Wednesday, December 30, 2009
He was scheduled to return to his number one rated radio show on Monday, but that is now in question.
No doubt, given their horribly ugly nature, some liberals will be overjoyed at this news.
In fact, a person called "devincf" just Twittered "Here's hoping Rush Limbaugh goes home to hell tonight." Another called "tropicalia" wrote: "Will Rush Limbaugh's death be the miracle I was expecting for New Year?"
Most people will not feel that way, and many will understand the need to pray for Rush at this time.
I remember the day President Kennedy was shot. I was in the campus bookstore when the news broke over the bookstore radio speakers.
A dumbell in front of me in line said, "I hope they got the (*)."
I remember the feeling that came over me as I said to him, "President Kennedy and I disagree about nearly everything, and I don't like him as president, but this is no way to get a man out of office."
The same can be said for President BO.
He is the worse president we have ever had...far worse than John Kennedy...but I would never wish some catastrophe on him (other than to hope he gets de-elected.)
This is a time for basic humanity to take precedence over political stances.
Pray that Rush will be OK, and that whatever is the cause of this condition, doctors will be able to get to the bottom of it and resolve it positively.
I will eagerly await more news on this and will report it as soon as it becomes available.
THURSDAY MORNING UPDATE: Rush Limbaugh is reported to be resting comfortably in a Honolulu hospital.
Once again I was surfing the blogosphere and came across this post, which I copied and pasted in my "future reference" folder. But I failed to copy the source.
I thought it important, so I have posted it here.
If you know who wrote it, please tell me in the comment section and I will place an addendum with proper credit here.
Dear Every Lawmaker:
You shall not pass this monstrosity Harry Reid calls health “reform” because in your twisted arrogance you are blind, unable to see everyone around you recoiling in horror, from the left to the moderate to the right to the voice of the American people expressed in every last poll spewing from the MSM. You know when CNN reports, actually reports, such widespread discontent that you people haven’t the capacity to see beyond the fog of the Twilight Zone surrounding your District of Criminals.
You shall not pass this bill because we back here in flyover country know that whatever form it eventually takes..., after you add a slew of amendments that weigh it down like rocks strapped to a hit vic, will be only scaffolding for the final hell you and the House will consummate and birth in committee next January, a bill that will kill the only healthcare in the world worth paying for, a bill that will blanket this country with single-payer care (despite claims otherwise), a bill that will destroy our options and stifle our liberty and not even remotely resemble your president’s hollow mantra of “hope.”
You shall not pass this bill because we cannot sustain your shopping spree. While the number of federal employees making over $100,000 has doubled in the past 18 months, and you just gave them a raise, the unemployment rate in this country is 10 percent and higher in many states you represent and not even close to getting better. In fact, the worst is yet to come. You’ve already sent us barreling beyond the legal debt limit and still you spend more so that you can travel far and wide, fat cat politicians laying claim to an endless stream of someone else’s money: OURS.
You shall not pass this bill because it will break this country
You shall not pass this bill because this country doesn’t need another liberty controlling shell game disguised as “entitlement.” You already have entire generations of people under the loving arm of the Motherland, nuzzling against her for comfort and care, in health (we’ll get to “in sickness” in good time).
You shall not pass this bill because it is NOT free and it will NOT do any good, except to boost your own inflated and egotistical and maniacal sense of “making history.”
You shall not pass this bill because you do not want to one day regret knowing that, by shoving everyone into the same health care plan, you destroyed our chances for ever grabbing a doctor’s time (otherwise known as creating “rationing”). You do not want to regret forcing people to become intimate with the wonderful world of waiting lists, as if we’re standing at the back of a line snaking outside our doctor’s waiting room into the hallway and outside the front door and across the street, stretching to the other side of the county. You do not want to regret forcing people to spend their waiting time being more productive than ever before … by reading War and Peace. While that’s unintended enrichment right there, Creator of Quality health care in the time it takes to read Tolstoy is not an epitaph you one day want chiseled on your tombstone.
You shall not pass this bill because you do not want to chase every smart kid who ever wanted to be a doctor away from medical school. Since doctors already earn less, thanks to Medicare and Medicaid, your health “reform” would push would-be medical students into something else, like garbage collection … or undertaking. Those two businesses are easily the least likely to fall under your government control anytime soon. Garbage is money, always has been (ask The Mob); and for med students, taking care of the dead would be just a few steps away from operating on the live, without the $300,000 in student loan debt or the hassles of malpractice insurance.
