" Experience hath shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyrany " T.Jefferson
" I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
" We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions."
" In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself."
ADL Attacks Limbaugh Because Rush Is A Conservative
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
01/27/2010
Abe Foxman, Director of the Anti-Defamation League, continued doing last week what he has been doing for the last two decades: finding any far-fetched excuse to attack political conservatives as anti-Semitic. On his Jan. 21 show, Rush Limbaugh opined that Obama’s current populist rage against Wall Street could result in anti-Jewish feelings inasmuch as “Wall Street” is often a code-word used by those who wish to blame economic woes on Jews. Limbaugh’s chastisement of Obama for dangerously stoking the fires was paradoxically reversed by Foxman into an indictment of Limbaugh: “He [Limbaugh] reached a new low with his borderline anti-Semitic comments about Jews on Wall Street…”
Those who have listened to Limbaugh know that for over 20 years he has spoken of his highest admiration for the achievements of the Jewish people and has supported Israel and her policies even as many liberal Jews were running away from Israel when her policies did not conform to political correctness. Indeed, Limbaugh has done more to advance support for Israel and make friends for Jewish Americans within the broader American community than has Foxman himself. But Foxman doesn’t care, for, in his mind, what makes someone a friend of the Jewish people is not how well they treat Jews nor their friendship to the Jewish community, rather, and only, if they espouse political liberalism.
For Foxman, as with so many in the Jewish community, what counts is not what you do and how you act but how liberal you are. For them, liberalism equals Jewishness, and if you are against liberalism ipso facto you must be a closet anti-Semite. The pre-dispositional belief that conservatives must be anti-Jewish results in concocting anti-Semitism in the weather report if anchored by a political conservative. Limbaugh is simply the latest in a long line of conservatives friendly to the Jewish people that Foxman has attacked.
Foxman fears that philo-Jewish, pro-Israel conservatives may end up influencing Jews into re-thinking their position on some of the social issues, and as Mr. Foxman has often warned: “We should not let Christians who support Israel think that in exchange for their support we will support them in their domestic social and cultural agenda.” Thus the need to demonize, as if to say: “How could you possibly share the political and social views of someone who is “borderline anti-Semitic”? In otherwords, those are the views of the “bad” people, not the “good” people.
Compounding the ADL’s hypocrisy is how they proclaim and pride themselves on their political liberalism and, then, go after Limbaugh for agreeing with a caller who said that Jews seem to vote liberal, 78% for Obama. Limbaugh wondered why so many Jews voted for Obama when so many of Obama’s mentors and friends spew anti-Jewishness. Instead of the ADL being concerned about that very question, the organization that is supposed to defend Jews indicts “the extremists who are criticizing the Obama policies.”
Less than two months ago, Foxman and the ADL even attacked the Tea Party movement. One fears that the ADL has detoured from its original mission of protecting Jews into a new calling to advance liberal policies and politicians who are liberal.
The ADL does not speak for all Jews, certainly not the near 30% of the community that harbors conservative beliefs. Indeed, some of our country’s leading conservative thinkers, writers, activists, and policy makers are Jewish, far more than the public realizes. But, they do their conservatism outside of the establishment Jewish organizations. The “Jewish” view the public hears is that which comes out of the Jewish organizations, and, by and large, the establishment Jewish organizations, including the ADL, are liberal and staffed by liberals: conservatives need not apply. Such is, also, the case for the Temples and Synagogues, and the clergy, except for the Orthodox.
It is hard to change the rules of the game by which one has for decades operated and viewed the world. It takes tremendous intellectual honesty, and is especially hard in the area of politics where for liberals what rules and determines is emotion. Liberal Jews have developed an easy formula for demarcating a world without having to undergo the rigor of evaluating each person and each situation. No matter that today’s conservatives have become friends and many on the left have become adversaries, liberal Jews insist on maintaining the world view that has given them comfort and identity for so many years. It is an emotional conviction often impervious to logic and facts and holds more sway than the smarts and education for which Jews are known. The brain-power kicks in and is routed only after the emotional choice and decision is first made.
