Universal National Service Act; FBI to access YOUR internet activity; No tax cuts for you!

“Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." –William Penn. 1) The WikiLeaks Assault on the Rule of Law and National Security The publication of over 91,000 classified U.S. military documents on Afghanistan by WikiLeaks has, as White House national security adviser Jim Jones said, “put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk.” The documents include raw intelligence reports whose disclosure could not only endanger lives, but risk revealing the methods and means of gathering information vital to success in Afghanistan. WikiLeaks’s founder, Julian Assange, an Australian who has made no secret of his opposition to the war, is unapologetic about the disclosure. He obviously believes it will help the political agenda that he pursues with WikiLeaks. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/26/the-wikileaks-assault-on-the-rule-of-law-and-national-security 2) Judge Blocks Parts Of Arizona Immigration Law PHOENIX (AP) ― A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned. But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants. "Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision. No, you’re not “free” or at “liberty” to break our laws. When I travel overseas, what do you think happens to me when I get stopped by the police without papers? We are the kindest nation in the world to immigrants. But keep trying our patience. See: http://cbs5.com/wireapnational/Judge.blocks.controversial.2.1828122.html 2a) Morning Bell: Surviving the Obama Assault on the Rule of Law Hours after yesterday’s decision by President Bill Clinton judicial appointee Susan Bolton to preemptively stop enforcement of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law, Thomas A. Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), told The New York Times: “This is a warning to any other jurisdiction.” Just in case the message from the Obama administration and its leftist allies was not clear, Obama appointee U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke told The Associated Press: “Surely it’s going to make states pause and consider how they’re drafting legislation and how it fits in a constitutional framework.” But no amount of pause by states and localities could ever possibly satisfy the Obama administration, its amnesty allies, and activist judges like Bolton. In a textbook case of judicial activism, Judge Bolton rewrote the Arizona law to her own needs, invented her own facts and ignored clear federal law. President Jimmy Carter appointee and immigration law professor at Yale Law School Peter Schuck told The New York Times: “She rushed to judgment in a way I can only assume reflects a lot of pressure from the federal government to get this case resolved quickly.” …Taken alone, the White House’s behavior on this issue is troubling enough. But put into the broader context of the first 18 months of this Administration, a truly pernicious pattern emerges. First, there was the Obama Justice Department’s decision to dismiss voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panther Party. Then there was the Obama administration’s use of TARP to bail out its union allies in what bankruptcy law scholars have called “so outrageous and illegal that until March of this year [2009], nobody even conceptualized it.” Then there was the Obama administration’s shakedown of BP in the White House’s Roosevelt Room. Less than a week later after a federal court found its first oil drilling ban to be “arbitrary and capricious,” the Obama administration issued a second oil drilling ban that was wider and killed even more jobs than the first. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/29/morning-bell-surviving-the-obama-assault-on-the-rule-of-law 3) Bill on political ad disclosures falls a little short in Senate: Good news for free speech! Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked legislation requiring fuller disclosure of the money behind political advertising, derailing a major White House initiative and virtually ensuring an onslaught of attack ads during this year's midterm election season. The vote -- in which Democrats fell just shy of the 60 votes needed to avoid a GOP filibuster -- marks a major setback for President Obama, who has railed against the influence of special interests in elections and pushed for the legislation as a counterpoint to court rulings freeing up the use of corporate money in politics. The development also represents a significant victory for Senate Republicans and business groups, which portrayed the measure as a Democratic attempt to tilt the playing field by discouraging corporations and other likely critics from spending money on political ads. The measure is the latest in a series of Democratic initiatives that have been approved by the House only to die in the Senate, including comprehensive climate-change legislation abandoned last week. Opponents of the Disclose Act -- which would force corporations, unions and other groups to reveal the donors behind their political ads -- said the vote marked a victory for free-speech rights, including the rights of corporations to spend as much as they want on political advertising. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/27/AR2010072704656.html 4) Movement to Bypass the Constitution in Presidential Elections See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ooKpo8wDSk 5) Text of H.R. 5741: Universal National Service Act To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes (emphases mine). Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services. Fortunately, this is not out of committee yet (so it can not yet be voted upon), but…

WHAT THE HECK????

See: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-5741

6) White House proposal would ease FBI access to records of Internet activity The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation. The administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly a user's browser history. It does not include, the lawyers hasten to point out, the "content" of e-mail or other Internet communication. But what officials portray as a technical clarification designed to remedy a legal ambiguity strikes industry lawyers and privacy advocates as an expansion of the power the government wields through so-called national security letters. These missives, which can be issued by an FBI field office on its own authority, require the recipient to provide the requested information and to keep the request secret. They are the mechanism the government would use to obtain the electronic records (emphasis mine). …The critics say its effect would be to greatly expand the amount and type of personal data the government can obtain without a court order. "You're bringing a big category of data -- records reflecting who someone is communicating with in the digital world, Web browsing history and potentially location information -- outside of judicial review," said Michael Sussmann, a Justice Department lawyer under President Bill Clinton who now represents Internet and other firms. …The administration has asked Congress to amend the statute, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, in the fiscal year that begins in October. …Marc Zwillinger, an attorney for Internet companies, said some providers are not giving the FBI more than the four categories specified. He added that with the rise of social networking, the government's move could open a significant amount of Internet activity to government surveillance without judicial authorization. "A Facebook friend request -- is that like a phone call or an e-mail? Is that something they would sweep in under an NSL? They certainly aren't getting that now." And the Left thinks The Patriot Act took away our privacy and freedom…ain't seen nothin' yet! See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/28/AR2010072806141.html?hpid=topnews 7) Democrats are betting that ending tax cuts for the rich will play in their favor President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress are setting the stage for a high-stakes battle over taxes in the final weeks before the November congressional elections, betting that their plan to eliminate tax breaks for the wealthy will resonate with voters who have lost houses and jobs to what many see as an era of Wall Street greed. “Tax breaks for the wealthy”. Right. As I previously reported, the Bush tax cuts don’t just affect the wealthy. It WON’T resonate with voters who have lost “houses and jobs” unless those voters are completely uninformed. Keep it up, Democrats. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/24/AR2010072402428.html 8) Panel hits Rangel with 13 ethics charges WASHINGTON – House investigators accused veteran New York Rep. Charles Rangel of 13 violations of congressional ethics standards on Thursday, throwing a cloud over his four-decade political career and raising worries for fellow Democrats about the fall elections. The allegations include failure to report rental income from vacation property in the Dominican Republic and hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional income and assets on his financial disclosure statements. Other charges focused on Rangel's use of congressional staff and stationery to raise money for a college center in New York named after him; accepting favors and benefits from the donors that may have influenced his congressional actions; use of a subsidized New York apartment as a campaign office instead of a residence; and misuse of the congressional free mail privilege. Note: This is the same Congressmen who proposed The Universal National Service Act. See story #5. Laws and conscripted service for thee, but not for me. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_go_co/us_rangel_ethics 9) Sen. Kerry Snaps Over Yacht Tax Scandal Sen. John Kerry on Monday snapped at reporters and tried to dodge questions about his new $7 million, 76-foot yacht. On Friday, the Boston Herald reported that the Massachusetts Democrat had berthed his yacht Isabel in Rhode Island and suggested he was seeking to avoid paying about $437,000 in sales tax and an annual excise tax of around $70,000 that would be levied if he berthed the vessel in Massachusetts. Rhode Island has no sales tax on yachts. Following his first public appearance since the story broke, Kerry tried to dash off to his SUV but was intercepted by reporters who asked about the yacht controversy. “Wait a minute. Let’s get this straight,” Kerry snapped. “I’ve said consistently we’ll pay our taxes. We’ve always paid our taxes. It’s not an issue, period!” Kerry said he docked the yacht in Rhode Island so it could have work done and that he would eventually move it to Massachusetts. Fox News political editor Joe Battenfeld then noted that Kerry’s yacht, which he bought in March, had been spotted in Nantucket, Mass., where the senator summers with his wife Teresa Heinz. That would make Kerry liable for the sales tax. Battenfeld asked Kerry point-blank if he had berthed the vessel in Massachusetts. “That depends upon who owns it, Joe,” Kerry said, then told his driver, “Can I get out of here, please,” before he slammed the SUV’s door and drove off.

Drug cartel act of war; Lib press conspiracy; Imaginary Racism

1) Los Zetas drug cartel seizes 2 U.S. ranches in Texas

In what could be deemed an act of war against the sovereign borders of the United States, Mexican drug cartels have seized control of at least two American ranches inside the U.S. territory near Laredo, Texas. 

Two sources inside the Laredo Police Department confirmed the incident is unfolding and they would continue to coordinate with U.S. Border Patrol today. “We consider this an act of war,” said one police officer on the ground near the scene. There is a news blackout of this incident at this time and the sources inside Laredo PD spoke on the condition of anonymity. 

Word broke late last night that Laredo police have requested help from the federal government regarding the incursion by the Los Zetas. It appears that the ranch owners have escaped without incident but their ranches remain in the hands of the blood thirsty cartels. 

