ACLU Defends Homeowners Arizona Gadsen Patriot Flag

An Arizona Homeowners Association (HOA) has demanded a homeowner remove the Gadsen Don't Tread on Me flag outside his home outside Phoenix. The ACLU is "urging" the HOA to "adopt a less limited interpretation of their statute." Yes, I know - amazing!

Andy C.McDonel and the Gadsen Don't Tread on Me Flag

Andy C. McDonel said his HOA, the Avalon Village Community Association, asked him remove "the debris" from his roof:

"It’s a patriotic gesture,” McDonel, who has vowed to fight the HOA’s mandate, told the Times. “It’s a historic military flag. It represents the founding fathers. It shows this nation was born out of an idea.”

Here is the amazing statement from the ACLU:

“The Gadsden flag meets the spirit of the law. It’s a historic military flag. Many consider it the original American flag, before the Stars and Stripes.

Connecticut and Colorado residents are fighting the same battle. Read more here.

Keith Carter Sues NRSC: National Republican Senatorial Committee Racist?

Keith Carter worked for the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) since 1995. He was fired in July 2010, has filed a lawsuit and is charging racism.

The lawsuit names Executive Director Rob Jesmer, Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross and Chief Financial Officer Jay Banning:

Carter, who is black, said he was referred to as “boy” and forced to clean up the feces of dogs white employees had brought to work.

He filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court on Monday.

Brian Walsh, a spokesman for the NRSC, disputed the charges.

“This is an unfortunate action taken by a disgruntled former employee,” said Walsh. “The suit is meritless, and we look forward to its resolution.”

Carter was hired as a building engineer. He managed "the building" and says he was "often invited to participate in management meetings." He says his good relationship with NRSC ended in 2009, as he was "stripped of his supervisory responsibility and ordered to perform menial tasks."

The NRSC termination letter said Carter did not obey instructions, left work early and smoked in the basement:

Carter claims that when one Republican official asked him and his co-worker to do a job, he would often say: “Boys, we need you to … ”

Carter alleges he was instructed to clean up trash after political events, a task not previously included in his job description.

The complaint also states that Carter “was instructed to clean dog waste that other employees (who regularly bring their dogs to work) neglected to pick up.”

Carter said he was not allowed to remind the white employees to pick up after their own dogs.

Carter also claims he was “berated and cursed at” when he explained that he could not immediately fulfill a request to expand the political director’s office. Carter said he told a senior committee official the wall could not be moved without consultation with an electrician.

The complaint alleges the senior official who berated Carter “does not speak to any of the other white employees of the NRSC in this manner.”

The NRSC now has one Black employee. The article does not say who is paying Carter's attorney or if the ACLU is involved.

ACLU Sues Every City with Illegal Immigration-Related Measures

With today's decision of federal Judge Susan Bolton to disallow the portions of the Arizona immigration bill  (SB1070) that would allow illegal migrants to be put in ICE custody, at least one city, Freemont, Nebraska, has rescinded their own bill mimicking Arizona's. The ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) were threatening lawsuits, and so Fremont caved. Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies says the ACLU hopes Fremont will start a trend.

[Krikorian] But I'm not aware of any city that has passed an immigration-related measure and that hasn't been sued by the ACLU, said Krikorian. "Their goal is intimidation. They are going to sue you until you cry 'uncle.'"

And so it goes with the communists at the ACLU. It is time to separate basic human rights from civil rights. If you are in the country illegally, there should be no right to civil rights. Human Rights, yes. Civil Rights no.

Arizona governor Jan Brewer says this is far from over. She is filing for an expedited appeal to the 9th Circus Liberal Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That's a complete time waster but necessary, as she can't get to the U.S. Supreme Court without the Marxists on the 9th Circuit rendering their decision first. The decisions coming out of the 9th are routinely overturned by the Supremes.  Let's hope SCOTUS  will agree to hear the case after the 9th Circus embarrasses themselves as usual, and thumbs their noses at the Rule of Law.  From Governor Brewer:

“I will battle all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary, for the right to protect the citizens of Arizona. Meanwhile, I also know we still have work to do in confronting the fear-mongers, those dealing in hate and lies and economic boycotts that seek to do Arizona harm.

“We have already made some progress in waking up Washington.  But the question still remains:  will Washington do its job, and put an end to the daily operations of smugglers in our nation, or will the delays and sidesteps continue?  I believe that the defenders of the rule of law will ultimately succeed with us in our demand for action.”

I support the ACLU when defending constitutional rights, but they routinely oppress the rights of others by simply suing, intimidating and waiting for the cry 'uncle.' How many winnable law suits have been dropped because of ACLU threat tactics? Being illegal in America is not a civil right.

ACLU Travel Warning for Az: ACLU Giant Bully on Playground of Illegal Aliens

To each person who has come to my blog in the past to remind me of the many good deeds of the ACLU, don't bother on this one. Some civil liberties can be debated. This one can't. This loonier-than-ever organization has issued a travel warning for Arizona because of their new immigration law, which is identical to Federal law. Before a person or state can do something to impinge your civil rights, surely they have to do something that does impinge. The ACLU is a giant bully on the playground of illegal aliens, aimed at the busy Fourth of July holiday weekend. Source Fox News and Fox Nation.

Black Hole Offensive to Blacks: Blacks Hear Black Whores: Hoops YoYo Pulled

A Hallmark graduation card telling kids they can do anything, accomplish anything, go anywhere in the universe, and...graduates are not afraid of "black holes,"has been officially pulled off store shelves, thanks to the NAACP. Hoops and Yo-Yo warn "black holes," you know the kind in the universe, to beware because these graduates are coming to discover exactly what they are? To the embarrassment of the black population, some hear it as "black whores." Hear Hoops and YoYo in the video below.

