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 December, 2010

Russian Immigrants: Democrats too much like Soviets we fled from

Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010


Staten Island Live:

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — Many Russian immigrants to the “red borough” of Staten Island are flocking to the Republican Party, saying that the national Democrats’ “socialistic” policies remind them too much of the top-down oligarchy they fled in their native land.

With many of the borough’s Russian arrivees already owning businesses and active in civic organizations, their muscle could help the Island GOP solidify electoral gains made this year, when the party took back congressional and Assembly seats.

Businessman Arkadiy Fridman said that the newly formed Citizens Magazine Business Club, a confederation of more than 50 Russian-owned businesses here and in Brooklyn, has aligned itself with the Molinari Republican Club (MRC) in an effort to increase the Russian community’s political and economic clout.


“We decided we had to support this club,” said Fridman, a former Soviet Army officer who came to the United States in 1992. “They are very close to our political and business vision.”

In the wake of the national GOP’s big wins this year, when the party took back control of the House, Republicans everywhere are more confident that their bedrock message of smaller government and lower taxes will resonate with American voters.

Fridman said that the Democrats “are going in an absolutely different direction,” focusing on “income redistribution” and rich-versus-poor “class war.”

“It’s too socialistic,” said Fridman, head of the non-profit Staten Island Community Center and president of Citizens Magazine, a public affairs publication. “It’s very painful for us to see.”

The Democrats’ national losses were seen as a rejection of President Barack Obama’s health care reform law and other initiatives that opponents say went too far in pushing government control on Americans.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

FIRE to Administrators of Public Colleges Nationwide: Beware of Personal Liability for Free Speech Violations

Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010

This is going to be the next step. The free speech, freedom of association and other rights violations seem to be ongoing and never ending. It is not as if court actions against public universities in these matters have not been well reported. It is unbelievable that college administrators could not be aware of what has been going on in the courts in regards to campus free speech. So now the next shoe is about to drop;  going after administrators personal fortunes and assets for using their positions to violate the rights of others.



Today, FIRE warned the presidents and top lawyers at nearly 300 public colleges and universities across the nation that they and their staffs should be ready to pay out of their own pockets if they continue to violate their students’ free speech rights.

Let’s hope that this catches their attention once and for all. For too long, public college administrators have been intentionally violating the free speech rights of their students, secure in the knowledge that they won’t personally lose a dime should a court rule against them. This means that if they feel like they can score political brownie points with those on campus who wish to see dissent silenced, they can do so without any personal cost. Heck, even if they lose to FIRE or in court, they can still say to their cronies, “Hey, I tried my best. We spent thousands in legal fees trying to shut those students up. We just couldn’t manage it!”

FIRE is putting these individuals on notice by sending a certified mailing this week to the presidents and general counsel of 296 of the biggest and most prestigious public colleges across the nation, highlighting significant legal developments from the past year. FIRE’s mailing warns these top administrators that with the state of the law on campus speech codes clearer now than ever before, they and their employees violate the speech rights of students at their own financial peril, as they can no longer count on “qualified immunity” to shield them from liability.

The legal doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for monetary damages for violating another person’s constitutional rights if their actions do not violate “clearly established law” of which a reasonable person in their position would have been aware. For years, public universities have argued that their speech codes did not violate clearly established law regarding students’ First Amendment rights, despite one legal decision after another striking down these codes under a constitutional challenge. One would think that university lawyers or law schools might have educated administrators on basic First Amendment principles, but one would evidently be mistaken.

Thanks to a continuing stream of federal court decisions, however, particularly in the Third Circuit, the argument that college administrators do not know that speech codes violate student free speech rights is increasingly untenable. Earlier this year, in McCauley v. University of the Virgin Islands, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals struck down university policies that absurdly prohibited “offensive” or “unauthorized” signs and conduct causing “emotional distress,” noting that a “desire to protect the listener cannot be convincingly trumpeted as a basis for censoring speech for university students.”

In our mailing, we are also warning administrators about a recent federal case in Georgia that FIRE coordinated, in which a federal district court determined that former Valdosta State University president Ronald Zaccari was not shielded from personal liability for violating the clearly established rights of student Hayden Barnes. (Zaccari is currently appealing that decision.) This is a major finding against a former university president, and if upheld, administrators will no longer be able to fool themselves that the possibility of qualified immunity being pierced is not a real one. As Dr. Johnson famously said, “the prospect of a hanging concentrates the mind wonderfully.”

FIRE comes wielding the carrot along with the stick, though. For colleges that wish to make an honest effort to rectify their speech codesthey do existFIRE offers resources such as its guide to Correcting Common Mistakes in Campus Speech Policies, a bound version of which is included in every certified letter. FIRE is also willing to consult with any university that shows an interest in changing its policies to better protect free speech on campus.

No institution should be proud of stripping its students of their fundamental rights. As our 2011 report on speech codes pointed out, the proportion of colleges that do so is slowly but consistently falling. “Only” 67 percent of public institutions colleges now prohibit speech that would be allowed in the larger society. (Three years ago, it was 79 percent, so it could be, and has been, worse.) But 67% is nowhere near good enough. Until that number reaches zero, FIRE will be there to bring the accountability to universities that is so sorely lacking.


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

Far Left Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison: ‘God Willing… the Border Will Become an Irrelevancy’

Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010

The border is irrelevant, we certainly have no intention of securing the border, so by all means line up to get your crotch check from the TSA, and by the way Big Sis wants to put TSA at subways, bus and train stations. Almost 80% of guns and bombs get through TSA now according to their own internal tests. ABC News showed us via the pilot who took video that the ground crew is not screened. How can we believe that DHS is serious about security when we have a nearly open border and  TSA screeners and methods that are 80% ineffective? [TSA was touted originally as a jobs program remember?? – Editor]

Or is it that the government wants people to get used to having their 4th Amendment rights violated routinely? Where are all of the “privacy activists” in the Democratic leadership? IF W had done this they would be having a cow. Remember how they had a cow over the Patriot Act? We were not as alarmed by it for two reasons:

1- It had a sunset clause so Congress had to reauthorize it every few years or it would go away.

2- The Supreme Court trimmed it down pretty well.

So what did those guardians of liberty in the Democratic leadership who opposed the Patriot Act so boisterously do as soon as Obama became President? They stripped the sunset clause out of the Patriot Act and made it permanent.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

Liberal Talker Alan Colmes: Muslims aren’t the terror problem, white males are…..

Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010

Then Dr. Monica Crowley hits Colmes with the fact that 126 Muslims have been arrested for plots against America in just the last two years.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

Obama to Enact Cap & Trade Even Though Congress Told Him No

Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010

This isn’t the only thing he is doing on his own. He is also enacting several parts of the health care law through regulation that the Senate told him no on as well.

As Obama has said himself that Cap & Trade will “necessarily make the cost of electricity skyrocket”: 

This is the problem that occurs when Congress grants federal bureaucracy such wide regulatory power to enact as they see fit. The bureaucrats get such wide power to enact law through regulation that they in effect become, as Justice Scalia once described as, “a junior varsity Congress” that can pass laws that are even against the will of Congress and the people. This action takes the entire purpose of Separation of Powers in the Constitution and tosses it right out the window. While Congress does have some minor delegable authority under the Necessary and Proper clause in no way did the Founders ever intend to have a situation where all three branches of government are legislating on their own and against the will of the people.

This action shows that the Obama administration and some of the Democratic leadership have nothing but utter contempt for the overwhelming expressed will of the American people.