Laredo Border Patrol is conducting aerial surveillance over the ranches to determine the best way to regain control of the U.S. ranches, according to the Laredo Police department. 

See: http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m7d24-Los-Zetas-drug-cartel-takes-control-2-US-ranches-in-Texas 

2) Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright 

It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign. 

The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?” 

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.” 

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage. 

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.” 

…“Part of me doesn’t like this s@#t either,” agreed Spencer Ackerman, then of the Washington Independent. “But what I like less is being governed by racists and warmongers and criminals.” 

Ackerman went on: 

…And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction. 

…But it was Ackerman who had the last word. “Kevin, I’m not saying OBAMA should do this. I’m saying WE should do this.” 

See: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/2/ 

2a) JournoList ‘Sick Puppies’ Planned Attacks on Sarah Palin 

The most insidious form of media bias is deciding what to cover and, more importantly, what not to cover.  The revelations uncovered by The Daily Caller in regard to Journolist have been damning on that front. The latest involve Sarah Palin and while anyone with a speck of honesty already realized that the media has been out to marginalize her from the very beginning, Journolist members took it to an even more egregious level. I know. I didn’t think that was possible either, but apparently it is. 

…Worse, the goal of the framing of the narrative was to marginalize and diminish a woman by using her womanhood itself against her for political means. In fact, one member, Daniel Levy of the Century Foundation, referred to the list as Obama’s “non-official campaign” and admitted he believed it was their job to discredit Palin: 

This seems to me like an occasion when the non-official campaign has a big role to play in defining Palin, shaping the terms of the conversation and saying things that the official [Obama] campaign shouldn’t say – very hard-hitting stuff, including some of the things that people have been noting here – scare people about having this woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/right-wing christia wing-nut a heartbeat away … 

…Sarah Palin, with customary courage and straight-talk openness, spoke out about the media to the Daily Caller: 

“With the shackles off, I relish my freedom to call it like I see it, while starving the media beast that was devouring the false reports about me, my staff and my loved ones,” she said…. 

“…The lamestream media is no longer a cornerstone of democracy in America. They need help. They need to regain their credibility and some respect. There are some pretty sick puppies in the industry today. They really need help,” Palin said. 

Sick puppies, indeed, as further evidenced by an earlier revelation regarding the more than disturbing desire of a JournoList member to watch Rush Limbaugh die in agony, while she “laughed loudly like a maniac.” 

See: http://www.redstate.com/snarkandboobs/2010/07/22/journolist-‘sick-puppies’-planned-attacks-on-sarah-palin/ 

2b) Limbaugh responds to JournoList death wish report 

So I asked Limbaugh: What do you make of the fact that people in positions of influence on the Left don’t just want to see you fail, don’t just want to see you marginalized, but would actually like to witness you dying a painful death? 

“Not having wished anyone dead, nor having fantasized about watching someone die, I cannot possibly relate to this,” Limbaugh responded. 

I can only surmise. I think most people on the left live in a world where merit is irrelevant. Theirs is a world in which connections, networking, kissing ass and obedient sameness are rewarded. I am the antithesis of all that. I am a legitimate, achieved and accomplished Number One and I’ve made it on my own and without them and without having followed their proscriptions. I think they are also jealous that I just sold my NY condo for a 125 percent profit while their homes are worthlessly underwater. 

Funny thing….a number of my friends sent me the Daily Caller piece and the most shocking thing to them in the story was the advocacy of having government shut down Fox News.  That the left wants me dead was not a big deal to them because it was nothing new to them. I think that’s hilarious. And about that: how about the LAW professor who thinks the FCC can pull Fox’s license? Fox does not have a license. The FCC does not grant Fox its right to exist. And this guy teaches law (emphasis mine).

See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/limbaugh-responds-to-journolist-death-wish-report-98917869.html 

3) Shirley Sherrod: view the short video, then read on below:

See: http://www.hannity.com/videos/?uri=channels/400391/979641 

3a) More on this…Sherrod case shows power of conservative media 

NEW YORK – A conservative blog posts 2 minutes, 38 seconds of video clips of a black federal agriculture official saying she didn't do everything she could to help a white farmer. The blogger labels it racism. Calls grow for the Obama administration to remove her. No one at the Agriculture Department or the White House checks further. The official is forced to resign. 

Monday ends, but not the story. 

A complete, 43-minute version of the video surfaces the next day, Tuesday, and casts a much different light on Shirley Sherrod's comments: They were part of an NAACP speech about how she overcame her racial prejudice to help the farmer, not about prejudice that stopped her from helping him. 

Now, the administration is criticized for wronging her by rushing to judgment. 

I heard that Sherrod’s speech was really about racial reconciliation. But it seems to me, that it is the left who is always calling attention to a person’s race. It is irrelevant whether the person who had applied for assistance was black or white. Why even mention it? Further, she talks about her “white” applicant getting help, “from his own kind”.  What the heck? Who talks like that except those who are inordinately obsessed with race? I know she said she was explaining how she recovered from racism, but if she is still calling attention to the differences between the races, she has not. 

See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100722/ap_on_re_us/us_sherrod_conservative_media 

4) Obama's Poll Numbers Down, Imaginary Racism Up 

…One of the videos shows an obvious liberal plant announcing, "I'm a proud racist!" Apparently this was their best shot, because they had to work this video into the montage twice, amid utterly innocuous posters, for example, saying, "God bless Glenn Beck." So I guess they didn't have anything better. 

Here's the part Soros' people didn't show you: In the fuller video shown on the Glenn Beck show, the Tea Partiers surrounded the (liberal plant) racist, jeering at him, telling him he's not one of them and to go home. In a spectacularly evil fraud, all that was edited out. 

Just hours later on MSNBC, Chris Matthews was loudly proclaiming that he would believe the Tea Partiers weren't racist when he sees "just one of those Tea Party people pull down one of those racist signs at the next Tea Party rally. I'm going to just wait. Reach over, grab the sign and tear it out of the guy's hands. Then I will believe you." 

Well, here it was. The (liberal plant) racist was driven from the Tea Party by the Tea Partiers. But you won't see that. Like USDA official Shirley Sherrod's apparently racist comments excerpted this week from what was, in fact, a commendable speech about racial reconciliation, the alleged Tea Party racism was, literally, "taken out of context." 

See: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38190 

4a) Mary Frances Berry’s comments on Tea Party Racism 

Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness. 

See: http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Mary_Frances_Berry_91E3D9D5-C40D-440C-9D48-1C50CBC60C87.html 

5) Glenn Beck: Does Presidential Assassination Program Exist? 

A story came out a little while ago that, quite honestly, I can't believe I missed, but someone sent it to me. It's about the "presidential assassination program," where "American citizens are targeted for killings far away from any battlefield, based exclusively on unchecked accusations by the executive branch that they're involved in terrorism." 

There are allegedly "dozens of Americans" on this hit list who "pose a threat" to the United States. National Security Adviser John Brennan said this: 

JOHN BRENNAN, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: There are, in my mind, dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world that are very concerning to us. 

So, we just shoot them on the spot and don't worry about their Miranda rights as American citizens? Now if it were on the battlefield — fine, I get it. But away from the battlefield? 

Let's refresh our memories on what this administration said they believed: 

• There's no terrorism, just "man-caused disasters" 

• Won't use the term ''enemy combatant'' 

• Changed the War on Terror to "overseas contingency operation" 

• Brennan proclaimed that "jihadists" aren't the enemy: 

…I want to stop here for a second, because I guarantee you the lowlifes at George Soros' blogs like Media Matters have put down their "World of Warcraft 3" controllers and have rushed back to call me all kinds of names. We are so polarized now that it's an automatic reaction: If Glenn Beck brings it up it's a lie! But, I mentioned that someone sent me this story, which I hadn't seen originally. The quotes we used a moment ago were from the far left-site Salon.com and the segment I watched was from the ever-conservative MSNBC (emphasis mine): 

GLENN GREENWALD, SALON: Look at the controversies that were created during the Bush administration, when the president got caught spying on American citizens without warrant or trying to detain them without due process. Here you're talking about something far more extreme. You're talking about targeting American citizens for murder, for assassination, based merely on the allegation that they're involved in terrorism. No evidence, no charges, no trial — nothing. 

DYLAN RATIGAN, MSNBC: His actions create a massive cognitive dissonance that actually allows him to get away with more than George W. Bush could when it comes to encroachments on civil liberties, facilitating theft from the American people or potentially calling you or me a terrorist and trying to have us killed. 

GREENWALD: Well, I know that that's the fact... 

I don't think I would have looked into this story if it had been reported on some GOP blog. But these guys are so in the bag for Obama, it bears investigating. 

Assassinating American citizens without due process? What happened to Miranda rights? Even the ACLU expressed: "profound concern about recent reports indicating that you have authorized a program that contemplates the killing of suspected terrorists — including U.S. citizens — located far away from zones of actual armed conflict. If accurately described, this program violates international law and, at least insofar as it affects U.S. citizens, it is also unconstitutional." 