Many Jews in America are secular. To them, the old religion is passé and has been replaced by a new religion: left liberalism. Ironically, the political liberalism that has become their Jewishness is more important than Judaism itself, and Jewish need and survival is pushed aside when it collides with whatever liberalism considers more important. Thus, left wing Jews have become the harshest and quickest critics of Israel , just as left wing Americans blame all of the world’s ills on America first. Liberalism is an ideological illness whose grip and spell negate country, religion, family, and common sense. It is the fiercest of all “faiths” -- it carries within it the seeds of national suicide. Feminists, for example, remain silent about the horrific treatment of women in the Moslem world because their liberalism dictates that they do nothing that would concede the notion of an exceptional Judeo-Christian American ethos.
There was nothing shameful about liberalism eighty years ago when Jews in America first identified with political liberalism. Louis Brandeis, Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson were liberals. But liberalism morphed into leftism and Obamaism, and like so many liberals, Jews clung to their Democrat identity and failed to jump off the train leading to their own crash and burn. The Democrat Party is their team, their panache, their side!
Many Jews still feel that their safety lies with being members of a coalition of minorities, even though most of the minority groups that constitute the Democrat coalition are hostile to Jewish interests, and success. Having never been the majority, many look at it as something hostile to them and remain uncomfortable with the sentiments of nationalism and patriotism -- conservatism -- that worked against them in Europe . Most remain liberal because they don’t yet understand the miracle and sweetness of American nationalism and patriotism and the unique good-will of its people.
But this axiom that the majority is dangerous and all minorities are benign and the “good guys” has lead to the Jewish community’s own harm. The Anti Defamation League was silent back in 1991 when the Jews in Crown Heights , Brooklyn , were being “pogromed” by militant blacks, out of fear of not wanting to take sides against a minority group. Years later, Abraham Foxman was forced to admit that his reluctance to get involved in defending the Jews in Crown Heights was “because we felt uneasy pointing a finger at the minority, Black community,” even though Jews were being beaten and their shops smashed.
Similarly today, the ADL spends most of its energy and man-power warning of white supremacists, who are so few in number that they’re irrelevant, and only rarely and tokenly stands up against the most immediate and pervasive threat to the Jewish people: Islamism. Though called upon to protect Jewish students who are the victims of Arab aggression on college campuses here in America , the ADL basically issues papers on “tolerance.” Private Jewish individuals have had to raise funds for the protection of Jews on campus while the ADL’s vast treasury is used to warn us about “Tea Parties and angry critics of Obama.” Again the ADL is reluctant to take a stand in behalf of Jews if it means standing against a ”minority” -- a minority here but members of a billion worldwide. The lesson: Just as liberal Jewish organizations choose liberalism over the protection of their own, American left/liberals, like Obama and Holder, will choose liberal political correctness over the defense and protection of the American people.
Mr. Spero is a radio talk show host, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at www.caucusforamerica.com.
ADL Attacks Limbaugh Because Rush Is A Conservative
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
01/27/2010
Abe Foxman, Director of the Anti-Defamation League, continued doing last week what he has been doing for the last two decades: finding any far-fetched excuse to attack political conservatives as anti-Semitic. On his Jan. 21 show, Rush Limbaugh opined that Obama’s current populist rage against Wall Street could result in anti-Jewish feelings inasmuch as “Wall Street” is often a code-word used by those who wish to blame economic woes on Jews. Limbaugh’s chastisement of Obama for dangerously stoking the fires was paradoxically reversed by Foxman into an indictment of Limbaugh: “He [Limbaugh] reached a new low with his borderline anti-Semitic comments about Jews on Wall Street…”
Ahmadinejad: 'Yep, I'm Nuclear'
by Ann Coulter
02/17/2010
The only man causing President Obama more headaches than Joe Biden these days is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who, coincidentally, was right after Biden on Obama's short-list for V.P.).