Hoops and YoYo Hallmark Graduation Card - Black Holes

The Hallmark graduation card has been on store shelves for three years. The micro-speaker opens with "Hey world, we are officially putting you on notice."

Members of the Los Angeles NAACP did take notice. As characters known as "Hoops" and "Yoyo" banter on, African American leaders hear offensive language.

"And you black holes, you are so ominous. Watch your back," the card vocalizes.

Even more encouragement:

Watch out, Saturn, this grad is gonna run rings around you!'"

Obviously the very popular Hoops and YoYo were referring to ominous black whores. There can be no mistake about it. LOL!

"That was very demeaning to African American women. When it made reference to African American women as whores and at the end, it says ’watch your back,’" said Leon Jenkins of the Los Angeles NAACP.

Hallmark says the theme of the card is the solar system:

...and emphasizes the power of the grad to take over the universe, even energy-absorbing black holes.

The card company says the card speaks about the power the grad will wield.

"The intent here is to say that this graduate is not afraid of anything," explained Hallmark spokesman Steve Doyal.

Here's how the Los Angeles NAACP spins it:

"You hear the ’r’ in there. ’Whores,’ not, ’holes.’ The ’r’ is in there," said Minnie Hatley of the Los Angeles NAACP.

"It sounds like a group of children laughing and joking about blackness, again," said another NAACP member.

Hollywood Grind offers one reason for this monumental screw-up by the NAACP:

There is such a thing as the black English dictionary that gives alternate pronunciations of English words that only some blacks use, so it is understandable that some blacks can’t hear the proper pronunciation of words like hole, and mistake it for whore, but that doesn’t mean the cards should be removed from store shelves. 

Blacks that can’t hear correctly spoken English words as they are meant to be spoken should simply not buy the card, but instead they had to make an issue out of nothing.

I don't get the part about blacks hearing a 'r' that isn't there, just because they speak 'black English." Is their hearing impaired? The NAACP is about as despicable as the United Nations these days.

This is as embarrassing as Prince Charles, the Defender-of-the-Faith-to-be, proclaiming the 'spiritual principles of Islam. I give two thumbs up to Hoops and YoYo and Hallmark for understanding the worth and value of our graduates. Too bad Hallmark is pulling the card. My guess is it has nothing to do with offending anyone, and everything to do with an ACLU lawsuit. Cretins!





Hoops and YoYo Put Black Holes on Notice: Blacks Hear Black Whores (video)
Linked by: Social Sense - Thanks Mustang!An Ol' Broad's Ramblings - Thanks Kate!

Muslims SEIU ACLU Running Justice says Rep. Steve King

Rep. Steve King (R-IA-5th) said today Muslims, SEIU and the ACLU have infiltrated the U.S. Justice Department and are calling the shots. Let's add the State Department too. Take a look at his press release today. What is it King knows that we don't?

Steve King

Rep. King called on Attorney General Eric Holder to make public the DOJ's draft complaint challenging the constitutionality of the new Arizona illegal alien bill.

“The ACLU, SEIU and the Muslim American Society are calling the shots at the Justice Department.  The ‘draft complaint’ DOJ has prepared to challenge the Arizona law is a ‘cut & paste’ version of the class-action lawsuit the ACLU filed in United States District Court on May 17^th. 

No other conclusion could be reached unless Holder releases the Department’s ‘draft complaint.’ But when it becomes public, all of America will know what I know today. The ACLU and their radical affiliates are dictating the policy of the White House and the Department of Justice.” 

Thumbs up in gratitude to Rep. King for speaking out.

Murari Lal Glacier Scientist: Unverified Data Used for Political Pressure

The lies and deceptions pile on, as Dr. Murai Lal admits unverified data was included in the UN's IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report. No only was the date unverified, but it was included after protests from other experts in the field of glacierology.

Here are snippets from MailOnline:

Dr Lal’s admission will only add to the mounting furore over the melting glaciers assertion, which the IPCC was last week forced to withdraw because it has no scientific foundation.
The claim that Himalayan glaciers are set to disappear by 2035 rests on two 1999 magazine interviews with glaciologist Syed Hasnain, which were then recycled without any further investigation in a 2005 report by the environmental campaign group WWF.

Dr Lal said: ‘We knew the WWF report with the 2035 date was “grey literature” [material not published in a peer-reviewed journal]. But it was never picked up by any of the authors in our working group, nor by any of the more than 500 external reviewers, by the governments to which it was sent, or by the final IPCC review editors.’

In fact, the 2035 melting date seems to have been plucked from thin air.

Another glacier expert tried to tried to raise a warning flag last year:

Professor Graham Cogley, a glacier expert at Trent University in Canada, who began to raise doubts in scientific circles last year, said the claim multiplies the rate at which glaciers have been seen to melt by a factor of about 25.

‘My educated guess is that there will be somewhat less ice in 2035 than there is now,’ he said.

But there is no way the glaciers will be close to disappearing. It doesn’t seem to me that exaggerating the problem’s seriousness is going to help solve it.’

...an authoritative report published last November by the Indian government said: ‘Himalayan glaciers have not in any way exhibited, especially in recent years, an abnormal annual retreat.'

Rajenda Pachauri, the UN's Chairman of the IPCC called the November report mentioned above "voodoo science." In other words, he said the Indian government had no credibility. Now, Pachauri has been forced to apologize for claiming the Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035. Did he apologize for including information to exert "political pressure" on the world? No. He blamed Dr. Lal who denied any culpability.

The director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), Benny Peiser, said the IPCC's "review process" is "skewed by a bias towards alarmist assessments."

Environmentalist Alton Byers said the panel’s credibility had been damaged. ‘They’ve done sloppy work,’ he said. ‘We need better research on the ground, not unreliable predictions derived from computer models.’