You shall not pass this bill because you do not want be responsible for the invention of doctor trailer parks. Under Obamacare, doctors who stay in the biz (due either to their own altruistic reasons or, more likely, to government extortion in exchange for the forgiveness of student loans or practice-related debt) will experience the community joy of public assistance, using food stamps to fill a shelf or two of their refrigerators (if they even have electricity). They’ll sell their homes at a loss and move into federal trailer parks for doctors, seeing patients out of the back room to cut down on practice overhead. The parks will have names like Bones Village and Blue Star Doctors Park and Good Samaritan Estates and take the place of hospitals, saving the federal government billions annually (because, naturally, we’ll have to bail out hospitals by then, too). They’ll become tourist destinations; we’ll plan vacations around our doctor visits and then tour the grounds, letting little Jimmy ride his first x-ray machine in exchange for a $5,000 admission fee. Universities will offer classes about them, with names like Contemporary Medical Trailer Park Economics and Staph Infection in the Trailer Park Hospital. You Congresscriminals, meanwhile, will continue to conduct annual hearings on the State of the American Health Care Crisis.
You shall not pass this bill because you do not want to create an entirely new travel industry. Under Obamacare, if you get cancer, you can see the world (or what’s left of it) after the
Government Health Rationing Board rules you ineligible for care, saving the taxpayers (by then) billions. You’ll use your retirement savings, or what’s left after you pulled them out of the market just before The Crash of ’12 and hid them under a stone in the hearth, to take a fishing boat to Haiti, the ocean cruise business having gone under and Americans no longer visiting any country east of Bermuda after nuclear ballistic missiles, unable to reach North or South America, wiped out every other continent during Iranian President Ahmed Ahmadinejad’s failed attempts to annihilate Washington. You’ll meet a witch doctor who will make you drink chicken’s blood and mumble incantations while stuffing his face in a bong during a 4-hour ceremony to exorcise your tumor. Amazingly, you’ll recover and come back to America and live a long and healthy life, taking annual vacations (by row boat, since you’re now broke) to Haiti for preventive health care.
You shall not pass this bill because you do not want to be responsible for creating less congestion in hospital emergency rooms … for all the wrong reasons. Under Obamacare, your typical accident victim will be treated only if they still have more than 75% of their blood and all of their limbs and at least 90% cognitive function (no substitutes, please). This will preserve the dwindling blood supply and eliminate the waste of resources required to keep a patient on life support. (Plus, it will help save the planet!) And think of the boon for transplantation! Why, with all of the accident victims unworthy of treatment ending up dead, we’ll have mobile organ harvesting sites outside each doctors’ trailer park. Donor waiting lists will become obsolete … that is, of course, if the recipients are still working and able to pay their share of taxes in support of the Motherland.
You shall not pass this bill because, if ACORN can sue the federal government over funding cuts, you can bet your sweet ass millions of people in this country will gladly contribute to organizations willing to bombard you with lawsuits that will hold up your monstrosity for decades in courts.
You shall not pass this bill because you can also bet your sweet (*) that millions of us will refuse to purchase your mandated health insurance. You do not want to be the reason federal courts start stuffing American people into cells at the new Thomson Penitentiary for Enemy Combatants for refusing to submit to your unconstitutional authority to fine us and jail us and even shoot us over our health care insurance.
And we will resist.
Finally, you shall not pass this bill because you are supposed to be the voice of the people. You represent the state from which you were elected. You do not represent yourselves. You do not represent an arrogant and indecisive and thieving and weak president who is on the wrong side of what is right and on the wrong side of history. When it comes right down to it, you shall not pass this bill because, if you do, you can kiss your life in the District of Criminals goodbye; we, the right-wing teabagging mobsters living out here in flyover country, which curiously includes the states you represent, will make sure your careers of public indecent exposure will skid to an embarrassing and resounding and infinitely final halt in 2010 or 2012 or whenever your next election happens to be.
Count on it.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The suspect, who carried the explosive in his underwear, passed through security at two airports -- in Nigeria and Amsterdam, Netherlands. He was not on any "no-fly" list, even though he was on a massive federal database of people with suspected ties to terrorists and his father apparently had warned U.S. embassy officials in Nigeria about his son.
The MainStream Media initially reported that Abdulmutallab was a poor Nigerian who had a misguided, unfortunate childhood, thus explaining, if not justifying, his sorry attitude toward Americans.
According to MSM, if you are black, and want to bomb a plane, you must be poor and uneducated.
It turns out that the ever-racist MSM didn’t do its homework.
Abdulmutallab came from a well-to-do family and has been described by friends and family members as a disciplined, if occasionally brash, young man. His father who until recently was chairman of First Bank
Check him out HERE.
Umar managed to get by security and onto an airplane with what amounts to a bomb, designed to blow the airplane and its occupants out of the air.
The bomb failed to explode, but set fire to Abdulmutallab’s pants. The fire was extinguished and the perp subdued by fellow passengers.
On CNN's "State of the Union," Homeland Security Czar, Janet Napolitano, said: "One thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked."