Despite Obama's personal magnetism, the Iranian president persists in moving like gangbusters to build nuclear weapons, leading to Ahmadinejad's announcement last week that Iran is now a "nuclear state."
Gee, that's weird -- because I remember being told in December 2007 that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Iran had ceased nuclear weapons development as of 2003.
At the time of that leak, many of us recalled that the U.S. has the worst intelligence-gathering operations in the world. The Czechs, the French, the Italians -- even the Iraqis (who were trained by the Soviets) -- all have better intelligence.
Burkina Faso has better intelligence -- and their director of intelligence is a witch doctor. The marketing division of Wal-Mart has more reliable intel than the U.S. government does.
After Watergate, the off-the-charts left-wing Congress gleefully set about dismantling this nation's intelligence operations on the theory that Watergate never would have happened if only there had been no CIA.
Ron Dellums, a typical Democrat of the time, who -- amazingly -- was a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, famously declared in 1975: "We should totally dismantle every intelligence agency in this country piece by piece, brick by brick, nail by nail."
And so they did.
So now, our "spies" are prohibited from spying. The only job of a CIA officer these days is to read foreign newspapers and leak classified information to The New York Times. It's like a secret society of newspaper readers. The reason no one at the CIA saw 9/11 coming was that there wasn't anything about it in the Islamabad Post.
(On the plus side, at least we haven't had another break-in at the Watergate.)
CIA agents can't spy because that might require them to break laws in foreign countries. They are perfectly willing to break U.S. laws to leak to The New York Times, but not in order to acquire valuable intelligence.
So it was curious that after months of warnings from the Bush administration in 2007 that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program, a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was leaked, concluding that Iran had ceased its nuclear weapons program years earlier.
Republicans outside of the administration went ballistic over the suspicious timing and content of the Iran-Is-Peachy report. Even The New York Times, of all places, ran a column by two outside experts on Iran's nuclear programs that ridiculed the NIE's conclusion.
Gary Milhollin of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control and Valerie Lincy of Iranwatch.org cited Iran's operation of 3,000 gas centrifuges at its plant at Natanz, as well as a heavy-water reactor being built at Arak, neither of which had any peaceful energy purpose. (If only there were something plentiful in Iran that could be used for energy!)
Weirdly, our intelligence agencies missed those nuclear operations. They were too busy reading an article in the Tehran Tattler, "Iran Now Loves Israel."
Ahmadinejad was ecstatic, calling the NIE report "a declaration of the Iranian people's victory against the great powers."
The only people more triumphant than Ahmadinejad about the absurd conclusion of our vaunted "intelligence" agencies were liberals.
In Time magazine, Joe Klein gloated that the Iran report "appeared to shatter the last shreds of credibility of the White House's bomb-Iran brigade -- and especially that of Vice President Dick Cheney."
Liberal columnist Bill Press said, "No matter how badly Bush and Cheney wanted to carpet-bomb Iran, it's clear now that doing so would have been a tragic mistake."
Naturally, the most hysterical response came from MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. After donning his mother's housecoat, undergarments and fuzzy slippers, Keith brandished the NIE report, night after night, demanding that Bush apologize to the Iranians.
"Having accused Iran of doing something it had stopped doing more than four years ago," Olbermann thundered, "instead of apologizing or giving a diplomatic response of any kind, this president of the United States chuckled."
Olbermann ferociously defended innocent-as-a-lamb Mahmoud from aspersions cast by the Bush administration, asking: "Could Mr. Bush make it any more of a mess ... in response to Iran's anger at being in some respects, at least, either overrated or smeared, his response officially chuckling, how is that going to help anything?"
Bush had "smeared" Iran!
Olbermann's Ed McMahon, the ever-obliging Howard Fineman of Newsweek, agreed, saying that the leaked intelligence showed that Bush "has zero credibility."
Olbermann's even creepier sidekick, androgynous Newsweek reporter Richard Wolffe, also agreed, saying American credibility "has suffered another serious blow."
Poor Iran!