The following links provide more on climate change fraud at the UN and around the world:

Related and Background:
Ocean Rise; Sea Levels Rise Never Began: Scientists Withdraw Claims of Sea Levels Rising

ClimateGate Phil Jones: No Global Warming Since 1995 Says Jones

ClimateGate 2008: Media Assisted Polar Bear Hysteria: Polar Bears Vanishing? Uh, no. And the Senate Knows it

Hottest Decade in History? Maybe Not - Earth-Based Climate Stations Manipulated

*****Phil Jones Hides Data from 42 Weather Stations

Inhofe Family Igloo Mocks Al Gore's Global Warming

Paul Dennis ClimateGate EMail Leaker? Were the Emails really hacked?

IPCC ClimateGate Grow: Counterfeit Claims about Netherlands 

ABC Questions Climate Forecasts: Can Climate Science be Trusted?
ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Scientist Phil Jones Not Prosecuted: UAE Asks for Jones Resignation  

Murari Lal Glacier Scientist: Unverified Data Used for Political Pressure

Copenhagen Junket Cost Millions - Millions for Failure: Inhofe on Copenhagen Caviar

Copenhagen Hopenhagen Nopenhagen? Rajendra Pachauri Apocalypse Now

EPA Endangerment Finding: Obama's Carbon Dioxide Pollutant: Obama TopDown Control

Andrew Watson Marc Morano: Andrew Watson Calls Marc Morano A-Hole

Chris Horner Sues NASA? NASA Hidden Data: ClimateGate NASA FOIA
Network Media Silent on ClimateGate: Day 14 and Counting

Hide the Decline Graph: ClimateGate Hide the Decline "Trick": Jones and Mann Hide the Decline

Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists: Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Down

Philip Jones ClimateGate: Phil Jones Global Chief Liar and Cheat 

CRU Souce Code Decoded: Marc Sheppard Finds the Fudge Factor 

ClimateGate: Global Warming Bullies 

ClimateGate Phil Jones Steps Aside: CRU Climategate Chief Steps Down

Jim Inhofe ClimateGate Investigation: Rajendra Pachauri Dismisses Top Warming Scientists

Scientists may sue Gore over "Warming and Change" Fraud

Jaws Dropped as Solar Scientist, Archibald, Praised C02

EPA Silences, Suppresses Opposition: EPA Lies

The EU's Carbon Trade: A Scheme and a Failure

The Fight for Human-made Global Warming


Important Resources:

Climate Depot

Watts Up With That?

Climate Audit, stephen McIntyre

A list of prominent scientists who have reversed their opinions

FCC Rick Boucher: FCC Rick Boucher Net Neutrality Proposal

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA-9th) is supporting the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) "Open Internet Proposal," or "Net Neutrality." Are you terrified yet? Update 10-23-09 below.

Rick Boucher

Boucher believes we need a new rule, where we have none now. He's already working on how to defend a court challenge, and he wants to modernize wireless.

As I read through this report on the proposed rule, I think it actually tells us nothing, although the public has until January 14th to comment on it.

The FCC wants to ensure "openness" for the Internet. The FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski, says there is a consensus among board members that:

"...we should move forward with a healthy and transparent process on an open Internet."

Sounds like a good idea. On our behalf the FCC, which plans to destroy talk radio, is trying to protect us. Create a rule, and create an opportunity for those managing the rule:

The FCC goal:

...an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates.

Some telecommunications services are apparently against "openness" through net neutrality - companies like AT&T, Verizon and Qwest. They say net neutrality will:

"strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition."

I will be the first to say that I do not fully understand the problems of managing networks effectively. I know that my internet service works very, very well. I'm not threatened by the revenue I generate (smiles). Things zip along well for me. But the "net neutrality" rule will apparently cause some problems:

...prevent operators from discriminating against any legal content a third party wants to deliver to consumers on their networks, though it allows for "reasonable" network management to unclog congestion, clear viruses and spam, and block unlawful content like child pornography or the transfer of pirated content.

Quite frankly, that means nothing to me. What I think the FCC is trying to do is to effect a "rule" where there is none now. Once a rule is established, the rule can be changed.

Of course, Google has an opinion about this, and Google and Verizon issued a joint statement. From that statement, here is what stood out to me:

First, it's obvious that users should continue to have the final say about their web experience, from the networks and software they use, to the hardware they plug in to the Internet and the services they access online. The Internet revolution has been people powered from the very beginning, and should remain so. The minute that anyone, whether from government or the private sector, starts to control how people use the Internet, it is the beginning of the end of the Net as we know it.

The same statement says that "innovation without permission" has changed the way we do business forever." I believe that, and it is a very good thing. The two companies say they are in "wild agreement" that we do not want "policymakers" (Congress) writing "overly detailed rules." Good luck with that. Start making rules about regulating the Internet, and Congress will jump on the bandwidth.

Here's the bottom line from Verizon and Google:

While Verizon supports openness across its networks, it believes that there is no evidence of a problem today -- especially for wireless -- and no basis for new rules and that regulation in the US could have a detrimental effect globally. While Google supports light touch regulation, it believes that safeguards are needed to combat the incentives for carriers to pick winners and losers online.

Slightly off topic, but to make a point about government mandates: the joint statement mentions the FCC's "national plan" to bring broadband to all Americans. I remember something about that in the Stimulus Bill. Yes, $7.2 billion was set aside for:

"...broadband and grant loan programs...." The government would run the program of course: then there's the mandate to the FCC that instructs it to create (within one year, mind you) a "national broadband plan to ensure that everyone in the US has broadband access."

The Google-Verizon joint statement ends with "transparency is a must." Now how can we know we will have transparency? We can't.