The Republicans in the House will have to defund the EPA or take some similar action to stop this, which means that there will be war between the new House Republicans, Obama and the Democrats.

The strategy for Obama and the Democrats will be to shut down the government unless the new Republicans in the House vote to fund ObamaCare, the reinserted “death panel” regulations and Cap & Trade. If the government gets shut down the elite media and the Democrats will blame Republicans for shutting down the government. If the new Republicans capitulate Democrats will call them a bunch of frauds come election time and say “see your Tea Party folks voted for all the same big government stuff the Democrats did”.

The Tea Party and the GOP need to get way ahead on this and prepare the American people for a fight.


The Obama administration is expected to roll out a major greenhouse gas policy for power plants and refineries as soon as Wednesday, signaling it won’t back off its push to fight climate change in the face of mounting opposition on Capitol Hill.

The Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to a schedule for setting greenhouse gas emission limits, known as “performance standards,” for the nation’s two biggest carbon-emitting industries, POLITICO has learned.

Under the schedule agreed to by EPA, states and environmental groups, the agency will issue a draft greenhouse gas performance standard for power plants by July 2011 and a final rule by May 2012. The agreement – which comes after states and environmentalists challenged the George W. Bush administration’s failure to set the standards – requires EPA to issue a draft limit for refineries by Dec. 2011 and a final rule by Nov. 2012.

The White House Office of Management and Budget has signed off on the schedule, according to a litigant in the legal fight.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Trashing the Constitution | Leave a Comment »

Indianapolis Diner Owner Shoots Burglar

Posted by iusbvision on December 27, 2010

Posted in Chuck Norton, Firearms | Leave a Comment »

Rep. Joseph DioGaurdia tells how Congress hides problems by taking them off the books.

Posted by iusbvision on December 27, 2010

Here is his book Unaccountable Congress – LINK

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Brigitte Gabriel: Demography and Jihad in Lebanon

Posted by iusbvision on December 27, 2010

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

Mayor of London praises Piers Corbyn: The man who repeatedly beats the Met Office at its own game – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on December 27, 2010

Some of you may know Piers Corbyn form the film “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. He is the bane of global warming alarmists. They call him names, send him threats, and don’t want his work to appear in academic publications. He also predicts the weather correctly about 85% of the time according to the Mayor of London. And London’s city government isn’t the only organization that is listening to Corbyn rather than the official climate orthodoxy who has been wrong year after year.

This post is a great compliment to THIS ONE.

UK Telegraph:

Do you remember? They [The British Met Office and the Global Warming Orthodoxy] said it would be mild and damp, and between one degree and one and a half degrees warmer than average. Well, I am now 46 and that means I have seen more winters than most people on this planet, and I can tell you that this one is a corker.

Never mind the record low attained in Northern Ireland this weekend. I can’t remember a time when so much snow has lain so thickly on the ground, and we haven’t even reached Christmas. And this is the third tough winter in a row. Is it really true that no one saw this coming?

Actually, they did. Allow me to introduce readers to Piers Corbyn, meteorologist and brother of my old chum, bearded leftie MP Jeremy. Piers Corbyn works in an undistinguished office in Borough High Street. He has no telescope or supercomputer. Armed only with a laptop, huge quantities of publicly available data and a first-class degree in astrophysics, he gets it right again and again.

Back in November, when the Met Office was still doing its “mild winter” schtick, Corbyn said it would be the coldest for 100 years. Indeed, it was back in May that he first predicted a snowy December, and he put his own money on a white Christmas about a month before the Met Office made any such forecast. He said that the Met Office would be wrong about last year’s mythical “barbecue summer”, and he was vindicated. He was closer to the truth about last winter, too.

He seems to get it right about 85 per cent of the time and serious business people – notably in farming – are starting to invest in his forecasts. In the eyes of many punters, he puts the taxpayer-funded Met Office to shame. How on earth does he do it? He studies the Sun.

He looks at the flow of particles from the Sun, and how they interact with the upper atmosphere, especially air currents such as the jet stream, and he looks at how the Moon and other factors influence those streaming particles.

He takes a snapshot of what the Sun is doing at any given moment, and then he looks back at the record to see when it last did something similar. Then he checks what the weather was like on Earth at the time – and he makes a prophecy.

I have not a clue whether his methods are sound or not. But when so many of his forecasts seem to come true, and when he seems to be so consistently ahead of the Met Office, I feel I want to know more. Piers Corbyn believes that the last three winters could be the harbinger of a mini ice age that could be upon us by 2035, and that it could start to be colder than at any time in the last 200 years.

Here is Dr. Corbyn from last year debating a hoaxer –

A few thoughts on what Dr. Corbyn says; the first is that he predicted the storms hitting England 100 days prior. Again this is not unusual for Dr. Corbyn whose weather predictions year after year are consistently the most accurate and the only people who deny that are those who hope that you won’t look up the record. Corbyn, like so many other scientists and others such as Lord Monckton who have become experts on the issue, have challenged Al Gore and much of the rest of the global warming alarmist crowd to real debates. There are very few of these because the alarmists don’t want to debate. The only debate I am aware of that was of any notoriety was a when Lord Monckton debated an alarmist in front of a crowd of college students with the students acting as a jury. Monckton won the vote.


UPDATE – Here is Dr. Corbyn gloating about his accuracy on Fox News-

Dr. Corbyn wins American Thinker’s Best Climate Predictor Award – LINK

One can make money betting on weather predictions – guess who has been making money winning? – LINK


Why Weatheraction got the last three Summer and Winter predictions correct and the Met Office got it wrong Sky News August 2009


See audits and graphs of the accuracy events of Weather Action forecasts – LINK

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

Global Warming Alarmists One Year Ago, “2010 to be record hot year”: Now record cold across much of globe…again.

Posted by iusbvision on December 27, 2010

Here we go again. Yet another in a long list of claims by global warming alarmists bites the dust.

The hurricane seasons did not continue to get worse, the Himalayan ice didn’t melt away, Arctic Sea Ice is rebounding fast, Antarctic sea ice in the upswing, … this list goes on and on. One of the other recent claims from the AGW alarmist crowd is that 2010 would be the warmest year on record. Well it hasn’t worked out that way. I found it amusing when the alarmist hoaxers went into a neo-orgasmic tizzy over a record hot day in Pakistan with some flooding. So if they can go crazy over a single hot day, and since turn about is fair play, can we have fun with record cold MONTHS and shove it in their face? Of course we can.

Of course we know the excuses up front, they will say one of two things, that this cold is due to weather and not climate, but that excuse seems to go bye bye when they go spastic reporting a single hot day. Or my favorite, it is colder because of global warming. Of course if it was warmer in spite of conditions that should make it colder all of the sudden their rhetoric would be “see its cause of global warming”. In fact our friends over at EUreferendum skewer global warming alarmist George Monbiot for predicting warmer and warmer winters and then when the nastiest cold one hits Monbiot says “see this is what I told you all along” – except that isn’t what he/they said at all. Monbiot, like other global warming hoaxers, is hoping that no one will go back and check.

Atlanta had its first White Christmas since 1882


Charleston Post – Cold Water Endangers Sea Creatures

Thousands of dead starfish that littered a beach near Charleston last weekend are the first signs of what might become a disastrous winter for coastal sea life. They died because water was chilled to a lethal temperature by frigid weather earlier this month.