See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/43208/ 

6) Why the ObamaCare Tax Penalty Is Unconstitutional

The federal power to tax is not unlimited, as the Supreme Court recognized when it struck down the first national income tax. 

The Justice Department announced last week that it would defend the new federal health-insurance mandate as an exercise of Congress's "power to lay and collect taxes," even though Barack Obama had insisted before the bill's passage that it was "absolutely not a tax increase." The truth is the mandate is not a tax—and if it were it would be unconstitutional. 

A tax is when the government takes money from individuals, puts it in the Treasury, and plans to spend it. With the health-insurance mandate, the government is not taking money from private individuals; rather, it is commanding them to give their money to another private entity, not to the Treasury. If individuals don't obey the mandate, they pay a penalty to the Treasury. But penalties aren't taxes. The mandate is legally separate from the penalty. 

Even if the Justice Department were to get the mandate considered a tax, it would be an unconstitutional one. Unlike states, the federal government has limited jurisdiction. Under the 10th Amendment, the federal government has only those powers enumerated by the Constitution, and all other powers are reserved to the people or the states. Every federal action must be authorized by a constitutional provision. If there is no such provision, then the action is unconstitutional. No provision of the Constitution authorizes the federal government to command people to buy insurance. 

…But the Constitution is only as good as the Supreme Court interpreting it. The Senate's imminent vote on Elena Kagan's nomination is a poignant reminder that we need a court that faithfully upholds the Constitution. Such a court would strike down ObamaCare. 

See: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748703724104575378910443018730-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwMTEyNDEyWj.html 

7) White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit 

WASHINGTON – New estimates from the White House on Friday predict the budget deficit will reach a record $1.47 trillion this year. The government is borrowing 41 cents of every dollar it spends. 

That's actually a little better than the administration predicted in February. 

The new estimates paint a grim unemployment picture as the economy experiences a relatively jobless recovery. The unemployment rate, presently averaging 9.5 percent, would average 9 percent next year under the new estimates. 

“Jobless recovery”? Isn’t that an oxymoron?

See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100723/ap_on_bi_ge/us_budget_deficit 

8) The Tax Tsunami On The Horizon 

Fiscal Policy: Many voters are looking forward to 2011, hoping a new Congress will put the country back on the right track. But unless something's done soon, the new year will also come with a raft of tax hikes — including a return of the death tax — that will be real killers. 

Through the end of this year, the federal estate tax rate is zero — thanks to the package of broad-based tax cuts that President Bush pushed through to get the economy going earlier in the decade. 

But as of midnight Dec. 31, the death tax returns — at a rate of 55% on estates of $1 million or more. The effect this will have on hospital life-support systems is already a matter of conjecture. 

Resurrection of the death tax, however, isn't the only tax problem that will be ushered in Jan. 1. Many other cuts from the Bush administration are set to disappear and a new set of taxes will materialize. And it's not just the rich who will pay. 

The lowest bracket for the personal income tax, for instance, moves up 50% — to 15% from 10%. The next lowest bracket — 25% — will rise to 28%, and the old 28% bracket will be 31%. At the higher end, the 33% bracket is pushed to 36% and the 35% bracket becomes 39.6%. 

But the damage doesn't stop there. 

The marriage penalty also makes a comeback, and the capital gains tax will jump 33% — to 20% from 15%. The tax on dividends will go all the way from 15% to 39.6% — a 164% increase. 

…Economic Substance Doctrine. ATR reports that "The IRS is now empowered to disallow perfectly legal tax deductions and maneuvers merely because it judges that the deduction or action lacks 'economic substance (emphasis mine).'" 

What the heck does “lacks economic substance” mean? That sounds like, “we disallow this deduction just because we want to!” 

See: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541131/201007211841/The-Tax-Tsunami-On-The-Horizon.aspx 

9) Stimulating Unemployment

If you can't create any jobs, pay people not to work. 

Presidents typically invite Americans to appear at Rose Garden press conferences to trumpet their policy successes, but yesterday we saw what may have been a first. President Obama introduced three Americans—an auto worker, a fitness center employee and a woman in real estate—who've been out of work so long they underscore the failure of his economic program. Where are his spinmeisters when he really needs them? 

Sure, Mr. Obama's ostensible purpose was to lobby Congress for the eighth extension of jobless benefits since the recession began, to a record 99 weeks, or nearly two years. And he whacked Senate Republicans for blocking the extension, though Republicans are merely asking that the extension be offset by cuts in other federal spending. 

But Mr. Obama was nonetheless obliged to concede that, 18 months after his $862 billion stimulus, there are still five job seekers for every job opening and that 2.5 million Americans will soon run out of unemployment benefits. What happens when the 99 weeks of benefits run out? Will the President demand that they be extended to three years, or four? 

…The one possibility the President and Congressional Democrats won't entertain is that their own spending and taxing and regulating and labor union favoritism have become the main hindrance to job creation (emphasis mine). Since February 2009, the jobless rate has climbed to 9.5% from 8.1%, and private industry has shed two million jobs. The overall economy has been expanding for at least a year, but employers still don't seem confident enough to add new workers. The economists who sold us the stimulus say it's a mystery. But maybe employers are afraid to hire because they don't know what costs government will impose on them next (emphasis mine). 

See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720504575377381727739058.html 

10) Beware The Dems' Lame-Duck Agenda 

Barack Obama's considerable political capital, earned on Election Day 2008, is spent. Well spent, mind you, on the enactment of a highly ideological agenda of ObamaCare, financial reform and a near trillion-dollar stimulus that will significantly transform the country. 

But spent nonetheless. There's nothing left with which to complete his social-democratic ambitions. This would have to await the renewed mandate that would come with a second inaugural. 

That's why, as I suggested last week, nothing of major legislative consequence is likely to occur for the next 2 1/2 years. Except, as columnist Irwin Stelzer points out, for one constitutional loophole: a lame-duck Congress called back into session between the elections this November and the swearing-in of the 112th Congress next January. 

Leading Democrats are already considering this as a way to achieve even more liberal measures that many of their members dare not even talk about, let alone enact, on the eve of an election in which they face a widespread popular backlash to the already enacted elements of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda. 

…They could then vote for anything — including measures they today shun as the midterms approach and their seats are threatened — because they would have nothing to lose. They would be unemployed. And playing along with Obama might even brighten the prospects for, say, an ambassadorship to a sunny Caribbean isle. 

As John Fund reports in the Wall Street Journal, Sens. Jay Rockefeller, Kent Conrad and Tom Harkin are already looking forward to what they might get passed in a lame-duck session.

See: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/541306/201007221851/Beware-The-Dems-Lame-Duck-Agenda.aspx 

11) The Rangel Standard

A public ethics trial will be instructive. 

The House ethics committee announced on Thursday that it would bring charges against Charlie Rangel, and the Manhattan Democrat responded by telling reporters that "I look forward to airing this thing." Don't we all. 

The ethics committee has been investigating Mr. Rangel since 2008 and its formal charges will remain sealed until a public hearing next week. However, the committee is not lost for choices: 

Allegations include Mr. Rangel's failure to report assets and income totaling at least a half-million dollars that, when he "amended" his reporting last year, doubled his net worth; his use of four rent-stabilized apartments in New York's tony Lenox Terrace complex, including one that he used as a campaign office; concealing taxable rental income from his Dominican Republic beachfront villa at the Punta Cana Yacht Club; and using his official Congressional letterhead to solicit donations for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York. 

Mr. Rangel has portrayed these charges as it-could-happen-to-anyone accounting errors, and he has vigorously denied any wrongdoing while declining to provide details until the ethics committee completed its inquiry. Still, in March he surrendered his gavel as Chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, not as the result of these accusations or any other pang of conscience, but because a separate investigation concluded that his participation in several corporate-sponsored Caribbean junkets violated House regulations. At the time, his work in raising taxes to pay for ObamaCare was nearly complete. 

See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703294904575385051601020166.html?mod=rss_opinion_main 

12) BP Negotiates with Libya: The Hal Lindsey Report 

Apparently, BP wanted the right to drill for oil in Libya. Libya's dictator, Muammar Gadaffi, set a condition: release the Lockerbie bomber. At the time, this Libyan man was serving a life sentence for planting the bomb that blew Pan Am flight 103 out of the night sky and onto the village of Lockerbie, Scotland. He killed 270 people, including 190 Americans. 

Did BP say, "No," and walk away from the negotiation? Not hardly. Instead, the company cajoled (or threatened?) then-Prime Minister Tony Blair into going along with the idea. So Blair apparently worked out a deal with Gadaffi. Then the UK got a team of Scottish doctors to certify that the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali al Megrahi, had prostate cancer and was only good for another three months. So, on the flimsy excuse of "compassion," (which, by the way, al Megrahi didn't show for the 270 families he devastated), Scotland released the bomber to return to Libya to die.