We have a Democrat president who doesn't like a particular news network and speaks about it openly. The FCC Commissioner, Michael Copps is on record saying this, in what he called the American Media Contract 2007 (guests were Jane Fonda, Helen Thomas, Jessie Jackson, Senator Bernie Sanders, among others):

We expect these:

1. A right to media that strengthens our democracy

2. A right to local stations that are actually local

3. A right to media that looks and sounds like America

4. A right to news that isn’t canned and radio playlists that aren’t for sale

5. A right to programming that isn’t so damned bad so damned often

And what do the American people — who own the public airwaves, by the way — get in return? Too little news, too much baloney passed off as news. Too little quality entertainment, too many people eating bugs on reality TV. Too little local and regional music, too much brain-numbing national play-lists. Too little of America, too much of Wall Street and Madison Avenue...."

As I asked in a previous article, who decides what America "looks and sounds"like? Who decides if the news is "canned" or not" Who decides what strengthens our democracy?

Obama's FCC transtion leader is a far-left attorney, Henry Rivera, who talks a lot about social justice. Rivera is the chair of the Minority Media & Telecommunications Council. This is what he wants the FCC to do:

1) funnel more "federal advertising" to minority media

2) allow foreign ownership; relax U.S. trade barriers to provide "overseas capital," for minority broadcasters

3) develop "constitutionally permissible yet non-dilute method of defining" the class [race] of licensees, i.e., "an applicant's race would be one of the numerous factors considered when the Commission reviews a license application."

4) change the FCC Commission to a more diverse Commission - it should look like America

In addition, Rivera wants a blue-ribbon panel discussion, now, to bring Communications to the table by creating a White House Cabinet position, and he advocates for "localism" to prevail when issuing broadcasting licenses - a position to be seen in Copps' comments above. "Localism" means increased minority ownership, including women, from the local community. The big boys go away. Won't radio be fun when this happens.

These are frightening, dangerous people. The FCC is considering these undemocratic measures for radio. Do we want them "regulating" the internet?

Thanks to David Lemon, Master of Bronze

Update 10-23-09:

Comments from Rep. Marsha blackburn (R-TN):

Net neutrality, as I see it, is the fairness doctrine for the Internet," she said. The creators "fully understand what the Fairness Doctrine would be when it applies to TV or radio. What they do not want is the federal government policing how they deploy their content over the Internet and they want the ISPs to manage their networks and deploy the content however they have agreed on with ISP. They do not want a czar of the Internet...

Update 10-23-09:

Senator John McCain has just introduced legislation to "prohibit the FCC from governing communications." McCain's bill is titled the "Internet Freedom Act." A snippet of text from the bill:

...the FCC "shall not propose, promulgate, or issue any regulations regarding the Internet or IP-enabled services."

Robert Bob Bauer is Anita Dunns Husband: Robert Bauer is Barack Obamas Lawyer: Dunn Bauer Power Couple

Robert 'Bob' Bauer is Anita Dunn's husband. Anita Dunn is President Obama's White House Communications Director. Robert Bauer is Barack Obama's personal attorney and the attorney for Obama for America since January 2007. See video below. Update 11-13-09 below.

Update 10-23-09: FOX News reports on Glenn Beck's news that Robert Bauer is being considered to replace Greg Craig as White House Chief Counsel. You might remember Craig's as the man responsible for the unprecedented firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin. See updates below video.

Robert 'Bob' Bauer - Anita Dunn: Power Couple

This power couple is in the news because Anita Dunn has recently made to controversial statements: (1) that Fox News is an "arm of the Republican party," and that Mao Tse Tung is one of the two philosophers Dunn most often turns to [assuming for 'wisdom.'] That comment put her husband in the spotlight, because he is also a member of Barack Obama's inner circle.

This report says Robert 'Bob' Bauer is Obama's personal attorney, attorney on political matters, and he is also chief counsel at the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and he is "the chief of the political law group at Perkins Coie headquartered in Seattle.

Bauer is considered "one of the nation's pre-eminent experts on election and campaign finance law." He is tending to Obama's interests on the Rod Blagojevich matter. I was wondering if he represented Obama on his "natural born" status, and wouldn't you know, WorldNetDaily has some of the answer, but maybe not all of it:

[Perkins Coie] ...the Seattle law firm hired by the White House to defend Obama in court cases challenging his "natural born" citizenship status and thus, his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution to be president. 

 If Bauer has not argued in court to keep Obama's "real"  "long form" birth certificate away from the public, we know he must have worked behind the scenes. You'll read below that Bauer is considered to be an "elite" and part of a "wiley group" in Washington, D.C.

Bob Bauer was counsel to Tom Daschle during Bill Clinton's impeachment trial. He worked for the presidency of Bill Bradley and John Kerry. He actively worked against Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign by arguing union support for Hillary in Indiana was illegal.

From this New York Times article from 2004:

Mr. Ginsberg [Benjamin] on the Republican side and Robert Bauer, a Democratic lawyer, have established themselves at the pinnacle of an elite and wily group of Washington election lawyers who have been testing -- critics say weakening -- the new McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law, as politicians and parties try to navigate the complex rules to their clients' maximum benefit.

Bob and Anita were featured as one of Newsweek's Top Power Couples in 2008. In fact, they are the only power "couple" mentioned - they were designated "The Couple" in an article titled The D.C. Powers. You can see what is alleged to be the Bauer-Dunn's home in Chevy Chase, MD by clicking here. Bauer is listed as a "partner" located in Washington, D.C. on the Perkins Coie website.

See the story of the "Fox News" bashing in the video below.