Of course that was a bald-faced lie designed to cover up their absolute incompetence to deal with the issue of Homeland security, with which Napolitano is charged.
Get it? She lied. She was untruthful. She tried to absolve herself and her department of the sin of failure to protect and tried to make it look as though the actions of the passenger and crew on the airplane were a result of good planning by Homeland Security.
If Napolitano had said, “Oops, things didn’t work out right…we goofed, the system didn’t work like it was supposed to,” that would have been the truth.
But she didn’t say that. She said: "One thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked."
It didn’t work…not on ANY level.
Can you see that?
So then Napolitano embarked on a new spin.
"I think the important thing to recognize here is that once this incident occurred, everything happened that should have," she said on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday. "We trained for this. We planned for this."
“…once the incident occurred…!”
Who cares how well it was handled ONCE THE INCIDENT OCCURRED, for pity’s sake?
The idea of Homeland Security is to KEEP THE INCIDENT FROM OCCURRING IN THE FIRST PLACE!!
FAILURE TO DO SO MEANS THAT IT WAS NOT HANDLED PROPERLY!!!
What is so hard to understand about that?
Finally, under pressure from the enemy news organization, FOX NEWS, she had to allow that the incident had, indeed, not been handled well.
"Here, clearly, something went awry. We want to fix that problem," Napolitano told Fox News on Monday.
So there you have a perfect example of how liberals typically handle everything they touch: lie; lie; lie and then lie some more. When you get caught lying, spin, spin and spin some more. If that doesn’t work, call people names. When you get caught lying AND spinning, and can think of no way out, reluctantly tell the truth.
And you libs think these LIARS should be given the responsibility of running health care?
What is WRONG with you?
ADDENDUM: Tom, over at Tom's Place makes a good point: Napolitano is nothing but a political hack. There was nothing about an American system that was even involved in this incident. What failed were foreign security forces [Nigerian (where the flight originated), and Amsterdam, Netherlands (where the flight continued on to the US)].
Monday, December 28, 2009
It conforms, however, with my experience with liberals as a generalization.
I do not believe that all liberals take issue with all of the principles and values listed here, but in my experience the majority of them do not subscribe to the majority of the items on the lists.
Nine principles and 12 values that liberals can’t stand. They are the antithesis of what they believe..
The Nine Principles
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force
me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
The Twelve Values
ADDENDUM: Thanks to Lone Ranger at Important Stuff--Or Not for pointing out that is from Glenn Beck's 9/12 Project.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
Member of the New Jersey Assembly, 1761-1771; Served on the Committee of Safety, Committee of Correspondence, 1775; Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, Member of Provincial Assembly 1775; Elected to the Continental Congress, 1776.
"[T]hanks be given unto Almighty God therefore, and knowing that it is appointed for all men once to die and after that the judgment [Hebrews 9:27] . . . principally, I give and recommend my soul into the hands of Almighty God who gave it and my body to the earth to be buried in a decent and Christian like manner . . . to receive the same again at the general resurrection by the mighty power of God. "
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Can you understand that this constitutes rationing of health care?
It turns out that Sarah Palin was right: there IS "death panel" legislation in this bill.
Not only that, if the Senate has its way, it will be almost impossible to remove the "death panel" provisions of the bill.
In the health care bill itself, Harry Reid and his cohorts have changed the rules of the Senate so that the section of the bill dealing with this rationing board can’t be repealed or amended without a 2/3 supermajority vote.
This is, as you well informed readers know, a change from the rule that used to let a portion of a bill be changed by a simple majority.
Its implications for the future are huge!
It completely changes how hard it will be to change portions of future bills, whether introduced by Democrats or Republicans.
It is a frightening piece of trickery, and the majority of Americans will not recognize that it is in the bill or that it has such dire implications.
This bill, in its entirety, is a travesty.
This provision in the bill is ten times worse, for it will apply to all sorts of bills in the future.
We will rue the day when we allowed this atrocity to have been passed.
Friday, December 25, 2009
REMEMBER, WE CELEBRATE JESUS' BIRTH TODAY.
HE IS THE REASON FOR THE SEASON.
WITHOUT HIM THERE WOULD BE NO CHRISTMAS.
HE IS GOD INCARNATE.
HE IS THE SAVIOR OF ALL WHO WILL COME TO HIM, TRUSTING IN, AND ONLY IN, HIS FINISHED WORK AT THE CROSS OF CALVARY AND BELIEVING IN HIS RESURRECTION.
MAY THE CHRIST OF CHRISTMAS BE YOURS ETERNALLY.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Do you remember a time when you wanted something...really wanted it, so much that it consumed your every thought and action?
Then do you remember when it looked as though that thing you wanted so badly was about to come to pass?