Which he promptly didn't do. In fact, the doctors now admit that maybe they missed the diagnosis. Hmmm. Al Megrahi will be living the hero's life of relative luxury in Libya for the next 10 to 20 years. I wonder if BP actually got the rights to drill. Even if they did, the company probably won't survive long enough to actually enjoy the fruits of their disgusting shenanigans in the Libyan desert. 

This whole "government doing the bidding of the corporation" thing really gets peoples' ire up. And it should. However, I'm still waiting for the press to fully explore the 20 year 'relationship' Barack Obama has had with BP (he's the greatest beneficiary of their prodigious political contributions) as lustily as they explored George W. Bush's 'relationship' with Enron or Dick Cheney's 'relationship' with Halliburton (emphasis mine). Then there's the fact that quite of a few of the President's appointments in the former Minerals Management Service spent their years between the Clinton and Obama administrations working for -- you guessed it -- BP. 

At one time, BP stood for British Petroleum, but in 2001, the company changed its name to simply BP. Its advertising tagline is: "Beyond Petroleum." Maybe it should be: "Buying Politicians." See: http://www.hallindsey.com/the-hal-lindsey-report-7232010/ 

13) Pat Condell: No Mosque at Ground Zero

See: http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=NjM1# 

14) PLO Flag to Fly in Washington D.C. 

The United States State Department has announced to the Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization Mission representative in the United States that its status will be upgraded from a 'bureau' to that of a "general delegation' and that this change will allow the office in which the  representation is situated to fly the PLO, now also the Palestine Authority, flag at its entrance. 

The upgrading, besides allowing the flag to be flown, also grants certan privileges to the delegation staff, such as diplomatic immunity, although it is not equal to embassy status. 

The PLO's chief representative in the United States, Maen Areikat,  said that this step makes the PLO's status in the United States equivalent to its status in Canada and many western European countries. 

Israeli Radio reported that sources in Prime Minister Netanyahu's office said that the Prime Minister knew of the planned step and did not object to it. Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem claimed that the step was taken to strengthen Abu Maazen and try to get him to agree to direct talks with Israel. However, they expressed disappointment that the White House did not make ceasing the PA's anti Israel incitement a condition for the status upgrade (emphasis mine). 

UNBELIEVABLE! 

See: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138752 

15) Top Secret America, comment by Hal Lindsey 

The Washington Post recently did an 'expose' of the tremendous growth of the intelligence community and counterterrorism organizations since 9/11. They called the series, "Top Secret America." The Post estimates that more than 850,000 people in America today hold top-secret security clearances. They say that there are 1,200 government agencies and 1,900 private companies working on counterterrorism, intelligence, and homeland security in more than 10,000 locations inside the United States. If this is true, and I've no doubt that it is, it indicates something very disturbing to me. It means that we live in such a state of fear -- fear of terrorism, fear of poverty, fear of offense -- that we have become willing to trade our freedom for some mystical form of security. 

See: http://www.hallindsey.com/the-hal-lindsey-report-7232010/

And: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/

 

Financial takeover bill passes; Smackdown of Obama by Supreme Court; It COVERS abortion

