If Tesla Were Here Would He Be Laughing or Crying?

I only ask because someone named a car after him and the damn thing is a piece of junk. I had the heater/AC question in my head as soon as I heard the first reports. You need electric power for more than just rolling forward. You need windshield wipers, if it works in the rain, which remains to be seen BTW. You need headlights after dark. You absolutely need heat in the winter and A/C in the summer. In the internal combustion technology, all those functions are powered by an alternator, which is turned by the internal combustion engine, producing current, which powers your accessories and neccessities.

So why, if these guys are so smart with this electric car, did someone not think to hook up a small generator to the power train of the car? The car starts rolling, the generator starts generating, you have relays and modulators to control what goes where and how much, and you could even rig it to charge its own batteries as it was rolling. Its a perpetual motion machine.

Someone Is Doing Their Research

The site this essay comes from is one I've just discovered, thanks to Twitter. Fluke's appearance at that faux Congressional hearing was a set-up from the start. Discover the Networks did the homework for us and revealed her for the Democratic operative we all knew her to be. What is revealed in this article, however, is the background on her boyfriend Cutie Pants' parents. We knew they were well-heeled dhimmi donors, but they're much more than that. They are screaming Marxists in the same category as Bill Ayers' parents.

Let me update you on a Tweet Cutie Pants sent: "Rush Limbaugh just called my girlfriend a slut and a prostitute on his show. She's finally made the big time."

Update #2: Sandra Fluke’s Boyfriend, Adam “Cutie Pants” Mutterperl, And His Radical Socialist Family

Recently, it was reported that Sandra Fluke is connected to none other than 1%’er, William (Bill) Mutterperl, through her boyfriend. However, it wasn’t reported who her boyfriend is. Everyone, meet Sandra’s boyfriend, wannabe producer, and amateur stand-up comic, Adam “Cutie Pants” Mutterperl, in this video audition he submitted to a “reality” show:

(you'll have to make the jump to see the vid. I aint posting that trash here)

Cutie pants? This guy is the epitome of what everyone thought Sandra Fluke’s boyfriend would be. Maybe Adam could produce a biopic titled, “Beta Males and the Progressive Chicks Who Dig Them”. Anyway, here are some pictures of Sandra and Adam frolicking in typical ghetto places like Spain and Italy:

(again, you make the jump)

The caption that Adam added to one of the Barcelona pics, “Pretty drunk”. Is this the part where I’m supposed to pay for your condoms, Adam? You know, because traveling between L.A., D.C., and New York, and vacationing in Barcelona, Italy, etc., is pretty darned expensive. I get it. Did you piss off your uber-wealthy parents to get cut off from your trust fund? You and Sandra must need some government subsidies. Idea: mock hearing. Brilliant!

Anyway, on to Adam’s “typical Democrat family”. The term BIll O’Reilly used to describe Bill Mutterperl is “Democratic stalwart”. However, as soon as I heard his name in a story about Sandra Fluke, I almost choked, due to my sudden epiphany. Why? Because anyone familiar with Boston and New York political history knows about the wealthy Mutterperl family’s long tradition of supporting the traditional Jewish variant of socialism. Bill Mutterperl’s family are much more than Democratic stalwarts.

So go read the entire article, hang around, read the one about The Federalist, The Eunuchorn and War. I think you'll enjoy it. I know I did.

Sign The Petition To Keep The Truth Flowing

The White House web site has a petition to remove Rush Limbaugh from the programming schedule on Armed Forces Radio Network.

Pat Dollard has posted a link to sign a petition to keep Rush Limbaugh on the schedule for Armed Forces Radio Network.

GO!!!! SIGN!!!!! NOW!!!!