Anita Dunn - Fox News (video)

Update: 10-23-09:
Major Garrett, FOX News says that Bauer may move from the top attorney for the DNC, AND Obama's personal lawyer to the post of White House Chief Counsel to replace Greg Craig. The White House is mum on the matter but Garrett cites unnamed Democrats "close to the situation. Obama's media controller, Anita Dunn, and Bauer's wife, isn't talking either.

Update 11-13-09:

It was announced today that Robert "Bob" Bauer IS replacing current White House counsel Greg Craig. Lots of rumors: was Greg Craig ousted over his tardy closing of Gitmo? or the way he fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin - a scandal underway right now? Or did Obama just want his long-time personal attorney, Bob Bauer, in the White House?

The latest:
Issa Calls for Ethics Probe: Bauer behind Obama-Sestak Stonewall?

Katherine Conway Russell Philadelphia ACORN : ACORN Katherine Conway Russell Lies? New Video

A 32 minute video with additional audio exposes ACORN's Philadelphia Office Director, Katherine Conway Russell, who claims she or the organization, threw the famous posing pimp and prostitute duo, James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, out of the office. Absolutely no discussion of prostitution, said Katherine.
 

Here's the video:

 Katherine Conway Russell - ACORN Philadelphia (video)

Check in with BigGovernment.com for the unedited video later today or tomorrow. Quote found there:

Alinsky Rule #1: “Power isn’t only what you have, it’s what the enemy thinks you have.”

Thanks to Stop the ACLU which has commentary.

Maggie's Sunday Morning Sermon Video: Uncle Sam and Your Wefare from the YouTube of Tim (Timothy?)

This morning's sermon from the YouTube of Tim (maybe Timothy?). Before the choir's soloist sings for us, pay special attention to the lyrics, and read them aloud with me, but first bow your head for a short prayer: Lord, may we be inspired to love and protect our Constitution as did our Founding Fathers, and we ask for your wisdom in doing so. Amen.

Who can take your money, with a twinkle in their eye? Take it all away and give it to some other guy? The government, the government can. Who can tax the sunrise, who can tax the trees? Let you run a business and collect up all the fees? The government, Oh the government can. The Government can 'cause they mix it all up with lies and make it all taste good. The government takes everything we make, to pay for all their solutions: health care, climate change, pollution...throw away the Constitution...

Congregation, please get our your pocket copy of the U.S. Constitution and go to: U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec. 8:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States…” U.S. Const. Art. I, sec. 8"

The important thing to remember is, the above DEFINES the ONLY access to, and outlay of our money, your money, my money. Here is a quote from Senator John McCain, April 16, 2007, who wanted to give my money, and your money to millions of illegal aliens, who nevertheless, got this right:

But it was not intended to command our economy, or redirect its benefits to this or that interest group or subordinate its growth to the growth of government. Government's constitutional obligation to promote the general welfare did not empower it to assume the responsibilities of individuals but to protect our right to exercise those responsibilities without fear or favor, and to profit from the results.

Thank you to 9-12 Project for video. Video by Tim Hawkins Comedy Channel. Also visit Tim Hawkins' website. Here's a snippet from Tim's website bio:

Want clean comedy with an edge? Tim Hawkins brings the funny. Hawkins has been accused of being equally gifted and twisted. Whatever your take, he has indeed become one of the most in-demand comics in the country. His arsenal is unique: high energy stand-up, physical comedy, slick guitar skills, a thousand faces and voices, improvisational chops. It all combines to create an insane comedy experience. And yes, the guy can really sing. “People think I live a rock-star life”, said Hawkins. “Believe me, Mick Jagger never gets lost in a Hertz parking lot looking for his Ford Focus.” His art form was honed primarily in churches, with a brief 6-month stint performing in prisons as part of Chuck Colson’s Prison Fellowship. Since his shows ranged from little kids to youth groups to married adults, he had to develop material that would hit a wide age range... With 4 kids of his own and a wife who is winning her battle with breast cancer, Hawkins gets new material daily from the perils of marriage and parenting. But it must be difficult to work clean all the time, right? “Clean comedy is easy. Funny comedy is hard." Read more here.

Uncle Sam and Your Welfare

Don't miss today's most important news: Dick Cheney CIA Torture Investigation Video, Transcript

Trent Franks Lawsuit: Trent Franks Obama Birth Certificate?

A report comes today that Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) is considering filing a lawsuit to force Barack Obama to make his long form birth certificate public.

Trent Franks

Glenn Thrush at Politico.com brings us this good news. Oops...wait, there's an update. Dang! Wouldn't you know? A spokesman for Franks says Franks considered this before the November 2008 elections but now believes the refusal of the courts to deal with the birth certificate issue previously, has rendered any further action "moot."

 All of you idiots out there wasting breath calling me a "birther," take note: when a conservative president comes along and there is no way to know whether or he or she is a natural born citizen, you will want it proven...that is unless you...being that you are a certified idiot, want Arnold or any other naturalized citizen...or no kind of citizen at all, to sit in the Oval Office.

 Listen folks, this is exactly what should happen, and Congress should have done it en masse when the question was first raised. What is it about Barack Obama that makes your brain turn to jelly. The Constitution says he must be natural born and the reasons for this are obvious. Bill O'Reilly hear this. You are one of the idiots.

If you believe that the Hawaiian government showed you a copy of Obama's long form birth certificate, you are wrong. Obama has not given permission to release it to anyone or show it to anyone, according to officials in Hawaii, and if he did, you would be on the bottom of the list. Drop the smug imperialism...please, it is extraordinarily annoying. I do not know whether President Obama is a natural born citizen, and neither does anyone else. I doubt that he is because he will not release the proof, and releasing a birth certificate is no big deal unless you do not have one. Congress should have dealt with this, as they did with John McCain's birth status. For all the non-birthers out there, do you have anything intelligent to say to this? Congress should have dealt with it - as they did John McCain. What say you?

