Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May, 2010

BP Resumes Work to Plug Oil Leak After Facing Setback

(May 27, 2010)

BP officials, who along with government officials created the impression early in the day that the strategy was working, disclosed later that they had stopped pumping the night before when engineers saw that too much of the drilling fluid was escaping along with the oil.—Clifford Krauss and John M. Broder

‘Top kill’ effort stops flow of oil into Gulf of Mexico, Coast Guard admiral says

(May 27, 2010)

Engineers have stopped the flow of oil and gas into the Gulf of Mexico from a gushing BP well, the federal government’s top oil spill commander, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, said Thursday morning.

The “top kill” effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, has pumped enough drilling fluid to block all oil and gas from the well, Allen said.—Jim Tankersley, Los Angeles Times

So which Party Organ has the correct Democrat narrative?  When it’s propaganda, does it really matter?

I.M. Kane

Read Full Post »

“We’ve lost a member of our family but we’re supposed to pay for the damage to her bumper? That’s just wrong.” Katherine Flemming

“Don’t overestimate the decency of the human race.” H. L. Mencken 


 

Family asked to pay for car damage after dog run over

From Breitbart

State Farm Insurance has asked a Canadian family to pay for repairing a bro…

A car insurer has asked a Canadian family to pay for repairing a broken bumper after their dog was struck by the vehicle and died, local media said Thursday.

The traffic accident occurred in March while Jake, a 12-year-old yellow Labrador, was out for his daily stroll around a quiet neighborhood in Aurora, Ontario, north of Toronto.

Kim Flemming had let the dog out when she arrived home from work. Moments later, a man knocked on the door to say a car had run over Jake.

“I got to the road and he was dying,” Flemming told the Toronto Star. “He died in my arms.”

Two months later, the family received a bill in the mail for 1,732.80 Canadian dollars (1,648.95 US) from State Farm Insurance.

The letter said Flemming had been found responsible for damage to the vehicle. “As such, we are looking to you for reimbursement,” it reportedly stated.

State Farm spokesman John Bordignon told the Star: “They could have made sure their dog wasn’t free on the roadway.”

A local bylaw requires pets to be on a leash when off the owner’s property, but the Flemmings said Jake had become accustomed to roaming outside the family’s home.

State Farm was not immediately available for further comment.

“We’ve lost a member of our family but we’re supposed to pay for the damage to her bumper? That’s just wrong,” daughter Katherine Flemming said.

Read Full Post »

“[C]ensus workers … are empowered under federal law to actually demand access to any apartment or any other type of home or room that is rented out, in order to count persons in the abode and for ‘the collection of statistics.’  If the landlord of such apartment or other leased premises refuses to grant the government worker access to your living quarters, whether you are present or not, the landlord can be fined $500.00.

[S]ome census workers apparently are going even further and demanding — and receiving — private cell phone numbers from landlords in order to call tenants and obtain information from them.”—Bob Barr


 

Census workers can enter your apartment in your absence

By Bob Barr

Thousands of census workers, including many temporary employees, are fanning out across America to gather information on the citizenry.  This is a process that takes place not only every decade in order to complete the constitutionally-mandated census; but also as part of the continuing “American Community Survey” conducted by the Census Bureau on a regular basis year in and year out.

What many Americans don’t realize, is that census workers — from the head of the Bureau and the Secretary of Commerce (its parent agency) down to the lowliest and newest Census employee — are empowered under federal law to actually demand access to any apartment or any other type of home or room that is rented out, in order to count persons in the abode and for “the collection of statistics.”  If the landlord of such apartment or other leased premises refuses to grant the government worker access to your living quarters, whether you are present or not, the landlord can be fined $500.00.

That’s right — not only can citizens be fined if they fail to answer the increasingly intrusive questions asked of them by the federal government under the guise of simply counting the number of people in the country; but a landlord must give them access to your apartment whether you’re there or not, in order to gather whatever “statistics” the law permits.

In fact, some census workers apparently are going even further and demanding — and receiving — private cell phone numbers from landlords in order to call tenants and obtain information from them.  Isn’t it great to live in a “free” country?

Read Full Post »

Retired Constitutional lawyer Michael Connelly read the entire proposed House Bill 3200 before Brother O signed it into law. He posted his stunning conclusions on his blog August 12, 2009.

The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. …

Connelly contends that the health care legislation is not intended to provide affordable health but to transfer power to the Executive Branch of government that will effectively destroy major portions of the Constitution of the United States.

Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.—Michael Connelly

I.M. Kane


 

The Truth About the Health Care Bills

By Michael Connelly

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

And another to the Bill of Rights:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Read Full Post »

Sestak’s Lose-Lose Dilemma
By Nancy Matthis at American Daughter

The hint of a White House bribe helped U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak in the Democratic primary for the Pennsylvania US Senate seat. But it will be a liability in the general election.

In an environment of massive anti-incumbent sentiment, it was advantageous to Sestak to differentiate himself from the self-serving Arlen Specter, who had switched parties to gain Obama’s sponsorship in hopes of saving his place in the Senate. One does not reach a high level in the military without being socially and politically prudent, and Sestak rose to the rank of three-star Admiral. He was also street-savvy enough to win two terms in Congress after that. Yet one can understand how he was tempted to let the story of the White House job offer, purportedly made last July, slip during the taping of a mid-February public affairs television show.

U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak … stands behind his contention that the Obama administration offered him a federal job if he would back away from a Democratic primary race against Sen. Arlen Specter.

“Yes, I was offered a job,” Sestak said….

Sestak said top party officials urged him to abandon his Senate bid when Specter joined the Democratic Party….

“Look, I am comfortable that I answered honestly,” Sestak said. “I said I would never agree with the type of deal that was done with Specter, so I would never go for a deal for myself.”

As early as last June, establishment Democrats were lining up against his then unannounced candidacy.

The public mulling of a Senate bid by Sestak – a retired admiral who’s just begun his second term in the House – is giving heartburn to many influential Democrats in Washington and in the Keystone State. Democratic leaders painstakingly worked to recruit Specter, potentially the Democrats’ filibuster-breaking 60th vote in the Senate, under the assumption that the former Republican would be able to coast through his adopted party’s primary on his way to another term.

Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell personified the great disconnect between Democratic incumbents and public sentiment, and proved himself a dismal prognosticator, when he assumed a loss for Sestak last June:

Gov. Ed Rendell (D) offered especially blunt words against a Sestak candidacy, telling MSNBC that “Joe should not run for the Senate in the Democratic primary. He would get killed. … [If] Joe Sestak runs against Arlen Specter, he is out of the Congress after just two short terms. We will lose a terrific Congressman and when he loses to Arlen, he fades into political obscurity.”

Now Sestak has handily won the primary, and the spectre of Specter has instead faded into political obscurity. Within Democratic circles, Sestak is diametrically opposed to the incumbent administration. He was a Hillary Clinton supporter. And there is a more painful fact, one that most political pundits overlook — Obama’s minion Admiral Michael Mullen, currently Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was responsible for ending Sestak’s 31-year naval career.

Sestak’s Navy career ended in a less-than-ideal fashion. In July 2005 – within a week of Adm. Michael Mullen’s swearing-in as chief of naval operations – Sestak was dismissed as deputy chief of naval operations due to a “poor command climate,” according to the Navy Times…. The ouster represented a stunning (albeit temporary) reversal of fortune for Sestak.

In fact, Mullen fired Sestak his first day on the job, so it most likely was a political move, and not based on performance.

So much for the machinations of the Democratic primary. The story of the job offer, potentially a bribe intended to interfere in the electoral process, has taken on a life of its own. The White House denies it, but Sestak is sticking by his story.

Democratic Senate Nominee Sestak Repeats Claim: White House Offered Him Job to Drop Out of Race Against Specter
Friday, May 21, 2010

Rep. Joe Sestak, the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate seat, said again this week that the White House offered him a job to keep him from challenging Sen. Arlen Specter in the Democratic primary.

Darrell Issa, a Republican Congressman from California, wants to find out whether Obama committed an impeachable offense.

Rep. Joe Sestak’s allegation that the White House offered him a job to drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary race against Arlen Specter is a crime that could lead to the impeachment of President Obama, Rep. Darrell Issa said….

Issa, R-Calif., is one of many inside and outside Washington who want the Democratic Senate primary candidate to explain in detail what offer the White House made.

“It’s very clear that allegation is one that everyone from Arlen Spector to Dick Morris has said is in fact a crime, and could be impeachable,” said Issa, who is threatening to file an ethics compliant if Sestak doesn’t provide more details about the alleged job offer.

….Sestak, a former vice admiral in the Navy, first alleged in February that the White House offered him a high-ranking position in the administration last summer if he would sit out the primary against Specter, who won the backing of the White House and state Democratic leaders for switching parties.