1) Morning Bell: The Lawyers and Lobbyists Full Employment Act Without spending a single dime, the Obama administration did more yesterday to create jobs for the U.S. economy than it has throughout its entire existence. With the single stroke of a pen, President Barack Obama signed the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill that set in motion 243 new formal rule-makings by 11 different federal agencies. Each of the 243 rule-makings will employ hundreds of banking lobbyists as they try to shape what the final actual laws will look like. And when the rules are finally written, thousands of lawyers will bill millions of hours as the richest incumbent financial firms that caused the last crisis figure out how to game the new system. Yesterday, the Washington law firm Jones Day snapped up the Securities and Exchange Commission head enforcement division lawyer, and J.P. Morgan Chase, one of the biggest U.S. banks by assets, assigned more than 100 teams to examine the legislation. University of Massachusetts political science professor Thomas Ferguson tells The Christian Science Monitor: By delegating so much to the regulators, Congress is inviting everyone interested in the outcome to make more campaign contributions, as they intervene in the regulatory process to influence the regulators. Nothing is settled. It’s a gold mine for members of Congress. So if the richest big banks, lawyers, lobbyists and Congress were the big winners yesterday, who are the losers? Small banks, entrepreneurs and you. Smaller community banks do not have the same resources that the Goldman Sachs of the world do to hire armies of lawyers and lobbyists to shape and comply with new regulations. The cost of compliance will eat up a much larger share of small bank revenue. Jim MacPhee, CEO of Kalamazoo County State Bank in Michigan and chairman of the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), told USA Today: “We weren’t part of the subprime (mortgage) meltdown. Why throw more regulations at us?” Then there is what the Dodd-Frank does not do: it does nothing to stop future government bailouts. Instead, it makes the TARP bailout system permanent. The bill’s “orderly liquidation” process empowers regulators to seize any firm they deem a threat to our financial system and liquidate them. These powers are subject to insufficient judicial review and do nothing to ensure that the firms’ creditors won’t receive 100% of their irresponsibly lent money back in future taxpayer funded bailouts. And speaking of taxpayer-funded bailouts, the bill does nothing to address Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose activities were instrumental to the financial crisis (emphasis mine). See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/16/morning-bell-the-lawyers-and-lobbyists-full-employment-act/ 1a) Goldman paying $550M to settle civil fraud charges WASHINGTON – Resolving a high-profile government case linked to the mortgage meltdown, Goldman Sachs & Co. has agreed to pay a record $550 million to settle civil fraud charges that it misled buyers of complex investments. The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the settlement Thursday with the Wall Street titan, just hours after Congress gave final approval to legislation imposing the stiffest restrictions on banks and Wall Street firms since the Great Depresssion. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100716/ap_on_bi_ge/us_sec_goldman 2) NAACP Takes Aim at Tea Party: Glenn Beck Transcript Relentlessly been called racist by the press, by politicians. Now, the NAACP adopted a resolution condemning the racist elements of the Tea Party. Well, I'd do that, too, if I knew where they were. The resolution initially said the NAACP would repudiate the racism of the Tea Parties and stand against the movement's attempt to push the country back to pre-Civil Rights era. They scaled it back. NAACP president Benjamin Todd Jealous wrote: "What we take issue with is the Tea Party's continued tolerance for bigotry and bigoted statements." What statements are those? I haven't seen any. There are racists in every organization. There are racists everywhere. There are racists everywhere. There are racists in the NBA. There are racists in NASCAR. It's a human condition. They should be discredited if there are racist people in the Tea Party. They should be discredited. I will help you do it. Where are they? Stand in truth and the truth is the movement is not about race. It's reducing the size and scope of government. And gosh, it's not — it's not only me who thinks so. …LISA FRITSCH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: The NAA finds itself not aligned with the Tea Party as it should be and promoting the advancement of black people with individual thought of mind and following their own convictions. But sadly, they find themselves aligned with this radical and fanatic New Black Panther Party who is also coming out and on a mission to depict the Tea Party as racist. TEXT: "They have become a political organization for the progressives and that is a shame because so many blacks still view them as a civil rights group. Unfortunately, this is a status they abandoned a long time ago." (Jimmie Hollis, Project 21 member and tea party organizer) See: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,596803,00.html 3) Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax WASHINGTON — When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.” And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce. Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations. …Congress can use its taxing power “even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions” of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce. While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax. “For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.” When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.” …“This is the first time that Congress has ever ordered Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service,” said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah. In their lawsuit, Florida and other states say: “Congress is attempting to regulate and penalize Americans for choosing not to engage in economic activity. If Congress can do this much, there will be virtually no sphere of private decision-making beyond the reach of federal power.” …In its legal briefs, the Obama administration points to a famous New Deal case, Wickard v. Filburn, in which the Supreme Court upheld a penalty imposed on an Ohio farmer who had grown a small amount of wheat, in excess of his production quota, purely for his own use. The wheat grown by Roscoe Filburn “may be trivial by itself,” the court said, but when combined with the output of other small farmers, it significantly affected interstate commerce and could therefore be regulated by the government as part of a broad scheme regulating interstate commerce. UNBELIEVABLE! It is difficult to know what to even say in response to this. THIS is what they plan to use to defend their case? The stealing of a farmer’s wheat grown for his own use? Well, I guess tyranny begets more tyranny. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=2&ref=politics 4) Obama Administration Approves First Direct Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Through New High-Risk Insurance Pools (CNSNews.com) - If you want proof that President Obama's Executive Order on taxpayer-funded abortion was a sham, look no further than Pennsylvania, says House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio). Boehner and other Republicans point to reports that the Health and Human Services Department is giving Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new high-risk insurance pool that will cover any abortion that is legal in the state. "The fact that the high-risk pool insurance program in Pennsylvania will use federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions is unconscionable," Boehner said in a statement on Tuesday. …The conservative Family Research Council says the $160 million in taxpayer funds for Pennsylvania is the first known instance of direct federal funding of abortions through the new high-risk insurance pools. The abortion funding for pool participants validates the arguments pro-life groups made throughout the health care debate – that taxpayer dollars will fund abortions, said Tom McClusky, senior vice president of the Family Research Council’s political action arm. “For our efforts to remove the bill's abortion funding, we were called 'deceivers' by President Obama and 'liars' by his allies. Now we know who the true deceivers and liars really are,’ McClusky said. "This action by the Obama Administration also exposes the worthlessness of President Obama's Executive Order that supposedly would prevent federal funding of abortion, but which both sides, including Planned Parenthood, agreed was unenforceable. See: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/69384 4b) Obama Admin Approves Second Set of Abortion Funding Under Health Care Law Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The day after revelations that the Obama administration allowed federal taxpayer funding of abortions under the new national health care law that was supposed to prevent it, new information shows President Barack Obama has authorized abortion funding in a second state. The first abortion funding had the Obama administration approve a Pennsylvania plan calling for the use of taxpayer funds to pay for abortions for virtually any reason through a new high risk insurance program created by the national health care law. Now, the National Right to Life Committee, which uncovered the first case of abortion funding, has dug up a second set -- in New Mexico. See: http://lifenews.com/nat6536.html 4c) More on this, from The National Review…In New Mexico, the new $37 million high-risk pool began enrolling individuals on July 1. They will start receiving benefits in August, including elective-abortion services, according to the state insurance department's website. Once a deductible is paid, 80 percent of the elective abortion is covered. Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee tells me: "HHS has been hiding most of these high-risk plans, including the plan that HHS will administer directly in 21 states. Of the four state plans we've managed to ferret out, two provided coverage of all essentially all abortions — Pennsylvania and New Mexico. This is part of a pattern, under this administration, of making 'soft' rhetorical statements on abortion policy, but consistently promoting and expanding abortion through low-visibility administrative decisions. The administration's heavy funding of groups pushing a proposed new pro-abortion constitution in Kenya is another example." See: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjRiNTU0ZjU1NmY0ZDZiZjJhY2UxYWM5N2U1YjJmZjk%3D 5) Cash crisis in NHS leaves patients lying on operating tables: Rationing in practice in The UK Women in labour have been forced to wait while epidural equipment was borrowed from other hospitals, while other patients have been denied chest drains and radiology supplies, according to doctors at South London Healthcare Trust. Minutes of a meeting between medical staff and the trust’s chief executive say “cash flow” problems at the trust which has a £50 million deficit, mean vital equipment is regularly not ordered. A separate letter sent to managers of the trust, one of the largest in the country, says consultants have been misled into carrying out operations when it was not safe to go ahead because of bed shortages. NHS watchdog the Care Quality Commission (CQC) has been asked to investigate the concerns, after eight doctors contacted their local MP. Staff at the NHS trust, which last year merged trusts running three hospitals in South London and Kent, are being asked to make major savings to tackle a worsening financial situation. Minutes of a meeting of the medical staff committee of Princess Royal University Hospital in Bromley say managers acknowledged that “crude measures” introduced to cut spending had affected clinical supplies (emphasis mine), meaning that stocks had run out when they were needed. I have visited The Netherlands several times, and been told by at least one woman who has given birth there that there is a lack of epidural procedure knowledge there. See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/7896737/Cash-crisis-in-NHS-leaves-patients-lying-on-operating-tables.html 6) Obama Institutes Offshore Drilling Moratorium … Again After the BP oil spill, the Obama Administration offered little excuse for instituting a moratorium on deepwater drilling regardless of the fact that it brought one of the Gulf Coast’s main industries to a sudden halt. Despite federal judge Martin Feldman’s ruling on the moratorium and despite a federal appeals court upholding that decision, the U.S. Department of Interior issued a new moratorium on deepwater drilling this afternoon. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/12/obama-institutes-offshore-drilling-moratorium-…-again 7) Sources say smackdown of Obama by Supreme Court may be inevitable According to sources who watch the inner workings of the federal government, a smackdown of Barack Obama by the U.S. Supreme Court may be inevitable. Ever since Obama assumed the office of President, critics have hammered him on a number of Constitutional issues. Critics have complained that much if not all of Obama's major initiatives run headlong into Constitutional roadblocks on the power of the federal government. Obama certainly did not help himself in the eyes of the Court when he used the venue of the State of the Union address early in the year to publicly flog the Court over its ruling that the First Amendment grants the right to various organizations to run political ads during the time of an election. The tongue-lashing clearly did not sit well with the Court, as demonstrated by Justice Sam Alito, who publicly shook his head and stated under his breath, 'That's not true,' when Obama told a flat-out lie concerning the Court's ruling. As it has turned out, this was a watershed moment in the relationship between the executive and the judicial branches of the federal government. Obama publicly declared war on the court, even as he blatantly continued to propose legislation that flies in the face of every known Constitutional principle upon which this nation has stood for over 200 years (emphasis mine). Obama has even identified Chief Justice John Roberts as his number one enemy, that is, apart from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until 'Obama is gone.' Apparently, the Court has had enough. The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven. A ruling against Obama on any one of these important issues could potentially cripple the Administration. Such a thing would be long overdue. First, there is ObamaCare, which violates the Constitutional principle barring the federal government from forcing citizens to purchase something. And no, this is not the same thing as states requiring drivers to purchase car insurance, as some of the intellectually-impaired claim. The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle. In the ObamaCare world, however, no citizen can 'opt out.' Second, sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama's history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President. The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue. This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student in Hawaii. And that is only the tip of the iceberg. See: http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m7d9-Sources-say-smackdown-of-Obama-by-Supreme-Court-may-be-inevitable 8) Banks repossess US homes at record pace July 15 (Reuters) - Banks repossessed a record number of U.S. homes in the second quarter, but slowed new foreclosure notices to manage distressed properties on the market, real estate data company RealtyTrac said on Thursday. The root problems of job losses and wage cuts persist, making a sustained U.S. housing recovery elusive. Banks took control of 269,962 properties in the second quarter, up 5 percent from the prior quarter and a 38 percent spike from the second quarter of last year, RealtyTrac said in its midyear 2010 foreclosure report. Repossessions will likely top 1 million this year. See: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSNLLEIE69820100715 9) Obama Stole Election Against Hillary: Voter Intimidation And Fraud Gigi Gaston, a lifelong Democrat, made a documentary film about it: See: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/07/obama-stole-election-against-hillary-voter-intimidation-and-fraud.html And: http://www.breitbart.tv/new-documentary-charges-obama-stole-nomination-from-hillary/ 10) An Obama Administration Job for Sen. Specter? Sources tell ABC News that Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pennsylvania, has informed the White House that he would like to consider remaining in public service after his Senate term ends at the end of this session, and White House officials are keeping an open mind about possible job openings for him. Specter, who was defeated in his March primary by Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pennsylvania, is a close friend of Vice President Joe Biden and someone praised for his leadership in pushing for greater funding for the National Institutes of Health. Sources said the job discussions are far from anything other than preliminary, and were not part of any "deal" when Specter switched parties and began supporting President Obama's agenda in earnest. “Sources said.” Yeah. Right. See: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/07/an-obama-administration-job-for-senator-specter.html#tp 11) Obama-Supported Kenyan Constitution Forces Sharia Law Yesterday, it was reported that Barack Obama is illegally funding a pro-abortion referendum in Kenya. But, it gets worse…The Constitution Obama is supporting forces Sharia Law in the country. Obama’s radical socialist cousin Raila Odinga is Prime Minister of Kenya. Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review reported: U.S. financial and rhetorical support for this constitution has some members of Congress calling for an investigation. In a letter to inspectors general of the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Republican representatives Chris Smith of New Jersey, Darrell Issa of California, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida raised questions about American constitutional lobbying in Kenya: “The Obama Administration’s advocacy in support of Kenya’s proposed constitution may constitute a serious violation of the Siljander Amendment and, as such, may be subject to civil and criminal penalties.” …And, as if the West’s exporting of its abortion license to Kenya — a nation known for a growing, enthusiastic Catholic and other Christian presence — weren’t alarming enough, the proposed constitution would also create a legal system within a legal system — codifying the strengthening of sharia by making it apply to every Muslim Kenyan. As Eric Rassbach of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty points out, “People are subjected to these tribunals merely by virtue of what religious community they were born into, and they have no way of opting out.” See: http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/07/obama-supported-kenyan-constitution-forces-sharia-law/ 12) Republican senator says he backs birther lawsuits WASHINGTON – Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama's citizenship in court. Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama's "refusal to produce a valid birth certificate." See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100713/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_republican_senator_birthers 13) Israel - he who touches you touches “the apple of His eye” - The Hal Lindsey Report: On this week's edition of "The Hal Lindsey Report": Saudi Arabia has accused Iran of harboring al-Qaeda for much of the last decade. It says that in 2003, al-Qaeda launched its attacks against Westerners in Riyadh from Iran. The Saudis say Iran ordered the attacks. Since Saudi Arabia financed and sheltered al-Qaeda prior to the 9/11 attacks, it's significant that the Saudis are now accusing someone else of doing what they did. In the past, they've preferred to lay low and not remind the world of that connection. What's changed? The Saudis are now making this very serious accusation public for the same reason that they've leaked the rumor that they will allow Israel to use Saudi airspace to attack Iran. They want the world to take them seriously when they say that don't want Iran to be allowed to go nuclear. Most people don't understand that Saudi Arabia, most of the Persian Gulf states, and Egypt are even more afraid of a nuclear Iran than Israel is. They've passed exasperation and are headed toward desperation because they can't make President Obama understand it, either. …It's odd that the Islamist nations have chosen Gaza as the symbol of Israeli oppression, especially since Gaza is the one place totally free of Israeli occupation. Israel completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005 -- forcibly removing every Jewish resident in a bizarre, convoluted display of 'self-ethnic-cleansing' applauded by the world. They turned over to the Palestinians all the land and infrastructure, and the former Jewish-owned farms, businesses, houses, synagogues, orchards, vineyards... all of it. The Palestinians promptly trashed everything Jewish and proceeded to turn Gaza into an armed terrorist camp. At their first opportunity, the Gazans elected Hamas to govern them. Then Hamas staged a violent coup and overthrew the ruling Palestinian National Authority. Even the Egyptians have blockaded Gaza because of the threat to Egypt posed by Hamas and other terrorist elements. All the while, Hamas functions under a 'declaration of war' against Israel and has allowed terrorists to rain down more than 6,000 rockets and missiles on Israel. So Israel blockaded Gaza to prevent the importation of materials with military applications -- not food or medicine or other items necessary for daily life. Israel also hopes the blockade will persuade Hamas to stop its aggression toward the Jewish state. It defies logic that this aggressor is seen as the 'victim' by much of the world. But then, irrational prejudice is rarely logical. See: http://www.hallindsey.com/the-hal-lindsey-report-7162010/ 14) Spies or Not, Obama Pushes “Reset” with Russia and NEW START Only days before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will conduct hearings on the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (NEW START) verification, the Obama Administration has decided to abruptly terminate the scandal caused by the Russian illegal spy ring arrested in the United States. Instead of viewing espionage on its merits—an activity undermining Obama’s Russian “reset” policy and an obstacle to the proclaimed new relationship with Russia—the Administration went into an overdrive to get rid of the embarrassing headlines. The reason: ratification of the NEW START treaty, which is Administration’s top priority. That Russia is continuing to spy on the United States should not come as a surprise. As early as 2007, it was widely reported that Russian (and Chinese) spy operations were “back at Cold War levels” in the United States. Moreover, according to then-Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, in the 2007 Annual Threat Assessment to the United States, China and Russia are “among the most aggressive in collecting [intelligence] against sensitive and protected U.S. targets.” The 2010 assessment highlights Russia’s ongoing efforts. Nor was the Administration on top of this investigation. Significantly, according to an eyewitness, on the day of the arrests a senior Administration official was annoyed and surprised with the FBI spy sweep. Reportedly, so was the President. This is despite the White House spin that they were ready for this all along. Questions abound about the White House’s handling of the spy affair. After the FBI had tracked 11 “sleeper” agents for the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), the Obama Administration agreed to an unprecedented swap. Unlike the Cold War, when spies did real hard time and where exchanged years after the arrest, these spies were allowed to confess and got swapped for two aging British agents, a Russian political prisoner who for 10 years denied being an American spy, and a Russian intelligence veteran who defected to the U.S. in the 1990s. This was not a good bargain for the U.S. No significant questioning of the spies took place, nor were their handlers expelled—presumably, they were allowed to quietly depart for Moscow. However, despite the fact that the Russian spy ring was handled with kid gloves—and despite the priority the Administration is putting on ratification of NEW START treaty—the Kremlin continues to perceive the U.S. as its principal foreign adversary. See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/12/spies-or-not-obama-pushes-“reset”-with-russia-and-new-start 15) Castro takes questions, warns of nuclear war HAVANA – Fidel Castro is taking questions from dozens of Cuban ambassadors at the Foreign Ministry and warning them of the threat of global nuclear war, in his most overtly political public act since re-emerging from four years of near total seclusion. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100716/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_cuba_fidel_castro

