« | »

Selected News For The Week Oct 16 – Oct 22

This thread is for the busy bees of S&L to post news articles that expose the rampant distortions and biases of our media watchdogs.

Posting Guidelines

To make the articles as readable as possible, please use the format described here


  • Only post ‘hard news’ from establishment media outlets.
  • Avoid editorials and ‘thought pieces’ unless they are truly newsworthy.
  • Eschew major news items that most people will likely have seen elsewhere.
  • Articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread should be posted as a comment there.
  • Always spell out the name of the source and post a link to it.
  • Always post less than one quarter of the original article.

Posts of articles that do not follow these guidelines may be edited or deleted.


This article was posted by Steve on Saturday, October 16th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

38 Responses to “Selected News For The Week Oct 16 – Oct 22”

  1. proreason says:

    No I didn’t write this guys video,


    but I’m beginning to wonder if ol pro’s wildeyed theories might be influencing political thought.

    Of course, a lot of the author’s ideas are lifted from Thomas Sowell’s book, but a lot of the author’s terminoloy and details are awfully close to things ol tinfoilhat pro has been saying here at S&L since early 2009.

    The theme I haven’t heard spelled out in detail yet is RISK.

    The RISK of Central Planning is so extreme that risk alone is enough to shove the new Aristocracy’s (pro’s obsolete name for the Ruling Class, but the author uses it as well.) elitism up their asses. For proof…..see the economic meltdown of 2008. And of course, the prior several dozen meltdowns as well.

    Maybe someday, we will be hearing from ‘rational’ people that the 2008 meltdown was a rigged deal. Other than Rush, nobody is willing to go close to that yet.

    • Coco Q. Rico says:

      Hello everyone at S&L. I will be attending an event in California tomorrow with gay conservative bloggers. I know most of you on this site probably oppose anything gay, but if you have any thoughts about what gay conservatives can contribute to the movement, especially gay bloggers, and how they/we can work around the usual list of contentious topics, feel free to contact me and share thoughts. My info is here: http://colorfulconservative.blogspot.com/2010/10/tomorrow-ill-be-at-gay-conservative.html . I hope to have a productive conversation with the queer Right tomorrow and expand upon the future discourse.

    • Mithrandir says:

      I think most conservatives DON’T have anything against gays personally, they have a problem with:

      1. Obnoxious people who force their lifestyle or opinions down the throat of others (and conservatives enjoy doing this with some issues as well)

      2. Gay people who pretend there is nothing -zip zero nada- wrong with homosexuality. I would feel MUCH more comfortable if gay people just admitted,“Yeah, it’s not a healthy lifestyle, but we don’t care, we are who we are, and we are going to continue regardless of the risks, so stop bothering us about health issues.”

      What gay people can contribute:

      1. A responsible federal government, restrained by the Constitution. Everyone loses out with the state of affairs we have now.

      2. Gay issues are STATE issues! So tired of people trying to elect federal Congresspeople who are going to be for or against homosexuality. That is NOT a federal issue, that is for the states to decide. To think otherwise is fascism from a central authority, and against the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. (wish everyone got that message!) The federal gov’t should be completely neutral, and Don’t ask don’t tell is very reasonable. Federal employees with gay spouses, their issues (marriage, health care) should be paid for by whatever state they come from where it is legal.

      3. Gay people can look introspectively and decide of they are part of a herd, tribe, collective, and to be stereotyped in that way, or are they independent thinkers. Can you live your lives independently, work with in state governments for rights or change that you want / need, or are you forever dependent upon a centralized gov’t to rule with a heavy hand (1 size fits all) approach to governing, in which no one is happy?

      4. For G*ds sake! Right wing gay people CAN’T POSSIBLY look at these open-air sex festivals like in San Francisco (folsom street fair) and EVER believe they will go anywhere but backwards in this nation. That is a sure topic of discussion:
      A: Be who we are, and let it all hang out?
      B: Stop being nihilists if you want to be accepted and move forward with the rest of society?

      I got more, I will check your web-blog now…

    • Coco Q. Rico:

      I simply want truth in advertising. Stop using the euphemism “gay”, and use the proper indentifier: homosexual.