If this event happened as described, here is the legal basis for impeachment:

U.S. Constitution Article II, Section 4 – Disqualification – The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

And here is the definition for impeachment:

Impeachment – Impeachment, in the U.S. and Great Britain, proceeding by a legislature for the removal from office of a public official charged with misconduct in office. Impeachment comprises both the act of formulating the accusation and the resulting trial of the charges; it is frequently but erroneously taken to mean only the removal from office of an accused public official. An impeachment trial may result in either an acquittal or in a verdict of guilty. In the latter case the impeached official is removed from office; if the charges warrant such action, the official is also remanded to the proper authorities for trial before a court.

An article in the Washington Examiner details the dilemma facing Sestak in the general election:

During his bid for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania Sestak claimed that he was offered a job in the Administration if he would agree to drop his bid to challenge the incumbent, Arlen Specter.

This is a felony according to the law.

The U.S. Code specifically forbids anyone from seeking to tamper with an election by offering a bribe or anything else of value or substance to a candidate. This is known as ‘quid-pro-quo.’ And it is a serious offense for which a person who is convicted of the crime could spend up to 5 years in prison….

How could the White House claim that nothing inappropriate took place when the very fact that Sestak was engaged in conversations with Administration officials during a hotly contested campaign is a highly suspicious act in and of itself?

Why would the White House even wish to talk to Sestak at all when it had clearly thrown its support to Specter?

Someone in this sordid mess is lying. And there are only 2 choices–Sestak or Robert Gibbs at the White House, who as press secretary must state to the public whatever he is instructed to say by the President and his advisers.

If Sestak is lying and the entire story is bogus, then his chances of beating the Republican in the Fall will drop like a lead balloon. But if he is telling the truth and continues to refuse to name the parties at the White House who offered him this deal, then he is protecting a felon. Either way Sestak loses.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement:

This latest bribery allegation reflects a disturbing pattern by the Obama White House. We still don’t have all the details about involvement of Obama administration officials in the sale of Obama’s former Illinois U.S. Senate seat by Rod Blagojevich. And we still don’t have answers about the charge that Obama Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina offered a federal job to Colorado Democratic Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff to keep him out of the Senate race. There is also the report that President Obama tried to push disgruntled White House Counsel Greg Craig out of the White House by offering a federal judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. And now we have Joe Sestak.

The Chicago Machine has truly come to Washington.

Other than impeachment, other parts of the law might be relevant, according to Judicial Watch:

According to Judicial Watch, the following laws (among others) may have been violated in the Sestak matter: 18 USC 210: Offer to procure appointive public office; 18 USC 211: Acceptance of solicitation to obtain appointive public office; 18 USC 595: Interference by administrative employees by Federal, State or Territorial Governments; and 18 USC 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity.

That legal opinion is reinforced by Jay Sekulow of The American Center for Law & Justice, who said in an interview:

Well, article 2, section 4 of the Constitution is there for a reason. And … this is spinning out of control, as far as the White House is concerned right now. This is getting big coverage and it’s getting big coverage because something’s wrong here. It’s undercutting democracy if, in fact, offers were made to have someone not run.

And it’s not just one or two sections of federal law that’s been violated here. We’ve done an analysis of this. There could be four or even five sections of the federal criminal code that was violated….

These are serious allegations here. …. I understand why Mr. Sestak is trying to not say anything right now because he’s now obtained the nomination and he may want the White House support. But the reality is, somebody’s going to have to speak. And if, in fact, it is established that an offer of employment was made so that he would not run, that is interference with a political campaign, it’s interference with elected office, it’s the promise and solicitation of a job opportunity in order to forego something. That violates … not only the Constitution, it violates federal law….

The opinion by most legal observers seems to be that Obama must have known if a job offer was made, but that someone else in the administration will take the fall for it. We, as ordinary citizens, watch this play out and have to decide who is not telling the truth — a high ranking military officer or a community organizer from Chicago. Hard choice that!

Related:

Michelle MalkinObama responds to Sestak scandal: Just trust me

Dick Morris.comPENN AG TOM CORBETT SHOULD EMPANEL GRAND JURY IN SESTAK AFFAIR

HyscienceJust ‘trust him’

Read Full Post »

Last September the Denver Post broke the story about a Democrat candidate running against a Senate incumbent who was offered a job by the White House as an incentive to drop out of the primary race.

