Saturday, December 13, 2014

Congressional Staffers Stage "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" Demonstration

On Thursday a couple hundred employees of the House of Representatives, and about six US Representatives, staged a "Hands up, don't shoot" protest on the Capitol steps in support of the Ferguson, Missouri, protesters. Apparently federal employees and elected officials are continuing to perpetuate the lie that is "Hands up, don't shoot."

The story that Michael Brown had surrendered to Officer Wilson with his hands up has been proved to be a fabrication. Yet it continues to be the meme of protesters nation wide. It somehow changed from being the lie told about Michael Brown to the rallying cry of those who continue to make police shootings of black suspects about race and race only.

Encouraged by President Obama and Eric Holder, protesters nationwide are still telling people that Michael Brown had his hands up when he was shot - even though every shred of evidence and reliable eyewitness testimony proved otherwise.

So now we have federal employees walking off the job to stand on the capitol steps with their hands raised. Since my tax dollars are paying their salaries I can't help but wonder if they all too Annual Leave to go out there and make their statement? And my tax dollars pay the representatives as well. You can be sure they didn't take paid time off to do this.

I read an article this morning about a St. Louis, Missouri, police officer who is going to be disciplined for wearing Darren Wilson's name on his sleeve while he was on duty babysitting monitoring protesters during what they called a "holiday themed march to city hall."

One or more of the protesters complained to the Chief of Police about the officer displaying the name of Officer Wilson, the man who was exonerated of any and all wrongdoing in the Michael Brown shooting.

From the article:  "It shows whose side he’s on,” one of the protesters explained. “I clench my fist. I want to attack, like they want to attack us. I know damn well they know Darren Wilson wasn’t attacking in self-defense. Darren Wilson had an option to Mace him. But he got to shoot.”

The protester's statement shows either his ignorance or his flat out refusal to accept the truth. And now he and people like him have the backing of people in the House of Representatives!

More from the article: 'Chief Sam Dotson said that the officer violated policies and will be disciplined.

“I couldn’t be more disappointed,” Dotson said. “We spend a lot of time working on professionalism and building a bridge in the community.”

Building a bridge is fine but do you and your officers have to live in a lie to do it?

And one more quote: "Jeff Roorda, business manager for the St. Louis Police Officers’ Association, spoke out in support of the unnamed officer

“For months, the U.S. Department of Justice has been calling violent protests where officers were shot at and had Molotov cocktails thrown at them ‘constitutionally protected exercises of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of expression," Roorda said.

“Now a police officer does nothing more than wear another officer’s name on his sleeve, an officer who has been exonerated of any wrongdoing, and is being told that his passive statement is constitutionally prohibited free speech. There is something wrong with this picture.”

It seems some in our government are bowing to the protesters at the expense of the truth. It's a sad state of events in this country when lies and a mob mentality win out over truth - particularly when the former is supported by our government officials - even those at the top.



Friday, December 12, 2014

News For A Friday

This one is a little long but it's been a busy news week.

It seems everyone is getting into the "white privilege" game. Recently it was announced that the University of Notre Dame is going to offer a seminar on the topic called “White Privilege Seminar: An Introduction to the Intersections of Privilege.” The purpose of the seminar is said to be to “educate and train” students “on the definitions of, historical/current paradigm of and causes/effects of white privilege.”

The seminar will be headed by Iris Outlaw, director of Notre Dame’s Multicultural Student Programs and Services. She also serves on the national board of the American Association of Blacks in Higher Education.

That's correct. Notre Dame is going to offer a seminar on white privilege to be taught by a black woman who, according to Republican campus activist Mark Gianfalla, last year "helped organize protests against the College Republicans’ hosting of Ann Coulter on campus under the premise that Ms. Coulter was a perpetrator of racial hate speech."

"Nothing is stopping her, however, from spewing the idea of white privilege and consequently white guilt in a University sanctioned course," Gianfalla says.

The seminar's description says that students will experience “personal transformation” and become “more aware of injustices and be better equipped with tools to disrupt personal, institutional and worldwide systems of oppression.”