Anthony Watts: Hundreds of new cold and snow records set in the USA

New 2 day record December snowfall amount to the Minneapolis/St Paul area

While there have been a few high temperature records in the desert southwest and western Oregon, the majority of weather records in the USA this week have been for cold, snowfall, or rainfall. The biggest number of records have to do with the lowest maximum temperature.

Here’s a summary of the weather records:

Record Events for Mon Dec 6, 2010 through Sun Dec 12, 2010
Total Records: 2002
Rainfall: 319
Snowfall: 320
High Temperatures: 71
Low Temperatures: 426
Lowest Max Temperatures: 767
Highest Min Temperatures: 99


NewsNet5:  Scientists: Winter could be the coldest Europe has seen in the last 1,000 years [Question of the day – Did the computer models used by the IPCC and alarmists predict this ? – Umm guess :) – Editor]

CLEVELAND – If you are planning a trip to Europe this winter, better pack the winter woolies. Several scientists there say this winter could be the coldest Europe has seen in the last 1,000 years.

Why this dire prediction? Polish scientists say the coming cold is connected to the speed of the Gulf Stream. That’s the warm current of water that travels from the Tropical Atlantic up along the US East Coast and over to Europe. the Gulf Stream effectively brings warmer temperatures to Europe, especially during the cold season. Figure 1 photo shows an active Gulf stream back in 2009. Note the active streams of warmer water (reds and yellow streaks) moving northeast thru the Atlantic Ocean. Figure 2 shows the active warm water streams as of September 1st, 2010. they are substantially weaker!

The Gulf Stream has really slowed down in the past two years. Its now moving at just half the speed it was just a couple of years ago. The scientists believe that this means the stream will not be able to add that extra heat to the European Countryside and compensate for the cold, Arctic winds. These scientists also believe, when the Gulf Stream stops completely, a new Ice Age will begin in Europe…


Norway – Coldest November in 222 years! – LINK


Anthony Watts – NCDC gets record snowfall in their own back yard! [Way to rub it in Anthony :) – Editor]


Germany – Coldest December in 100 years – LINK.


Anthony Watts being the rather clever chap that he is – gave us a nice post comparing statements from the British Met and the Global Warming Policy Foundation and compared them to the results:

By Dr. Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation Met Office 2008 Forecast: Trend of Mild Winters Continues

Met Office, 25 September 2008: The Met Office forecast for the coming winter suggests it is, once again, likely to be milder than average. It is also likely that the coming winter will be drier than last year.

Reality Check: Winter of 2008/09 Coldest Winter For A Decade

Met Office, March 2009: Mean temperatures over the UK were 1.1 °C below the 1971-2000 average during December, 0.5 °C below average during January and 0.2 °C above average during February. The UK mean temperature for the winter was 3.2 °C, which is 0.5 °C below average, making it the coldest winter since 1996/97 (also 3.2 °C).

Met Office 2009 Forecast: Trend To Milder Winters To Continue, Snow And Frost Becoming Less Of A Feature

Met Office, 25 February 2009: Peter Stott, Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Despite the cold winter this year, the trend to milder and wetter winters is expected to continue, with snow and frost becoming less of a feature in the future.

“The famously cold winter of 1962/63 is now expected to occur about once every 1,000 years or more, compared with approximately every 100 to 200 years before 1850.”

Reality Check: Winter Of 2009/10 Coldest Winter For Over 30 Years

Met Office, 1 March 2010: Provisional figures from the Met Office show that the UK winter has been the coldest since 1978/79. The mean UK temperature was 1.5 °C, the lowest since 1978/79 when it was 1.2 °C.

Met Office July 2010: Climate Change Gradually But Steadily Reducing Probability Of Severe Winters In The UK

Ross Clark, Daily Express, 3 December 2010: ONE of the first tasks for the team conducting the Department for Transport’s “urgent review” into the inability of our transport system to cope with snow and ice will be to interview the cocky public figure who assured breakfast TV viewers last month that “I am pretty confident we will be OK” at keeping Britain moving this winter. They were uttered by Transport secretary Philip Hammond himself, who just a fortnight later is already being forced to eat humble pie… If you want a laugh I recommend reading the Resilience Of England’s Transport Systems In Winter, an interim report by the DfT published last July. It is shockingly complacent. Rather than look for solutions to snow-induced gridlock the authors seem intent on avoiding the issue. The Met Office assured them “the effect of climate change is to gradually but steadily reduce the probability of severe winters in the UK”.

Met Office 2010 Forecast: Winter To Be Mild Predicts Met Office

Daily Express, 28 October 2010: IT’S a prediction that means this may be time to dig out the snow chains and thermal underwear. The Met Office, using data generated by a £33million supercomputer, claims Britain can stop worrying about a big freeze this year because we could be in for a milder winter than in past years… The new figures, which show a 60 per cent to 80 per cent chance of warmer-than-average temperatures this winter, were ridiculed last night by independent forecasters. The latest data comes in the form of a December to February temperature map on the Met Office’s website.

Reality Check: December 2010 “Almost Certain” To Be Coldest Since Records Began

The Independent, 18 December 2010: December 2010 is “almost certain” to be the coldest since records began in 1910, according to the Met Office.

Met Office Predicted A Warm Winter. Cheers Guys

John Walsh, The Independent, 19 January 2010: Some climatologists hint that the Office’s problem is political; its computer model of future weather behaviour habitually feeds in government-backed assumptions about climate change that aren’t borne out by the facts. To the Met Office, the weather’s always warmer than it really is, because it’s expecting it to be, because it expects climate change to wreak its stealthy havoc. If it really has had its thumb on the scales for the last decade, I’m afraid it deserves to be shown the door.

A Frozen Britain Turns The Heat Up On The Met Office

Paul Hudson, BBC Weather, 9 January 2010: Which begs other, rather important questions. Could the model, seemingly with an inability to predict colder seasons, have developed a warm bias, after such a long period of milder than average years? Experts I have spoken to tell me that this certainly is possible with such computer models. And if this is the case, what are the implications for the Hadley centre’s predictions for future global temperatures? Could they be affected by such a warm bias? If global temperatures were to fall in years to come would the computer model be capable of forecasting this?


Notice in the headline we said “again” – you see this round of record colds comes after the last round of record colds from last January – LINK.


By the way, Piers Corbyn of “The Great Global Warming Swindle” fame, has once again accurately predicted what this winter was going to be like. The Mayor of London is giving him praise.

Posted in 2012, Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Why me? Why Him? Why her?

Posted by iusbvision on December 25, 2010

Now I’m not one to second guess what angels have to say, but this is such a strange way to save the world.

Merry Christmas.

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

An American Carol: Leftist Academics & Radical Christians

Posted by iusbvision on December 25, 2010

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

Lord Christopher Monckton lecture at the Heartland Institute: Global warming alarmists have lost the argument both scientifically and rhetorically.

Posted by iusbvision on December 24, 2010

Lord Monckton gives a less serious and more humorous speech on global warming alarmism at The Heartland Institute. Lord Monckton has had formal debates against the best of the AGW scientists and has won these debates so handily that none of them will debate him any more. Global warming alarmists spend their time staying out of Lord Monckton’s way hoping that they will never be in a position to face him.

In this speech Monckton laughs at global warming alarmists and the audience laughs with him.

Posted in Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Robert Spencer – The Complete Infidel’s Guide To The Koran

Posted by iusbvision on December 24, 2010


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

Lt. Col. Allen West: PC rules of engagement cost lives. The terrorists are doing what the Quran says.