Can you remember the excitement that welled up within you, making your heart race as the adrenalin freely flowed when the time for "its" arrival drew near?
Liberals have had just that kind of lust for control, and they are about to realize it.
As the vote on health care legislation draws near, liberals in the Senate and House can hardly contain themselves.
When this legislation is passed, they will have taken the first big step toward transforming this nation into full fledged oligarchy, and they will be the elitists in control.
By definition, and oligarchy involves the absolute rule of a few.
One of the reasons I believe conservatives in the legislative branch of our government have refused to stand up and fight vigorously against this crippling legislation is that they, too, have the same power lust in their hearts, can't get it on their own and are content to play second fiddle to the liberals if it means they can move closer to the power they crave.
Soon the two houses of government, the House of Representatives and the Senate will form a committee to iron out the differences between the two bills they have produced and upon the resulting bill being signed by President BO we'll have forgone our constitutional government.
Once it becomes clear that the constitution no longer has any vestige of influence in what government cannot do, it is gone forever.
Precedent will dictate that we do not have to abide by the dictates of "a tired old document that has seen its day."
We have been convinced that health care is a right, that the government confers rights on the people and that they have done a service by enacting this nation-crushing legislation.
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the liberal leadership will be giddy with power, and thus will begin a wholesale usurping of our individual rights and freedoms.
As the real meaning of this power grab becomes evident, most citizens will wonder what happened.
"Why can't I do this any more?" they'll cry out.
"What happened to my right to do that?" will be the mournful whine.
"After all, this is a free country, isn't it?"
Not any more it isn't.
You decided to give up freedom for "free" health care.
Yes you did. You elected these vile, power saturated nere do wells to congress.
Their lust will never be satisfied, and their emotions will rule day after day.
I will miss my liberties and freedoms.
I had kinda gotten used to them.
Monday, December 21, 2009
62% of Americans do not want this bill.
This so-called "representative" government does not care what you want.
They only care that they have the power to do what they want, no matter what you want.
They are in control and you mean nothing to them.
And 38% of you will sit by and let this happen, either too stupid or not caring that you have been deceived.
Even you liberals will not like what's in this bill, but you will never be rid of it.
You will not like living in a county controlled by a few elitists who see themselves as smarter than you.
You won't like it, but you will be powerless to do anything about it.
As it stands now, the blood of our forefathers was wasted.
We might just as well have remained British subjects and eschewed the Revolutionary War.
By Christmas Day the great experiment will have ended, its funding cut off and its rule placed in the hands of an oligarchy.
Thanks to those of you who put him in office, President BO has begun giving us the change he hoped for: the demise of the American Way of Life as we have known it.
It was a good ride.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement.
He called on the entire state to pray "that universal happiness may be established in the world [and] that all may bow to the scepter of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the whole earth be filled with His glory."
Saturday, December 19, 2009
I sent 50 or 60 emails to tattle on myself.
I guess they enrolled me in "Organizing for America."
Imagine my surprise when I got the following "Holiday" card from the President, himself (yeah...right).
http://my.barackobama.com/holiday (Just put in your first and last name and he will personalize a message for you.)
That President BO would take the time to personally wish me "Happy Holidays" is just more than I ever expected.
I'm just beside myself. Believe me, that takes up a lot of room.
I wonder whether he knew how offended I am by that greeting.
I don't celebrate this time of year as the holidays. I celebrate it as Christ(The Annointed of God)mas(birth)...Christmas.
Friday, December 18, 2009
He was an avowed socialist, believing that the government knows "the situation" (whatever that means) better than the "average" citizen (whatever that means), and thus should be empowered to make almost all decisions for the good of the people.
He likewise believed (according to him) that since all Americans are self-evidently equal, all Americans should have roughly the same things in life: similar homes; similar cars; similar pay; similar numbers of children, and so on.
When I pointed out to him that he lived in a 4,000 square foot home with a swimming pool and a three car garage, filled with three high-end imports, and asked him to justify his life-style based on his socialistic beliefs, his response was, "Well, someone has to be at the top to oversee the process."
He iterated that he would include himself in the elite group at the top.
How convenient for him.
Governmental power tends to bring out the "control-freak" side of those holding the power.
They come to believe that they know better what is good for the citizens than do the citizens, themselves.
Thus, although 62% of Americans oppose the health care legislation about to make its way through the senate and perhaps into law, the Senate, Congress and President BO believe with all or their hearts that they know better than we do and therefore are justified in pushing it through no matter what.
Even though 64% of Americans oppose bringing Guantanamo inmates into the country and affording them citizen-like trials, the Senate, Congress and President BO believe with all or their hearts that they know better than we do and therefore are justified in placing them in Illinois.
