaluative criteria for promotion and tenure candidates be revised to accord with the First Amendment and common sense.

FIRE hopes to resolve this situation amicably and swiftly; we are, however, prepared to use all of our resources to see this situation through to a just conclusion. We request a response by April 15, 2009.


Adam Kissel

The National Association of Scholars issued this statement:

NAS has published an expose article on how Virginia Tech has imposed a political test on candidates for promotion and tenure. Specifically, Virginia Tech’s College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences is making active support and advancement of “diversity”a requirement for faculty to keep their positions and for promotion.

This is a highly unusual step-one that flouts academic freedom. “Diversity” is not a category of academic accomplishment equivalent to high-quality teaching or success in scholarly research and publishing. “Diversity” is an ideology. The term summarizes a set of objectives popular on one part of the political spectrum. Virginia Tech, which is a public university, has no business turning a partisan political credo into a test that must be passed for faculty members to win tenure or to advance in rank.

To read Peter Wood’s article (“Free to Agree”) on the Virginia Tech policy, click here.

Adam Kissel authored another article on FIRE’s blog which brings even more clarity to FIRE’s position in this matter.

Suppose the provost at your college started a new “patriotism” initiative. In the first year, he would permit faculty members to self-report their “patriotism accomplishments.” In the second year, faculty members would be strongly encouraged to report their “patriotism accomplishments” on their annual reports of their activities. In the third year, faculty members would be told that “patriotism accomplishments are especially important for faculty seeking tenure and promotion,” and dossiers for tenure and promotion would include a multi-part section on “patriotism.” There would be a list of kinds of activities that would count as sufficiently “patriotic.” Faculty assessment in the area of “patriotism” would include attention to patriotism in one’s publications and one’s syllabus, and faculty members would be encouraged to further educate themselves about “patriotism” by going to patriotic events.

Or put the word “Christianity” in place of “patriotism.” Suppose the provost tells all faculty, graduate students, and tenure and review committees that Christian activities are something they can choose to report in their self-assessments. After three years, there is a “Christian accomplishments” section in the tenure dossier, a list of approved activities, and strong pressure to incorporate Christian themes into faculty members’ research, teaching, and professional development.


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

Bloomberg: Government has spent 12.8 Trillion buying up/shoring up banks. Still no mortgage help.

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2009

As we reported earlier, when it was at 9.7 Trillion that was enough to pay off 90% of all mortgages in the United States – LINK. Instead of fixing toxic assets, mortgages and housing the government decided to turn around and use out money to buy up and get control of the banks – LINK. Now it is 12.8 trillion which is more than enough to buy up all of the toxic assets and essentially fix most of the problem, but none of that has been done. We are being scammed.

Bloomberg News now reports 12.8 trillion.

March 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. government and the Federal Reserve have spent, lent or committed $12.8 trillion, an amount that approaches the value of everything produced in the country last year, to stem the longest recession since the 1930s.

New pledges from the Fed, the Treasury Department and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. include $1 trillion for the Public-Private Investment Program, designed to help investors buy distressed loans and other assets from U.S. banks. The money works out to $42,105 for every man, woman and child in the U.S. and 14 times the $899.8 billion of currency in circulation. The nation’s gross domestic product was $14.2 trillion in 2008.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 3 Comments »

Stimulus working great: 742,000 Americans lose their jobs in March.

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2009


NEW YORK (Reuters) – Job losses in the U.S. private sector accelerated in March, more than economists’ expectations, according to a report by ADP Employer Services on Wednesday.

Private employers cut jobs by a record 742,000 in March versus a 706,000 revised cut in February that was originally reported at 697,000 jobs, said ADP, which has been carrying out the survey since 2001.

The big drop foreshadows a huge decline in the non-farm payroll reading in the government’s employment report that will be released on Friday, some analysts said.

“It’s a terrible number. It is almost a loss of three quarters of a million jobs which is possibly the highest we have seen so far over the length of this crisis,” said Matt Esteve, foreign exchange trader with Tempus Consulting in Washington.

Jay Leno all over Obama –

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

Byron York: Congress floats a bill to control your salary. – Is government big enough yet?

Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2009

Byron York in the DC Examiner:

But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the “Pay for Performance Act of 2009,” would impose government controls on the pay of all employees — not just top executives — of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

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