Rabble and Scum OWS NOT the TEA Party

Pat has this one up from the Washington Times.

Cantor may be another Republican establishment politician, but he's MY Republican establisment representative and in this particular instance, he's right.

The stark visceral differences between the rabble and scum (hey, I like that...rabble and scum) turning New York streets and parks into open effluent ponds, and the members of the TEA Party are painfully obvious to anyone who's willing to accept reality. Carney lives in another dimension.

Stolen Futures

Are you willing to do what it takes to remove these scum from the offices that they dishonor?

Why Radical Islam Is A Threat

Free Americans believe everyone should have the opportunity to practise their religious beliefs as they see fit. However, we must draw a line when that belief system restricts the opportunities of others to do the same. We cannot allow one religion to take precedence over another.

From Sea to Shining Sea

Islam is not “just another religion” to be granted the protection and deference we grant to other religions like Judaism and Christianity. Islam demands that it be the only religion and that all must bow down to it in all matters, religious and civil – from marriage and divorce to contract disputes and to punishments for criminal behavior. Islam is incompatible with our constitutional government and must be dealt with before it grows along with the exploding birth rates of its members. It is the duty of all Muslims to work toward the imposition of Islam and the Sharia wherever they live, and the only way to counter this is to shut down any further immigration of Muslims into this country.

The rot of multiculturalism is not just something that will some day destroy America, it is already well on its way, as the events pertaining to the massacre by a Muslim terrorist at Fort Hood make abundantly clear. What has happened to our army at higher command levels began long before Obama came to the presidency, but the lunacy of deliberately casting a blind eye at the role of Muslims in world-wide terrorism has gotten much worse, and this has become a perilous problem for all Americans as home-grown Muslim terrorism gathers strength.

God and Government: Islam and West Are Incompatible
American Thinker

Fascism - the Face of Obama

A NEW ORDER HAS ARISEN!


The Dear Leader has just fired and replaced the head of a major corporation. And now we are hearing that GM may have to declare bankruptcy ANYWAY? Why doesn't Obama and co. get blamed for wasting billions of dollars on a failing corporation instead former CEO Wagoner. The administration was told repeatedly that GM would probably have declare bankruptcy months ago. But Obama and the democrats would not listen. THEY are the ones that are bankrupting the country.


That same Dear Leader has demanded that a major corporation be given to a foreign corporation for free. Chrysler was given 30 day to finalize any deal with Fiat or face the loss of billions in government aid. Fiat will assume a 35% (possibly raising to 55%) stake in the company, debt free. Why Fiat? Simple. Small cars. Supposedly Fiat will share technology with Chrysler enabling Chrysler to market fuel efficient cars. You know, similar to all those Fiats that you see Americans driving today.....Say goodbye to the Ferrari, Maserati, and the Alfa Romeo.......Can you see anyone buying a Chrysler Maserati?
How much of the bail out will be going to Fiat? Supposedly, Chrysler is to pay back the $6,000,000,000 that it will get as a result of this deal prior to Fiat assuming control of the company. (Fat chance.)

“Almost 95% of banks in this country remain well-capitalized. Since that time, many banks have been contacted by regulators, and urged, sometimes forcefully, to participate in the [Capital Purchase Program].”
If this is the case, that means that almost ALL banks will receive a portion of the TARP money, whether they want it or not. So, that means that Congress will control the wages of the executives of these companies also. Yet again, because of greed of Congress, Americans lose. Because Congress set taxes so high, yet allowed bonuses to be taxed at a lower rate, many executives take a low yearly salary and get paid year end bonuses as compensation. Not for performance, but, as a portion of their salary. Now, Congress wants to take this away from them.


Now that the financial institutions have taxpayer's money, certain Congressmen think that these employees should be paid like government bureaucrats. Of course, no Congressman ever gets rich from the taxpayer's money.....

Jon Jacobs:

Taxpayer are now like shareholders of your company. Indeed they are. Therefore it's no surprise to see taxpayers' elected representatives demand "their" management show accountability for major expenditures past and present.

Except that we are truly shareholders in our government, and THOSE employees refuse to be held accountable.

These officials evidently feel banks, once brought under the public umbrella, should be run not like businesses but like public agencies, where salaries are set by published charts rather than managers' discretion - and where bonuses don't exist. A great many voters seem to share that view. It all sounds fair - even logical. Until, that is, you stop to ponder what's the exit strategy. If every banker's pay is effectively subject to congressional review, who will want to work for banks?

I hope these people get good jobs in foreign firms.

Congress is blind. The conceited bastards running the circus evidently believe that being the head clown in the circus enables one to run the business end of it, too......

Please look at the above links and information with open eyes. Search the web for more info. And then come back and show me where I am wrong in believing that Obama and the Democrats in Congress are not, at the very least socialist, if not fascist.