“Not long after news leaked last month that Andrew Romanoff was determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet, Romanoff received an unexpected communication from one of the most powerful men in Washington.

Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration …”—Michael Riley, the Denver Post

Since the story first appeared, the Post has not mentioned it or written any follow-up articles. The only time the scandal has been mentioned since September was in a comment made by a curious reader.

I am shocked, shocked to find that reporting was actually going on there.

I.M. Kane


 

Denver Post Goes Silent on Senate Candidate Job Offer Scandal

By P.J. Gladnick

A Democrat candidate running against a Senate incumbent is offered a job by the White House as an incentive to drop out of the primary race. Sounds like the Joe Sestak scandal in which he alleged that someone in the White House offered him a job in order to drop out of the race against the incumbent senator from Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter. Right? Well, yes. However, this also perfectly describes another similar scandal in which it is alleged that the White House offered a job to Andrew Romanoff (photo) in order to drop out of the primary race for the senate from Colorado against incumbent Michael Bennet. And the amazing thing about this scandal is that the newspaper that broke it has since remained completely silent on any further reporting.

First the scandal details as reported by Michael Riley for the Denver Post in this September 27, 2009 article: 

WASHINGTON — Not long after news leaked last month that Andrew Romanoff was determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet, Romanoff received an unexpected communication from one of the most powerful men in Washington.

Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post.

Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said.

The rest of the story was fairly hard-hitting:

The White House said that no job was ever offered to Romanoff and that it would be wrong to suggest administration officials tried to buy him out of the contest.

“Mr. Romanoff was never offered a position within the administration,” said White House spokesman Adam Abrams.

Yet several top Colorado Democrats described Messina’s outreach to Romanoff to The Post, including the discussion of specific jobs in the administration. They asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

So congratulations to the Denver Post for breaking this story. However just one “little” problem. Since that story was published, the Denver Post has been in complete lockdown mode regarding it. No followup articles. No mention at all of a job offer made by the White House to Romanoff even referenced in other related stories. In fact, the only place could your humble correspondent was able to find a mention of the scandal after the original article in the Denver Post was this comment posted by a reader at an unrelated story written by Vince Carroll:

Hey Vince:

When are you going to drop these fluff stories and write a series on the job offer that Romanoff got from the White House to get out of the race.

This dog and pony Work comp fluff is junior reporter stuff for the wet behind the ears office girl who gets hired for her attributes.

That is unless your editor has put the topic OFF limits.

Good question. Has the Denver Post put the Romanoff White House job offer scandal off limits?

—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.

 

Read Full Post »

            An Addendum to the “Raza Studies” Curriculum

(H-T Dr. L)

Read Full Post »

After four hours of public debate, Manhattan Borough President, Democrat Scott Stringer and 29 members of Community Board 1 voted to dishonor the memory of those who died at the World Trade Center on 9/11 and honor their Muslim murderers by approving a $100 million mosque and community center project near Ground Zero.

Although the board has no legal authority over whether the mosque gets built, its support is important in influencing public opinion.

“What we’re rejecting here is outright bigotry and hatred.”—Scott Stringer

In “Mother Dearest & the Courthouse Cabal,” Wayne Barrett of the Village Voice raised questions about how Stringer’s parents had benefited financially from his political ties, and whether some of his campaign contributors were involved in ethical improprieties.

“I think they need to establish a place such as this for people of goodwill from mainline Christian, Jewish and Muslim faiths so we can come together to talk.”Kevin Madigan, priest at St. Peter’s Catholic Church

Feel free to contact St. Peters Church Office at:

22 Barclay St, New York, NY 10007

(212) 233-8355

Community Board staff are available to provide information to the public.  Please feel free to contact the Community Board at:

49-51 Chambers Street, Suite 715

New York, NY 10007

Tel. (212) 442-5050

Fax. (212) 442-5055

man01@cb.nyc.gov

Too many quivering Americans allow the Democrat Party’s Politically Correct madness to blow unabated.

I.M. Kane


 

NYers wage jihad vs. WTC mosque

By Tom Topousis and Joe Mollica

Angry relatives of 9/11 victims last night clashed with supporters of a planned mosque near Ground Zero at a raucous community-board hearing in Manhattan.

After four hours of public debate, members of Community Board 1 finally voted 29-1 in support of the project. Nine members abstained, arguing that they wanted to table the issue and vote at a later date.