Posted by iusbvision on December 24, 2010



Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Post 2010, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Andrew Klavan: Is America Satanophobic?

Posted by iusbvision on December 24, 2010

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

Xtranormal Takes on CPUSA and the Democratic Leadership.

Posted by iusbvision on December 24, 2010

The second video below  makes some very good points that are undeniable. The rhetoric used by the Communist Party and the Democratic leadership is indistinguishable. In the name of class envy and helping people both seek to use crisis to expand their power and subjugate the citizen. In the process most people do not get the help they need and things get worse, but the politicians do gain the power [Examples of crisis that leads to bureaucrats taking power 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]

This video explains the point brilliantly – Financial Crisis 101 in three and a half minutes:

To those who have not done their homework, or spent some years on most any college campus, this may seem crazy or shocking. The following video challenges you to go to the Communist Party web site and look for yourself at


“The mere fact that over 100 million people have been murdered in the name of communism does not matter.  The fact that a bank exec makes some money on my home mortgage and an oil executive gets rich because I drive my car is the REAL atrocity. Come to think of it I hate doctors and engineers and anybody who makes my life better.”

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

Bill Whittle on Palin Haters: It is easier to attack those with integrity when you have none.

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

This is one of the finest explanations of the propaganda and psychology used by the far left and the elite media as I have ever seen.

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad, Republican Brand | Leave a Comment »

Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research: Halt economic growth, start government rationing. Global Warming Alarmists Party Fat in Cancun

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

Steven Crowder reports form Cancun –

UK Telegraph:

In one paper Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, said the only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing the poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years. This would mean a drastic change in lifestyles for many people in countries like Britain as everyone will have to buy less ‘carbon intensive’ goods and services such as long haul flights and fuel hungry cars.

Prof Anderson admitted it “would not be easy” to persuade people to reduce their consumption of goods. He said politicians should consider a rationing system similar to the one introduced during the last “time of crisis” in the 1930s and 40s. This could mean a limit on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.

“The Second World War and the concept of rationing is something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale of the problem we face,” he said.

Heard enough yet? Or do you still believe this is about real climate and not about getting central control of the economy and diminishing national sovereignty?

Posted in Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

Police State Injustice in New Jersey

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

This is the story of Brian Aitken. This story is an absolute outrage. Governor Christie gave him commuted his sentence to time served, but it should have been an out and out pardon. This is why we need judges that respect the limits of the law and the Constitution.

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

Public School Administrator Punishes Student Christmas Club: “Keep your cheer to yourselves”

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

Just how radicalized are some public school administrators? Who would trust their child to a system that tolerates people with judgment this bad?

Posted in Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Former White House Advisor Van Jones: Left has to “pretend” there is a need for taxes and regulation to meet its economic goals.

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

Does it get more straight forward than this folks?

Did you  see the link behind him – go HERE to find out just what that means.

Van Jones was appointed to work in the White House. He is a self proclaimed revolutionary communist. The founder of STORM, a group which advocated revolutionary communism. Jones was “resigned” when Glenn Beck started reading what this man writes and playing his speeches on his show. White House communications director Anita Dunn was “resigned” after she told a group of people that the philosopher she turns to most is Mao. Mao is the greatest mass murderer in the last 100 years and was a founder of the Chinese Communist Party. We know what the economic goals of communists are. This also is another example which demonstrates that government does not regulate for our benefit. They regulate to pick winners and losers to empower and enrich themselves.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Harry Potter Actress Beaten by Family, Called a Prostitute for Seeing Non-Muslim

Posted by iusbvision on December 21, 2010

Ayaan Hirsi Ali says that Islam is overtly bigoted against women, non Muslims and blacks (I am aware of how black Muslims in Arab countries are not treated well institutionally).

UPDATE -A very revealing article written by a Yemeni journalist:

“There Must Be Violence Against Women”

London Muslim is reporting that Azad is under threat of death from her father and is trying to get the charges dropped and playing happy family out of fear.

Afshan Azad

Afshan Azad

The Blaze:

Afshan Azad, the 22-year-old British actress who portrayed Padma Patil, a classmate of Harry Potter in the blockbuster Hollywood films, was reportedly beaten, called a ‘whore’ and threatened with death by members of her own family after dating a young, non-Muslim man.

According to the UK’s Daily Mail, the young actress was assaulted and called a ‘prostitute’ after she met with a young Hindu man — a potential relationship that apparently angered her father and brother. After her family members threatened to kill her, Azad reportedly fled the family’s home through her bedroom window. The movie star is apparently so frightened of her brother and father, she has refused to confront them in court.

Both men were charged with making threats to kill her and her brother was also charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm on his sister.
Instead of both going on trial today, the prosecution decided to accept a guilty plea of assault by her brother, and both men were formally found not guilty of making threats to kill. …
Richard Vardon QC, prosecuting, told the court: ‘The incident took place on Saturday 21 of May at the home address of the family in Longsight, Manchester.
‘The prosecution allegation in essence is she was the victim of a wholly unnecessary and unpleasant assault by her brother.
‘The reason for the assault, apparently her association with a Hindu young man, that apparently being disapproved of by her family who are Muslim.

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

Democrats Yearly Deficit Spending 6.5 Times Higher than Republicans. Democrats Pork Spending 50 Times Higher – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on December 20, 2010

UPDATE – The Treasury just released new numbers. This is truly staggering. What do we have to show for all this madness?

2010 YEARLY DEFICIT: $2.08 Trillion. That is 10 times higher than the last year Republicans had budgetary control.

CNS News reported:

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

So much for that promise.

Byron York of the Washington Examiner:

Press coverage of the budget frenzy on Capitol Hill has suggested that pork-barrel earmark spending is still a bipartisan problem, that after months of self-righteous rhetoric about fiscal discipline, Republicans and Democrats remain equal-opportunity earmarkers.It’s not true. A new analysis by a group of federal-spending watchdogs shows a striking imbalance between the parties when it comes to earmark requests. Democrats remain raging spenders, while Republicans have made enormous strides in cleaning up their act. In the Senate, the GOP made only one-third as many earmark requests as Democrats for 2011, and in the House, Republicans have nearly given up earmarking altogether — while Democrats roll on.

The watchdog groups — Taxpayers for Common Sense,, and Taxpayers Against Earmarks — counted total earmark requests in the 2011 budget. Those requests were made by lawmakers earlier this year, but Democratic leaders, afraid that their party’s spending priorities might cost them at the polls, decided not to pass a budget before the Nov. 2 elections. This week, they distilled those earmark requests — threw some out, combined others — into the omnibus bill that was under consideration in the Senate until Majority Leader Harry Reid pulled it Thursday night. While that bill was loaded with spending, looking back at the original earmark requests tells us a lot about the spending inclinations of both parties.

In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion.

Where did those GOP earmark requests come from? Just four Republican lawmakers: South Carolina Rep. Henry Brown, who did not run for re-election this year; Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao, who lost his bid for re-election; maverick Texas Rep. Ron Paul; and spending king Rep. Don Young of Alaska. The other Republican members of the House — 174 of them — requested a total of zero earmarks.