What a shame that this country has these questions. If Barack Obama did not have this hanging over his head, he would be much better off. If our leaders...any one of them was doing his or her job, there would not be this chatter. To Rep. Franks: For gosh sakes do it! And see if you cannot get others in Congress to join you. Think about how Congress has allowed this to happen.

If you thought about it in the Summer and Fall of 2008 - nothing has changed except that the man now leads this country. Anyone denying that action must be taken, needs to give a good answer why. The problem for you is, you have no good answer. As I watched Marine veteran David Hedrick, speak at Rep. Brian Baird's Townhall, and voice so eloquently - in a way that Barack Obama could never match, I saw the spirit that made America great. I watched the conservatives cheer and applaud Mr. Hedrick, while the majority of the attendees sat still and silent in their seats, willing to let Baird call Hedrick and all of us like him, a "brown shirt," willing to be satisfied with their Congressman telling them he would "let them keep their health insurance."

What kind of ignorance does it take to keep your butt in the chair when your liberty is under assault from all directions? Others talking and wondering: ChicagoRay: Rep. Trent Franks Joins Demand for Eligibility Proof The Snooper Report: Obama Birth Certificate Fruitloop Ft. Hard Knox: Barack Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate at Coast Province General Hospital

Carl Bernstein Sarah Palin: Bernstein Says Palin Ignorant (video)

Carl Bernstein is completely flummoxed that Conservatives like Sarah Palin. He says Sarah Palin is ignorant. "She's a demagogue, she's ignorant, she's a flake." See video below. Bernstein says that if Liberals picked someone as unqualified as Sarah Palin [for the second highest office in the land,] Conservatives would have run her out of town...." I'd like Bernstein to write a book about how Conservatives can run a Liberal out-of-town, because, believe me, we tried with Barack Obama. If you want to talk about "unqualified," the conversation needs to shift to Barack Obama.

"John McCain really committed an unpatriotic act by choosing Palin as his running mate."

And let us not forget this one: [Palin] is "manifestly unqualified for high office. As for Carl Bernstein, this is the face of hate. It's also about unbridled stupidity - about acting stupidly. May Sarah Palin live long and speak loudly to continue to baffle Mr. Bernstein. Carl Bernstein - Sarah Palin Video

Sonia Sotomayor La Raza: Conservatives and Liberals Agree on Sotomayor

Conservatives and Liberals agree that Sonia Sotomayor hid her liberality while testifying at Congress about her views, and how those views will influence her decisions if she is confirmed for the U.S. Supreme Court. Ignoring Sotomayor's La Raza membership, an extremist organization known as the "Latino answer to the KKK," and many other controversial opinions, papers and speechs, some Conservatives will cast a vote for her. Liberals will all vote for her, but activists are grousing that she has let down the cause, abandonded her judicial captial, and betrayed minorities by donning her Conservative hat and keeping her cool. Conservatives and Liberals agree that the "real Sonia Sotomayor" has not yet stood up.

Sonia Sotomayor

Conservatives are flummoxed that the Sonia Sotomayor witnessing under oath, is a completely different Sonia Sotomayor known by her previous court rulings, her speeches and her mammoth pile of writings. Liberals are flummoxed that this week's testimony is not the Sonia they know and love, ...the same Sonia that will deny a White man his right to have a reverse discrimination case heard, the Sonia that holds membership in La Raza,

La Raza was condemned in 2007 by former U.S. Rep. Charles Norwood, R-Ga., as a radical “pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland.”

Norwood urged La Raza to renounce its support of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees “the Race” as part of an ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.

...the same Sonia that, speaking as a member of La Raza, said "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion as a judge than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” and then repeated it another 6 times, the same Sonia that supports "the Latino answer to KKK," :

Miguel Perez, a La Raza spokesman at Cal State-Northridge, has been quoted as saying: “The ultimate ideology is the liberation of Aztlan. Communism would be closest [to it]. Once Aztlan is established, ethnic cleansing would commence: Non-Chicanos would have to be expelled — opposition groups would be quashed because you have to keep power.”

...the same Sonia who has had 60% of her rulings overturned by the Supreme Court,

 ...the same Sonia who in January 2009 ruled that States do not have to abide by the Second Amendment. In other words, if a State decides that residents do not have the right to keep and bear arms, then Sonia thinks that decision is Constitutional. In Maloney v. Cuomo, she signed the opinion stating a that the Second Amendment does not protect individuals from having Second Amendment rights.

 ...the same Sonia who holds for abortions at any stage of pregnancy even if the mother's life is not endangered, the same Sonia who ruled in favor of a Muslim inmate's right to have a "holiday feast" (which had been denied him because the particular holiday was not a mandatory holiday in Islam) on the grounds that it was "subjectively" important to him, regardless that it was not important to Islam. ...the same Sonia who opined in a dissenting opinion that minority felons should have the right to vote, based on past discriminations,

 ...the same Sonia who voted for the courts of other Nations to have a say when one parent removes a child from the country without the other parent's consent - in other words, you, the parent, might be subject to the opinion of a court in another land where your spouse absconded with your child without your permission.

 Still yet, some Republican liberals plan to vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. The names are no surprise. We learned some time ago we cannot count on Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), Senator Olympia Snow (R-MAINE) and now Senator Mel Martinez, a Republican Hispanic senator from Florida who is retiring in 2010. Some more about La Raza and what it means for Judge Sotomayor to hold membership in this organization:

La Raza Facts: 15 things you should know by Michelle Malkin writing for NationalReviewOnline: 

Only in America could critics of a group called “The Race” be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as “hate.” 