It's Still Too Soon To Lower Prices At The Pump

Transcript from Rush Limbaugh today:

Obama (Dear Leader) has just announced that the United States and Britain are going to release oil from their Strategic Reserves. I didn't even know that Cameron was up for reelection. I did not know that he was up for reelection. That's why Obama's doing this. This is going to have absolutely no impact whatsoever. It is a purely political move from the guy who says, "We can't drill. We can't drill fast enough, can't drill soon enough." What does that mean? If we can't drill what it means is putting more oil on the market isn't gonna matter anything. Besides, if we drill we can't put any oil on the market for two-to-three years so we're going to deplete the Strategic Oil Reserve

The purpose of the Strategic Oil Reserve is to provide the nation an emergency capacity. We don't have an emergency, other than Obama's reelection is in trouble. That's the emergency! There is no shortage of oil. The emergency is the price of gasoline going up and the toll that is taking on Obama's approval numbers. That's the emergency. And even something that's set aside for national security -- and that's what the Strategic Oil Reserve is for.

We don't have an emergency. There is not a shortage. We are exporting gasoline. Do you know that, folks? We are a net exporter now of gasoline. As you go to the pump and you see the price rise, we have a net-exporting-of-gasoline position now. Part of this is due to refining capacity around the world and a number of other things. There's not an oil shortage. There's not a crisis. This is simply a flailing attempt to try to get the price down. If you're gonna do this, do this in October, not now. Folks, I'm gonna tell you something. Doing this now, releasing oil from our Strategic Reserve is a sign, I think, of pure panic. I think the truth of the matter is the left is in a state of panic.

They're peeing in their collective pants. Its not panic, its TERROR at the thought that Dear Leader will go down in history as the worst President evah!!! It's too late to worry about that.

Well Written and Right On Point

Time to dial up the rhetoric

The right should be commended for responding vigorously to the baseless accusations that the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, and conservatives in general inspired Jared Loughner to go on a shooting rampage that left six people dead and fourteen wounded. Yet the fact that this defense of conservatives had to occur at all is beyond disturbing.

There were two critical points that immediately sprang to my mind when I saw the left predictably blame the right for Loughner’s murderous rampage. I know that Rush Limbaugh has touched on these points and others may have as well. However, I want to offer my own take and explain why these points are so critical, and why it should be clear now that the differences between the left and right are irreconcilable.

The first critical point is that this is the latest example of a string of incidents over the past two years or so where someone who committed national-level violence (and who can more closely be identified with the left than the right) was said to be a conservative—or influenced by conservatives—and thus “proof” that conservatives are dangerous. Similar accusation were made about Joe Stack, John Patrick Bedell, James Von Brunn, Michael Enright, and Clay Duke.

The second critical point follows on the heels of the first. If the response to Loughner’s bloodbath is the kind of two-minute hate that the left drums up against the right when a leftist goes on a murderous rampage, what is going to happen once someone who truly can be identified with the right actually does do something violent that captures national attention? The answer is that the left will set in motion the process of complete criminalization of any opposition to the left.

Read more:

Hello My Name is Bob and I'm a Killer

Shamelessly re-posted, with minor edits, from AmericanThinker.

On the morning of January 8, 2011, I intentionally entered a gathering held by Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and shot her at near-point-blank range. I injured fourteen others, killing six -- among them a beautiful, curious, doe-eyed, nine-year-old girl. I didn't actually pull the trigger, but I'm as guilty as the psychopath who did.

Here are just a few of the charges against me:

I am a conservative.

On occasion, I listen to Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox News.

I've been known to pick up a book or two by conservative authors: Thomas Sowell, Andrew McCarthy, or the Founding Fathers, for example!

I believe that the federal government is too large, far too intrusive, and dangerously powerful.

I believe in personal responsibility and the amazing generosity of Americans to aid those in need rather than permanent entitlements.

I believe that the private, not the public, sector is the backbone of our economy.

I believe that our progressive tax system is punitive. We are over-taxed, over-regulated, and over-lectured.

I believe in the power of the free market to correct itself, without government (taxpayer) intervention.

I believe that the Constitution is intended to limit government and empower the individual.