Talk to Republicans, and they’ll say it would be nice if there were no earmark requests at all, but party leaders can’t control everybody. “Brown’s retiring, Cao’s defeated, Paul is Paul and Young is Young,” one GOP aide shrugs. Still, the bottom line is that the House GOP’s nearly perfect renunciation of earmarks is striking. “For a voluntary moratorium, it was impressive that there were only four scofflaws,” says Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

The Senate is a different story. But even though some Republicans are still seeking earmarks, Democrats are by far the bigger spenders. The watchdog groups found that Democrats requested 15,133 earmarks for 2011, for a total of $54.9 billion, while Republicans requested 5,352 earmarks, for a total of $22 billion.

If you look at the top 10 Senate earmarkers as measured by the total dollar value of earmarks requested, there are seven Democrats and three Republicans. (The leader of the pack is Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, who requested $4.4 billion in earmarks.) The three Republicans are Sens. Roger Wicker, Sam Brownback and Thad Cochran. One of them, Brownback, is leaving the Senate, while the other two are from Mississippi, which is apparently earmark heaven.

IUSB Vision Editor Commentary:

Isn’t it interesting that the only time you hear about “deficits” from the Democrats and the elite media is when they want to raise tyour taxes? Then the Democrats drop a 1.1 trillion dollar spending bill in the hopper near the end of a lame duck session and what do we hear? The  ….chirp….chirp….chirp… of crickets in the silence.

As the Deficit Commission has rightly pointed out tax rates need to be lowered for most individuals and businesses because the higher the rate the less the compliance, the higher the rate the more wealth goes overseas, the higher the rate the fewer will take risk, the higher the rate the less small businesses can hire. The simple truth is that the wealthy and upper middle class can take money and park it in a tax free growth account and leave it there. They have the option of not moving their money thus it cannot be taxed. It is for these reasons it is economic growth that generates real revenue, not high tax rates.

You heard the rhetoric all over the elite media and from the Democrat leadership, “If we don’t raise taxes on the “rich” the government will lose half a trillion dollars a year in revenue”. That entire narrative is a canard for the following reasons.

There are very few wage earners who make $250,000 a year.

The way the tax code is set up the majority of people who pay the top marginal tax rate and not individuals at all, but are Sub-S small businesses with 5 – 200 employees.

The half a trillion dollar number is generated from a series of formula’s that make up what is known as the “static Keynesian model”. These models not only are not accurate, but usually are not even clos,e as they do not account for changes in behavior that result from people changing the rules. For example: the government taxes every cheese burger 100 dollars. Since America consumes a billion cheese burgers a year the government estimates that the tax revenue will be $100 billion dollars.

Of course this leaves out the obvious, who would buy a cheeseburger of the government taxed each one $100? So along comes a Republican who proposes to lower the tax to $50 per cheese burger; along comes the media and the Democrats to cry that the tax cuts are costing the government $50 billion a year! Quite dishonest isn’t it?

Lowering tax rates resulted in increased revenue under Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton (second term tax cuts), and Bush II.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 4 Comments »

Obama Administration moves to regulate internet against court ruling and will of Congress.

Posted by iusbvision on December 20, 2010

Congress wouldn’t pass it. The government sued for the authority to regulate the internet and lost. So of course the Obama Administration has decided to do it anyway.

The regulations passed are not onerous but that isn’t the point. By declaring the internet to be phone lines the FCC has made a massive power grab of which this is only the first step. This is one of the important messages of this election; the American people have had enough of government officials who simply refuse to recognize any limits on their power.

Wall Street Journal:

Tomorrow morning the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will mark the winter solstice by taking an unprecedented step to expand government’s reach into the Internet by attempting to regulate its inner workings. In doing so, the agency will circumvent Congress and disregard a recent court ruling.

How did the FCC get here?

For years, proponents of so-called “net neutrality” have been calling for strong regulation of broadband “on-ramps” to the Internet, like those provided by your local cable or phone companies. Rules are needed, the argument goes, to ensure that the Internet remains open and free, and to discourage broadband providers from thwarting consumer demand. That sounds good if you say it fast.

Nothing is broken and needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and the European Commission both decided this year that net-neutrality regulation was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet technology and infrastructure.

Analysts and broadband companies of all sizes have told the FCC that new rules are likely to have the perverse effect of inhibiting capital investment, deterring innovation, raising operating costs, and ultimately increasing consumer prices. Others maintain that the new rules will kill jobs. By moving forward with Internet rules anyway, the FCC is not living up to its promise of being “data driven” in its pursuit of mandates—i.e., listening to the needs of the market.

It wasn’t long ago that bipartisan and international consensus centered on insulating the Internet from regulation. This policy was a bright hallmark of the Clinton administration, which oversaw the Internet’s privatization. Over time, however, the call for more Internet regulation became imbedded into a 2008 presidential campaign promise by then-Sen. Barack Obama. So here we are.

Last year, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski started to fulfill this promise by proposing rules using a legal theory from an earlier commission decision (from which I had dissented in 2008) that was under court review. So confident were they in their case, FCC lawyers told the federal court of appeals in Washington, D.C., that their theory gave the agency the authority to regulate broadband rates, even though Congress has never given the FCC the power to regulate the Internet. FCC leaders seemed caught off guard by the extent of the court’s April 6 rebuke of the commission’s regulatory overreach.

In May, the FCC leadership floated the idea of deeming complex and dynamic Internet services equivalent to old-fashioned monopoly phone services, thereby triggering price-and-terms regulations that originated in the 1880s. The announcement produced what has become a rare event in Washington: A large, bipartisan majority of Congress agreeing on something. More than 300 members of Congress, including 86 Democrats, contacted the FCC to implore it to stop pursuing Internet regulation and to defer to Capitol Hill.

Facing a powerful congressional backlash, the FCC temporarily changed tack and convened negotiations over the summer with a select group of industry representatives and proponents of Internet regulation. Curiously, the commission abruptly dissolved the talks after Google and Verizon, former Internet-policy rivals, announced their own side agreement for a legislative blueprint. Yes, the effort to reach consensus was derailed by . . . consensus.

After a long August silence, it appeared that the FCC would defer to Congress after all. Agency officials began working with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman on a draft bill codifying network management rules. No Republican members endorsed the measure. Later, proponents abandoned the congressional effort to regulate the Net.

Still feeling quixotic pressure to fight an imaginary problem, the FCC leadership this fall pushed a small group of hand-picked industry players toward a “choice” between a bad option (broad regulation already struck down in April by the D.C. federal appeals court) or a worse option (phone monopoly-style regulation). Experiencing more coercion than consensus or compromise, a smaller industry group on Dec. 1 gave qualified support for the bad option. The FCC’s action will spark a billable-hours bonanza as lawyers litigate the meaning of “reasonable” network management for years to come. How’s that for regulatory certainty?

To date, the FCC hasn’t ruled out increasing its power further by using the phone monopoly laws, directly or indirectly regulating rates someday, or expanding its reach deeper into mobile broadband services. The most expansive regulatory regimes frequently started out modest and innocuous before incrementally growing into heavy-handed behemoths.

On this winter solstice, we will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation. The darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter’s night for Internet freedom.

Mr. McDowell is a Republican commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

Florida School Board Shooter Self Proclaimed Humanist, Railed Against Rich, Touted Far Left Smear Site Media Matters

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

Once again lone wolf violence inspired by the hate rhetoric of envy from Media Matters and the far left blogs. Prof. Amy Bishop shot up her university, the man who flew his plane into the IRS building, the Pentagon shooter, the Discovery Channel shooter, the SEIU thugs who beat up Kenneth Gladney and the list goes on.