Both Barack Obama and John McCain will speak this week in San Diego at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, the Latino organization whose name is Spanish for, yes, “The Race.” 

Can you imagine Obama and McCain paying homage to a group of white people who called themselves that? No matter. The presidential candidates and the media have legitimized “The Race” as a mainstream ethnic lobbying group and marginalized its critics as intolerant bigots. 

The unvarnished truth is that the group is a radical ethnic nationalist outfit that abuses your tax dollars and milks PC politics to undermine our sovereignty. Here are 15 things you should know about “The Race”: 

15. “The Race” supports driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. 

14.”The Race” demands in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants. 

13. “The Race” vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state, and federal authorities. 

12. “The Race” opposes a secure fence on the southern border. 

11. “The Race” joined the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds from entering immigration information into a key national crime database — and to prevent local police officers from accessing the data. 

10. “The Race” opposed the state of Oklahoma’s tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions, and strengthened local-federal cooperation and information sharing. 

9. “The Race” joined other open-borders, anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California’s bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law. 

8. “The Race” bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an “absolute disgrace.” 

7. “The Race” has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn. 

6. Former “Race” president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton’s Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: “U.S. English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks.” He was referring to U.S. English, the nation’s oldest, largest citizens’ action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. “The Race” also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms “illegal” and “amnesty.” 

5. “The Race” gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as “a radical racist group . . . one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West.” 

4. “The Race” is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration-enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves — in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes. The New York Times reported that current “Race” president Janet Murguia believes “hate speech” should “not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights.” 

3. “The Race” sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz., the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose principal inveighed: “We don’t want to drink from a White water fountain, we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain in our aqueducts. We don’t need a White water fountain . . . ultimately the White way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction.” 

2. “The Race” has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home-loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal “mortgage counseling” grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks, and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens. 

1. “The Race” thrives on ethnic supremacy — and the elite sheeple’s unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes: “[The] organization’s very nomenclature ‘The National Council of La Raza’ is hate speech to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of ‘race’ in Spanish, not ‘the people’ — and that’s precisely why we don’t hear of something like ‘The National Council of the People,’ which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and tribal chauvinism.” The fringe is the center. The center is the fringe. Viva La Raza.

Whatever Happened to the KAng Nam?

A note from Radarsite: Despite its being at least as dangerous, in its global implications, as the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, and despite the fact that, according the rather ambiguous Korea Herald report quoted below, this looming maritime crisis still remains factually unresolved, we hear no more about it. Did the Kang Nam really turn around and head back home without discharging it deadly cargo? Did Kim Jong Ill really blink? Or as one skeptic suggests, did it already offload at some unknown port? Either way, thanks to the overwhelming event of Michael Jackson's demise, and various other more important stories, it seems that the Kang Nam crisis is no longer deemed newsworthy. It's off the front page. But it's not off our radar screen. Did the world just avert a major catastrophe? Or has the world just decided to look the other way? We will follow up on this. - rg ------------------------------------------------ From the Korea Herald

Kang Nam may be heading back home The Kang Nam, a North Korean ship suspected to be carrying illicit weapons or related material, may be headed back home, according to diplomatic sources here. "The ship is near our waters. That is about all I can say," said one diplomatic source on the condition of anonymity. Experts said this could mean that the ship is on its way back to North Korea, indicating that the latest United Nations Security Council sanctions are taking a toll on the reclusive communist state. "If the ship is on its way back, it would mean that Resolution 1874 is taking effect and causing the North to retreat," said Kim Tae-woo, vice president of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses. It has been almost two weeks since the Kang Nam set sail on June 17, but Seoul has claimed it has no information on the whereabouts of the ship. The Kang Nam is the first North Korean ship to come under international scrutiny since the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1874 that strongly recommends member states to help search and ground North Korean ships suspected of carrying illicit weapons or related material. Some observers said the Kang Nam may have already unloaded such items, but others said the North would wait until the last minute, as the weapons and materials constitute a vital source of funds for the impoverished regime. Myanmar, the alleged destination of the Kang Nam, has recently told the foreign press that it would not allow the ship to disembark if it is found to be indeed carrying such items. The government of Myanmar already has an idea of the items on the ship as the Kang Nam must declare them in advance, according to Foreign Ministry officials. "The fact that the Myanmarese government has spoken out, if it has as some of the news reports claim, it indicates that the resolution is working," said one Foreign Ministry official. The Myanmar Embassy here said it had no comment. A United States destroyer - USS John McCain led by Capt. Jeffrey Kim - is reportedly close on the Kang Nam's tail. But the destroyer is not authorized to forcefully search the North Korean ship. Due to these limits, critics have said the resolution needs to plug the loopholes by allowing such actions by the member states. (jemmie@heraldm.com) By Kim Ji-hyun

Campaign Finance Law Under Supreme Court Scrutiny

In a Supreme Court summer session termed "unusual," campaign finance laws will receive the Court's scrutiny.

Supreme Court

In the spotlight is the McCain-Feingold provisions for spending limits by corporations and unions. The question: is it constitutional to limit corporate political spending?

The court is reaching out to decide the foundational question about the rights of corporations in political campaigns," said Nathaniel Persily, a professor at Columbia Law School. "It's the last step in several incremental moves the Roberts Court has made to strike down the pillars of campaign-finance law."

Since the court largely upheld McCain-Feingold in 2003, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who voted with the majority in that opinion, has retired and been replaced by Justice Samuel Alito, who has voted to limit certain aspects of McCain-Feingold in prior cases.