      Say it loud, say it proud.

    • proreason says:

      Coco, i wouldn’t be very popular at your convention, but since you asked for ideas, here are a few.

      1. the gay movement is being used by radicals / communists for their own purposes; i.e., the destruction of this great country. It seems to me that homosexuals are essentially conservatives in that they want and need to be left alone. Ironically, the talent level in the homosexual community is extraordinary. If those energies were solely directed at maximizing that talent, rather than begin misdirected toward disassembling this country, then the greater good would be advanced in a major way. By tacitly aggreing to being used by radicals, you are doing damage you can’t imagine to your own communities.

      2. as Mith says, our main issue with homosexuals is with a tiny percentage who want to shove a view down our throats that we know without question is bad for our children and society. We know that 98% of gays are past the point of change. Most of us don’t expect you to change, but we also know that young people are easy to influence, and by shouting so loudly that there is no difference between the gay and straight lifestyle, we know that you influence a small percentage of young people who still can choose, and who just might choose a path that is likely to make their lives more difficult.

      3. stop the nonsense about “gay marriage”. No, re-defining the core institution of human culture for the past 10,000 years is not something that straight people treat as a throw-off issue. We think it is INSANE. Yes, you should have the rights that married people have. I have no issue with you having visitation rights in hospitals for your partners, or being able to pass your property on to someone you have formed a union with. But call it something different than marriage, because it ISN’T MARRIAGE. By pushing the issue, you play into the hands of the radicals who seek to divide, not unite.

    • fallingpianos says:


      What one does with one’s genitals does not an identity make.

    • Petronius says:

      Coco, you might speak to them of the tremendously popular Dutchman, Pim Fortuyn. Pim, along with Theo van Gogh, did much both in life and by their deaths to awaken Europe to the Muslim threat.

    • Adam Moreira says:

      @Mithrandir – whether or not there is something wrong with the gay lifestyle is irrelevant.

      1. The issue of marriage: Marriage is a religious function performed by houses of worship. The government performs unions (although most states call that marriage, they aren’t the same).
      2. Because marriage endorses a Christian way of life, it’s a violation of the First Amendment, later incorporated against the states by the 14th. The Fourteenth makes it a federal issue.

  2. confucius says:

    From AP:

    Obama’s half brother in Kenya says he married teen

    October 16, 2010

    NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — President Barack Obama’s polygamist half brother in Kenya has married a 19-year-old woman more than 30 years his junior.

    Malik Obama, 52, told a Kenya news station that the teen quit school and wanted to get married.

    “She decided she doesn’t want to go back to school. She wants to get married now. She came here, and what am I supposed to do? So we are married,” Malik Obama said on the video broadcast by NTV.

    Sheila Anyango is now Malik Obama’s third wife, although he did not say when the wedding took place. Polygamy is legal in Kenya if it falls under religious or cultural traditions.

    The 19-year-old’s mother told The Associated Press on Friday she is furious that her daughter quit high school and married the 52-year-old. …

    “I told her not to get married until she has finished her education. Let the world teach her a lesson even if she has problems in her marriage. I don’t want to see her again,” Ouma said.

    Ouma said she did not receive a bride price from Malik Obama but that if she received one she would spend it on her other children’s schooling. …

    Barack Obama’s father had at least six other children in his native Kenya. Kenyans have claimed the U.S. president as one of their own even though he was raised by his mother and did not know his Kenyan father or relatives there well.


    • Adam Moreira says:

      The fact that she is 19 though is not insignificant. If she were 17 instead or 19, that would be alarming.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      The fact she stopped her education to marry this twerp brother of dingleBarry is alarming. Regardless of age!!

    • confucius says:

      I’m enjoying Malik’s explanation, “She came here, and what am I supposed to do?”

      It’s like he “inherited” the marriage from Bush.

    • U NO HOO says:

      Is this the guy in the paper mache hut?

    • mr_bill says:

      No, the one in the hut is George. He lives on less than a dollar a month, his big brother could send him a $20 bill and change his life, but Nerobama is busy redistributing everybody elses’ wealth. Liberals are only generous with other peoples’ money.