According to Clay Duke’s Facebook page, which has now been taken down, Duke proclaimed his religion as Humanist and his politics, well you will see that below. If Duke had listed anything like Tea Party or Evangelical or favorited Glenn Beck the reaction from the elite media would have been nothing short of orgasmic. Of course the last 200 years are filled with violence from secular leftists such as Stalin, Pol Pot, Hugo Chavez, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Ortega, etc.

Via The Blaze:

Clay Duke, the man who opened fire on a Florida school board Tuesday, posted a “last testament” on Facebook decrying the wealthy and linking to a slew of progressive sites including and

The chilling Facebook statement, posted under the “About Clay” section, talks about being born poor and how the rich “take turns fleecing us”:

My Testament: Some people (the government sponsored media) will say I was evil, a monster (V)… no… I was just born poor in a country where the Wealthy manipulate, use, abuse, and economically enslave 95% of the population. Rich Republicans, Rich Democrats… same-same… rich… they take turns fleecing us… our few dollars… pyramiding the wealth for themselves. The 95%… the us, in US of A, are the neo slaves of the Global South. Our Masters, the Wealthy, do, as they like to us…

In addition to the note, Duke also includes a reference to class warfare:

“There’s class warfare, all right, but its my class, the rich class that’s making war and we’re winning”
– Warren Buffet

And then issues a call to rise up, which seems to be from a poem titled “The Mask of Anarchy”:

Rise like lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number.
Shake your chains to earth like dew.
Which in sleep has fallen on you.
Ye are many – they are few.

Besides the writings, Duke also includes an exhaustive list of links under the quote “You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!” The page includes a link dedicated to Wikileaks, another to a progressive 9/11 truther site, and even Media Matters.

Far left radio talker Mike Malloy lied saying that the shooter was a Glenn Beck follower.

Beck responded saying that you knew the guy was a liberal because he didn’t know how to shoot.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action, Lies, Violence | Leave a Comment »

Federal Reserve Bureaucrat Bans “Merry Christmas” from Bank

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

KOCO-TV reports:

Federal Reserve examiners come every four years to make sure banks are complying with a long list of regulations. The examiners came to Perkins [the town] last week. And the team from Kansas City deemed a Bible verse of the day, crosses on the teller’s counter and buttons that say “Merry Christmas, God With Us.” were inappropriate. The Bible verse of the day on the bank’s Internet site also had to be taken down. […]Specifically, the feds believed, the symbols violated the discouragement clause of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, “…the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication … express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion.”

The feds interpret that to mean, for example, a Jew or Muslin or atheist may be offended and believe they may be discriminated against at this bank. It is an appearance of discrimination.

Local residents were upset, with one woman calling it “absurd” while another man called it “ridiculous.”

The news station says the bank has contacted Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe (R) and U.S. Rep. Frank Lucas (R), as well as the Oklahoma Bankers association, for help.

Most grade schools do not produce this level of foolishness. Indeed this form of stupidity is learned at one place, radicalized public universities.

So both Oklahoma Senators wrote a letter to the Federal Reserve and with a new Tea Party controlled House with Ron Paul as the chair of the Banking Committee this was going to mean bad news. The Federal Reserve reversed the order.  Perhaps said pinhead bureaucrats should be made to attend Justice Scalia’s upcoming classes on the Constitution as said pinheads are obviously in dire need of a refresher, but then again so are many public universities.

Here is the letter:

Click to Enlarge

Click to Enlarge

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action, Stuck on Stupid | Leave a Comment »

‘Big Sis’ getting DHS involved with global warming alarmism

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

More nonsense from the hoaxers….

CNS News:

At an all-day White House conference on “environmental justice,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that her department is creating a new task force to battle the effects of climate change on domestic security operations.

Speaking at the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice on Thursday, Napolitano discussed the initial findings of the department’s recently created “Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force.”

Napolitano explained that the task force was charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.”

According to the former Arizona governor, the task force would address specific questions, including:

“How will FEMA work with state and local partners to plan for increased flooding or wildfire [Fires are up because Clinton stopped the loggers from managing the federal forest land. Without management, clearing of the underbrush and man made fire breaks massive forest fires were the result – Editor] or hurricane activity [Max Mayfield the former director of the National Hurricane Center said that at Katrina we were at the peek of the 55 year hurricane cycle and the increased hurricane activity we saw was expected and had nothing to do with global warming. Of course the global warming alarmists tried to get him fired for daring to tell the truth but President Bush said no – Editor] that is more serious than we’ve seen before?

Posted in 2012, Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Lessons in Humanity: Habeas Corpus and the Presumption of Innocence

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

Aside from the important legal and philosophical points addressed in this brilliant scene. There is also a communications theory lesson as well. Often we have talked about “Attitude Change Propaganda” (ACP). Attitude change propaganda is a tactic elite media journalists, academics with an agenda, and political hit men have used for years and continue to use to this day. ACP is when you pick out some of the facts and present them with an attitude; an emotionalism that implies a narrative. This is what Admiral Satee and her interrogator use quite effectively in this scene (until she takes it to far and the gig is up).

A classic example of this ACP tactic is at 4:27 in the video when the interrogator asks, “Captain can you tell me just what happened on star-date 44390 – let me refresh your memory”. ABC used this exact same tactic in the Charlie Gibson interview of  Sarah Palin when he asked, “the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war”. What ABC was counting on the viewer not knowing is that there are six Bush Doctrines, and how was Sarah supposed to remember which one was articulated on which date? She answered with one of the six recognized Bush Doctrines and Charlie Gibson said it was wrong and threw another in her face.

At 10:00 in the video Captain Picard gives the same warning that appears in Federalist Paper #1 by Alexander Hamilton:

Worf:  I believed her. I helped her. I did not see what she was.

Picard: Villains who twirl their mustaches are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.

Worf:  I think, after yesterday people will not be so ready to trust her.

Picard: Maybe, but she, or someone like her will always be with us waiting for the climate in which to flourish spreading fear in the name of righteousness (A classic example of why we should not trust those who use a crisis to gain power**). Vigilance Mr. Worf – that is the price we have to continually pay.



Rahm is best known for saying, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before,” at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council in Washington, D.C. on November 19, 2008.


Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Police Psychologist: Shocking Horrific & Disgusting Display Of Police Behavior!

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

This is a growing problem with some young police. Instead of looking for a reason to show restraint he looked for an excuse to escalate. This time it resulted in an innocent artists death.

This is an issue that I have discussed quite a bit with my friends both in and out of police service.

It is because of this “excuse to escalate” issue that I made the following video with the following caption:

Attention Police – Just because technically you may be given a tactical excuse to use force, doesn’t mean that you should and doesn’t mean that it is genuinely justified. Being a peace officer means that you show restraint even if it can hurt, because that uniform means you are a peace officer, not merely a tactical combat officer. If you don’t understand that you should not be in that uniform.

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

Muslim Cleric on Egyptian TV: Wife Beating Permitted Only When She Refuses to Have Sex with Her Husband.

Posted by iusbvision on December 19, 2010

Allah permits a husband to beat the wife because he honors her……   that’s what he says …


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

Univ of Maryland survey on Fox News makes us ponder who is more dishonest, leftist academics or elite media journalists – UPDATED

Posted by Chuck Norton on December 18, 2010

First the news, then the analysis… [and see the update below!]