Olbermann's most macho guest, Rachel Maddow, demanded to know -- with delightful originality -- "what the president knew and when he knew it." This was on account of Bush's having disparaged the good name of a messianic, Holocaust-denying nutcase, despite the existence of a cheery report on Iran produced by our useless intelligence agencies.
Olbermann, who knows everything that's on the Daily Kos and nothing else, called those who doubted the NIE report "liars" and repeatedly demanded an investigation into when Bush knew about the NIE's laughable report.
Even if you weren't aware that the U.S. has the worst intelligence in the world, and even if you didn't notice that the leak was timed perfectly to embarrass Bush, wouldn't any normal person be suspicious of a report concluding Ahmadinejad was behaving like a prince?
Not liberals. Our intelligence agencies concluded Iran had suspended its nuclear program in 2003, so Bush owed Ahmadinejad an apology.
Feb. 11, 2010: Ahmadinejad announces that Iran is now a nuclear power.
Thanks, liberals!
Ahmadinejad: 'Yep, I'm Nuclear'
by Ann Coulter
02/17/2010
The only man causing President Obama more headaches than Joe Biden these days is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who, coincidentally, was right after Biden on Obama's short-list for V.P.).
Despite Obama's personal magnetism, the Iranian president persists in moving like gangbusters to build nuclear weapons, leading to Ahmadinejad's announcement last week that Iran is now a "nuclear state."
Gee, that's weird -- because I remember being told in December 2007 that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Iran had ceased nuclear weapons development as of 2003.
State Dept. Official: Obama Violated Pledge
Sunday, 31 Jan 2010 08:50 PM
The recent awarding of a lucrative federal contract to a company owned by a financial contributor to the Obama presidential campaign -- without competitive bidding -- "violated" President Obama's many campaign pledges to crack down on the practice, a top State Department official told Fox News.
The contract, worth more than $24.6 million, was awarded on Jan. 4 by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to Checchi and Company Consulting, a Washington, D.C.-based firm owned by economist and Democratic Party donor Vincent Checchi. The deal called for Checchi's firm to train lawyers and judges in Afghanistan and thereby strengthen the "rule of law" in the war-torn country.
"You make a valid point. If you want to say this violates the basis on which this administration came into office and campaigned, fair enough," Assistant Secretary of State P.J. Crowley told Fox. A Fox reporter reminded Crowley that Obama had made many pledges during the 2008 campaign to crack down on the use of no-bid contracts. The president signed a memorandum last March instructing the Office of Management and Budget to curb the practice.
Crowley confirmed that the contract has been "terminated" because the circumstances under which it was awarded “violated the Competition in Contracting Act." Crowley said the contract was actually a renewal of a $44 million contract first awarded to Checchi and Company in October 2004 by the Bush administration -- after a competitive bidding process -- and will now be put out for competitive bids.
The existence of the Checchi contract was first publicly reported by Fox News on Jan. 25.
The recent awarding of a lucrative federal contract to a company owned by a financial contributor to the Obama presidential campaign -- without competitive bidding -- "violated" President Obama's many campaign pledges to crack down on the practice, a top State Department official told Fox News.
I'm Sick of "Inherited"
The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush, blah blah blah. Amazingly enough, a lot of people swallow this nonsense.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009.
Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period:
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.
In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
WAKE UP, AMERICA , BEFORE ITS TO LATE
So once more, I'll try a short civics lesson.
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party. They controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009, as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For FY 2009, though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets.
'm Sick of "Inherited"
The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush, blah blah blah. Amazingly enough, a lot of people swallow this nonsense.
Pictures from London. This is beyond scary!
This makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Can you imagine having a Christian demonstration against Islam in downtown Baghdad or here for that matter?
View the pictures below and decide how you really feel about the future of the Western World. These pictures are of Muslims marching through the streets of London during their 'Religion of Peace Demonstration.'
Can you imagine having a Christian demonstration against Islam in downtown Baghdad or here for that matter?
View the pictures below and decide how you really feel about the future of the Western World. These pictures are of Muslims marching through the streets of London during their 'Religion of Peace Demonstration.'