I believe in holding our elected officials' feet to the fire, be they Republican or Democrat (incendiary pun intended).

I believe that our sovereignty is at risk via unsecured borders, out-of-control spending, our crippling deficit, reckless abuses of the Constitution, and the moral decay of Washington.

In short, I'm a madman. Guilty as charged, and armed with the belief in my 1st-Amendment right to peaceably question those we elect to serve.

The only person who actually pulled the trigger on that terrible, fateful day was Jared Loughner -- by every account, a deeply troubled young man. But the real guilty walk among us: senior citizens in red, white, and blue, armed with signs saying "Taxed Enough Already"; flag-wavers clinging to guns and religion; doctors; the wealthy; business owners; talk radio; and any citizen -- particularly a conservative -- who dares exercise his or her right to free speech.

We're called greedy, stupid, and racist. We're ridiculed with snide "slurpee" innuendos and called lewd and malicious names, such as "teabaggers." Ordinary citizens are maligned by their own government while the pious, liberal elite get a free pass on reason and truth, while Islamists invoke their religious cloak, while the ideologue professes his moral superiority, while the media uses the power of spin, and while leftists, including Robert Gibbs and Barack Obama, employ their bully pulpit.

We defend conservatism by our very way of life: as self-reliant, taxpaying, moral citizens, and as faithful defenders of limited government and the power of the individual. We are violent inciters only insomuch as we threaten the current leftist, agenda-driven stranglehold on government. So alarming is our threat that the real inciters wasted no time in politicizing the tragic deaths of six innocent citizens, not to mention one revered congresswoman still fighting for her life. And they will waste no time in shamelessly exploiting a "crisis" at the hand of a lone psychopath to further enact gun control and squelch freedom of speech under cries of "civility."

Does the left really believe that the "rhetoric" of Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox is incendiary? Do they fail to understand that the language of conservative "talk" is the echo of ordinary citizens calling for limited government and individual freedoms? Or do they silence us because we know our current leaders don't actually believe in their own limited power? Truth be told, even Jared Loughner undermines their agenda. And they know it. They know that their "transformation" of America is failing and that people like me are not afraid to say so.

My name is [Bob], and I'm a killer. They are determined to stop me before I kill again.

Conservatism As A Crime?

Watchdog: Left Exploiting Arizona Rampage to ‘Criminalize’ Conservatives
Monday, 10 Jan 2011 07:54 PM
By David A. Patten and Kathleen Walter

The left’s systematic ridicule of Sarah Palin and other conservatives following the Arizona shooting rampage reflects a deliberate campaign to “ultimately criminalize” conservative thought in America, according to media watchdog L. Brent Bozell.

Bozell’s comments in an exclusive Newsmax.TV interview came as 22-year-old Jared Loughner appeared in federal court in Phoenix on Monday on charges of trying to assassinate U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz. The shooting spree Saturday at a Safeway supermarket north of Tucson left six dead and 13 wounded. The judge ordered that Loughner be held without bail.

Bozell, founder and president of the conservative watchdog group Media Research Center, isn’t alone in his concern about the media coverage of the rampage.

Such efforts to blame the Tucson massacre on conservatives reflect a broader agenda, Bozell said.

“This is a part of a campaign to delegitimize, and ultimately criminalize, conservative thought in this country,” Bozell said. “Note how quickly The New York Times came out with an editorial calling for the Fairness Doctrine as a result of this.

“I mean, anything to pin to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin or the tea party . . . anybody on the conservative side, to delegitimize them, that’s what they’re going to do. That’s the tactics of the far left.”

Palin’s antagonists are focusing on a Facebook post nine months ago that listed a number of Democrats the GOP hoped to defeat following the vote on healthcare reform. It used what some say appeared to be a cross hairs symbol to designate vulnerable districts, including Giffords.' Giffords later cautioned in a cable TV appearance that heated political rhetoric such as that could have serious consequences.

But evidence emerged Monday that Loughner’s fixation on Giffords may have predated both the rise of the tea parties and Palin’s emergence on the national political scene in 2008 as Sen. John McCain’s vice-presidential running mate.

Read more: Watchdog: Left Exploiting Rampage to ‘Criminalize’ Conservatives

Meet Michael Copps, He Wants To Regulate Your Speech

Meet the FCC commissioner who wants to control the news

By Mike Riggs - The Daily Caller Published: 12:53 AM 12/08/2010 Updated: 6:58 AM 12/08/2010

In 1949, the Federal Communications Commission created a rule requiring broadcasters to cover issues that the government deemed important, and to do so in a way that the government found “honest, equitable and balanced.” If a broadcaster did not agree to abide by this rule, the FCC reserved the right to revoke the station’s broadcasting license. This rule was called the Fairness Doctrine. The FCC abandoned it in 1987. FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, a socially conservative Democrat appointed to the FCC in 2001, would like to bring it back.

Copps has a long history of advocating for government control of media, dating to the beginning of his tenure. But it wasn’t until last week, after Copps spoke to the BBC and an audience at Columbia University, that Congress decided to look into the commissioner’s philosophy against private media companies.

“We are going to be pretty close to denying our citizens the essential news and information that they need to have in order to make intelligent decisions about the future direction of their country,” Copps told the BBC. Media outlets are not “producing the body of news and information that democracy needs to conduct its civic dialogue.”
[Emphasis added]

Copps went on to criticize his Republican colleagues at the FCC, who he claims, “eviscerated just about every public interest responsibility that generations of reformers had fought for and won in radio and TV.” In other words, the FCC folded the Fairness Doctrine in the 80s when it should have been cooking up legal justification for applying it more widely.

Republican Rep. Joe Barton got wind of Copps’ remarks and sent him a letter in which he asked if Copps meant “to suggest that it is the job of the federal government, through the Federal Communications Commission, to determine the content that is available for Americans to consume.” While Copps has not publicly answered Barton’s query, it’s no secret what he’d say: Hell yes

Read more:

Its Only Hate Speech When They Don't Agree

One person's information is another person's hate speech. This is ridiculous to the point of lunacy. This is why we need to let everyone say what they want, where they want, no matter how much we may dislike the message. Besides, the more they talk, the easier it is to identify the idiots, fruitcakes, nutjobs and those who would limit our ability to spread the information.

Of course, they can't/won't point to specific instances of "hate speech" because it only exists in their tiny little minds.


Liberal Groups Want FCC to Police Talk Radio, Cable News
By: Jim Meyers

A coalition of more than 30 mostly liberal organizations has sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to monitor “hate speech” on talk radio and cable news networks.

The groups assert in the letter that “hate, extremism and misinformation have been on the rise . . . as the media has focused on Arizona’s passage of one of the harshest pieces of anti-Latino legislation in this country’s history.”

The organizations include the Center for Media Justice, the Rainbow Push Coalition, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Association of Latino Independent Producers, and Common Cause.

“As traditional media have become less diverse and less competitive, they have also grown less responsible and less responsive to the communities that they are supposed to serve,” the letter states.“In this same atmosphere hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable television programs masquerading as ‘news.’”

The coalition did not mention any specific media outlets.The groups also argue that the Internet has made it more difficult for the public to separate “the facts from bigotry masquerading as news,” The Hill newspaper reports.

The Internet “gives the illusion that news sources have increased, but in fact there are fewer journalists employed now than ever before,” according to the coalition.

“Moreover, on the Internet, speakers can hide in the cloak of anonymity, emboldened to say things that they may not say in the public eye.

“For these reasons, as the Commission deliberates how the public interest will be served in the digital age, it should consider the extent of hate speech in media, and its effects.”

The Hammer On Rush On the Oil Rig

The Alternative, Non-Truther Reading of Rush's Oil-Rig Rant

BY Mary Katharine Ham

Several bloggers are calling Rush Limbaugh the equivalent of a 9/11 Truther for alleging on his radio show that the oil-rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico was an inside job perhaps perpetrated by the Obama administration. I didn't listen to the show, so I don't have the full context, but judging from the transcript of the segment, there's pretty clearly a different, more reasonable conclusion one can draw from it.

It's Occam's Razor time.

Ezra Klein and Kevin Drum say Limbaugh is accusing the Obama administration of blowing up the rig based on this paragraph. James Joyner is more circumspect, but comes to a similar conclusion:

RUSH: "I want to get back to the timing of the blowing up, the explosion out there in the Gulf of Mexico of this oil rig. Since they're sending SWAT teams down there now this changes the whole perspective of this. Now, lest we forget, ladies and gentlemen, the carbon tax bill, cap and trade that was scheduled to be announced on Earth Day. I remember that. And then it was postponed for a couple of days later after Earth Day, and then of course immigration has now moved in front of it. But this bill, the cap-and-trade bill, was strongly criticized by hardcore environmentalist wackos because it supposedly allowed more offshore drilling and nuclear plants, nuclear plant investment. So, since they're sending SWAT teams down there, folks, since they're sending SWAT teams to inspect the other rigs, what better way to head off more oil drilling, nuclear plants, than by blowing up a rig? I'm just noting the timing here. "

The last sentence does sound suspect—frankly, it's hard to tell what exactly he means in that paragraph alone—but the paragraph before it makes a lot more sense and colors the one above. The full segment transcript is here:

RUSH: "Wow. All right, so SWAT teams, we're sending big sis down there, Janet Napolitano, to look at all the valves and stuff, make sure they're properly greased. He-he-he-he. Ahem. And Lisa Jackson is doing the same thing. So obviously the regime is open to the idea that this is not an accident. The regime is open to the possibility that this could well have been on purpose. Don't forget, 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? Jury's still out. The regime is on the case, soon to tell us what happened."

In this paragraph, Limbaugh is not saying SWAT teams are proof that the Obama administration is blowing things up, but proof that the Obama administration thinks there's a possibility that the explosion could have been eco-terrorism, and is guarding against it on other rigs. This is not a totally outlandish thought, as the FBI deemed eco-terrorism the nation's biggest domestic threat as recently as 2008.

Glenn Reynolds expressed the same fear of foul play, albeit much less colorfully. Another report linked by Glenn suggests "swat team" might just be the way the Interior Department is referring to its inspector squad, which would invalidate Limbaugh's theory, but that wasn't at all clear at the time he was on air.

When Limbaugh goes on to talk about timing, in the paragraph cited by Drum and Klein, my read is he's talking about the fact that an oil-rig explosion happened the day before the 40th anniversary of Earth Day and just weeks after the Obama administration announced it was open to more offshore drilling—a move that would have undoubtedly incensed the kind of people who perpetrate eco-terrorism.

He mentions in the segment that Al Gore encouraged civil disobedience, which he seems to posit eco-terrorists could have taken to heart. He also mentions strongly worded press releases from environmentalist groups like Sierra Club. (Maybe Rush is moving toward the "words matter" camp?)

I have a story here from Reuters, September 24th, 2008 (shuffling paper) right here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers: "Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon."

So you got the guru here urging civil disobedience, you got the regime sending SWAT teams down there to all the rigs in the Gulf. They're sending SWAT teams to all the rigs in the Gulf! Whoa ho-ho-ho. So obviously Obama thinks the tea partiers are expert scuba divers as well or maybe they have their own fleet of underwater submarines that can go deep enough to go undetected, set explosives, and hightail it back to the protests in Ohio, or wherever they (laughing) happen to be.

The second paragraph is a joke about how SWAT teams were seemingly called out at an Obama event to defend against a group of peaceful Tea Party protesters. (They were actually just police in riot gear, and were likely there just to protect against the worst-case scenario at an Obama event, but the video juxtaposition was funny.)