I will no longer call Obama a socialist. - UPDATED with Part 2

FASCISM - Part 2 Bumped and updated

Most of us imagine the transformation of a free society to a tyrannical state in Hollywood terms, as a melodramatic act of violence like a military coup or an armed insurrection. Tocqueville knows better. He foresees a slow death of freedom. The power of the centralized government will gradually expand, meddling in every area of our lives until, like a lobster in a slowly heated pot, we are cooked without ever realizing what has happened. The ultimate horror of Tocqueville’s vision is that we will welcome it, and even convince ourselves that we control it.

There is no single dramatic event in Tocqueville’s scenario, no storming of the Bastille, no assault on the Winter Palace, no March on Rome, no Kristallnacht. We are to be immobilized, Gulliver-like, by myriad rules and regulations, annoying little restrictions that become more and more binding until they eventually paralyze us.


I will call Obama and his fellow travelers, the Democratic party, especially Pelosi and Reid, by their proper label:

Fascists

Michael Ledeen at PajamasMedia:
There’s a element of truth to the basic theme (although not to the headline): the state is getting more and more deeply involved in business, even taking controlling interests in some private companies. And the state is even trying to “make policy” for private companies they do not control, but merely “help” with “infusions of capital,” as in the recent call for salary caps for certain CEOs. So state power is growing at the expense of corporations.

But that’s not socialism. Socialism rests on a firm theoretical bedrock: the abolition of private property. I haven’t heard anyone this side of Barney Frank calling for any such thing. What is happening now–and Newsweek is honest enough to say so down in the body of the article–is an expansion of the state’s role, an increase in public/private joint ventures and partnerships, and much more state regulation of business. Yes, it’s very “European,” and some of the Europeans even call it “social democracy,” but it isn’t.

It’s fascism.

Henry Waxman = Joe McCarthy

Separated at birth?

except Ol' Joe actually did have commies in powerful positions......Oops. Still do.
Rep. (D) Henry Waxman has decided to use his power of investigation and the full power of the government to "monitor" Talk Radio, ie., Rush, Hannity, and Levin. So, the libs were right. Innocent private citizens are going to be investigated by the government. Are bloggers next?
(still think that there's no difference in the parties? Support whichever candidate wins the primaries!)

Via The American Spectator:

Others on the Democrat side are pushing ahead with other plans. Rep. Henry Waxman has asked his investigative staff to begin compiling reports on Limbaugh, and fellow radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin based on transcripts from their shows, and to call in Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin to discuss the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

"Limbaugh isn't the only one who needs to be made uncomfortable about what he says on the radio," says a House leadership source. "We don't have as big a megaphone as these guys, but this all political, and we'll do what we can to gain the advantage. If we can take them off their game for a while, it will help our folks out there on the campaign trail."

1984-Remember, we're watching you for your own good...

Remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.......

Hasn't ANYONE in government read George Orwell? Or for that matter, anyone that voted these twits into office in Maryland? Red light cameras. Speeding cameras. Surveillance cameras in "high crime" (as defined by whom?) areas. Now the word crime isn't even mentioned. "Strategic" areas need cameras. Monitored by the local police. All to prevent crime. What happens when someone in power creates a law making something previously legal into an illegal act? Firearms = terror weapons. Opinions = hate speech. Unorthodox sex = sex crime. How intrusive are we going to get? Liberals want to stop conservative talk radio, slandering it. Conservatives want to keep up family values in a changing society. Its not up to the police to prevent crime. Its up to the citizens to prevent crime. Otherwise, there is no reason to not have a police state. Police catch criminals. A crime must be committed. If we subject ourselves to 24 hour monitoring, with continuing increases in surveillance, where does it stop? At the forefront of our thoughts, we must remember that we are a free people. We must stop this insanity before we can't. Because we are being watched......

We need to prevent any of this developing in Virginia.

City passes camera law

Hoping to deter crime by expanding the use of surveillance cameras, Aberdeen passed a measure that empowers the city government and police to require cameras in new developments.

The Police Department, the Department of Planning and Community Development, and the Department of Public Works will decide whether a new residential, commercial or industrial development must install cameras at "strategic locations" before a development permit is issued.
Cameras installed at new developments will be connected to a watch room at the police station, Mayor S. Fred Simmons said.

Simmons said the police chief will work with the other departments to study the feasibility of installation and check whether a camera is "wanted and necessary" at new developments.

But the ordinance does not spell out guidelines for determining whether a new development will be required to have cameras, which concerned the lone dissenter on the council vote, Ruth Elliott.

"We have no internal procedures or policies on this," Elliott said. "It is vague, and you can read in between the lines."
Elliott expressed concern that the two-sentence ordinance gives broad authority to the city without laying out parameters about how the city will determine whether a development should have cameras.

But Simmons said, "The reason why it's left open is that the whole landscape changes all the time." (emphasis mine)

Melissa Ngo, senior counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, also questioned an ordinance that lacked guidelines on determining where cameras would be required.

"How are they going to decide?" said Ngo, whose Washington-based organization studies civil liberty and privacy issues. "If this is going to be low-income development, are they going to watch over the poor people? If this is going to be fancy condos, are they going to decide that they don't need to look over those people?"