      As an interesting aside, George tells people its just a coincidence that he and Barry have the same last name. He denies their relation. My guess is that he hasn’t figured out that he could sneak into the US, live in public housing, refuse to follow a duly issued order for deportation, claim political asylum, and feed off the system like Aunt Zeituni Oingoboingo.

  3. ptat says:

    Coco, if you are a “gay conservative”, then I am an Anglo-American Caucasian Heterosexual conservative–what could we possibly have in common? Oh–THAT’S RIGHT–we are both CONSERVATIVE! Drop the stinkin’ labels, for God’s sake…a conservative is a conservative. As for gay marriage, Pro said it all, except–what about equal rights for SINGLE PEOPLE!?

  4. canary says:

    Coco, First you said your were “bi” & married. What’s your spouse think? I would bring up that the sex party should leave the military alone, when their in such a dangerous position. 2nd, I would suggest how making a gay party adds to confusion to children; leading to them becoming more sexually active & demonstrative. Help us understand.

    Please give some answers to better help us understand.
    For example.

    A 4th grade girl asks you. “How do I know if I’m gay or straight? I think Mary is so pretty & nice, and I really like playing with her. But, Johnnie is really cute and I like playing with him too. Girls kiss girls & boys and gives hugs in school. Is that how they are learning which they like best? How do I find out as I’m getting older now. I also like girl rock stars, and want to be one. Is that a sign?

  5. tranquil.night says:

    “Enjoy your afternoon on the Mall, Mr. Stewart. There will be a much bigger Rally to Restore Sanity on November 2nd.” – DocZero

    Continuing off of the clear display of “Who’s the real whackjob?” we saw demonstrated this week by the Republican women tearing apart their Beta-male opponents.

    With the One Nation rally having been a colossally embarassing exposure of who the Left’s nutroots Communists really are, we’re now being treated to essentially a repeat disaster by another wing of the astroturf lawn – the Obamabots that are too ashamed of the Won and are now pretending to shed the skin of their damaged label for Centrism. It’ll be about as useful as deciding to use School Buses to evacuate Katrina victims the Thursday AFTER the storm hits, but likely more fun to watch.

    Stewart and Huffing-Puffington are the two last standing Liberals mediaites with any decent audiences. They’re putting the last of their credibility into these rallies being mildly successful. Colbert already destroyed his.

    Their pride won’t allow them to accept that the Tea Party is more than just a political movement. It is the antithesis to their designs. As their politicians, media operatives and even chunks of the unions and academia are learning – no institution of Liberalism is safe anymore from America’s re-awakening. Their aristocracy’s hubris is their downfall.

    • proreason says:

      A rally led by a fake news comedian? One who has declared that the oppositions’ consistently polled 60%+ majorities are meaningless and that 70 to 80% of the country agrees with HIM.

      It won’t matter how big or little the turnout is.

      The joke’s on him.

  6. Petronius says:

    COBBLERS! Medieval Paths in Iron Age Village Deemed Too Dangerous by Health and Safety Chiefs

    (London) Daily Mail

    18 Oct 2010

    “A perfectly preserved medieval village is set to lose its iconic cobbled paths over health and safety fears, it emerged today.

    “The historic settlement of Dunster, Somerset, dates back to Bronze and Iron Age Britain and is regarded as one of the most-perfectly preserved medieval villages in England.

    “The village attracts thousands of visitors a year because of its 1,000-year-old castle and quaint features including the medieval cobbled streets.”

    * * *

    “Now health and safety chiefs have ruled them to be too dangerous … replacing them with smooth-surfaced roads at a cost of more than £100,000 ‘to bring the village into the 21st century’.

    “But residents have slammed the ruling and are demanding that the cobbled streets be repaired to protect the ‘character’ of the village.”

    * * *

    “Resident Donna Richards said: ‘. . . In generations past these cobbles have been left for us to see and experience, so do we have the right to take it away from future generations?’

    “One elderly visitor to the village, Giles Parks, 69, said ‘. . . I’m on holiday from Derbyshire and where I live the council is paying huge sums of money to put in cobbled paths in an old part of town. Why can’t people leave things alone? It’s mainly because this village has been left alone that we’ve come to see it.’”


    Indeed, why can’t Liberals and governments just leave us alone?

    What a load of old cobblers!

  7. canary says:

    CAIR hopes to sue FBI for GPS tracker on middle-easterner. Obama administration doesn’t want warrants.

    AP: Discovery of GPS tracker becomes privacy issue
    By Paul Elias Oct 16 2010

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community college student, took his car in for an oil change earlier this month and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage.

    The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.

    Two days later, FBI agents arrived at Afifi’s Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property – a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights….

    The Obama administration last month asked the D.C. federal appeals court to change its ruling, calling the decision “vague and unworkable” and arguing that investigators will lose access to a tool they now use “with great frequency.”

    After the D.C. appeals court decision, the 9th Circuit refused to revisit its opposite ruling.

    Legal scholars predict the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately resolve the issue since so many courts disagree.

    George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr said the issue boils down to public vs. private. As long as the GPS devices are attached to vehicles on public roads, Kerr believes the U.S. Supreme Court will decide no warrant is needed. To decide otherwise, he said, would ignore a long line of previous 4th Amendment decisions allowing for warrantless searches as long as they’re conducted on public property.
    All of which makes Afifi’s lawyer pessimistic that he has much of a chance to file a successful lawsuit challenging the FBI’s actions. Afifi is represented by Zahra Billoo of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the country’s largest Islamic civil rights group.

    Afifi declined comment…

    Still, Billoo hopes the discovered GPS tracking device will help publicize in dramatic fashion the issue of racial profiling the lawyer says Arab-Americans routinely encounter.

    She said Afifi was targeted because of his extensive ties to the Middle East, which include supporting two brothers who live in Egypt and making frequent overseas trips. His father was a well-known Islamic-American community leader who died last year in Egypt.

    “Yasir hasn’t done anything to warrant that kind of surveillance,” Billoo said. “This was a blatant example of profiling.”


    • heykev says:

      One good thing is happening here and another is rather unsettling.

      First is seems like our friends at the FBI were profiling (gasp) this man because of his trips to the Mideast, his brothers live there and his father recently was killed there. I’m sure this on one of the reasons our Dear Leader does not want this really talked about – because he’s FINALLY profiling. Something that should be done more often. If this was done at airports, maybe some of the men who got onto planes would have been stopped BEFORE boarding instead of by passengers.

      But what’s really disturbing to me is how little freedoms we have left. I see getting access to someone’s GPS w/o a warrant is the beginning of a slippery slope we should not go down.There should be some expectation of privacy with out the government snooping on where we been and what we’ve done.

      I’ve often thought that we could change intrusive government snooping into our lives and businesses selling our personal information be simply saying that WE OWN that information and no one is allowed to sell our personal information. Think about all the information that is available about you.
      GPS and tollway passes track your every move.
      credit card purchases show what we purchase and when – even the local grocery store tracks your purchases with a “discount card” you show them when you want to get the discounts they offer that week.
      everywhere web we’ve visited is tracked by our computers

      All this and more is available so we no longer have any real privacy.

  8. mr_bill says:

    O’Donnell questions separation of church, state
    From a rabit AP

    WILMINGTON, Del. (AP) — Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell of Delaware on Tuesday questioned whether the U.S. Constitution calls for a separation of church and state, appearing to disagree or not know that the First Amendment bars the government from establishing religion.

    Notice the switch from the headline. The headline reads “separation of church and state,” the AP’s assertion in this paragraph is different: establishment of religion. These are two different things, as noted below. Ms. O’Donnell knows full well that the government cannot establish an official religion, her assertion is that “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution, and she is right.

    The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O’Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons’ position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine…

    …”Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?” O’Donnell asked him.

    When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O’Donnell asked: “You’re telling me that’s [separation of church and state] in the First Amendment?”

    “You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp,” Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone said after the debate, adding that it raised questions about O’Donnell’s grasp of the Constitution.


    This is a bit of editorializing by the AP. The words are not in the Constitution, anywhere. The First Amendment does not say the State cannot be religious, it just says that it cannot force its subjects to be religious: These are two different things. To wit: we have historically recognized Christian (because this IS a Christian nation and was founded by Christians) ideas and themes in the form of the Ten Commandments on the Supreme Court building, recognition of God (as in “In God We Trust,” “One Nation Under God…” etc.) It appears the AP doesn’t know the difference (along with a lot of other supposedly “educated” people).

    What the AP fails to address is that after the subject came up, O’Donnell asked Coons if he could name the five freedoms named in the First Amendment. He failed to name one. Coons mis-identified “separation of church and state” as one and failed to name any other, then begged a moderator to save him from having to answer the question posed by O’Donnell. For the record, the five freedoms are: Freedom of press, assembly, petition, speech, and freedom of religion. And for the record, separation of church and state appears nowhere in the Constitution, not even in the First Amendment.

    • proreason says:

      facts facts facts.

      you stinkin conservatives are so proud of your stinkin facts. constitution this constitution that. who cares about a dumb website some old farts wrote what must have been 20 years ago, or even more.

      Meanwhile President Bush has added 3 trillion to the deficit and is running budget surpluses over 1 trillion a year.

      Bushhitler MUST BE STOPPED.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Yes, I had no idea a former president could have so much influence and power almost two full years after leaving office.

      That barry guy; Poor little feller, t’ain’t no bigger’n’ a squirrel. mmm hmmmm.

      I really wish that Bush would get out of the way and let the big “o” do stuff to make the economy better and get people jobs n’ stuff. I mean, y’know? I mean like, y’know?

  9. canary says:

    Hugo Chavez increasing his siezure of private grocery stores, rationing food cards, & forcing people to buy food from Government.

    The Miami Harold: Venezuela introduces Cuba like ration card-
    by Antonio Maria Delgado

    Presented by President Hugo Chávez as an instrument to make shopping for groceries easier, the “Good Life Card” is making various segments of the population wary because they see it as a furtive attempt to introduce a rationing card similar to the one in Cuba…

    “We see that in short-term this could become a rationing card probably similar to the one used in Cuba,” Roberto León Parilli, president of the National Association of Users and Consumers, told El Nuevo Herald. “It would use more advanced technological means [than those used in Cuba], but when they tell you where to buy and what the limits of what you can buy are, they are conditioning your purchases.”
    Chávez said Tuesday that the card could be used to buy groceries at the government chain of markets and supplies.

    “I have called it a Good Life Card so far,” Chávez said in a brief statement made on the government television channel. “It’s a card for you to purchase what you are going to take and they keep deducting. It’s to buy what you need, not to promote communism, but to buy what just what you need.”…

    “Why can’t our Bicentennial chain use a card to make it easier for customers to buy their groceries?” the minister said in an interview broadcast on a government channel. He said that this type of initiative has been used by private commercial entities….

    In theory, the government could begin to favor the import of products to be sold through the government chains and have more control over the type of products purchased and the people buying them.

    “The card emerged when goods began to become scarce,” Suchlicki said. “The government had seized many companies that did not work because the government managed them poorly. Then they decided to distribute groceries through those cards.”

    “People depended on the government to eat, and nothing gives you more power than having people depend on you to get their food quota,” he said.

    Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/09/04/1807508/venezuela-introduces-cuba-like.html#ixzz0yaMJs8vb

    1} Obama wrote in 2006 Hope that many liberals believe America should be run like Hugo Chavez, only without the torture.
    2} Michelle Obama repeatedly said on Huckabee’s show that the government (specifically “congress, governors” should control what America eats.
    3} Senator Tom Coburn (R) said there is a bill telling people how many servings of vegetables, etc that Americans should have to eat. This was part of his questioning the new Supreme Court Justice, who refused to answer if it was constitutional.

  10. mr_bill says:

    Obama Strips the ‘Creator’ from Declaration of Independence — Again
    Tuesday, October 19, 2010
    By Penny Starr

    For the second time in little over a month, President Barack Obama stripped the word “Creator” from the Declaration of Independence when giving a speech.

    “As wonderful as this land is here in the United States, as much as we have been blessed by the bounty of this magnificent continent that stretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific, what makes this place special is not something physical. It has to do with this idea that was started by 13 colonies that decided to throw off the yoke of an empire and said, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that each of us are endowed with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,’” Obama said in Monday’s speech… [Emphasis added.]

    …When asked why the president did not use the words “endowed by their Creator” in his Monday speech, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters on Tuesday, “I haven’t seen the comments, Lester. But I can assure you the president believes in the Declaration of Independence.”


    Ummm, Mr. Gibbs, I think you might be mistaken. I’m sure the media treat this just as they did with Ms. O’Donnell’s [correct] remarks on the contents of the First Amendment. I’ll bet the media will accuse Nerobama of not knowing or not understanding the Declaration of Independence. /sarc. Of course, Nerobama does not believe in the Declaration of Independence or unalienable rights granted by the Creator. It runs counter to his philosophy that government is mother, father and god. It runs counter to his beliefs that the rights any of us enjoy exist only because government has seen fit to allow them to us, until he can manage to take them away. It runs counter to his thinking of the Bill of Rights as a list of “negative rights” that unreasonably restrict what the government can do. He is showing us all who he is, some just refuse to see it.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      There is also the common misconception that unalienable and inalienable are interchangeable terms. They are not.

      Unalienable: adj. Not to be separated, given away, or taken away;

      Inalienable: incapable of being repudiated or transferred to another;

      Similar yes, but unalienable is far more constricting a term than inalienable. My opinion, of course. But it was the subject of much discussion in my high school Western Civ class. One student was corrected by the teacher about it and he replied, “So what? What’s the difference?” I think it’s significant.

    • Adam Moreira says:

      So he stripped the Creator from it – what’s the big deal with that when the USA is a secular country? And as I have said before, if you take away religion, you still have Greek and Chinese philosophy, which have same tenets of right and wrong as Christianity does.

      As for the separation of church and state, Congress can make no laws respecting or prohibiting religion (and it was incorporated against the states in the 14th). As it’s not mentioned again in the Constitution, the President wasn’t given the power to combine church and state. Therefore, the principle derives from the Tenth Amendment (Congress can’t respect it, and it’s not an Enumerated Power).

      As for JudeoChristian beliefs – it’s not mentioned in the Constitution, which governs the USA government.

    • mr_bill says:

      I noticed that as well, Rusty. You make a good point about its meaning. Its strange that a “legal scholar,” renowned public speaker, former “President” of the Harvard Law Review, and current President of the US would make such egregious “errors,” repeatedly.

      Adam, the US is NOT a secular country, it never has been. This is a Christian country, founded by Christians, populated predominantly by Christians, with Christian traditions and values. The US not founded on Greek Philosophy or Chinese Philosophy. Why hold on high foreign philosophies and deny those which are native to the American Culture? Many of the principles that have made this country so successful and its citizens so free are derived from Natural Law (as is the portion of the Declaration which Nerobama is attempting to pervert), which includes God as its fundamental basis. His continued refusal to acknowledge the Creator as the source for those rights means quite a lot. It means that Nerobama believes these rights, granted by our Creator, are not so. Consequently it means he believes these rights can be taken away by man (or government) as they must have been granted by man (or government). It means he is denying a significant basis for the continuing liberties that are innately stamped upon each being at the beginning of their existence. A review of his stance on abortion will tell you that he does not believe that the right to life is granted by the Creator, as he has been so willing to extinguish life, even after birth – a practice also known as infanticide, or murder. I think its disgusting and I have absolutely no respect for another human being who could advocate such a thing, such are the trappings of “secularism.” Secularism is nothing more than the willful denial of virtue and would supplant the guidance of right and wrong with moral relativism, whose most eloquent response to anything is nothing more than a glorified “it depends.” It is an errosion of that which has meaning and principle in favor of that which is transient and utterly lacking in enduring value.

      “respecting or prohibiting religion” does not have the same meaning as “respecting the establishment of religion.” The Founding Fathers were quite deliberate with their language for good reason. The meaning of the First Amendment, as it was written, does not have the same effect as “separation of church and state.” If the Founding Fathers were such devout secularists or intended government completely void of the guidance of God, why has the Congress always opened with a prayer? Why does the Declaration make reference to the Creator?

      “Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to “recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness…” George Washington, October 3rd, 1789

    • proreason says:


      ‘adam’ is a troll.

      Steve doesn’t seem inclined to ban him, so the correct approach is to ignore him..

    • mr_bill says:

      I know it, Pro. I read Petronius’ dressing down of the new guest the other day and I generally won’t feed a troll. That was “one for the road.”

  11. proreason says:

    Read how Karl Rove makes a German interviewer look like a school kid:


  12. proreason says:

    Noemie Emery. Remember that name, because you may find youself saying it in the same breath as VDH and Thomas Sowell in a few weeks.


    “…When this backlash occurs, it is dense beyond words to claim that this stems from a fear of “the other” (meaning non-whites and immigrants) while these rebels strive to elect blacks to the House in South Carolina and Florida, Hispanics to the Senate in Florida, Hispanics to the governors’ mansions in New Mexico and Nevada, and to elect the daughter of Indian immigrants to the state house in South Carolina, home of secession and massive resistance, where the far right gave twice as many votes to black conservative Tim Scott as to one of Strom Thurmond’s sons.

    There are words to describe this, but “bright” is not one of them. This meritocracy has created an “elite” without merit. In everyone’s eyes but its own.”

    Or in more prosaic language, Obamy’s a dumb shit, an arrogant dumb shit.

  13. canary says:

    Adam, here is a link of communicating with soldiers in overseas war zones such as Iraq or Afganistan. 2009
    As you can see there are some restrictions, But, when it comes to be on a U.S. base, it’s less restrictive to communicate via web.

  14. proreason says:

    Dem Tennesse Governor describes how he will shift $140M health care costs to feds (i.e., YOU AND ME) under Obamycare.


    He says it is just common sense, and wonders whether the ‘authors’ of the bill had any experience with game theory (i.e., trying to understand how other parties might use adjust their behaviour based what you do). Of course, as a Dimocrat, he thinks it’s unintentional. But we know better.

    He probably also underestimates the cost to the taxpayer by a factor of 10.

  15. confucius says:

    From The Atlantic:

    Why is This GOP House Candidate Dressed as a Nazi?

    by Joshua Green
    October 8, 2010; 10:00 PM ET

    An election year already notable for its menagerie of extreme and unusual candidates can add another one: Rich Iott, the Republican nominee for Congress from Ohio’s 9th District, and a Tea Party favorite, who for years donned a German Waffen SS uniform and participated in Nazi re-enactments.

    Iott, whose district lies in Northwest Ohio, was involved with a group that calls itself Wiking, whose members are devoted to re-enacting the exploits of an actual Nazi division, the 5th SS Panzer Division Wiking, which fought mainly on the Eastern Front during World War II. Iott’s participation in the Wiking group is not mentioned on his campaign’s website, and his name and photographs were removed from the Wiking website. …

    Iott, a member of the Ohio Military Reserve, added, “I’ve always been fascinated by the fact that here was a relatively small country that from a strictly military point of view accomplished incredible things. I mean, they took over most of Europe and Russia, and it really took the combined effort of the free world to defeat them. From a purely historical military point of view, that’s incredible.”

    Historians of Nazi Germany vehemently dispute this characterization. “These guys don’t know their history,” said Charles W. Sydnor, Jr., a retired history professor and author of “Soldiers of Destruction: The SS Death’s Head Division, 1933-45,” which chronicles an SS division. “They have a sanitized, romanticized view of what occurred.” Sydnor added that re-enactments like the Wiking group’s are illegal in Germany and Austria. “If you were to put on an SS uniform in Germany today, you’d be arrested.”

    Christopher Browning, a professor of history at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, said, “It is so unhistorical and so apologetic that you don’t know to what degree they’ve simply caught up innocent war memorabilia enthusiasts who love putting on uniforms.”

    Iott says he does not recall exactly when he joined the Wiking group (his name appears on a unit roster as far back as 2003), but did so with his son “as a father-son bonding thing.” He says his name and pictures were removed from the Wiking website not out of concern that they would harm his political career, but because he quit the group three years ago, after his son lost interest.

    Iott participated in the group under his own name, and also under the alias “Reinhard Pferdmann,” which has also been removed, and which Iott described as being his German alter ego. “Part of the reenactor’s [experience],” Iott said, “is the living-history part, of really trying to get into the persona of the time period. In many, not just in our unit, but in many units what individuals do is create this person largely based on a Germanized version of their name, and a history kind of based around your own real experiences. ‘Reinhard’ of course is ‘Richard’ in German. And ‘Pferdmann,’ ‘pferd’ is a horse. So it’s literally ‘horse man.'” …

    The actual Wiking unit has a history as grisly as that of other Nazi divisions. In her book “The Death Marches of Hungarian Jews Through Austria in the Spring of 1945,” Eleonore Lappin, the noted Austrian historian, writes that soldiers from the Wiking division were involved in the killing of Hungarian Jews in March and April 1945, before surrendering to American forces in Austria.

    “What you often hear is that the [Wiking] division was never formally accused of anything, but that’s kind of a dodge,” says Prof. Rob Citino, of the Military History Center at the University of North Texas, who examined the Wiking website. “The entire German war effort in the East was a racial crusade to rid the world of ‘subhumans,’ Slavs were going to be enslaved in numbers of tens of millions. And of course the multimillion Jewish population of Eastern Europe was going to be exterminated altogether. That’s what all these folks were doing in the East. It sends a shiver up my spine to think that people want to dress up and play SS on the weekend.”


    The link has pictures and a videoclip.

  16. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    Former Joint Chief: Clinton Admin wanted to repeat Gulf of Tonkin to remove Sadam

    From Marine Corps (that is pronounced “core” Mr. President) Times:

    Let U-2 get shot down? Book says idea broached

    By Bruce Rolfsen – Staff writer
    Posted : Friday Oct 22, 2010 12:14:38 EDT

    One proposal to start a war in Iraq: Let Saddam Hussein shoot down an Air Force U-2.

    Retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Hugh Shelton said he heard that idea in October 1997 from a high-ranking member of the Clinton administration. The revelation is part of Shelton’s new autobiography “Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior,” released on Oct. 12.

    Shelton said he agreed to the idea with one major condition, that the unnamed administration member fly the U-2. Needless to say, the idea was never mentioned again to the general.

    …Shelton went onto say that he was shocked at the disrespect and audacity of the question and told the cabinet member, “Remember, there is one of our great Americans flying that U-2, and you are asking me to intentionally send him or her to their death for an opportunity to kick Saddam. The last time I checked, we don’t operate like that here in America.”


    Want to bet it was someone from the Clinton administration that came up with “Bush lied, people died?”

  17. Papa Louie says:

    US: Cleric Awlaki Lunched at Pentagon
    From October 21, 2010

    “Anwar al-Awlaki, an Al-Qaida leader labeled a dangerous threat by the United States, was invited to a luncheon at the Pentagon in the months after the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. military said Wednesday. …

    At that time, the then-secretary of the U.S. Army was interested in having a “moderate Muslim” speak to a Pentagon audience, said the FBI document.

    Awlaki came under FBI scrutiny after the 9/11 attacks because of his ties to some of the hijackers. But Pentagon officials who approved the lunch invitation were apparently unaware of the FBI’s interest in Awlaki. …

    Awlaki has praised the Fort Hood rampage and said Muslims like Hasan should only serve in the U.S. military if they planned to carry out similar attacks.”


    Why do I always feel uneasy when the government starts an outreach program? Has it ever done any good? Does anyone else find it telling that when the Pentagon went looking for a “moderate Muslim” to speak to them, they could only find Awlaki? Of a supposedly billion peace-loving, moderate Muslims in the world, they just happen to pick the one guy who is now more dangerous than Osama bin Laden. I would be surprised that Awlaki didn’t take the opportunity to finish the job started by his students except that clerics always leave suicide bombings to their useful idiots looking for 72 virgins.

    For the person at the Pentagon responsible for inviting Awlaki, here’s a suggestion for what to name your memoirs: “My Dinner with Anwar”.
    (Of all the lunch counters in all the towns in all the world, he walks into mine…)

« Front Page | To Top
« | »