UPDATE IV Breaking! – Famed Economist Dr. John Lott dissects fraudulent University of Maryland “study” on Fox News

Via The Blaze

The University of Maryland released a study claiming that regular viewers of Fox News are the “most misinformed” when it comes to knowledge of American politics.

The UMD-commissioned study — “Misinformation and the 2010 Election: A Study of the US Electorate” — looked to judge how likely viewers of various news outlets were to believe false information (note: the study did not actually measure any sort of actual misinformation presented by some media outlets). According to the study, Fox viewers were “significantly more likely” to believe the following “misinformation”:

–Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

–Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

–The economy is getting worse (26 points)

–Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

–The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

–Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

–The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

–When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

–And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

FNC has since fired back at the report, defending the content of its broadcasts and judgment of its viewers while simultaneously dismissing the study and its conclusions.  Via the New York Times:

In a statement, Michael Clemente, who is the senior vice president of news editorial for the network, said: “The latest Princeton Review ranked the University of Maryland among the top schools for having ‘Students Who Study The Least’ and being the ‘Best Party School’ – given these fine academic distinctions, we’ll regard the study with the same level of veracity it was ‘researched’ with.”

Mr. Clemente oversees every hour of objective news programming on Fox News, which is by far the nation’s most popular cable news channel.

For the record, the Princeton Review says the University of Maryland ranks among the “Best Northeastern Colleges.” It was No. 19 on the Review’s list of “Best Party Schools.”

I am going to show you the depths of planning that these academics had to go through to get these results. Before we do that let us examine what a REAL polling and survey research organization like the Pew Research Center  (2) has to say.

According to Pew the most informed newspaper readers are those who read the Wall Street Journal. The most informed radio listeners are those who listen to Rush Limbaugh. And this year the most informed television viewers were the audience of Sean Hannity.

Asked a series of four questions to test their knowledge about politics and current events, just 14% of the public got all four correct – as many got all four wrong (15%). Two-in-ten got three correct, 26% two and 25% one. Regular readers, viewers or listeners of most media sources outscored the general public.

People were asked which party currently controls the House of Representatives  (Democrats), to identify the post held by Eric Holder (U.S. attorney general), which company is run by Steve Jobs (Apple) and which country has an active volcano that disrupted international air travel earlier this year (Iceland).

Overall, seven-in-ten Americans know that Democrats have a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. No media audience did poorly on this question, and 90% or more of the Hannity, Limbaugh and O’Reilly audiences got this right.

Far fewer know that Eric Holder is the attorney general. Just 22% got this question right. Wall Street Journal readers and Hannity viewers performed best on this question, with 56% of each audience answering it correctly.

About four-in-ten (41%) know that Steve Jobs is the head of Apple. Wall Street Journal (85%) and New York Times (80%) readers are especially likely to know this. Six-in-ten know that the volcanic eruption that recently disrupted international air travel is in Iceland. Journal (82% correct) and Times (81%) readers also did especially well on this question.

Examining the bogus Univ of Maryland survey –

Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

OK lets tackle this one. We know that the stimulus according to an analysis by the Federal Reserve created almost exclusively temporary jobs and some government jobs at an average cost of 400,000 per job. It was promised that unemployment would not rise above 8% if the stimulus was passed and yet it went to 10%, and over 17% if you use normal methods and not the government formula. The stimulus which failed resulted in added uncertainty in the economy which undoubtedly cost jobs. If that money had been used as tax cuts it would have helped create jobs. But the question here is “most economists”.

Most people know what an issue is and might not know what a specific group thinks about it. For example: “Most economists” did not see the mortgage collapse coming. “Most economists” thought that the stimulus package would help much more than it did, “most economists” were surprised by month after month of unexpected, unexpected, unexpected, unexpected bad economic news. “Most economists” have a very poor record of predictions as any examination of government projections shows that most of them are not just wrong, but not even close, because they almost exclusively use static Keynesian models.

This  also depends on what group of economists you ask and if most of that group were to agree on the question.Fox News does not bring on much Keynesian economic ‘talent’. Most economists and financial analysts that appear on Fox are either Austrian School, or followers of Hayek, Friedman, or a mix like Mankiw. These are people whose predictions come true far more than the ones that the AP or Reuters use.

Fox News analysts mostly said that the stimulus wouldn’t work, “most economists” that appeared in the elite media said the opposite, look who ended up being right. The same can be said about the opening affects of ObamaCare, the flat-lining of the economy due to uncertainty etc etc.

It would be fair to say that most of the economists that the viewers have been exposed to might feel the way the respondents answered and if that is the case the answers makes perfect sense and by no means makes them ignorant people.

[It only makes sense that if you poll a group about a subset of people that they are least exposed to that they would get more incorrect answers about that particular subset.- Editor]

Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

Again according to “most economists” that like static Keynesian models that do not take into account game theory or what is known as the “adverse selection spiral”, then I could see the Univ of Maryland’s point. But the problem is that even Obama’s own Medicare Actuary agrees with conservative economists and have said that it will raise costs. So far the analysts at Fox have been more accurate on the opening effects of ObamaCare [We have been cataloging the statements of people on both sides of this debate if anyone doubts it I will be happy to start producing the quotes, but most of them are already published on this web site so be sure to see our “Health Law” category – Editor]. Remember what we told you above, most economists of what group of economists surveyed? If I surveyed Austrian School economists how would most of them have answered?

– The economy is getting worse (26 points)

I found this one to be pretty amusing. Some indicators go up in a month and some go down. This question greatly depends on who you ask and/or what indicator you wish to look at. The Keynesian economic growth formula can be artificially inflated with government deficit spending. Since government spending in the Keynesian formula is treated the same as consumer spending and investment spending all the government has to do is take out a loan or print up cash and whaaalla – instant short term economic growth.

Even with an artificially inflated growth rate of 1-1.5% the truth is that we need REAL private sector economic growth of over 1.5% just to break even with people coming of age and entering the workforce. They may call the inflated 1.5% government economic growth number an improving economy, but in economic reality we are still taking on water. Fox viewers know this. Elite media viewers have been told every month for almost two years (up until August/September) that things were getting better and “summer of recovery” etc.

– Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

This one really got me to laugh. All scientists agree that climate change is occurring. Climate is always changing, the question is what is changing, how, and does man have much to do with it. In that regard there are growing numbers of scientists and people that reject AGW alarmism.

–The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

The keyword here is ANY. Every Democrat package has targeted tax cuts. Tax cuts that are so targeted it means you don’t get them. A tax cut if you outfit your home in solar panels and other green tax breaks etc. They did pass a payroll schedule reduction, but that was just a reduction in the deduction tables, the tax rate you pay was the same so come April 15th you had to pay more or get a smaller refund.

–Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

This depends on how it is measured. Remember those changes in the deduction tables we mentioned. Well those who have started doing their taxes are writing bigger checks or getting smaller refunds as a result, so they think that their taxes are going up.

–When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

Where Univ of Maryland…. in the House or in the Senate? Most Republicans in the House did oppose it. Here is the final vote in the House on TARP I – with 91 Republicans for and 108 against. Here is Tarp II – with 19 voting for and 156 voting against. It would seem that Univ of Maryland only looked at the Senate vote.

–And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

Again this depends on how it was asked. Do I believe that Obama was born in the United States? Yes I do because I saw the newspaper announcement and that seems like pretty good evidence. Is it CLEAR that he was? That depends, some of his own relatives say he was born in Kenya so why isn’t it clear to them? Some may believe that he was born here but are not completely CLEAR because he has not released his long form birth certificate. The question in this regard is so vague that it is useless for scientific purposes. Clearness implies transparency and Obama has not delivered on that. As far as I know no host or anchor at Fox has pushed a story and claimed that Obama is not a citizen. The study doesn’t show us that this every happened on Fox.