Kill cracker's babies?; One Giant Leap for Allah; Feds sue AZ; "Perfect Citizen" - the end to privacy

"Posterity -- you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it." --John Quincy Adams 1) Obama: Israelis suspicious of me because my middle name is Hussein In an interview aired Thursday evening, Obama was asked whether he was concerned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would try to attack Iran without clearing the move with the U.S., to which the president replied "I think the relationship between Israel and the U.S. is sufficiently strong that neither of us try to surprise each other, but we try to coordinate on issues of mutual concern." …During the interview Wednesday, when confronted with the anxiety that some Israelis feel toward him, Obama said that "some of it may just be the fact that my middle name is Hussein, and that creates suspicion." "Ironically, I've got a Chief of Staff named Rahm Israel Emmanuel. My top political advisor is somebody who is a descendent of Holocaust survivors. My closeness to the Jewish American community was probably what propelled me to the U.S. Senate," Obama said. "I think that sometimes, particularly in the Middle East, there's the feeling of the friend of my enemy must be my enemy, and the truth of the matter is that my outreach to the Muslim community is designed precisely to reduce the antagonism and the dangers posed by a hostile Muslim world to Israel and to the West," Obama went on to say. Or, let me see, maybe it's because you won't let them build in their own land, or maybe because you support and side with their enemies all over the world, or maybe because you don't care if Iran goes nuclear...no, wait, it's definitely your middle name. See: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/obama-israelis-suspicious-of-me-because-my-middle-name-is-hussein-1.300793 2) US Ends June With $13.2 Trillion In Debt, Adds $210 Billion In Total Debt, On Track To Breach Debt Ceiling In Under Six Months In case one is wondering why the House Democrats attached a document to the emergency war supplemental bill that "deemed as passed" a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget, which basically allows the ruling party to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the constraint of an actual budget, here is the answer: on June 30, the US closed the books with just over $13.2 trillion in total debt, an increase of $210 billion in one month, or $2.5 trillion annualized. There is just $1.1 trillion left on the ceiling. As we have long been warning, at the current run rate, the ceiling will be breached in under six months, or just around November 2. More disconcerting is that the monthly debt roll continues to be in the "ridiculous amount" category, hitting a total of $660 billion, of which $583 billion was rolling off Bills (we are not sure what the $19 billion im "GSE investment" was for, but we are fairly sure the words Ponzi and Perpetuation are part of it). Of course, if America knew that according to the Obama non-existent budget the debt ceiling would be breached in 2010, it may not have a favorable reception among those few who are still willing to vote for either party of the bipartite farce that passes for a government. See: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/us-ends-june-132-trillion-debt-adds-210-billion-total-debt-track-breach-debt-ceiling-under-s 3) Obama as anti-business moves into mainstream discussion …Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria wrote Monday that after speaking with numerous corporate executives, most of whom voted for Obama, he found that “all think he is, at his core, anti-business.” Tuesday, the Washington Post reported on a 65 percent decline from two years ago in donations to Democrats from Wall Street, due to the financial regulation bill nearing passage in Congress. On Wednesday, the Daily Beast’s Lloyd Grove reported from the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado that New York Daily News owner and publisher Mortimer Zuckerman said the Obama White House has a “hostility to the very kinds of [business] culture that have made this the great country that it is and was.” Steve Pearlstein of the Washington Post noted: “There is no denying it — bad blood has developed between big business and the Obama administration, and that’s not a good thing.” Pearlstein argued that businesses could do much more to pull their weight on improving the economy rather than blaming the administration. Yeah, business exists to “improve the economy”. What an idiot. Businesses exists to provide goods and services and make money, boys and girls. “Business” doesn’t owe you a job. See: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/08/obama-as-anti-business-moves-into-mainstream-discussion 4) U.S. Plans Cyber Shield for Utilities, Companies The federal government is launching an expansive program dubbed "Perfect Citizen" to detect cyber assaults on private companies and government agencies running such critical infrastructure as the electricity grid and nuclear-power plants, according to people familiar with the program. The surveillance by the National Security Agency, the government's chief eavesdropping agency, would rely on a set of sensors deployed in computer networks for critical infrastructure that would be triggered by unusual activity suggesting an impending cyber attack, though it wouldn't persistently monitor the whole system, these people said. …Some industry and government officials familiar with the program see Perfect Citizen as an intrusion by the NSA into domestic affairs (do ‘ya think? - emphasis and comment mine), while others say it is an important program to combat an emerging security threat that only the NSA is equipped to provide. …A U.S. military official called the program long overdue and said any intrusion into privacy is no greater than what the public already endures from traffic cameras. It's a logical extension of the work federal agencies have done in the past to protect physical attacks on critical infrastructure that could sabotage the government or key parts of the country, the official said. “No greater than what the public already endures from traffic cameras?” I can avoid traffic cameras by not driving (or by engineering alternate routes on frontage roads, to avoid intersections like the one near my house). Now I have to avoid “Perfect Citizen” by not accessing the Internet or using my computer? People, how much more of this will you endure? Or as one commenter, Mike Lorrey, said, “Wow, the name "Perfect Citizen" just screams of Orwellian repression.” See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704545004575352983850463108.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLETopStories 5) Obama Loses Drilling Moratorium Appeal in Court The Obama administration lost its court bid to maintain a six-month moratorium on offshore deepwater drilling which a federal judge ordered lifted last month. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the government's emergency request to stay that judge's order pending appeal. The motion was denied because the government failed to show "a likelihood of irreparable injury if the stay is not granted," the appeals panel judges wrote in a 2-1 ruling. The government also "made no showing that there is any likelihood that drilling activities will be resumed pending appeal." Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has said he will soon issue a new order to block deepwater drilling regardless of how the court ruled and oil companies have not resumed drilling due to the legal uncertainties. …which means the effect is the same. When is someone going to risk his “life, his sacred fortune”, and stand up to this administration? See: http://srnnews.townhall.com/newsbriefs/g/1d8f4139-61f7-4eaf-b5f2-8b84d00779ae 5a) Live from the Gulf: Shrimpers and Fishers Want Drilling Ban Lifted Every year, residents of the Gulf come to Morgan City, Louisiana to celebrate the lifeblood of the region’s economy: seafood and oil. This September marks the 75th anniversary of this symbiotic relationship. The Shrimp and Petroleum Festival emphasizes “the unique way in which these two seemingly different industries work hand-in-hand culturally and environmentally in this area of the ‘Cajun Coast’.” One might think the Deepwater Horizon explosion and subsequent oil spill would significantly mar this relationship, and the seafood industry would vociferously support President Obama’s offshore drilling moratorium. But the reality is just the opposite is true; the spill has strengthened the bond between the oil and seafood industry and the shrimpers and fishers have been as vocal as anyone in lifting the offshore drilling ban. Without any scientific or technological basis for banning offshore drilling, it is senseless policy that is pouring salt into the economic wounds of the Gulf. Peter Vujnovich, a third generation oyster farmer and owner of Captain Pete’s Oysters said, “Even though the oil industry and the seafood industry have conflicts, we need each other. I use a tremendous amount of fuel in my (seafood) farming operations and it seems senseless at this time when the economy is down and jobs are at stake to shut down such a major part of Louisiana’s income and job opportunities.” See: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/08/live-from-the-gulf-shrimpers-and-fishers-want-drilling-ban-lifted 6) Feds Sue Arizona…But, What About Rhode Island? Anyway, if enforcing immigration law is a bad thing for local cops to do, as Holder claims, why pick on Arizona? If he’s really upset that the same laws he has taken an oath to enforce might actually get (gulp!) enforced, why isn’t he suing Providence instead of Phoenix? They’ve been doing local immigration enforcement for years now. As The Boston Globe-Democrat reported yesterday, “From Woonsocket to Westerly, the troopers patrolling the nation’s smallest state are reporting all illegal immigrants they encounter, even on routine stops such as speeding, to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” Even liberal Providence, where politicians long opposed any local enforcement efforts, changed its policy in 2008 after the infamous Marco Riz case. Riz was the illegal immigrant arrested by Providence cops twice while under a federal deportation order but released both times. He was then charged with carjacking a woman in Warwick and raping her in Providence. Rhode Island cops now routinely contact ICE when they suspect they’ve come across an illegal immigrant. Since 2006, the number of contacts they’ve made to ICE’s Law Enforcement Support Center in Vermont has nearly doubled, the Globe reported. How is this significantly different than Arizona’s proposed law? Families who fear running into the next Marco Riz might think Rhode Island is onto something. But not Team Obama (emphasis mine). See: http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/07/07/feds-sue-arizona-but-what-about-rhode-island/ 6a) NBC Reporter Discovers New Immigration Law Causing Illegals to Leave Arizona NBC's Lee Cowan, on Thursday's NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, discovered a stunning result of Arizona's new immigration policies - illegal immigrants are now leaving the state. Cowan opened his piece noting a long line now "stretches around the Mexican Consulate in Phoenix every day" but noticed a twist, as the line was full of "immigrants trying to figure out not how to stay in Arizona, but how to flee it." See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/07/09/nbc-reporter-discovers-immigration-law-enforcement-causes-illegals 7) Holder's Black Panther Stonewall President Obama's Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.) One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!" …There was outrage over the decision among Congressional Republicans, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division—especially after it was learned one of the defendants who walked was Jerry Jackson, a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and a credentialed poll watcher for the Democratic Party last Election Day. See: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203550604574361071968458430.html 7a) Before the Obama Justice Dept Dropped Charges Against Him, Black Panther Advocated Killing White Babies See: http://www.breitbart.tv/before-the-obama-justice-dept-dropped-charges-against-him-black-panther-advocated-killing-white-babies/ 7b) Malik Shabazz incriminates himself in black panther case See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JunrpGf5QRc 7c) New Black Panther Party Leader Praises Osama Bin Laden See: http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=XdZu6UIruz 8) Gibbs Evades Question of Whether Obama Agrees With His Medicare Director That Health-Care System Must Redistribute Wealth (CNSNews.com) – White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has evaded answering the question of whether President Barack Obama agrees with Dr. Donald Berwick, his newly appointed administrator of Medicare and Medicaid, who has insisted that health-care systems must redistribute wealth. “Excellent health care is by definition redistributional,” Berwick said in a speech delivered on July 1, 2008. When asked directly at the July 7 White House press briefing whether Obama agreed with this, Gibbs would not answer the question. …Berwick gave the July 1, 2008 speech to honor the 60th anniversary of the National Health Service, Britain’s government-run single-payer health care system. “You could have had a monstrous insurance industry of claims and rules and paper-pushing instead of using your tax base to provide a single route of finance,” said Berwick in the video recording of the speech that CNSNews.com provided to Gibbs. “You could have protected the wealthy and the well, instead of recognizing that sick people tend to be poorer and that poor people tend to be sicker. And that any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must—must--redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional. Britain, you chose well.” …On Wednesday, Obama made Berwick the director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) through a recess appointment (that means, without the “advice and consent” of the Senate, comment mine). See: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/69149 9) U.S. House plan overturning Obamacare halfway there If 109 more signatures gathered, even Pelosi couldn't halt new vote A measure in the U.S. House of Representatives that would force the chamber into a new vote on Obamacare, even if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn't want it, is halfway toward its needed support. Advocates say constituents need to call their representatives to tell them to get on board right away so that the petition is positioned to move forward whether or not the GOP becomes the majority in the House after the 2010 fall elections. The