Here, Rush seems to be sarcastically analogizing what the left sometimes describes as tantamount to a domestic terrorism movement (Tea Party) and what he believes may be a more immediate domestic terrorism threat (ecoterrorism).

I'm not sure why Limbaugh didn't just say eco-terrorism, and that leaves it up to interpretation, but there is a much more innocuous reading of this passage than, "Obama blew up an oil rig on purpose."

If Limbaugh were saying Obama is using SWAT teams to blow up an oil rig to foil future off-shore drilling, why would he also say SWAT teams are proof that Obama's "open to the possibility that this could well have been on purpose?" Limbaugh either thinks Obama sent SWAT teams to defend/investigate or to destroy, but he doesn't believe both. The former is more likely.

Worth The Re-post

Open letter written by Lou Pritchett, VP of Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble.

Barack Hussein Obama You Scare Me

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail..

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do. You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaugh's, Hannitys, O'Reillys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

The Chronicle - Mark Alexander

Dezinformatsia

Stirring the melting pot: "Now to the growing national backlash against the state of Arizona over its tough new immigration law that says police can stop people just on the suspicion they might be there illegally." --NBC's Brian Williams

"It's now gone beyond protest to threats of a boycott, as Arizona becomes a laughing stock to some." --NBC's Andrea Mitchell

"Critics are having a field day with this, Sheriff Arpaio, as you know. Some are calling for a business boycott of the state of Arizona. The Homeland Security Secretary, used to be the governor of Arizona, says she doesn't like this, this bill. Editorial cartoons are making fun of it. Here's one where a guy goes up to a fast food counter and orders nachos and is immediately surrounded by police for probable cause. Are you worried that it affects the image of your state?" --NBC's Matt Lauer to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio

"Let me talk about the politics of this. It's forcing the president to address immigration policy. It's forcing Republicans and Democrats to wrangle with it. But what really is driving voters and emotion right now are jobs and the economy. Is this a bad issue politically at this time?" --MSNBC's Contessa Brewer

"Law Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant." --MSNBC on-screen caption -- begging the question, "What part of 'illegal' doesn't MSNBC understand?"

Blame Rush Limbaugh: "I think it is fair [for Bill Clinton to blame Rush Limbaugh and other talk hosts for inciting violence]. There is a climate of violence on the right. Liberals are demonized in the most personal way. I mean, you know, Rush comes out and has this wonderful op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal at the end of the week and saying, you know, 'conservatives are protesting because we love our country,' and unfortunately the rhetoric of the right has all too often been they love their country and we on the left do not. We are traitors, we are un-American, we are unpatriotic. Obama is weakening our national defense on purpose." --Salon's Joan Walsh

Goldman-Sachs Only Did What They Had To Do

I have my own opinions on this situation, and they all involve a straw man, a red herring, and the extremists on the left, hell bent on destroying this country by destroying our ability to direct our own financial decisions.

Rush Breaks Down the Democrat Party's Goldman Sachs Inquisition
Congress screwed up the market by forcing banks to make subprime loans to people who couldn't pay them back. Goldman isn't pure, but they wanted to survive. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen)

"I'm not convinced that Goldman isn't in on this. They'll pay a $500 million or $400 million fine in exchange for a couple of billion in profit down the road. Goldman will take the hit, Republicans get tied to them, Democrats win in November (or don't lose as bad) and all is well." -Rush

The Regime, Class Warfare and the Destruction of American Capitalism
The greatest country on earth is being systematically dismantled right in front of our eyes, and the Republicans are getting blamed for it. It's absurd. (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen)

Channeling Emails

State-Run Media Wrongly Reports Rush Moving if Obamacare Passes: These propagandists just make up their own stories.

Land Grab By the Federal Government?: Government is staging a full-fledged control assault on this country and, as much as I wish this weren't true, we are the ones left to fight it.