It is because of the vagueness and the nature of the questions that this survey could never withstand the peer review process and was just released as it was. The ideas of being asked about what a subset of a group of people think (like the “most economists” question) would be laughed at. It is better and more scientific to ask direct questions about issues, not what they think some subset might think of them.

This is exactly why far left journalists aren’t trusted by people because of spin that becomes dishonest, just like this “survey”. If you think this scholarship is shoddy, wait till you see the status of climate science.

UPDATE I – Flashback 2007 – Rasmussen Poll:

Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure. Republicans reject that view and, by a 7-to-1 margin, say the President did not know in advance about the attacks. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 18% believe the President knew and 57% take the opposite view.

If I worked for the University of Maryland I would present it this way:

Democrats are twice as likely to be misinformed conspiracy theorists (35%) than the populace at large (18%) with 26% of Democrats not sure how misinformed they are. Republicans, most of whom watch Fox News, reject such uninformed views 7-1. On knowledge of great historical events Fox News viewers are far more informed than Democrats who watch CNN or MSNBC.

UPDATE II Big Journalism reports that money for the study came from the Tides Foudation and George Soros. Of course to the informed that is no surprise whatsoever.

It is a big problem with medical academics being paid to conduct studies and writings with a predetermined conclusion. Sometimes the writings are pre-written and the academic just puts his name to it for a check. Then we found out about the millions that eco-groups, Marxist groups, George Soros/Tides, alternative energy companies, governments, and investment banks like Goldman Sachs (they want to trade the carbon and get a fee for each trade) have been pumping billions into alarmist scholarship propaganda. Now this.

UPDATE III – “How the World Works” tests claims from the “study” and the University of Maryland Study assumes that SOME government claims about the stimulus etc are gospel. They did not actually go out and survey economists. But when you look at the actual government report that the Maryland Study cites (a CBO report) the report admits that economists it used were in conflict about the multiplier/job effect:

Posted in 2012, Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »

Hugo Chavez’ Party Gives ‘Order by Decree’

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

OK all of you leftist students and professors who defended this guy; those of you who denied the killings, the suppression of freedom of speech, the opposition people who suddenly vanish…

Let’s see you deny this.



CARACAS, Dec 17 (Reuters) – Venezuela’s parliament gave President Hugo Chavez decree powers for 18 months on Friday, outraging opposition parties that accused him of turning South America’s biggest oil producer into a dictatorship. [Who want’s to bet that this will never be undone – Editor]

The move consolidated the firebrand socialist leader’s hold on power after nearly 12 years in office, and raised the prospect of a fresh wave of nationalizations as the former paratrooper seeks to entrench his self-styled “revolution.”

Chavez had asked for the fast-track powers for one year, saying he needed them to deal with a national emergency caused by floods that drove nearly 140,000 people from their homes. [Oh yes there is always a crisis that leads to these things isn’t there – Editor]

But the Assembly, which is dominated by loyalists from his Socialist Party, decided to extend them for a year and a half.

That means the president can rule by decree until mid-2012, and can keep opposition parties out of the legislative process until his re-election campaign is well under way for Venezuela’s next presidential vote in December of that year. [Who want to bet that there will either be no election, or this will be the last one, or that the opposition gets “vanished” to the point where the election is pointless – Editor]


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

Palin to Senate: Vote NO on START

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

I really do not care what you may think of Sarah Palin at this moment because this is an issue that every good American can get behind. The latest START Treaty gives away the farm and was very poorly negotiated to put it mildly.

I am aware that a long time ago Democrats opposed missile defense because it was Ronald Reagan’s idea but it is time to get over it. The way nuclear and ICBM technical proliferation has spread around the world the United States and our closest allies need missile defense. I would like one leftist to explain to us how being vulnerable and letting yourself get blown up is some kind of virtue.

The Governor is spot on with these critiques of the START Treaty.

Palin in National Review:

The proposed New START agreement should be evaluated by the only criteria that matters for a treaty: Is it in America’s interest?  I am convinced this treaty is not.  It should not be rammed through in the lame duck session using behind the scenes deal-making reminiscent of the tactics used in the health care debate.

New START actually requires the U.S. to reduce our nuclear weapons and allows the Russians to increase theirs.  This is one-sided and makes no strategic sense.  New START’s verification regime is weaker than the treaty it replaces, making it harder for us to detect Russian cheating.  Since we now know Russia has not complied with many arms control agreements currently in force, this is a serious matter.

New START recognizes a link between offensive and defensive weapons – a position the Russians have sought for years.  Russia claims the treaty constrains U.S. missile defenses and that they will withdraw from the treaty if we pursue missile defenses.  This linkage virtually guarantees that either we limit our missile defenses or the Russians will withdraw from the treaty.  The Obama administration claims that this is not the case; but if that is true, why agree to linking offensive and defensive weapons in the treaty?  At the height of the Cold War, President Reagan pursued missile defense while also pursuing verifiable arms control with the then-Soviet Union.  That position was right in the 1980’s, and it is still right today.  We cannot and must not give up the right to missile defense to protect our population – whether the missiles that threaten us come from Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, or anywhere else. I fought the Obama administration’s plans to cut funds for missile defense in Alaska while I was Governor, and I will continue to speak out for missile defenses that will protect our people and our allies.

There are many other problems with the treaty, including the limitation on the U.S. ability to convert nuclear systems to conventional systems and the lack of restriction on Russian sea launched cruise missiles.  In addition, the recent reports that Russia moved tactical nuclear weapons (which are not covered by New START) closer to our NATO allies, demonstrate that the Obama administration has failed to convince Russia to act in a manner that does not threaten our allies.

If I had a vote, I would oppose this deeply flawed treaty submitted to the Senate. Just because we were out-negotiated by the Russians that doesn’t mean we have to say yes to this. New START’s flaws have to be addressed in the form of changes to the treaty language that, at a minimum, completely de-link missile defense from offensive arms reductions.  Other issues would have to be addressed in the ratification process.  If this does not happen either now or next year, Senate Republicans, vote no!

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad, Russia | 1 Comment »

Gallup: Number of people insured by their employer down 5.2%. Number insured by taxpayers up 3.5%

Posted by iusbvision on December 17, 2010

They told us that we would not lose our health insurance and that the cost of insurance is going down. We know as we have covered in our ObamaCare Round-Up posts of elite media coverage that neither is the case. Premiums are rising, companies are dumping their insurance plans, insurers are getting out of some markets and prices have gone up quickly with those who had to do so stating clearly that the new legislation is to blame.

Now we are seeing the effects of big government economics in the aggregate. Prices up and wealth being destroyed so employers and people cannot afford it. Unemployment, uncertainty, debt crisis, monetizing, the cap & trade threat, and ObamaCare all add up.


In U.S., New Low of 44.8% Get Healthcare From Employer

Government healthcare up, employer-based care down in 2010 vs. 2009

by Elizabeth Mendes

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new low of 44.8% of American adults report getting their health insurance through an employer in November, down from 50% in January 2008, when Gallup began tracking it. The percentage of Americans with government-based healthcare remains elevated, with the 26% who report having it last month similar to the high of 26.3% found in September.


Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »