Friday, April 30, 2010

Arizona Is Doing The Job The Federal Government Does Not Want...nor has the guts to do!

Things are getting real bad out there may want to load up with your 2nd Amendment fuel.  One of my biggest gripes about all this news over the recent Arizona law concerning illegal immigraration is lines like this:
"U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the federal government may challenge the law..."  The federal government has no right* to challenge the state of Arizona, especially when the federal government is negligent in enforcing it's own laws.  Arizona has every right to protect it's borders and it's citizens from illegal invaders irregardless of the shade of their skin or the language they speak.  I don't care where the invaders come from, whether it be Switzerland, Norway, Ethiopia, or Bermuda, since when did Mexico get some special privilege to cross into our country simply because they're next door and need only to climb a fence or swim a river.  Why not let all those people who may have to swim an ocean to get here free passage on some get-me-more-voters ocean liner (see below).  Arizona is doing the job the federal government does not want nor have the intestinal foritude to do.  Meanwhile, I'm with Fred on this one... ~ Norman E. Hooben

* See Mack/Printz vs The United States decision of the United States Supreme Court.  Just in case you want to know, that was really about Sheriff Richard Mack vs William Jefferson Clinton when Clinton tried ram the Brady Bill down our throats.  Clinton lost big time but you would never know it from the mainstream media.  The decision goes on to say that the federal government could not commandeer state and county officers for federal bidding.  It further stated that the States (capital S) were not subject to Federal direction.

Check out Texas Fred here:

"Here we go again, some of those dumber than a bag of dog crap bleeding hearts crying about due process ..."

Ariz. officer sues over immigration law
April 30th, 2010 . by TexasFred
Ariz. officer sues over immigration law
PHOENIXAnger mounted Thursday over an Arizona law cracking down on illegal immigration as a police officer filed one of the first lawsuits challenging the law and activists gathered outside an Arizona Diamondbacks game at Wrigley Field in Chicago, chanting “Boycott Arizona.” Read his complaint here.Ariz. officer sues over immigration law
The lawsuit from 15-year Tucson police veteran Martin Escobar is one of two filed Thursday, less than a week after Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed the law that’s sparked fears it will lead to racial profiling despite the governor’s vow that officers will be properly trained.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the federal government may challenge the law, which requires local and state law enforcement to question people about their immigration status if there’s reason to suspect they’re in the country illegally, and makes it a state crime to be in the United States illegally.
Escobar, an overnight patrol officer in a heavily Latino area of Tucson, argues there’s no way for officers to confirm people’s immigration status without impeding investigations, and that the new law violates numerous constitutional rights.
Full Story Here: Ariz. officer sues over immigration law
Officer Escobar? Surely there’s no ethnic loyalty here? Is there? Surely he’s not against this law because he himself is a Hispanic? Of course not, what a silly supposition on my part! Surely he’s not against this law because he believes it could cause problems for some of his friends or his family? No…
What am I thinking? An Hispanic officer files suit against a law that HE feels is unfair in its written intent, a law that only mirrors the laws that our federal government won’t enforce, a law that he feels, through his vast knowledge of constitutional law is unconstitutional, and there’s no ethnic influence involved in his thinking? Yeah, that sounds about right…
The National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders also filed a lawsuit Thursday, and is seeking an injunction preventing authorities from enforcing the law. The group argues federal law pre-empts state regulation of national borders, and that Arizona’s law violates due process rights by letting police detain suspected illegal immigrants before they’re convicted.
Here we go again, some of those dumber than a bag of dog crap bleeding hearts crying about due process and detention before conviction. What is Aztlan, Raza, and MEChA
Let me ask those bleeding hearts this ONE question: Do you need a conviction to know that the guy that just broke into your home is an INVADER? And that guy is there to do YOU and YOUR family harm? Do you need a court of law to make that decision for you?
I have heard people say that they would NOT defend their homes. I have heard it said that they would give the invaders anything they wanted just to placate them in hopes of no bodily harm happening to themselves or their family.
That’s exactly what this National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders is saying. Turn the other cheek. Let the INVADERS have what they want, maybe then they’ll just move on to a new target and leave us alone.
That’s NOT what’s going to happen. Read the declarations of La Raza and Aztlan, you’ll learn everything you ever wanted to know about RACISM and violence against anyone that is NOT a Hispanic.
Look at what the Hispanic drug cartels are doing to each other in Mexico, and to any Hispanic, or any other ethnicity for that matter, that happens to be caught in the line of fire. That my friends is exactly what is going to happen right here in the USA if we don’t stop this INVASION, enforce the laws of this land, and deport ALL illegals, Hispanic or otherwise.
“Mexican-Americans are not going to take this lying down,” singer Linda Ronstadt, a Tucson native, said at a state Capitol news conference on another lawsuit planned by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the National Immigration Law Center.
Linda Ronstadt? I didn’t know she was still alive. :?
Well Linda, let me say this, when you drop the Mexican from American, you may have some credibility, but as it stands right now, you’re just another supporter of illegals and that makes you an accessory TO their illegal actions! The hyphenated American thing is costing you. They, and YOU Linda, are either American, or you are not!
And Linda, so you know, I don’t want illegals to take this lying down. I want them to take it standing up on both feet as they tote their illegal asses to the nearest border and LEAVE our home!
At least three Arizona cities – Phoenix, Flagstaff and Tucson – are considering legal action to block the law. In Flagstaff, police are investigating a threatening e-mail sent to members of the city council over their opposition to the law. The author said council members should be “arrested, tried in court, found guilty of treason and hanged from the nearest tree!”
The hypocrisy of these supporters of illegals would almost be funny if they weren’t such loons and moonbats. These people are sick! They actually are capable of these violent acts! They have nothing but disdain for the law of the land and it’s enforcement. They are obviously pretty stupid too. Arrested for TREASON?
Pay attention moonbats:
Treason – noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one’s government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or to one’s state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
Enforcement of the laws of the USA, writing laws FOR the USA, laws that are supported by at least 70% of the LEGAL, voting citizens of this nation is NOT an act of treason. It is justice in motion. It is the celebration of American law and the will of We, The People going forward as we try to stop the ILLEGALS that have invaded, and continue to invade our home!
I sincerely hope it doesn’t come to this, but if it’s WAR the illegals and their supporters want, then WAR it can be. A sovereign nation has every right to repel invaders. These illegals are nothing but invaders. Violent, disease carrying invaders!
Maybe it’s time that We, The People got a lot more involved in the protection of our home! Maybe it’s time for Martin Escobar to turn in his badge and find another line of work.
I hear that activists and community organizers make good money and have brilliant futures.

Obama "...cannot be trusted " - Who else do you think we're talking about?

"The bottom line is that so far absolutely no positive proof has been provided that establishes that Barack Obama was born on American soil."


New investigation into Obama background spells trouble ahead

A brand new, in-depth investigation into the background of Barack Obama may spell big trouble ahead regarding the issue of Presidential eligibility.
The investigation was conducted by Northeast Intelligence Network--a team of experienced, professional private investigators whose services have been utilized by Fortune-500 companies.  The director, Douglas J. Hagmann, is a 23-year veteran in high-level investigations and is a member of the International Counter-Terrorism Officers Association.
Hagmann's investigation into the background and Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States is extensive and thorough.  His conclusions are stunning.
(AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall).
For example, neither of Obama's parents were citizens of the United States at the time of his birth.  Therefore, Obama would have to have been born on U.S. soil in order to qualify as a 'natural born citizen' according to the qualifications specified in the Constitution.
But Hagmann's investigation reveals that, contrary to the notion of those who point to a short-form birth certificate in Hawaii, and 2 birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers, neither of these factors proves anything at all about Obama's status or citizenship:
the Certification of Live Birth is consistently cited by individuals, the media and others to prove the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA.  Nonetheless, even an authenticated and genuine Certification of Live Birth is legally insufficient for the purpose of proving eligibility, as it merely represents that OBAMA’s birth record is on file in the state of Hawaii. It falls short of providing the information necessary to determine constitutional eligibility in at least two areas: it does not offer any information regarding who supplied the information, nor does it confirm the authenticity of the information provided. Again, it merely indicates that the information is “on file.”
In other words, the 'certification of live birth' as touted by Obama apologists and the mainstream media as 'proof' Obama meets the eligibility requirements of the Constitution actually proves nothing.
In addition, Hagmann disputes the notion that birth announcements in local Hawaiian newspapers provide proof:
Many who argue that Barack Hussein OBAMA II was born in Hawaii not only point to the COLB as direct evidence of eligibility, but they also point to two separate birth announcements that appear in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin in 1961. Those doing so either fail to understand the legal definition of a natural born citizen as it applies to the eligibility factor, or are guilty of intentionally misdirecting the core issue. A birth announcement is simply that – a public announcement that a baby was born. The birth announcements do not provide any information about the child’s citizenship, cannot be authenticated, and hold no weight of evidence to support either side of the eligibility argument.
However, the key information in Hagmann's report that casts doubts upon Obama's eligibility is the fact that the very organizations that published the short-form certificate of live birth and the 2 birth announcements in newspapers have direct connections with Barack Obama.
The DailyKos is the primary suspect and the first entity to publish 'proof' of a birth certificate.  The DailyKos is an ultra-Leftwing hate-group that not only is 'in the tank' for Obama but smears and seeks to destroy those who oppose extremist, Leftwing initiatives in politics. 
'Fight the Smears,' which also pointed to these 2 erroneous pieces of 'evidence,' is owned by 'Organizing for America,' which was originally named 'Obama for America.'   This speaks for itself.
And finally, there is the much-hallowed ''--supposedly an independent, non-partisan clearinghouse that separates truth from fiction in the media and on the Internet.  Hagmann's investigation reveals that Factcheck is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, which receives its primary funding from the Annenberg Foundation.
Barack Obama was a founding member, chairman, and past President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was also funded by the Annenberg Foundation.  Thus, the supposed 'neutrality' of can safely be called into question.
The bottom line is that so far absolutely no positive proof has been provided that establishes that Barack Obama was born on American soil.
Why is this important?  An individual who would spend millions of dollars hiding his background and pertinent documents from the public, and who would make false statements about about his history, cannot be trusted to tell the American people the truth about what his policy initiatives are intended to do regarding the 'fundamental change' of America.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Co-Ed Submarines... Who would have thought?


Navy moves to put women on submarines
Associated Press   

In an Aug. 22, 2004 photo provided by the US Navy, General Dynamics test engineers rest in modified berthing facilities in the Torpedo Room aboard the pre-commissioned nuclear submarine Virginia during sea trials in the Atlantic ocean. The Navy is considering allowing women to serve aboard submarines for the first time, 16 years after bringing female sailors onto surface combat ships. (AP Photo/ US Navy, Petty Officer 1st class James Pinsky)
Associated Press Writers
ST. MARYS, Ga. (AP) — Submariners sleep nine to a bunk room. There are four showers and seven toilets for the roughly 140 enlisted men. The passageways on board the vessel are so narrow that crew members can barely squeeze by each other without touching.  And that’s on the roomiest submarines.
The Navy is considering allowing women to serve aboard submarines for the first time, 16 years after bringing female sailors onto surface combat ships.
Some sailors and wives warn that putting men and women together in extremely close quarters underwater for weeks at a time is just asking for sexual harassment cases and wrecked marriages. But supporters of the idea say it is a matter of fairness and equal opportunity, and what worked on ships can work in subs.
“There’s just a whole lot less privacy on board a submarine,” said retired Navy Capt. Mike McKinnon, commanding officer of the Kings Bay sub base near St. Marys from 2004-07 and a former skipper of the submarine USS Kentucky. “But I think grown adults and professionally minded people can deal with those issues.”
Over the past two weeks, top leaders at the Pentagon have said they are considering ending another in the dwindling number of military specialties reserved for men only. Officials said a decision could come soon, and women could be aboard subs by 2011.
The Navy will have to work through a host of issues first. Would men and women get separate bathrooms and sleeping quarters, as is already done aboard surface ships? Would the process of integrating subs begin with female officers, followed by enlisted women? What would happen if a woman discovered at sea that she was pregnant?
“If women can be on space shuttles and on surface ships, I think they ought to be able to work on submarines,” said Lisa Goins, who retired in February after a 20-year Navy career. She served aboard aircraft carriers and at the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Kings Bay is the East Coast base for the Navy’s Ohio-class submarines, which are armed with Trident nuclear missiles and go on 77-day tours of duty underwater. The 18 Ohio-class subs would probably be the first to take on women since they are the largest in the undersea fleet, 200 feet longer than the Navy’s fast-attack submarines.
Still, at 560 feet, Ohio-class subs are a tight fit for their 160-man crews. Sailors sleep in cramped bunk rooms roughly the size of walk-in closets. The 140 enlisted men share two bathrooms. (The officers have separate facilities.)
The passageways and hatches are so narrow that those aboard are always rubbing up against each other — a situation played for laughs in the 1959 Cary Grant comedy “Operation Petticoat,” in which a World War II sub rescues a group of stranded Army nurses.
The Associated Press sought permission to interview sailors at Kings Bay about the potential policy shift, but after a week, the Navy had yet to give its approval. Sailors contacted outside the base would not comment.
On blogs and online networking sites, wives of submariners have warned that the close contact could lead to sexual temptation and other complications.
“I completely believe this would put strain on some relationships because there are trust issues,” said Jennifer Simmons, whose husband serves on a submarine at Kings Bay. “It’s asking for sexual harassment cases left and right. If you’re trying to go through a passageway together, guess what — you’re going to touch.”
The Navy bans “fraternization” between unmarried men and women. Punishment can range from a letter in the offender’s file to a court-martial. Navy officials said they had no immediate figures on reports of fraternization aboard its ships.
The rule change that allowed women to serve on combat ships was pronounced a success by the Navy long ago. But it was not all smooth sailing.
In the mid-1990s, the aircraft carrier Eisenhower was nicknamed “The Love Boat” after 15 women became pregnant and a man videotaped himself having sex with a woman. However, the Navy said 12 of the women who conceived did so before boarding the ship, and the three others got pregnant during shore leave.
Officials said the paperwork for changing the policy on submarines is being drawn up and could be finished by the end of the month or early November, after which it would be sent up the chain of command and then to Defense Secretary Robert Gates for his approval. If Congress wants to block the move, it must pass legislation.
Key military leaders have already said they favor changing the policy that has allowed women on all surface ships since 1993 but still bans them from submarines. Women are allowed to serve on subs in a few countries, including Australia, Canada, Norway, Spain and Sweden.
McKinnon, the former base commander, said he suspects unhappy spouses would be the biggest obstacle to a change in policy. He acknowledged that sailors serving undersea together for weeks without surfacing form close bonds.
“I think there’s this concern that if you have women out there, they’re going to develop feelings for each other and have bad things happen,” McKinnon said. “I think that’s a natural thought. But the surface Navy’s come through it.”
He added: “You work with women in the workplace. You should be able to work with them on submarines.”

The Latest... From Pundit & Pundette

Navy submarines to go coed

What could go wrong?
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military's ban on women serving on submarines passed quietly into history Thursday.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates notified lawmakers in mid-February that the Navy would be lifting the ban, unless Congress took some action against it. And Navy spokesman Lt. Justin Cole said Thursday that the deadline for Congress to act passed at midnight.
The Navy plans a press conference later Thursday to talk about the new policy.
"There are extremely capable women in the Navy who have the talent and desire to succeed in the submarine force," Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said hours after the congressional deadline passed. "Enabling them to serve in the submarine community is best for the submarine force and our Navy.
I don't doubt their capabilities. But there are other factors to be considered. Like a few women among 130 or so men, confined in a very small space, for months at a time:

In general, the idea of converting submarines to accommodate coed crews has raised two primary concerns. Chief among them is privacy. Submarine crews of 130 to 140 men share the space equivalent to that of a medium-sized home, with few bathrooms and showers and little or no privacy. To sleep, men slip into racks that are stacked three or four high. They change clothes next to their beds, and they sometimes "hotbunk" or share their racks with others on alternating shifts.
Call me old-fashioned but this strikes me as a recipe for trouble. Debbie Schlussel agrees:

Women on subs will be a huge headache. It’s only just starting. Periods and pregnancies do not belong on Navy submarines. How many women on subs will get pregnant? And who will end up paying the tab for sending them home? You will. Social experiments in the military are always a disaster. And the U.S. taxpayer is always the loser.
Sadly, in this case, so is national security. You can’t run an effective Navy operation with women having to be flown home. That’s gonna happen. Good luck with it.
And since women will be vastly outnumbered, conflicts may arise among the men in competition for their attentions. Bad for morale.

See also: Chinese Built only takes a fifth grade education but guess who's building yours?
____________________Bonus video:

Mr. Obama, will you please explain this to TellerIP

TellerIP is a name certain cowards give themselves when they don't want to make their real identities known. This particular no-name coward has made several comments on this website that are in support of Obama's Marxist philosphy. For those of us in the know, Obama uses Alinskyite rhetoric to appease his followers that any thinking human being recognises as lies and propaganda. Of course who ever said that any follower of Obama knows how to think...rationally that is! I use to think that Bill and Hillary Clinton were the experts in deciet but along comes Obama and now the whole world is turned upside down...right is wrong, left is right, no is yes, no tax means more tax, and the list goes on. Can we really wait until 2012 to get rid of these people? ~ Norman E. Hooben

The following from:

Obama: At a certain point you've made enough money! Video

Straight from Obama's Marxist, fire-breathing, racist mouth, he strays off-teleprompter, and we hear it from him - he who made $5.5 million in 2009, there comes a time when we've made enough money. See video below.

From the video:
[OBAMA] We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.
"The core responsibilities" - like sharing our wealth? Like he told Joe the Plumber, to help "the guy behind us?" Americans do not have a responsibility to grow the economy. When we take care of our business, the economy grows. The responsibility to ourselves and our families, our church and the other private and charitable outreaches we choose to make - those are our responsibilities.

Obama is so steeped in collectivism, that he doesn't have a clue how this country works, or the fight he will face as we take this country back from him.

Hear great commentary from The Great One, Mark Levin in the video below.
Obama: You've made enough money! (video)
Others talking: 
 Hot Air
 The Lonely Conservative

That's Why We Had To Pass The Bill...too find out what's in it...and now we know (pretty scary)

This is scary...

Related news... Video: Peter Orszag explains how ObamaCare will ration healthcare

A Change Of Pace ...not all tales are of doom and gloom, meet Einstein.


Meet the world's smallest horse

When Einstein was born he tipped the scales at a mere 6 pounds and measured just 14 inches tall. And while these stats might sound ho-hum for a baby of the human variety, they tell a very different story for a baby horse.
Einstein is a pint-sized pinto colt born last Friday in New Hampshire, and this living "My Little Pony" is making a giant splash in world news.
"We've been at this for 20 years and I've never seen one this small," Judy Smith, owner of Tiz A Miniature Horse Farm in Barnstead, New Hampshire, told the Boston Herald. The average miniature horse foal stands 21 inches tall at birth and weighs 18 pounds.
Although he has yet to be certified as the smallest horse on the planet (the world's record currently belongs to Thumbelina, a chestnut mare born in 2001 near St. Louis who weighed 8.5 pounds and stood 11 inches at birth), Einstein has become an instant Internet star:

Breeders say that unlike the record-holder, Thumbelina, Einstein shows no signs of dwarfism. He's just a super tiny horse.

Lessons Of My Father...and some!

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

The Country Is Going's a couple of reasons why

Wikipedia Distributing Child Porn, Co-Founder Tells FBI
By Jana Winter  -

The parent company of Wikipedia is knowingly distributing child pornography, the co-founder of the online encyclopedia says, and he's imploring the FBI to investigate.

Updated at 4 p.m. ET, April 28.

The parent company of Wikipedia is knowingly distributing child pornography, the co-founder of the online encyclopedia says, and he's imploring the FBI to investigate.
 Larry Sanger, who left Wikipedia in 2002, said Wikimedia Commons, the parent company of Wiki products including Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikinews and Wikiquote, is rife with renderings of children performing sexual acts.
Sanger sent a letter to the FBI earlier this month outlining his concerns and identifying two specific Wikimedia Commons categories he believes violate federal obscenity law. 
The first category, entitled “Pedophilia,” contains 25-30 explicit and detailed drawings of children performing sexual acts.  The category was created three years ago. 

The second, “Lolicon,” provides cartoons similar in detail and depiction. One of the more egregious cartoons shows a rendering of a young child about to perform oral sex on a much older man.  ...Read more here.

Calif County Trims Toys To Cut Fat (Ya don't eat the freakin' toy!  You idiots!)

Un-Happy Meal? Calif county trims toys to cut fat
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A county in California's Silicon Valley has decided to ban restaurants from giving away toys and other freebies with high-calorie meals.
The ordinance, passed 3-2 Tuesday by Santa Clara County supervisors, is aimed at curbing childhood obesity. Opponents call it another example of too much government meddling in family affairs.
The ban covers unincorporated areas of the county — which means only about a dozen fast-food chains and several family-owned restaurants.
A restaurant would face fines up to $1,000 if it violates the ban.
Supervisors will conduct a final vote May 11. If it passes then, the ordinance would take effect 90 days later.

Then we got a whole bunch of foreigners telling us what to do... We got foreigner #1 in the White House and then we got those members of a clan, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, et al that don't act like any Americans I once knew.  Can we deport them all at once?  I know a nice country that will take's called HELL!

When Things Go Wrong In The No Spin, that is the spin zone!

What do General Motors and Barack Obama have in common? ...I think we all know the answer!

"The fact that they’re both controlled by unions and the fact that they both lie ..."

What do General Motors and Barack Obama have in common?  The fact that they’re both controlled by unions and the fact that they both lie about how taxpayer money is and will be used.
A few days ago, GM was beating its chest, proclaiming that the company is selling lots of cars and implying that such sales are the reason GM was able to repay a multi-billion dollar government loan several years early.
However, the truth appears to be that GM simply took money from TARP escrow funds to pay down the other government loan, keeping its hands deep in the taxpayers’ pockets.
It’s also worth noting that GM has an outstanding note (debt) to the United Auto Workers union at a higher interest rate than the government loan.  What responsible business pays down their low-interest debt first?  Perhaps a business that knows it’s sucking the blood from taxpayers and wants to keep paying the union 9% when the union knows it would be all but impossible to earn 9% anywhere else.  (I’m not saying that 9% is an unreasonable rate for a loan that risky, by the way.  I am saying that to the extent GM actually has free cash flow to pay down debt, they should pay down the high-interest rate debt first.)
GM realizes that its biggest shareholder is the government, namely Barack Obama and not the people of the United States.  Thererfore, they know they’ll have support to burn taxpayer dollars in order to enrich the UAW and they know that they’ll have Democrats behind them when they lie about it.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Obama Compares Self to Reagan, How's He Doing?

This is got to be the biggest joke in the history of mankind! There's no comparison at all !!!

Source: Chicago Ray

Obama Compares Self to Reagan, How's He Doing?

Not even close

Monday, April 26, 2010

A Torch With No Flame...I call it the beginning of the end

The following video should be shown in every classroom throughout the land...but it won't! Every child should be taught from whence we came...but they won't!  Every American is less than one generation away from losing all of their freedoms  ...and that, they will! (unless they wake up and arrest the Obama, Pelosi, Reid clan) ~ Norman E. Hooben

The Next Generation The Constitution and The Second Amendment: Charlton Heston A Torch with No Flame

This is an outstanding video looking at how the Second Amendment and the Constitution are viewed by coming generations - the keepers of the flame.

Charlton Heston: A Torch with No Flame (video)

H/T to David Lemon, Master of Bronze.

We Don't Need A Climate Bill ...Mother Nature Knows Best

Climate bill placed on hold over Senate dispute

WASHINGTON – Long-awaited climate change legislation was put on hold by its authors Saturday when a dispute over immigration politics and Senate priorities threatened to unravel a bipartisan effort that took months of work.
Voicing regrets, Sen. John Kerry said Saturday he is postponing the much anticipated unveiling of comprehensive energy and climate change legislation scheduled for Monday. The Massachusetts Democrat made his announcement after a key partner in drafting the bill, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, threatened to withhold support if Senate Democratic leaders push ahead first with an immigration bill.
Graham is angry that Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is considering that. Legislation to overhaul immigration laws and grant legal status to millions of long term immigrants unlawfully in the country could create problems for Republicans in the midterm elections. It's a top priority for Hispanic voters — and most Republicans are opposed. Reid's idea amounts to a "cynical political ploy," Graham asserted.
Kerry tried to assure environmentalists and other backers of the climate bill that the delay will be short. The legislation aims to cut emissions of pollution-causing greenhouse gases 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. It also likely will expand domestic production of oil, natural gas and nuclear power.
The bill would apply different carbon controls to different sectors of the economy, without a broad cap-and-trade approach.
"We all believe that this year is our best and perhaps last chance for Congress to pass a comprehensive approach," Kerry said in a statement. "Regrettably, external issues have arisen that force us to postpone only temporarily."
Kerry, Graham and Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman have spent more than six months working on the bill they had hoped to unveil Monday. White House energy adviser Carol Browner praised the three senators, reiterating that the Obama administration wants the energy and climate bill done this year.
Environmental groups said they were disappointed with the delay and they would push Democrats to follow through on their pledge to pass legislation.
Graham's threat to back away from the coalition came Saturday in a letter to groups that have supported his efforts on the climate bill.
He said putting immigration at the top of the legislative priority list would derail efforts to find common ground on climate change, a difficult issue involving critically important economic priorities. And he warned that Republican lawmakers would not take kindly to being put on the spot with Hispanics. Many in the Republican Party's political base are adamantly opposed to 'amnesty' for illegal immigrants.
"Moving forward on immigration — in this hurried, panicked manner — is nothing more than a cynical political ploy," Graham said. "Let's be clear, a phony, political effort on immigration today accomplishes nothing but making it exponentially more difficult to address in a serious, comprehensive manner in the future."
Praising Graham's work on the climate legislation, Kerry said the Republican "helped to build an unprecedented coalition of stakeholders from the environmental community and the industry who have been prepared to stand together behind a proposal."
Kerry said he deeply regrets that Graham "feels immigration politics have gotten in the way and for now prevent him from being engaged in the way he intended."
Lieberman also praised Graham's work, and said he's disappointed that "allegations of partisan politics will prevent us from introducing the bill on Monday as planned."
Pushing immigration ahead of climate legislation risks angering environmentalists, who see this as their best chance in recent years to pass a bill addressing global warming. But Reid told fellow Democrats this week he wants to pursue legislation that would offer legal status to many unlawful immigrants before tackling climate change.
Hispanics voted heavily Democratic in 2008, and they've been disappointed with President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats for not following up on campaign promises to reform immigration laws. Reid is up for re-election this year and trailing in polls in Nevada, where Latinos are an important constituency. With Democrats facing a tough political climate in the midterm elections, energized Hispanic voters could make a difference in several states.
In a statement Saturday that was both conciliatory and noncommittal, Reid said he is committed to passing both immigration and energy this year.
"Immigration and energy reform are equally vital to our economic and national security and have been ignored for far too long," he said.
Both measures will require bipartisan support, Reid said, "and energy could be next if it's ready." Comprehensive immigration reform requires significant committee work that has not yet begun, he noted.
Reid said he appreciates Graham's work on both issues, but added: "I will not allow him to play one issue off of another, and neither will the American people. They expect us to do both, and they will not accept the notion that trying to act on one is an excuse for not acting on the other."
A spokesman said Reid would continue to consult with Kerry on building bipartisan support for a climate bill.
The House last year narrowly passed a bill creating a system to cap emissions blamed for global warming, but has not acted on immigration. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has long said the Senate must vote before the House on an immigration bill.

Armed man arrested at NC airport as Obama departs ...but why?

This headline story from the Associated Press compliments of One News Now is very alarming.  I don't want to start off by saying, "To the best of my knowledge..." concerning individual rights under the 2nd Amendment.  It is the knowledge of the United States Constitution that citizens have the right to bear arms! The are no exceptions!  It does not say you cannot bear arms because so and so is in the vicinity.  Even if that so and so is the so-called President of the United States.  Who gave the so-called authorities the power to arrest this individual?  What law was broken?
We don't have to continue with more questions for the facts presented in this story exhibit a police action indicative of a police state where the police made up their own law and arrested an innocent person. Now if it turns out that the person was a legitimate threat then that does not legitimize the arrest for simply being armed.  ...I do have one more question, "What do you do with cops who invent their own laws?" IMHO, imprisonment for no less than ten years with no chance of parole! ~ Norman E. Hooben

Armed man arrested at NC airport as Obama departs
 4/26/2010 2:45:26 AM

An Ohio man has been charged after authorities spotted him with a gun in a North Carolina airport parking lot as Air Force One was departing Sunday afternoon.

Joseph McVey, 23, is charged with going armed in terror of the public, a misdemeanor, said Asheville Regional Airport Police Capt. Kevan Smith. Airport police saw McVey get out of a car about 2 p.m. in the rental car return lot and he had a gun, Smith said. He was taken into custody immediately and was being held at the Buncombe County jail.

Security was heightened at the airport because President Barack Obama was leaving after vacationing in the state, headed to the memorial service for the 29 West Virginia coal miners killed in an explosion. The suspect was nowhere near the president's plane and was in a public area.
 Obama also visited 91-year-old evangelist Billy Graham's home after spending the weekend in Asheville.

McVey's car had strobe lights like a police car might, but the suspect is not in law enforcement, said Smith.

The investigation into what McVey was doing with a gun and why his car was equipped with strobe lights is continuing, Smith said. Local police were in charge of the investigation. The Secret Service had no comment on the arrest, deferring to airport police.

A jail officer did not have a hometown listed for McVey and said it didn't appear McVey had an attorney. His bond was set at $100,000.

Related news... ( From World Net Daily )

Why legal guns still cause arrests

'I am not quite sure what hysteria is about people carrying anything'

Posted: April 24, 2010 By Michael Carl © 2010 WorldNetDaily

James Goldberg of Glastonbury, Conn., recently was arrested for carrying a firearm at his neighborhood Chili's restaurant, and his release because his actions were legal has sparked a major debate over the Second Amendment.
But the legislative director for the Massachusetts Gun Owners Action League, Jim Wallace, contends the case is evidence of the successful work of gun opponents in demonizing the hardware itself, using fear to crack down on a legal activity.
"I am not quite sure what the hysteria is about people carrying anything," Wallace said.
"If police officers carry openly, is the general public scared? They shouldn't be. Nor should they be scared if their fellow citizens are doing the same thing. The problem is the irrational stigma, probably created by the media, about guns themselves," Wallace said.
"What the gun opponents are fostering is a basic mistrust of their fellow citizens," Wallace said. "I've asked students at forums what they don't trust about the person next to them. They usually answer, 'I trust him, he's my friend.'
"Then I usually say, 'So what's the problem?' If you trust him, there shouldn't be a problem," Wallace said.