Even though President BO's approval rating (about 47% at this writing) has dipped lower faster than almost any other president, he still considers that he knows what is best for us and therefore whatever he wants to do he should be able to do.
Although 60% of Americans do not favor the proposed so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, the Senate, Congress and President BO believe with all or their hearts that they know better than we do and therefore are justified in forcing it upon us.
At the risk of seeming somewhat cynical, let me say that you can call your Senators, call your Congress persons and call the White House all you want, they don't care one whit what you think, what you like or what you want, they are going to do what they want to do because they believe that you have given them absolute power and they intend to use it.
As Baron Hill told his constituents at a town hall meeting, "This is my town hall meeting, and I set the rules...and you're not going to tell me how to run my congressional office...I don't allow filming because the films usually wind up on YouTube in a compromising position..." (See it HERE)
Between now and November of 2010, we will know for certain whether they are correct.
I pray that we will let them know in no uncertain terms that they are wrong.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
1. The government has done such an outstanding job with Social Security that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Social Security is broke and faltering? There is NO "Social Security 'trust fund'?"
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
2..The government has done such an outstanding job with Medicare that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Medicare is broke and faltering?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
3. The government has done such an outstanding job with Amtrack that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Amtrack is broke and faltering?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
4. The government has done such an outstanding job with buying into Chrystler Corporation that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? The Chrystler Corporation is broke and faltering?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
5. The government has done such an outstanding job with lowering the deficit that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? The deficit is more than 4.5 times as bad as it was when President BO took office?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
6. The government has done such an outstanding job with swine flu vaccinations that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Swine flu vaccines has been delivered late to every venue to which it was actually delivered, always fewer shots than they promised and to some venues never delivered at all?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
7. The government has done such an outstanding job with bank bail-outs that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Banks have been failing at an unprecidented rate?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
8. The government has done such an outstanding job with unemployment (by creating new jobs and saving existing jobs) that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? Unemployment has risen under President BO's leadership? Unemployment is higher than the 8% it was promised it would never rise above? Unemployment is at 10%? There is no way to measure the so-called jobs saved?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
9. The government has done such an outstanding job with transparancy and openness that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? The government has completed more business behind closed doors than at any time in the history of America?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
10. The government has done such an outstanding job with the war in Afghanistan that they have demonstrated their ability to run a comprehensive health care program.
What? What's that you say? The war in Afghanistan has faltered at best and at worst is likely to become another Vietnam?
Well, never mind that one...let's move on.
Maybe, just maybe, trusting the government to run the country's health care is not such a good idea after all.
Better get busy and tell your Senators. They still seem to think it's a good idea.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
I first saw this video on Social Sense.
The Scripture that contains the words about which Daniel was right is Daniel 12:4b: "...many shall run to and fro , and knowledge shall be increased ."
For centuries the passage was ridiculed as the rantings of a deranged old man pretending to be a prophet.
God's Word was right again...how about that?
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
To some, this is no more than the government collecting information that they need to evaluate the behavior of citizens, and is not a privacy infringement at all.
To me, and others of my ilk, this is an inexcusable, offensive, dangerous and unconstitutional attack on my (and your) privacy.
Here is the article in its entirety (You can check it out for yourself HERE):
New York Times
Published: December 12, 2009
The government is increasingly monitoring Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites for tax delinquents, copyright infringers and political protesters. A public interest group has filed a lawsuit to learn more about this monitoring, in the hope of starting a national discussion and modifying privacy laws as necessary for the online era.
Law enforcement is not saying a lot about its social surveillance, but examples keep coming to light. The Wall Street Journal reported this summer that state revenue agents have been searching for tax scofflaws by mining information on MySpace and Facebook. In October, the F.B.I. searched the New York home of a man suspected of helping coordinate protests at the Group of 20 meeting in Pittsburgh by sending out messages over Twitter.
In some cases, the government appears to be engaged in deception. The Boston Globe recently quoted a Massachusetts district attorney as saying that some police officers were going undercover on Facebook as part of their investigations.
Wired magazine reported last month that In-Q-Tel, an investment arm of the Central Intelligence Agency, has put money into Visible Technologies, a software company that crawls across blogs, online forums, and open networks like Twitter and YouTube to monitor what is being said.
This month the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law sued the Department of Defense, the C.I.A. and other federal agencies under the Freedom of Information Act to learn more about their use of social networking sites.
The suit seeks to uncover what guidelines these agencies have about this activity, including information about whether agents are permitted to use fake identities or to engage in subterfuge, such as tricking people into accepting Facebook friend requests.
Privacy law was largely created in the pre-Internet age, and new rules are needed to keep up with the ways people communicate today. Much of what occurs online, like blog posting, is intended to be an open declaration to the world, and law enforcement is within its rights to read and act on what is written. Other kinds of communication, particularly in a closed network, may come with an expectation of privacy. If government agents are joining social networks under false pretenses to spy without a court order, for example, that might be crossing a line.