At the end of the seminar students will be required to attend a White Privilege Conference in Louisville, Kentucky for three days. This conference “examines challenging concepts of privilege and oppression and offers solutions and team building strategies to work toward a more equitable world,” according to its website.

“The problem I see with this course is that it is teaching a flawed and inherently racist sociological theory as fact,” says Gianfalla. “This isn’t education. It’s indoctrination. Where is the required counterpoint course on affirmative action? It does not exist because that idea does not fit with the social and racial agenda of the professor.”


Speaking of universities - at least two universities in the United States have postponed exams for any student who "feel traumatized by the grand jury decisions in the Mike Brown and Eric Garner cases.

Really?

Pete Hegseth, a veteran of three tours in Afghanistan and CEO of Concerned Veterans For America, was interviewed by Megyn Kelly last night and naturally found this idea to be ridiculous. He drove home the point by talking about his own history and our military members.

"I was a student at Princeton on 9/11. I didn't get bereavement time," he said.

Hegseth went on to say he knows about the “Ivy League bubble world with adult children who don’t know what the real world is like and want to be coddled in their beliefs.” Hegseth attended Harvard after Princeton.

“Tell that to the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan who didn’t get a day off; who watched their buddy get blown up, who saw their kids get born while they were overseas or their buddy killed. They didn’t get to sit back and wonder; they did their job no matter what.”

Megyn's other guest, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, says that the minority community is traumatized and there is nothing wrong with delaying the exams. Apparently he's not too worried about how these students will function in the real world when they have to deal with tragedy or traumatizing events and will still be expected to maintain their responsibilities.

The student at Columbia who are asking to delay their exams are law students. Kelly suggested each of them get an asterisk placed on their diplomas and should be required to tell perspective employers that they may not be able to go to court in the event of a traumatic situation.

World War II produced "The Greatest Generation." Today it seems the United States is producing "The Pantie Waist Generation...."


In other news, Senator Dianne Feinstein, who once called Edward Snowden a traitor for releasing government information to the public that she felt should not be released, released her own government information that most people don't think needed to be released. Feinstein released the Senate Intelligence Committee's (an oxymoron?) report on the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques (EIT) the other day saying the American people "need to know" when the United States screws up. She released it knowing full well that it could endanger Americans all over the world, particularly our military and civilians in the Middle East, and gave those people a 96 hour window to prepare for the potential increase in violent attacks before making the report public. Is this not also treason?

The CIA says the report is full of misrepresentations and untruths. Director John Brennan made a public statement yesterday contradicting Feinstein's claim that waterboarding and other EITs accomplished nothing and did not yield any information that could not have been gathered in more conventional ways. Dianne Feinstein apparently is an expert in interrogation and intelligence gathering techniques.

President Obama and John McCain support the release of the report. Neither of those two surprise me at all. McCain insists that you can get no valuable information by using EITs - even as the current CIA director and several  previous CIA directors (Leon Panetta, Michael Hayden, George J. Tenet, and Porter J. Goss) all say that very valuable intelligence came from using those techniques including information that eventually led to locating and killing Osama bin Laden. But again - Feinstein and McCain obviously know better than the directors because.... well, just because.

It is highly believed that Dianne Feinstein released the report for two reasons. First, she is angry at the CIA for spying on Senate computers. And second, in January she will most likely lose her position as Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

No Republicans members of the Senate Intelligence Committee supported the release of the report. Dianne Feinstein and the other Democrats who did should be removed from office. Oh wait... some of them will be in January!


Finally, it it believed by some members of the House of Representatives that Speaker John Boehner made a deal with President Obama last year about amnesty and that it was his intention to fund Obama's Executive Order on illegal immigration all along. I have said before that I believe amnesty, or at least a path to citizenship is coming for the illegals that are already here. Neither side really wants to deport them. Democrats see illegals as future Democrat voters and Republicans see deportation as the possibility of losing Hispanic voters (which historically has been disproved.)