Goldberg was released because under the provisions of the Connecticut firearms-permit law, he was carrying legally.
Connecticut is one of 13 states that allow open carry with restrictions. According to The Free Library, others are Utah, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Tennessee, Mississippi, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.
States that offer open carry without licenses or restrictions are Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, South Dakota, Vermont, Kentucky and Virginia.
While all states have their own variations of rules and regulations, Second Amendment advocates say the Goldberg case is a worrisome indicator.
Connecticut Citizens Defense League President Scott Wilson said that while the Chili's employees may have been well-intentioned, the greater issue was ignorance of the law.

Listen to an interview with Wilson:

"There is a perceived notion that if someone outside the law in Connecticut is carrying a firearm, concealed or otherwise, then someone is probably engaging in some type of illegal act," Wilson said.
"Never mind what the employees thought. The police themselves are unaware of the law. On many occasions, talking with retired or active-duty state police officers in Connecticut, they very simply don't know the law," Wilson said.
"And in some cases, even after I've pointed it out to them, they throw out, 'Well, we will charge you with breach of peace.' So it's not just the employees of Chili's. Police officers, Connecticut state troopers, and a lot of NRA instructors who teach the safety course here in Connecticut don't know the law," Wilson said.
Listen to an interview with Wallace:

Wallace said he looks at it as a picture of the whole nation.
"The problem is a nationwide perception of people with guns," he said.
Wilson cited the immediate reaction following the Goldberg case: lawmakers in the Connecticut Legislature proposed a plan to take away the open-carry provisions.
While it wasn't successful, Wilson said the reaction was alarming. "The Connecticut Constitution, Article 1, Section 15, says clearly, 'Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state,'" Wilson said. "Plain and simple, Connecticut is an open-carry state provided the person has a Connecticut permit to carry pistols and revolvers."
Democratic State Rep. Stephen Dargan said bills were introduced to "plug the hole" in the law, but they didn't go anywhere, and he believes there is a better way to deal with it.
"The best solution is to inform the public about the citizen's right to carry firearms. That will be a lot better than trying to pass a lot of unnecessary laws. Let's inform the people about what the Second Amendment means and that Connecticut understands that people have a right to keep and bear arms," Dargan said.
Goldberg's incident at the Chili's is not isolated. Even though most states now allow carry permits, a number of citizens have been arrested and charged for gun-law violations.
The San Jose Mercury News reports police arrested Sherman Fontano for carrying an unloaded .357 revolver. Fontano said California law allows for the open carry of an unloaded firearm.
In March, the Starbucks coffee-shop chain created a furor by agreeing to allow people with legally issued handgun permits to carry their guns into the shops, following a case in Seattle in which people carried firearms into the store.
States' rules regarding carrying weapons vary widely, with 16 states having procedures to issue permits. Currently Illinois and Wisconsin are the only two U.S. states that do not issue permits for either concealed or open carry of firearms.


Sunday, April 25, 2010

Health-Care Costs Skyrocket...when are you going to get the picture?

News You Can smart when it comes to brain food

All you seafood lovers out there (and in here, as in 'me') be advised that the same food that may make you smart may also make you dead! ~ Norman E. Hooben

First this: From the University of California

Is Fish Really Brain Food?

Some of Grandma's health advice (wet feet cause colds, for instance) has not panned out. Some has stood the test of time (such as the idea that roughage—that is, fiber—is good for you). Fish as brain food may also get the nod from scientists. It has already gotten the nod for its cardiovascular benefits. There's now evidence that eating fish can play a positive role in mental health. Read more here, but not before watching this: how's that for a fair warning? Do you feel smarter now?

The American People Are Witnessing The Greatest Lie

There's another video below...and if that doesn't wake you up, roll over and die!

The following quote has been posted at this site on several fitting it is to re-post it here fits in so well with the above video:

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies in the heart of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear. The traitor is the plague..." Marcus Tullius Cicero, speech to the Roman Senate.

Not only is the traitor the plague, he is a Muslim that embraces what you will see in the next video...and this is not good for America. Between what you have seen in the above video and the truth that you see below should cause alarms to go off is for reasons depicted here that Obama has to go before his term is up or America is finished! I hope these videos wacks some sense into what is left of America... Do we have the patriotic spirit of 1776?

Time to ban Islam as a religion...for it is not!

Bonus video...