The subject that took me the above Wall Street Journal post was: Decisions Indicate Supreme Court Moved Rightward This Term. Being the scholar that I am not, I don't see that conclusion, but whatever....With our government in Democrat hands, and one or more judges perhaps retiring after Justice Breyer, any move to the right is probably temporary. I did find a very interesting piece at the SCOTUS Blog. Written by Tom Goldstein, he talks about the appropriate way in which Justice Roberts is leading the court into measured decisions that will be unimpeachable:

It is reinforcing its own legitimacy with opinions that later can be cited to demonstrate that it is not rapidly or radically changing the law. This approach may be in the starkest relief if next Term the Court cites its recent decision in Wisconsin Right to Life as precedent for concluding that McConnell v. FEC and Austin v. Michigan have been significantly undermined and should be overruled. The plurality and concurrence in Wisconsin Right to Life famously debated how aggressively the Court should go in overruling prior campaign finance precedent. The Chief Justice urged patience – not moving more quickly than required – and the wait may not have been long.

About Justice Roberts:

Overgeneralizing broadly, conservatives believe that doctrines like substantive due process, the exclusionary rule, and a high wall separating church and state aren’t merely wrong but overstep the limited role of judges and endanger the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. Turning back those decisions, in turn, is thought to (among other things) enhance respect for the Court. The Chief’s professional life is defined by the Court — as a clerk, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, private practitioner, and now the Chief Justice — and his institutional commitment to it, including ensuring that it is regarded as an institution of integrity rather than a political football (see my earlier post on the Ricci opinion) — is profound. But that perspective – when taken by a thoughtful judge who has the long view – also counsels in favor of moving at a measured pace. If the Court instead were to announce in rapid succession the overruling of its prior decisions permitting regulation of campaign contributions, guaranteeing a right to an abortion, and finding affirmative action consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, then the public would likely be left with the impression that constitutional law is nothing more than a power play between competing ideologies that reflect nothing more than the happenstance of the most recent appointments.

Read the entire article at SCOTUS Blog. From the BLT (The Blog of Legal Times) we learn how a few of the Justices will spend a portion of their summer:

July will also find Justice Samuel Alito Jr. teaching in Innsbruck, Austria at St. Mary's University School of Law's summer program there. Last year, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. taught in the same program and was paid $15,000, according to his recently released financial disclosure form. Speaking of Roberts, he is scheduled to teach a course in July on the history of the Supreme Court at the New England School of Law program in Galway, Ireland.

Around the same time, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is scheduled to teach in Rome, hosted by Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, for his part, will return to Salzburg, Austria for his 20th straight year, teaching in McGeorge School of Law's summer program. Last year, McGeorge paid him $21,700. In August, Kennedy is also due to speak at the Chautauqua Institution's famed summer program in New York.

So for now, we have an "unusual" Supreme Court summer session called for September 9th to look into McCain-Feingold Campagin Finance Law. Much needed scrutiny, in my opinion.

ACLU Fight for Muslim Right to Fund Terrorism

by Stop the ACLU Recently the ACLU released a report on Muslim charities, many of which were proven terrorist funding fronts. In the report the ACLU falsely creates victims where none exist and once again exaggerate their favorite target of vilification, the U.S. government. According to the ACLU the evil American empire are stomping on the rights of Muslims to donate money to charities acting as front groups funding terrorist activities.

It suggests (contrary to a substantial body of evidence) – that the U.S. government was wrong to have acted against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, the Global Relief Foundation and other charities accused of raising money for terrorist organizations. The report also perpetuates the myth that the United States government may be planning to prosecute persons for unwittingly contributing to charities that were fronts for terrorism.

The ACLU asserts that post-September 11 policies targeting these charities have a “disproportionate” effect on Muslims and “are undermining American Muslims’ protected constitutional liberties and violating their fundamental human rights to freedom of religion, freedom of association, and freedom from discrimination.”

It recommends a series of policy changes which include repealing Executive Order 13224, issued shortly after September 11, which creates mechanisms for designating persons and organizations as “specially designated global terrorists” (SDGTs). The ACLU also calls on the FBI to employ the” least intrusive means” necessary to accomplish its investigative objectives and urges the federal government to ban law enforcement practices that “disproportionately” target people “based on ethnicity, national origin or religion.”

There is outstanding evidence that fears of Islamic charities donating their money to fund terrorist activities are legitimate. In many cases, such as the Holy Land Foundation, convictions happened. Of course the ACLU would make them partial. There is absolutely no evidence anyone wanting to donate money to legitimate charities, or people that donated unknowingly to front groups have had any civil liberties violated. The government has only went after the charity/front groups themselves, and never after donors.

The ACLU recommendations mean “more money for Hamas,” said Dennis Lormel, who created the FBI’s terror financing section. Terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah use the charities to build hospitals and provide food to the poor to win the trust of local Muslims. They then use “this credibility to enlist children as suicide bombers,” Lormel said.

But if the ACLU had its way, the U.S. government would lose critical tools for preventing U.S. charities from sending money to terrorist organizations. Using the “least intrusive means” would make it much more difficult (if not impossible) to shut down terrorist- financing charities like HLF, Lormel told IPT News, because they could deny the government the ability to use methods like wiretaps which were critical to building a case against the group for providing funds to Hamas.

Ending the SDGT designations would take away a valuable deterrent to abuse. “We know from experience that people stop donating to these charities once they are designated as supporters of terrorism,” added Lormel, a 28-year FBI veteran who oversaw its stepped-up efforts to shut off the flow of funds to terrorist organizations after September 11.

The ACLU complaints about the “disproportionate” impact of these investigations on Muslims overlook the reality that most of “the terrorist violence we’ve seen the past eight years comes from the Muslim world,” says Jonathan Schanzer, who worked as a Treasury Department counterterrorism analyst in the George W. Bush Administration.

The bottom line is if the ACLU get their way on this it is good for America’s enemies and bad for America. This is almost always the case when the ACLU get their way.