The board has no official say over whether the estimated $100 million mosque and community center gets built. But the panel’s support, or lack of it, is considered important in influencing public opinion.

Holding up photos of loved ones killed in the Twin Towers and carrying signs such as, “Honor 3,000, 9/11 — No mosque!” opponents of the proposed Cordoba House on Park Place called the plan an insult to the terror-attack victims.

“That is a burial ground,” said retired FDNY Deputy Chief Al Santora, referring to the fact that victims’ remains were scattered for blocks.

Santora’s 23-year-old son, Christopher, was the youngest firefighter to die that day.

“I do have a problem with having a mosque on top of the site where [terrorists] can gloat about what they did,” said Santora, with his wife, Maureen, by his side.

About 150 people attended the emotional Greenwich Street meeting, were some shouted down others as they took their turns.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the head of the Cordoba Institute, which is in charge of the project, insisted that the site would help “bridge the great divide” between Muslims and the rest of America.

“We are Americans, we are Muslim Americans,” Rauf said. “Many of us were born in the United States. We have no higher aspirations than to bring up our children in peace and harmony in this country.”

But the crowd got ugly when he added, “Freedom of assembly is the right of all Americans.”

Amid boos, one woman shouted, “Not at the World Trade Center!”

Rauf’s wife, Daisy Khan, followed him to the microphone to pitched the planned community facility as “much needed party space and much needed venue space” for the area.

She was roundly booed.

Some audience members preached tolerance for the Muslim leaders.

Before the meeting, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, a supporter of the mosque, stood in front of the site and said, “What we’re rejecting here is outright bigotry and hatred.”

Catholic priest Kevin Madigan, of St. Peter’s Church, which is about a block away, agreed.

“I think they need to establish a place such as this for people of goodwill from mainline Christian, Jewish and Muslim faiths so we can come together to talk,” Madigan said.

Read Full Post »

Two more Census workers blow the whistle

By John Crudele

Naomi Cohn, told The Post that she was hired and fired a number of times by Census. Each time she was hired back, it seems, Census was able to report the creation of a new job to the Labor Department.

Each month Census gives Labor a figure on the number of workers it has hired. That figure goes into the closely followed monthly employment report Labor provides. For the past two months the hiring by Census has made up a good portion of the new jobs.

Labor doesn’t check the Census hiring figure or whether the jobs are actually new or recycled. It considers a new job to have been created if someone is hired to work at least one hour a month.—John Crudele

Read the entire NY Post story at http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/two_more_census_workers_blow_the_OqY80N3DBTvL17VmxKKR0O


 

Obama administration backs Vatican in pedophile case

From Breitbart

The Obama administration in a brief to the Supreme Court has backed the Vatican’s claim of immunity from lawsuits arising from cases of sexual abuse by priests in the United States.

The Supreme Court [six Catholic justices … Um ...yeah ...?] is considering an appeal by the Vatican of an appellate court ruling that lifted its immunity in the case of an alleged pedophile priest from Oregon.

In recent months, large-scale pedophilia scandals have rocked the Roman Catholic Church in a number of countries, including Austria, Ireland, Pope Benedict XVI’s native Germany and the United States.

Read the entire Breitbart story at http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.48ccbdeaaf685b4c112dc4554a808ca0.961&show_article=1


 

Arizona Ethnic Studies Exposed

By Cliff Kincaid

It turns out that the [Brazilian Marxist Paulo] Freire book is required reading in “Raza Studies” or Mexican-American courses in the high schools in Tucson, Arizona, where students have been protesting Arizona’s new immigration law. Other required books are Occupied America by Rodolfo Acuña, a professor emeritus of Chicano studies at California State University in Northridge (CSUN), and Prison Notebooks by Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Communist.

“We are fed up. We are going to move to do away with the injustice to the Chicano and if the ‘gringo’ doesn’t get out of our way, we will stampede over him.”—Jose Angel Gutierrez, Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO)

“Gutierrez attacked the gringo establishment angrily at a press conference and called upon Chicanos to ‘Kill the gringo,’ which meant to end white control over Mexicans.”

One activist said the concern began when parents came to be aware of violence in the schools directed against white and black children. “This investigation was undertaken to find the roots of this hate,” she told me. Another person, in turn, “told me the books in their Mexican-American classes are kept under ‘lock and key’ and the kids can’t even take them home. She said she asked to see them but they were very secretive about them and she was prohibited.”