A national conversation about social networking and other forms of online privacy is long overdue. The first step toward having it is for the public to know more about what is currently being done. Making the federal government answer these reasonable Freedom of Information Act requests would be a good start.
So...now you know.
How does this sit with you?
Monday, December 14, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
Following his duel with Aaron Burr, in those final twenty four hours while life still remained in him, Hamilton called for two ministers, the Rev. J. M. Mason and the Rev. Benjamin Moore, to pray with him and administer Communion to him. Each of those two ministers reported what transpired. The Rev. Mason recounted:
[General Hamilton said] “I went to the field determined not to take his life.” He repeated his disavowal of all intention to hurt Mr. Burr; the anguish of his mind in recollecting what had passed; and his humble hope of forgiveness from his God. I recurred to the topic of the Divine compassion; the freedom of pardon in the Redeemer Jesus to perishing sinners. “That grace, my dear General, which brings salvation, is rich, rich” – “Yes,” interrupted he, “it is rich grace.”
“And on that grace,” continued I, “a sinner has the highest encouragement to repose his confidence, because it is tendered to him upon the surest foundation; the Scripture testifying that we have redemption through the blood of Jesus, the forgiveness of sins according to the richness of His grace.” Here the General, letting go my hand, which he had held from the moment I sat down at his bed side, clasped his hands together, and, looking up towards Heaven, said, with emphasis, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Friday, December 11, 2009
His character issue manifested itself on the golf course in anger. Lots of golfers get angry, but Tiger Woods got angry like few others. He cursed, sometimes loud enough to be heard on TV, he threw his clubs, he stomped like a child and he kicked dirt, all with great fervor.
His talent ran deeper than we could imagine. So did his character flaws. He believed his own hype, and that because of his position could do anything he wanted, any time he wanted, anywhere he wanted, with whomever he wanted and nobody could tell him otherwise.
Like all of us, Tiger Woods had impulses. Unlike most persons of character, he believed he had no responsibility to control those impulses. He projected the image of "strong family man" all the while living an opposite life-style.
Tiger has lost many of his corporate sponsors, not because they are so squeaky-clean and never have moral lapses, but because his "new image," that of philanderer, is not good for their image or their sales.
Tiger Wood's is a sad story and a sad commentary on celebrity. But it is a story that demonstrates the absolute truth revealed in Scripture (Romans 3:23) "...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" That goes for you and me, too. It is the nature of fallen mankind.
There is one, and only one, solution: a changed heart brought about by a personal encounter with God through Christ Jesus.
That's true whether you are a sports celebrity, a politician, a movie star, or just a regular Joe, like me.
Otherwise, we just throw it all away.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The most arrogant Pres ever.
SMART DIPLOMACY:” Obama snubs King.
A day before President Obama receives his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, the president’s treatment of his Norwegian hosts has become hot news across Scandinavia.
News outlets across the region are calling Obama arrogant for slashing some of the prize winners’ traditional duties from his schedule. “Everybody wants to visit the Peace Center except Obama,” sniped the Norwegian daily Aftenposten, amid reports the president would snub his own exhibition at the Nobel Peace Center. “A bit arrogant—a bit bad,” proclaimed another Aftenposten headline.
“It’s very sad,” said Nobel Peace Center Director Bente Erichsen of the news that Obama would skip the peace center exhibit. Prize winners traditionally open the exhibitions about their work that accompany the Nobel festivities. “I totally understand why the Norwegian public is upset. If
I could get a few minutes with the president, I’d say, ‘To walk through the exhibition wouldn’t take long, and I’m sure you would love the show. You have no idea what you are missing.’”
Meanwhile, the Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet is reporting that the president has declined an invitation to lunch with King Harald V, an event every prize winner from the Dalai Lama to Al Gore has attended. (The newspaper’s headline: “Obama disses lunch with King Harald.”)
To be fair, though, Obama’s just in town to pick up his prize, and the King probably doesn’t have enough accomplishments on his record yet to merit lunch with Obama. But here’s the best point:
The American president is acting like an elephant in a porcelain shop,” said Norwegian public-relations expert Rune Morck-Wergeland. “In Norwegian culture, it’s very important to keep an agreement. We’re religious about that, and Obama’s actions have been clumsy. You just don’t say no to an invitation from a European king. Maybe Obama’s advisers are not very educated about European culture, but he is coming off as rude, even if he doesn’t mean to.”
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
The word is "Mountebank": a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money and/or fame.
Like the global warming guys.
Like the local snake-oil salesman.
Like Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman.
Like President BO.
Like Robert Gibbs.