Listening to Boehner's bold speeches then watching what he does has some wondering who got to him; who's pulling his strings. Is he a genuine RINO or does someone have something on him that they're using to get him to become a closet Democrat?

One thing is certain - in my lifetime this is the first time the majority party in the House of Representatives has elected an apparent member of the minority party as Speaker...

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Obama's Misguided Biblical References

Why is it that liberals like to ridicule Christians, the Bible, and religion in general until they see a way to use it in their scheme(s) to get something done?

What's more interesting is the way they make up their own Bible verses and/or change the stories to fit their narrative.

At the 1992 Democrat National Convention, "Reverend" Jesse Jackson made the following remarks about Christmas.

“We hear a lot of talk about family values, even as we spurn the homeless on the street. Remember, Jesus was born to a homeless couple, outdoors in a stable, in the winter. He was the child of a single mother. When Mary said Joseph was not the father, she was abused. If she had aborted the baby, she would have been called immoral. If she had the baby, she would have been called unfit, without family values. But Mary had family values. It was Herod — the [Dan] Quayle of his day — who put no value on the family.”

According to his bio information, Jesse Jackson attended the Chicago Theological Seminary in 1964. Is that what they teach at that school - that Mary and Joseph were homeless and that Mary was abused when Joseph found out the baby was not his? Really?

Hillary Clinton, in comments criticizing then New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's policies on the homeless, once said “Christmas celebrates ‘the birth of a homeless child.’

Liberal newspaper columnists have said the same thing. I wonder - have they ever actually read the Bible? Neither Mary nor Joseph were homeless. The only reason they were in Bethlehem was because the Roman government ordered them to return to their cities of origin to be taxed. The Romans must have been Democrats.

Fast forward to President Obama's recent attempts at Biblical quotes. Obama apparently believes, or has decided to turn Christmas into an incident of immigration, as if Mary and Joseph were poor, homeless people trying to immigrate to Bethlehem to make better lives for themselves.

"If we’re serious about the Christmas season, now is the time to reflect on those who are strangers in our midst and remember what it was like to be a stranger," 
Obama said recently in a town hall meeting on immigration.

Obama said the story was about a ‘soon to be mother’ and ‘a husband of modest means’ who were looking for a place to stay but there were no rooms at the inn.

OK, that last part is true enough - except that's not what Christmas was about. Those things were only very small parts of the much greater story. Interesting how that works.

At that same meeting President Obama again showed his ignorance of the Bible when he said “I think the good book says, you know, ‘Don’t throw stones in glass houses.'"

Some try to excuse Obama by saying "Well, it's like the verse in John where Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Except it isn't like that at all. The reference to the glass house is in no way Biblical. And Obama's reference to it really doesn't justify his executive action to bypass Congress on the issue of illegal immigration.

At a prayer breakfast in 2012, President Obama quoted the Bible to justify his proposed tax increases on the wealthy. Obama quoted Jesus in Luke 12:48: “From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.”

But one not need be a Biblical scholar to know that in this reference Jesus was talking about individual stewardship in an individual's relationship with God rather than government. Jesus is saying we should be faithful and give generously without regret. 

There are those who believe Obama has a God complex and believes he is far greater than the average American. I do believe he's a narcissist and thinks he is better and smarter than anyone else. I think his favorite Bible verse as President is probably Matthew 22:21 "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's," - with Obama being Caeser.

President Obama should probably stay away from Biblical quotes unless he has someone with Biblical knowledge helping him select the proper verse. He should know by now that his misquotes will go viral by the end of the day. Of course, being the narcissist that he is he probably doesn't worry about details like that. And his followers don't much care what he says as much as how he says it. 

Not to worry, Mr. President. If you get caught up in a misquote you can simply turn it around (as you did with the now infamous "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor) by saying "What we really said was...." Your followers seem to live by the motto "Don't worry about what he said before, just take what he said today and go with it." So you're safe with them.


Dear Republican Majority.....

In November the people of the United States of America spoke. We spoke with our votes and we spoke out against the Obama administration, against Harry Reid, and against liberal Democrat policies and practices. We elected you overwhelmingly, in both the House and Senate, to take control of our nation once more and restore her greatness in the world.

We the people told you we want you to do something to improve our economy. We want you to restore the strength of our military and restore relationships with our allies that have been so badly destroyed by the current administration. We want you to secure our borders to stop the constant invasion of illegal aliens (and terrorists) crossing into our country unchecked. We want you to ensure that the President, the House, the Senate and every federal agency follows the laws of the land and the Constitution rather than doing whatever they wish whenever they wish. And we want the President held in check to prevent his lawless practices from further damaging our great nation.

So once the elections were over what did you do after the celebrations ended? You put the same bad leadership back in place in both Houses. Against the cries of the people who elected you - you put John Boehner and Mitch McConnell back in the leadership positions. With those two simple moves you told your electorate "Thanks for the votes. Now it's time to get back to same ol', same ol'."

John Boehner is Speaker of the House. Really? That's the best you could do? In March of last year, despite all of his blustering from the podium, John Boehner said he "absolutely trusts Obama" and that they "have a good working relationship." The only way that's possible is if Boehnor has completely forgotten who he is supposed to represent - the people who elected him. I guarantee those people don't "absolutely trust Obama." If they did Boehner would have been replaced by a Democrat.

Like Boehner, Mitch McConnell talks big but when it comes to action he seems to be in the back of the crowd. He hasn't done much but talk. In 2010 McConnell said "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

Guess what there, Mitch? You failed on that one. Why is that? Could it be because Republicans like you failed to carry the message of conservatism to the people so they'd vote against Obama? Could it be that the establishment Republicans pushed the wrong candidate in 2012?

The Tea Party helped Republicans take over the House of Representatives in 2010 in a pretty decisive vote. Two years later Barack Obama won re-election. This year the American people decided they've had enough of Obama and his cronies. They've had enough lawlessness, scandals, hidden agendas, lack of transparency, wide open borders, and outright lies.

You, Mr. McConnell, were elected by the people of Kentucky to fight against those things, open borders and illegal immigration being two of them. So what are you doing? Both you and Boehner are getting ready to approve an omnibus spending bill that will fully fund the President's (illegal) Executive Order that basically gives amnesty to 5 million illegals.

The smart thing to do would be to pass a continuing resolution until after January, when you, the Republicans, take over the House and Senate, then pass an omnibus bill that defunds Obama's amnesty order. Make the President veto it so the American people can see where his loyalties lie. But you're cozying up to the President and giving him what he wants. And you're being open about it. You flat out mislead the American people.

I'm not the world's smartest man. But I know that the illegals who are in the country today aren't going home. Neither party is going to attempt to round up the 12 to 15 million people here illegally and send them home in a mass deportation. Democrats want them here and Republicans actually believe if they send them back they will lose Hispanic votes. (History proves them wrong.)

So if we're not going to send them back what then? Eventually something will have to be done, whether Republicans and conservatives like it or not. First, and foremost, our borders need to be secured. The Democrats haven't done it. No President, Democrat or Republican, has done it in my lifetime. And Obama's policies have only opened it up wider, despite his claims that they are more secure than ever. (I guess he didn't notice the near 300,000 people who came across the border this years alone - even though his administration transported them all over the country trying to find places for them to stay. He must not have been watching Fox News.)

So eventually there will have to be a plan. Amnesty for all illegals, while it has been done before, is not the answer. Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million illegals in 1986 with Congressional approval and with a Congressional promise that our borders would then be secured. The amnesty happened. Border security did not. No other President has done it either. So much for sovereignty and national security.

The best thing Republicans can do for the American people would be to oust Boehner and McConnell from their leadership positions and replace them with a couple of conservatives who have the courage and the fortitude to stand up to Obama and the Democrats instead of sucking up. It's what we the people wanted when we voted in November. It's what we the people still want. As Rush Limbaugh has said many times: "The Republicans were not sent there to compromise. They were not sent there to govern with Obama. They were not sent there to fix anything. They were sent there to stop the things that are transforming and, in some cases, destroying the country." 