It's Simply Delightful to Witness the Democrat Party's Implosion: It's Simply Delightful to Witness the Democrat Party's Implosion

Pelosi's Office Knew of Massa Concerns: New details about the involvement of the House speaker's office will likely fuel questions about when the leadership learned of the allegations.

Prediction: Moment of Frustration Will Expose Our Young President: Obama is a big mistake and America is realizing it

Prayers Up For MahaRushie

Having gone through it and having the bat crap scared out of me, I can empathize. I'm glad he wasn't as stubborn as I was.

NY-23 Not A Third-Party Race

Why NY-23 is Not a Third-Party Race
This is a special election. There was no GOP primary. Third parties are sure losers, but this is different:

Hoffman is the true Republican in the race and he's leading.

(Rush 24/7 Members: Listen)
» Gallup: Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group
» Real Clear Politics: NY-23 Poll: Hoffman +5
» PoliticsDaily: Gingrich Takes Heat from Right

DC Protest Warrior: From Rush...To Good Not To Share

From Rush...To Good Not To Share

“Perhaps you and I have lived with this miracle too long to be properly appreciative. Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance, it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it, have never known it again.”
Ronald Reagan

A Warrior Got His Orders

I first met Ted Sampley at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in 2005. He arrived with a contingent of veterans from Rolling Thunder. The experience was unforgettable.

In 2005, code pink and SEIU thugs were demonstrating their contempt and hatred of our military and wounded soldiers by lining the sidewalk in front of the Main Gate on Friday nights with flag-draped coffins and holding signs with slogans such as " Your son was maimed for a lie" "Sign-up here to die for Halliburton".

Ted detested the anti-war/anti-military crowd with a passion only a Viet Nam veteran could understand completely. But he was particularly disgusted with code pink.

We hit it off immediately.

He confronted moonbat protesters on their turf and he scared them. (Hell, he scared me, sometimes.) He made our favorite moonbat, nicknamed Squeegee Boy, cry and run to the code pink hags for protection.

In October of 2006, we re-united at the BootMurtha rally in Johnsown PA. and had a great time.
In 2007, at the first GoE event, Ted was taking moonbat prisoners and performing early morning wake-up calls on the code pink hags at their rally point.

That was the last time I sw him. Ted Sampley called me friend and Brother. I will miss him.

WRAL
POW advocate, Vietnam veteran Ted Sampley dies :: WRAL.com

ENCToday

National and local political activist, decorated veteran, POW advocate, businessman and master potter Ted Sampley passed away Tuesday. He was 62.
Sampley, who was recovering from heart surgery a week earlier, was experiencing difficulties from the surgery at the Veteran's Hospital in Durham on Tuesday. He died while being rushed to surgery.
His sudden passing surprised many in Kinston.
"This is a shock to me," said master shipbuilder Alton Stapleford, the architect of the CSS Neuse II, which Sampley helped bring to fruition. "It's really hard to comprehend right now."
Sampley served several tours of duty in Vietnam in the U.S. Army and won four Bronze Stars, the Army Commendation Medal and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, among other honors. He was honorably discharged during 1973.
His work with prisoner of war and missing in action groups didn't start in earnest until 1983, when he led groups demanding that the United States put pressure on Vietnam to release POWs or explain what happened to them.
Sampley was well-known on the national stage. He formed Web sites and led veteran groups against the candidacies of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and Republican presidential nominee John McCain.
Conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh mentioned Sampley on his national radio broadcast in 2004 for an incident with Kerry when the senator from Massachusetts allegedly gave Sampley a vulgar finger gesture in front of school children at the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C. Sampley also helped create the Web site "Vietnam Veterans against John McCain."
Sampley was also busy on the local front. During the past decade or so, Sampley helped found the local Salute festival, started construction on the CSS Neuse II and helped begin the National Walk of Honor at Neuseway Park that also honors veterans.

Its About Philosphy, Not Party

TO REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITEE CHAIRMAN MICHAEL STEELE:

http://conservativehq.com/petitions/republican-leadership/
Whereas, broadcasters and commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage are now seen as the de facto leaders of the Republican Party;

Whereas, this result is the natural and inevitable result of the fact that those who are supposed to provide leadership – Republican elected officials and party officers – are doing little to stand up to the socialist policies of the Obama administration;

Whereas, the GOP absolutely refuses to fire the Congressional leaders who helped get the party and the country into this mess;

Whereas, current Republican leadership cowers in fear of the President’s popularity;

Whereas, the anger of grassroots conservatives continues unabated towards weak-kneed, spineless, earmark-loving, Big Government, establishment Republicans;

Whereas, Americans are already beginning to realize that the new president is every bit as reckless and extreme as conservatives said he was;

Whereas, the Republican Party can’t get any traction, because the party leadership is as confused and clueless as the Obama administration;

Whereas, this problem will continue until all Big Government, anti-conservative Republican politicians are replaced with principled conservative leaders.

Resolved, the signers of this petition will withhold support and contributions from all Republican committees until Big Government Republican politicians are replaced with principled conservatives. Conservatives will no longer tolerate incompetent, weak-kneed, spineless, earmark-loving, Big Government, establishment Republican leadership, and we demand an immediate return to principled conservatism and a leader that will stand up to President Obama and the Congressional Democrats in their efforts to make America a socialist country. http://conservativehq.com/petitions/republican-leadership/
http://conservativehq.com/petitions/republican-leadership/

The Durbin Doctrine’s Assault on Free Speech

Heritage Foundation Morning Bell

Following a premeditated White House campaign to demonize Rush Limbaugh, Newsweek aided the left’s “Hush Rush” campaign with a cover story pushing for Rush to be silenced. Now, Rush can handle criticism from the White House and Newsweek just fine. But there was also a little noticed vote in the Senate late last month that could enable the left to accomplish by government regulation what they could never accomplish with actual debate.
During the debate over the unconstitutional bill that would give the District of Columbia a vote in the House of Representatives, Sens. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) each sponsored amendments with major implications for the First Amendment. DeMint’s amendment banned the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine which, prior to 1987, was used by the government to stifle free speech on our nation’s airwaves. DeMint’s amendment passed 87-11. Score one for free speech.
However, Durbin’s amendment also passed, although by a much narrower 57-41 margin. And what does Durbin’s amendment do? It forces the FCC to “take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.” In other words, Durbin wants to bring the wonders of government enforced affirmative action to our nation’s airwaves. Sen. James Inhofe warns: “The revocation of broadcaster licenses [under the Durbin Doctrine] is a real possibility, which at the very least will threaten the willingness of broadcasters to appeal to conservative listeners.”The true intention of the Durbin Doctrine could not be more clear. Its language is modeled after a Center for American Progress report that aims to fix “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio.” And just two years ago, Durbin told The Hill: “It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”Durbin’s commitment to squelching free speech has not diminished at all since that 2007 statement. But Durbin has gotten smarter. He knows that reinstating the old Fairness Doctrine is a non-starter so he has come up with a new but equally pernicious law that will accomplish the exact same thing. Conservatives need to wise up in the fight for free speech. The Fairness Doctrine is dead. The real threat is the Durbin Doctrine.

QUICK HITS

President Hugo Chávez ordered the navy on Sunday to seize seaports in states with major petroleum-exporting installations, part of his effort to assert greater control over infrastructure that had come under the dominion of political opponents in regional elections last year.

Billions of American taxpayer dollars used to bailout insurance giant AIG are flowing to some of the largest foreign banks in the world.

President Barack Obama’s new small-business loan plan will be run through an agency that the GAO says has insufficient oversight in place for that program.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has downgraded the jobs created by the stimulus from 4 million down to 3 million.

Govs. Rick Perry (R-TX), Mark Sanford (R-SC), Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Haley Barbour (R-MS), and Bob Riley (R-AL) have all rejected federal unemployment stimulus money that would have forced them to permanently expand their states unemployment programs.