Like Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, Harry Reid, and the super greasy, Charles Rangel.
Like the guys in the picture.
Mountebanks, one and all.
Monday, December 7, 2009
President BO has forgotten.
Many members of congress have forgotten.
Either that, or they don't care if it happens again.
President BO and Eric Holder have extend the rights of citizenship to our enemy combatants by affording them the luxury of a civil trial in New York instead of a military trial in Guantanamo.
They see the world through rose colored glasses and somehow think their idea of "being nice" will make the world a safer place.
The events leading up to the attack on Pearl Harbor, diplomatically, gave little indication that such a malicious event was being planned.
The "dots" were not connected because they were so dispersed that one could not see the pattern.
It was a similar situation with 9/11.
There were dots, to be sure.
They had been gathering for years.
Both the Clinton and Bush administrations missed them.
The Clinton administration missed more of them than the Bush administration, simply because most of the dots developed during Clinton's time in office.
And now more dots are being developed.
These dots are more insidious than the dots before 9/11 or Pearl Harbor.
These dots are about jihad, it is true, but about much more.
These dots have to do with the abdication of our American legal system, who is afforded what rights and why, and whether we continue as a sovereign nation.
Sovereignty is not a word most liberals understand or appreciate.
They believe that we are all living in the same world, therefore should be governed by some world governing organization.
They are willing to eschew liberty and freedom in order to achieve this world government.
Frankly, I don't want to be brought down to a "level playing field" where despotic countries' political systems are integrated into ours.
I don't want to be like, say, Italy, where "justice" is handed out, not on the basis of evidence, but on national relationships.
You may talk about "greed" (when you really mean aspiration to success) all you want, but this country is far, far better morally, spiritually, economically and socially than any other country that ever has been, is now or ever will be.
We don't need to be like France, or England, or Spain, or Germany, or China, or Romania or any other country.
They, in fact, want to be more like us, hence the growth of Americanization in these lands.
But there are those who are either so envious of our success or so barbaric in their religious fervor that they would like nothing better than to destroy our country and move toward ruling the world.
That was Japan's goal leading up to Pearl Harbor, and that was the goal of the hijackers on 9/11.
Have we not learned from history that we must be ever diligent in protecting the freedoms that our founders and fore-fathers shed their blood to achieve?
Have we not learned that the basic nature of mankind is not peace and love, but is hatred and war?
Do we think we can just go on making dumb decisions that reverse the strides made in the name of a republican form of government, which has served us so well these 230+ years?
Why do we forget?
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Elbridge Gerry: SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; MEMBER OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS, GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
Called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that:
". . . with one heart and voice we may prostrate ourselves at the throne of heavenly grace and present to our Great Benefactor sincere and unfeigned thanks for His infinite goodness and mercy towards us from our birth to the present moment for having above all things illuminated us by the Gospel of Jesus Christ, presenting to our view the happy prospect of a blessed immortality."
Maybe the Marines greeting President BO were ordered to be quiet, but couldn't help themselves and just had to clap lightly.
And maybe the soldiers greeting President Bush were ordered to clap wildly and cheer.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Britain enacted their National Insurance Act in 1911, as the first step on the way to their universal health care.
After WWII, in 1948, the United Nations adopted the International Bill of Human Rights. The United states did not sign, nor did we participate in the Social and Economics Rights sections of the bill, however, and has resisted nationalized health care.
During the Clinton administration, an attempt was made to pass universal health care legislation (which was given the name, “HillaryCare” by political pundits), but it failed.
Now, President BO and the liberal congress is trying again.
The question United States citizens need to ask is, “Where did the thrust for universal health care come from?”
We are not like other countries.
We are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people, not a people of the government, by the government and for the government.
What clamor from the people can the government point to, a priori, for federalized health care?
Answer: There was none.
The idea has been bandied about since the late 1800s, but as a national policy, it has never been asked for by the people.
Turns out that the idea that we must have universal health care came to the fore as a result of the so-called progressive thinking of politicians who thought it would be a good way to make the people more beholden to the government, specifically their own reelections to office.
Paul Joseph Goebbels, (German politician and Reichsminister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945) wrote: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
As we continue to press this supposed national debate on universal health care in the United States, ask yourself how involved our government is in perpetuating the idea of Goebbels’ statement.
Check the lies about its costs, its exclusions, its restrictions, its aim and so-forth.
Who is most likely to find it necessary to perpetuate lies about a government program, someone whose interest is in being re-elected to office or someone with no particular axe to grind?
Ask yourself, “Did President BO run for and come into office only to find this great outcry from the citizens to replace the finest health care system in the world with one run by a government with a history of cost over-runs, hyperbole and inefficiency?”
Of course not.
He came into office with universal health care as part of his agenda.