Read the entire Kincaid story at http://www.academia.org/arizona-ethnic-studies-exposed/


 

Labrador wins Idaho primary upset

By Josh Kraushaar

State Rep. Raul Labrador won an upset victory in Idaho’s 1st District Republican primary Tuesday, defeating military veteran Vaughn Ward, the preferred candidate of the Washington GOP establishment.

Ward’s defeat also came despite his high-profile support from former Alaska Gov. [Sellout] Sarah Palin, who did more to assist Ward than almost any other House candidate. Last Friday, she headlined a rally and fundraiser for Ward and her parents and in-laws were supporters of Ward’s campaign.

Labrador will face freshman Rep. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho), who ran unopposed in the Democratic primary, in the general election.

With Minnick and Labrador—who won the backing of a local group called Tea Party Boise—on the ballot, the general election will feature an unusual dynamic: No matter who wins the GOP nomination Tuesday, both a Democrat and a Republican with significant tea party backing will square off come November.

Read the entire Kraushaar story at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37790.html


 

FBI Files: CBS’s Walter Cronkite Aided Vietnam Protestors in 1960s

By Kyle Drennen

Yahoo! News reporter John Cook revealed FBI documents that detail allegations that former CBS Evening News anchor Walter Cronkite offered CBS News resources to transport fierce Vietnam critic and Democratic Maine Senator Edmund Muskie to a Florida anti-war rally in November of 1969.

[T]he FBI files describe how “Cronkite encouraged students at Rollins College in Winter Park, Fla., to invite Maine Sen. Edmund Muskie to address a protest they were planning….Cronkite told the group’s leader that Muskie would be nearby for a fundraiser on the day of the protest, and said that ‘CBS would rent [a] helicopter to take Muskie to and from site of rally.’”

“[S]uch tight collaboration between a news organization and the anti-war movement — particularly the offer of CBS News resources to help ferry a sitting senator and future presidential candidate around in opposition to the war — was highly unusual and would presumably have been explosive if known widely at the time.”—John Cook

Cronkite … has long been held up as a media hero, touted as the model of objectivity and the “most trusted man in America.” … Chris Matthews invited on ex-CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather on Hardball to mark Cronkite’s passing. Rather praised his predecessor as a “beacon” of “straight news.”

Read the entire Drennen story at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2010/05/14/fbi-files-cbss-walter-cronkite-aided-vietnam-protestors-1960s


Read Full Post »

“Taking a temporary break from offshore drilling is an important step, but it’s not enough. We need to stop new offshore drilling for good, now. And then we need an aggressive plan to wean America from dirty fossil fuels in the next two decades.”—Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club

[T]his catastrophe will do to deep water oil exploration what Chernobyl did to nuclear energy. I expect new offshore drilling to cease for years, perhaps even decades. That sets up a future of greater dependence on Arab oil imports and higher energy prices.—John Myers

For additional information on the alleged cover up in the Gulf, see RUSSIANS REPORT NORTH KOREAN MINI-SUB TORPEDOES GULF RIG and OIL RIG SABOTAGE, ATTACK OR JUST AN ACCIDENT? for a compendium of articles (H-T Arlen Terrell).

I.M. Kane


 

A Crude Coincidence—The Gulf Oil Spill Works Out Well For The Greens

By John Myers

“The end justifies the means.” —Machiavelli

Fact: Deep water oil platforms don’t just blow up. As the centerpieces of projects that cost billions of dollars, they are designed not to.

Fact: Just before 10 a.m. on April 20 a Transocean rig called the Deepwater Horizon 40 miles south of Venice, La., exploded and caught fire as it was working a well for BP.

Fact: Two weeks later as much as 300,000 barrels of crude oil have spread into the Gulf of Mexico, the bulk of it hitting the shores of Louisiana. More than 2 million barrels could spill out before the well is finally capped making this disaster worse than the Exxon Valdez catastrophe which spilled 400,000 barrels of oil into Alaska’s Prince William Sound in 1989.

Fact: This giant gulf oil spill happened less than three weeks after President Barack Obama announced he would allow offshore drilling.

Fact: Few in the mainstream media or in the federal government are putting a spotlight on to what caused the explosion that killed 11 men. Rather, their focus has been on what it will do to the environment.

Fact: The Greens have all the ammunition they need to permanently suspend future offshore oil production as well as drilling in environmentally sensitive areas, such as the oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

On April 30 Obama suspended plans to expand offshore oil drilling. That same day, during the PBS talk show, The McLaughlin Group, Eleanor Clift made this prediction: “The catastrophic oil spill in the gulf will silence Sarah Palin’s, ‘Drill, Baby, Drill.’”

That’s the aim of the Greens. Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, said on Saturday: “Taking a temporary break from offshore drilling is an important step, but it’s not enough. We need to stop new offshore drilling for good, now. And then we need an aggressive plan to wean America from dirty fossil fuels in the next two decades.”

What My Deep Throat Says About This Deep Disaster

While I have been around plenty of oil rigs in my life I am hardly an expert. But I have friends who are. One of them is Ryan who is an oil field technician for one of the original Seven Sisters here in Calgary. I met with him last Friday to talk about the Transocean accident and what might have triggered the explosion.

“It probably comes down to one of two things,” said Ryan. “The blowout preventer failed to operate and seal the well. With the computers they have on deep ocean wells that shouldn’t happen; there is always the possibility of human error.” He looked around the room and then confided: “And of course it could be sabotage.”

The blowout preventer is a set of valves that connects the pipe from underground to the surface and it is used to control excessive pressure that might go further up the line. Valves can burst from either high-pressure oil, or oil mixed with gas which travels to the surface unexpectedly. That can start a catastrophic fire if sparked by the electrical gear on the platform. It should be noted that oil services contractor Halliburton is denying that its workers might have caused the accident.

It has already been alleged that Halliburton improperly cemented the well. Cementing is a process used to fill the gap between the drilled hole and the casing that brings oil and gas up out of the ground.

There has been speculation on whether the sealing process had been completed before the blast occurred. Yet the company insists that its workers had finished the cementing operation 20 hours before the rig went up in flames.

Perhaps It Was Just A Coincidence

The Wall Street Journal wrote on Friday: “Concerns about the cementing process—and about whether rigs have enough safeguards to prevent blowouts—raise questions about whether the industry can safely drill in deep water and whether regulators are up to the task of monitoring them.” To its credit, the WSJ is one of the few to report on the question of what caused the explosion.

While the Exxon Valdez accident immediately focused on the cause of the spill and the role that ship’s captain Joseph Jeffrey Hazelwood played, there is so far scant information and inquiry into what triggered the explosion on board the Deepwater Horizon.

The Greens were furious with Obama for allowing offshore drilling. It may be a happenstance that the Deepwater Horizon blew up three weeks later. But given the history of the Green movement I think it is worth considering that environmental extremists could have had a hand in this accident.

I had been thinking along these lines this past Friday when I got an email from my editor asking if I thought something was fishy and would I like to write about it.

I said yes, even though I was a bit apprehensive that you folks might consider me a reactionary or even a nut. And while I am not a big listener of Rush Limbaugh, I was encouraged when I read he was thinking along the same lines.

“Obviously the regime (the Obama Administration) is open to the idea that this is not an accident,” said Limbaugh. “The original Earth Day 40 years ago was inspired by the river in Cleveland catching fire. Forty years later, the day before Earth Day this year, the gulf is on fire. Coincidence? The jury is still out.”

Love him or loathe him, what Limbaugh says is backed up by the actions of the White House which sent Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to the site. Napolitano has declared this is “an incident of national significance.” Then on Sunday Obama visited the Gulf Coast to bolster efforts to control the spill.

The Dark Side Of The Greens

Of course I don’t know that eco-terrorists sparked this catastrophe. But I do know you don’t call a cop unless you think there might have been a crime. And some extremists in the Green movement are most certainly criminals.

The Federal government considers eco-terrorism a greater threat to America than Osama bin Laden and his organization al Qaida. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): “Eco-terrorism is the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally oriented, sub-national group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature.”

Guilty or not I have no doubt that the extremists in the environmental movement must be celebrating the Gulf Coast crisis. A recent poll by the WSJ asked: “Have your views on offshore drilling changed after the oil spill off the Louisiana coast?” The response by its conservative readership was a resounding, yes.

We may never know what caused the explosion that sunk the Deepwater Horizon. What we do know is that 11 men lost their lives and there is going to be untold suffering to the wildlife and on the people of America’s Gulf Coast. We can also expect this catastrophe will do to deep water oil exploration what Chernobyl did to nuclear energy. I expect new offshore drilling to cease for years, perhaps even decades. That sets up a future of greater dependence on Arab oil imports and higher energy prices.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.