plan is a discharge petition pushed by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. "Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XV, I, Steve King of Iowa, move to discharge the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, the Judiciary, Natural Resources, Rules, House Administration and Appropriations from the consideration of the bill (H.R. 4972) to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was referred to said committees on March 25, 2010, in support of which motion the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives affix their signatures. …" See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=176077 9a) Poll: Majority Favor Health Care Law Repeal A majority of Americans want the health care overhaul repealed, according to a recent poll. Rasmussen Reports, which for weeks has been polling on the question, released figures Monday showing 60 percent of voters want the law reversed -- on the high side of the group's results. The survey, conducted July 1, shows a persistent and deep divide in public opinion over the law, though passions may be stronger on the side of those who want repeal. Forty-nine percent strongly favor repeal, while 24 percent strongly oppose. See: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/07/poll-majority-favor-health-care-law-repeal/ 9b) If You Believe America Has Lousy Health Care, Here's Why If you believe that Americans have lousy health care, it is probably not because you have experienced inferior heath care. It is probably because you were told America has lousy health care. Last week, major news media featured these headlines: Reuters: "U.S. scores dead last again in healthcare study" …For those who read the first sentence or two, an even more common practice, the Reuters report begins this way: "Americans spend twice as much as residents of other developed countries on healthcare, but get lower quality, less efficiency and have the least equitable system (there‘s a buzzword for the left, comment mine), according to a report released on Wednesday. The United States ranked last when compared to six other countries -- Britain, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand, the Commonwealth Fund report found." …Only later in the report does the discerning reader have a clue as to how agenda-driven this report and this study are. The otherwise unidentified Karen Davis, president of the never-identified Commonwealth Fund, is quoted as saying how important it was that America pass President Obama's health care bill. Could it be that Ms. Davis and the Commonwealth are leftwing? They sure are, though Reuters, which is also on the Left, never lets you know. Here's how the Commonwealth Fund's 2009 Report from the president begins: "The Commonwealth Fund marshaled its resources this year to produce timely and rigorous work that helped lay the groundwork for the historic Affordable Care Act, signed by President Obama in March 2010." …The same thing happened on a far larger scale in 2000 when the world press reported that the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) ranked America 37th in health care behind such countries as Morocco, Costa Rica, Colombia and Greece. This WHO assessment was reported throughout the world and regularly cited by leftwing critics of American health care. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, no one other than a few conservatives noted that Cuba was ranked 39th, essentially tied with the United States. Which means that the WHO report is essentially a fraud. Who in his right mind thinks Americans and Cubans have equivalent levels of health care? For that matter, how many world leaders travel to Greece or Morocco instead of to the United States for health care? The answer is that WHO doesn't assess health care quality; it assesses health care equality, exactly the way any organization on the Left assesses it (emphasis mine). See: http://www.dennisprager.com/columns.aspx?g=4dfb0dc4-8ed3-484b-a92a-cb69debf3cbf&url=if_you_believe_america_has_lousy_health_care,_heres_why 10) U.S. Space Program Bows To Mecca Priorities: NASA's chief says his mission is not to return us to space but to help the Muslim world feel good about its scientific contributions. The moon we should be landing on should not be crescent-shaped. At a time when the only missile programs in the Arab world, namely in Syria and Iran, are aimed at hitting Israel with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, NASA administrator Charles Bolden goes on Al Jazeera to tell the Muslim world his "foremost" goal was to make them feel good about their achievements in math, science and engineering. Citing the International Space Station as an example, Bolden described space travel as an international collaboration of which Muslim nations must be a part. As much as we are excited about the prospect of U.S. tax dollars going to encourage young Jordanians and Egyptians to become astronauts, we'd much rather not see Americans abandoning the final frontier to the Chinese while we hitch rides with the Russians. Bolden's one small step for Islam comes after presiding over the demise of the space shuttle program and the cancellation of the Constellation program, which was to put America back on the moon and restore America's space dominance. This administration does not believe in American exceptionalism and has said at conferences such as the G-20 that we would just like to be one of the 20. We no longer seek to lead, but we yearn to apologize. Hey, fellas, forget that American flag on the moon. Sorry about that. It won't happen again. Welcome aboard the starship Kumbaya. See: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/539485/201007061923/US-Space-Program-Bows-To-Mecca.aspx 10a) One Small Step For Man, One Giant Leap For Allah Can you imagine those paraphrased immortal words from the Title being spoken on the next moon landing? They will be, if the current administration and NASA have their way. In an effort for appeasement and the direction of the president, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden has designed the NASA Muslim Outreach Program. It is an attempt to better the relations of America with the Muslim world. Obama and Mr. Bolden are being praised by the press for their glorious efforts. At least one cooler head is prevailing. Michael Griffin, who served as NASA administrator during the latter half of the Bush administration, told FoxNews.com “NASA … represents the best of America. Its purpose is not to inspire Muslims or any other cultural entity.” Come on Mr. President, we are talking about NASA, not the installation of another foot-bath in the Kansas City Airport. See: http://www.redstatereport.com/2010/07/one-small-step-for-man-one-giant-leap-for-allah/ 11) Obama attacks Reid's Senate “opponent” (Go to http://www.sharronangle.com and donate to “Harry’s opponent”) LAS VEGAS (AP) - President Barack Obama is going on the attack against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Republican opponent, saying her views are too extreme and ridiculing her comments on the BP oil spill. Obama never mentioned tea party-backed Sharron Angle by name at a campaign rally Thursday night at a Las Vegas casino. Calling her "Harry's opponent," Obama castigated Angle for referring to a $20 billion victims' compensation fund for the Gulf oil spill as a "slush fund." After coming under attack for the remark Thursday Angle took it back. Obama ridiculed that, too: "I'm sure she meant slush fund in the nicest possible way," he said. Said Obama: "She favors an approach that's even more extreme than the Republicans we've got in Washington. That's saying something." Some of the comment below the article are inspiring, like: Rep60: “Said Obama: "She favors an approach that's even more extreme than the Republicans we've got in Washington. That's saying something." I wonder what is so extreme? Adhering to the Constitution? Lowering taxes? What heretics!” And: Rebas_Thgil: “I get the impression that Sharon might want to read bills before voting, for one thing. Or, more radical than that, she might actually want to take into account her constitutency's input on legislative issues. Radical indeed. She could be way way over the top, espousing the idea of following the Constitution. If so, more power to her and to us!” And: Roger: “Obama, you stay and campaign for him a long, long time. Every time they see that pale pasty face of Reid I want them to think of your ears. To hear your lies, your smarmy teleprompter comments and see your golfing for months on end. Can you golf a while in Vegas? We want to make sure that none of the voters forget how the military in Afghanistan waited months while you golfed, and how you golf when the oil is washing up on the gulf shoreline while you cronies stop boats and inspect them when oil needs sucking up! Oh, you just hang around Vegas from now until the election, and make sure Reid is there with you step by step.” See: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GR8OFO1&show_article=1 12) Obama: Individual salvation depends on collective salvation GLENN: This is the same way, this is the same thing that — this is the root of social justice. Social justice has to happen because we all are in this together. It also is the way that you can excuse killing cracker babies. You can kill millions of people because they don't get it, and if we don't get them out of the way, we can't all be saved. Now, this is the religious context. Now, not everybody who is — you know, most people who are like Stalin, they don't believe in the religious side. But the American social justice progressive, in the way the early 20th century or Jeremiah Wright understand collective salvation, this is it. And it is out and out evil. And I want you to hear what the president has said about his own salvation, how he cannot achieve it without collective salvation. …They are still doing it today by not showing cracker babies on ABC News, NBC News, CBS News, the Washington Post or the New York Times. We showed you this last night. They are not reporting essential stories. Because they're gatekeepers. The hell they are. You are the gatekeeper. You are the one. It is not a collective thing. It is individual, and you will be held eternally responsible for the role that you played in letting liberty slip through man's fingers. When America is lost, there is no freedom on Earth. None. There is no cowboy that runs in at the end on his horse wearing a white hat because the Americans are gone. If America falls, the world falls into darkness. …Most importantly, you must fall to your knees and you must reconnect with God. He is not asking you. He is commanding us as a people to get behind Him. He will right the wrongs. We will have to pay a price because we lived outside of His laws. We will have to pay a price, but every day we don't get behind Him, the price gets bigger. It gets harder. Get behind Him. He will be our shield because these people are not enemies of ours. They are enemies of Him. They are enemies of man's freedom. All you have to do is stand where he asks you to stand. All he asks of you is to be peaceful. All he asks for you to do is stand up! Stand up. See: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/42764/ 13) "Freedom of Religion" vs. "Freedom of Worship" Recently, President Barack Obama and others in his administration (including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) have been using the term "freedom of worship." That's a significant departure from the constitutional phrase with which most Americans are familiar: "freedom of religion." The truth is that changing the word "religion" to "worship" drastically changes what is protected. Read the words of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." That "free exercise" wording protects those whose religion entails much more than worship. The Left -- specifically the ACLU -- has been extremely successful in misleading the American public into believing that the "separation of church and state" is a constitutional principle. It is not. As a result, far too many people of faith, including pastors, have confined themselves and their worldview within the church walls while godless philosophies and agendas overwhelm the public square. …Founding Father John Adams wrote in a letter to his wife in 1775 warning that "Liberty, once lost, is lost forever." Today, in our state and federal legislatures and in our courts of law, true liberty is losing its meaning and authority in society. New generations of citizens are either ignorant of or unimpressed by the battles fought to gain and sustain it, and the unhindered expression of Christian faith is becoming a primary target and casualty. The Left's advance of "tolerance" is not simply respecting one another's views, but the forced acceptance of a political philosophical perspective that would trump traditional religious mores and practice. Francis J. Beckwith puts it this way: Liberal tolerance is a sham. Although portrayed by its advocates as an open, tolerant, and neutral perspective, it is a dogma whose proponents tolerate no rivals. Those of us who are concerned with presenting and defending our faith in a post-Christian culture must be aware of this sort of challenge, one that masquerades as open, tolerant, and liberating, but in reality is dogmatic, partisan, and coercive. See: http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34939 14) Hawaii governor vetoes same-sex civil unions bill HONOLULU – Hawaii's governor ended months of speculation by vetoing contentious civil unions legislation that would have granted gay, lesbian and opposite-sex couples the same rights and benefits that the state provides to married couples. Republican Gov. Linda Lingle's action on Tuesday came on the final day she had to either sign or veto the bill, which was approved by the Legislature in late April. …About 60 percent of the more than 34,000 letters, telephone calls, e-mails and other communications from the public to the governor asked her to veto the measure, the governor's aides said late last week. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100707/ap_on_re_us/us_hawaii_civil_unions 15) Senate-seeker wants Obama birth-certificate treatment Mexican-born candidate: 'If I didn't prove citizenship, I'd be removed from the ballot' A Mexican-born candidate for U.S. Senate said he is considering a lawsuit against the Missouri secretary of state for discrimination because her office forced him to produce a birth certificate but "didn't make Obama show proof of citizenship" to appear on the ballot. Hector Maldonado, 38, a self-described "Lincolnian Republican conservative," is seeking the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Missouri. He was born one of 10 children in Durango, Mexico. His father is a migrant field worker who owns a small hog ranch in Perris, Calif. See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=176325