He intends to force it upon us, in spite of the fact that the majority of the people do not want it.
He is much smarter than you are, and knows what you need much better than you do.
It is not his to ask whether you want it, it is his to compel you to accept it.
Isn’t that what government of the people, by the people and for the people is all about?
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
President BO stood before cadets at West Point, cadets who were preparing themselves to do what he refuses to do: to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and the people it empowers.
I'll not copy the whole speech on this post. If you want to check my facts, you can read the entire transcript of the speech HERE.
He began by recalling "...why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place."
President BO spoke of the 9/11 attacks and our response in Afghanistan, concluding that discourse with, "Within a matter of months, Al Qaeda was scattered and many of its operatives were killed. The Taliban was driven from power and pushed back on its heels. A place that had known decades of fear now had reason to hope."
Then, in a speech that was supposed to be about Afghanistan, he found it necessary to insert what had to be a jab at the Bush administration, saying, "Then, in early 2003, the decision was made to wage a second war in Iraq. The wrenching debate over the Iraq war is well-known and need not be repeated here...drew the dominant share of our troops..."
President BO went on to tell us how responsible he is being by beginning to remove our troops from Iraq, after which he, ironically, told us how we have "...given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully leaving Iraq to its people."
How about that! In one breath he castigates us for being in Iraq and congratulates us for doing a good job there.
When he finally got back to the reason for the speech, he said, "...our forces lack the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces and better secure the population."
True, our forces DO lack the full support they need.
When General McChrystal asked for 40,000 additional troops to do what he had been told to do, President BO's response was to think it over for more than three months.
What a great understanding of what the military does! What great understanding of why the military does what it does! What a great understanding of how the military does what it does!
What great respect he has shown for the expertise and experience of General McChrystal, who probably got to be a general by first leading out in some Community Organization somewhere, maybe even Chicago!
He who has never been so much as a member of an ROTC battle group, let alone had even a modicum of military training, tells the general in the field to wait, to let a few more American soldiers be killed or wounded...no matter.
Our fearless Commander in Chief needed to think it over!
Well, if you have no military training, no experience on the battlefield and really don't know the first thing about either military tactics or strategy, I guess you have to think these things over.
Imagine: The enemy has congregated just over the next hill. Recon has shown that they are ready to attack. They have Russian and Chinese weapons and artillery and lots and lots of boots on the ground. General McCrystal, knowing that the attack is coming is asked by his platoon leaders what his orders are.
McCrystal answers, "Let me think it over. Give me a few months."
Even the most ignorant liberal could see a problem with that, right?
But you see no problem with President BO taking three months to make a decision about additional troops.
Having held off as long as he could, the president then began his usual bout with "I" trouble.
He began to tell the cadets all he had done to make things right in the Middle East, and all he was planning to do to make things righter in the Middle East.
Twenty times in the next 30 seconds of the speech he refers to his heroic actions with regard to the war.
"As president, I have signed a letter of condolence to the family of each American who gives their life in these wars."
Is that the way you think those letters get done (never minding the absolute terror he inflicted on the syntax and grammar of that sentence)?
"I see firsthand the terrible wages of war. If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow." he said.
After a genuine, full-bore ramble for more than a minute, President BO finally got around to telling the cadets that he would authorize 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in 2010.
He hastened to let everybody know that they would not be there long, because he's going to start withdrawing them in 2011, just a year after they get there!
His next thoughts were a group of rationalizations about his decision.
To help in Afghanistan, he will complete the closing of Guantanamo Bay (to make good use of our values...whatever that means), use diplomacy on those he has just agreed to fight with more troops, "...show our strength in the way that we end wars and prevent conflict, not just how we wage wars..."
"And we must make it clear to every man, woman and child around the world who lives under the dark cloud of tyranny that America will speak out on behalf of their human rights and tend for the light of freedom and justice and opportunity and respect for the dignity of all peoples. That is who we are; that is the source, the moral source of America's authority."
When did we start with that?
"In the end, our security and leadership does not come solely from the strength of our arms. It derives from our people, from the workers and businesses who will rebuild our economy; from the entrepreneurs and researchers who will pioneer new industries; from the teachers that will educate our children and the service of those who work in our communities at home; from the diplomats and Peace Corps volunteers who spread hope abroad; and from the men and women in uniform who are part of an unbroken line of sacrifice that has made government of the people, by the people, and for the people a reality on this Earth."
Talk about schizoid!
And by what measure of his actions in his year in office has he ever demonstrated that he believes in a government "of the people, by the people and for the people?"
He believes in a people of the government, by the government and for the government.
His reception and reaction from the cadets was polite, but devoid of enthusiasm.
Those men and women are not only great soldiers, they are smart.
President BO did not fool them one little bit.
How much has he fooled you?