The Republicans were elected to stop Obama. Period. Are you paying attention gentlemen?

According to Rassmussen your current approval rating is at 8%. That means you've got immense opportunities for improvement. But already you're screwing up and doing what you want instead of what the voters want. I can guarantee one thing. We are watching. And if you continue to coddle the President and give in to his demands, you both will find yourselves unemployed at the next earliest opportunity. We the people have had enough.


Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Whose Side Is Dianne Feinstein On?

Yesterday, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairperson, threw the CIA under the bus when she released a report of all of the things she and other Democrats believe the CIA did wrong concerning the enhanced interrogation of Muslim prisoners, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Feinstein, along with the Obama administration, admitted that the release of the report could endanger Americans at home and abroad, with the Obama administration putting military members around the world on high alert, yet they released this report to the public anyway. Obama, as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, just put the entire military in increased harm's way for political reasons. There was absolutely no good reason for releasing this report now, while we're still at war with radical Islam.

In an appearance on CNN's "The Situation Room," Feinstein attempted to justify the release of the report saying that although Americans around the world could face increased threats because of the report that doesn't mean America "shouldn't clean our house," she he said. "We admit our mistakes."

In an unusual move for CNN, Wolf Blitzer pressed Feinstein about the possibility of Americans dying because of the report.

"I assume you would feel guilty about that," he said.

"I would feel very badly, of course," Feinstein responded testily. "I mean, what do you think, Wolf Blitzer? But we lose control at the end of this year. The Republicans take control, and there's some evidence that this report would never see the light of day."

And there you have the reason the report was released. The Democrats lose control of the Senate in January and this is their last opportunity to take a shot at the Bush administration for its perceived wrongdoings - the safety of Americans worldwide be damned.

In a statement that was completely non-surprising, Senator John RINO McCain said "Mr. President, I rise in support of the release – the long-delayed release – of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s summarized, unclassified review of the so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ that were employed by the previous administration to extract information from captured terrorists. It is a thorough and thoughtful study of practices that I believe not only failed their purpose – to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies – but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world.

“I believe the American people have a right – indeed, a responsibility – to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values.

“I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again. I thank them for persevering against persistent opposition from many members of the intelligence community, from officials in two administrations, and from some of our colleagues."


He went on but you get the gist of it.

In a statement that was completely surprising, Senator Lindsey Graham, normally John McCain's strongest ally and supporter, said “The timing of the release is problematic given the growing threats we face. Terrorism is on the rise, and our enemies will seize upon this report at a critical time. Simply put, this is not the time to release the report.

“I believe its release at this time is politically motivated. I have no doubts that it will create problems for our country and the men and women serving our nation around the globe.”


President Obama weighed in, not on the report but on its contents. "These techniques did significant damage to America's standing in the world and made it harder to pursue our interests with allies and partners," Obama said.

From what I've seen over the last six years the main reason we've had difficulties pursuing our interest with allies and partners is Barack Obama. From his first day in office he has been alienating our strongest allies, from Great Britain to Israel. And now he's trying to make friends with Iran and helping them become a nuclear power.

Yeah, the Democrats are doing a great job maintaining the strength and sovereignty of the United States. Absolutely. And Al Gore hasn't made a dime from the global warming myth.

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Benjamin Crump's New Gig - Cleveland, Ohio

Benjamin Crump, the attorney who has gone from Trayvon Martin's family in Florida, to Michael Brown's family in Missourie, to Eric Garner's family in New York, has now landed in Cleveland, Ohio, and is representing the mother or Tamir Rice.

The mother of Rice, the the 12 year old boy who was shot and killed by a police officer in Cleveland, Ohio, in November, has called for the conviction of the officer who shot her son. Naturally, I can understand her grief and her pain. I have lost a son to tragedy myself. It's a pain you never, ever get over. But while her comments are understandable, they're not logical and people should not treat them as such.

In a case that is very different than the other three, Tamir Rice was in a local park in Cleveland brandishing what appeared to be a real firearm. The Cleveland police have released a photo of the gun that was placed into evidence. If this if the actual gun that Tamir had in his possession when the officer rolled up it's certainly understandable why he felt he had to shoot.


Someone go ahead and explain to me why anyone should suspect this to be a toy.

Reports are that whoever called the police reported someone in the park with a gun. They told the dispatcher that the gun "might be fake" but that information wasn't passed on to the responding officer. All he knew what that there was someone in the park with a gun. (Video surveillance cameras do show Tamir walking up and down the sidewalk with the gun.) When the officer arrived he confronted the boy (it is unknown how at this point) and when Tamir reached for the gun in his waistband the officer shot him. He died the next day in the hospital.

The thing that makes this case so very different from the others (Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Eric Garner) is that Tamir Rice had a gun (a very real looking gun) in his possession at the time he was shot. Rice's mother says that the officer should have talked to her son and he would have complied with whatever he was told. But she doesn't know that for certain - particularly since the officer says when he confronted Tamir the boy reached for the gun in his waistband. Not many officers responding to a gun call would allow the suspect to actually draw the weapon before firing.

Tamir's death was even more of a tragedy than Trayvon, Michael or Eric. He was only 12 years old. He probably had no idea he could face police action for what he was doing. But he was doing it nevertheless.

His mother's attitude is understandable. She lost her son. And he wasn't even old enough to be a criminal yet. He was a kid.

To those who are calling this a case of murder, including Tamir's mother, I say you need to understand the facts. If you're going to ignore the facts that don't fit into your narrative I can't change that. Truth is truth. But some people will refuse to believe it because of their own agenda. There is no changing the mind that is closed.

Tamir Rice's tragic death will scar his community for a while.  Florida blood sucker Attorney Benjamin Crump, who said of Darren Wilson "I don't care about his due process," now represents the family of Tamir Rice. Like Al Sharpton, he seems to show up everywhere that a black person gets killed by a white person. But since I'm pretty sure he's not licensed in four states, he most likely can only be an adviser in the cases. And he doesn't have a great track record so far - except for making disparaging remarks on television... two or three times a week.

Yes, the Tamir Rice case will be exploited by the race baiters and race haters for a while. Facts won't matter as long as a white cop killed a black kid. Hopefully truth will prevail and the officer will be OK. And before Eric Holder decides to make it a racial case...


Saturday, December 6, 2014

I'm Tired Of Republican/Conservative Ignorance

I have to say I'm getting really tired of Republicans and conservatives who say that Michelle Obama is really a man. They all seem to believe it and make their statements as "fact" but have no evidence to support their claims except some video made by a guy who says that the size of Michelle's fingers and her shoulders mean she's a man. The video proves nothing except to people who want to believe what they want to believe.

Not that I should have to do it but I've researched photographs of Michelle Obama as a child and a teenager. It's pretty clear that despite the beliefs and rhetoric of hate filled people on the right, she is and always has been a female. Sorry for all of the haters but truth is truth. You remember when you said that to liberals?








I hate to be so blunt with you Obama haters but attacks on Michelle that are completely unfounded are no better than liberal attacks on Sarah Palin or Laura Bush. Your ignorance is showing. And as a conservative American patriot I'm tired of the manure you people are spreading. You are embarrassments to the conservative movement and to America in general. Educate yourselves before you post anything else, please.

I'm no Obama fan, believe me. I think he's destroying our great nation. Any of you who have read my previous posts know this. But posting lies and obvious falsehoods makes you and the rest of us look like idiots. And I, for one, do not appreciate conservatives like myself being made to look stupid by people who post ignorant, uninformed, and hateful nonsense.

Some of you may not like what I'm saying. I really don't care. If you post ignorance without doing any research on your own then you're part of the problem. And since I don't get paid for my blog posts - it matters not if I have a lot of readers. I will tell the truth regardless of people's opinions.

Do the research. It will make you honest. If you wish to continue posting very obvious BS that's your prerogative, but you only make yourselves look foolish and uninformed. It's really your choice.