Obama Abolishes Internships--No, It Is Not A Joke

The internship is an honored tradition that allows young people (or older people in career transition) to gain practical and useful experience to further their chances to obtain gainful employment in the future. Unfortunately, the internship represents ideals that President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama abhors like the free market, individual choice, and, well, WORK!!! As Eric Erickson points out at RedState.com, the Obama Labor Department intends to abolish private sector internships.

Barack Obama is telling teenagers and college students, who are now suffering through a 26% unemployment rate, that they are not allowed to volunteer their time in the free market in exchange for acquiring valuable and relevant job skills that might, just might, get them off the unemployment line — and that ignores the ability to make valuable connections through networking in the workplace and build relationships for future careers and opportunities. The lost opportunity just of the loss of networking and relationship building is overwhelming and will put some college students who did not go to the right school or belong to the right fraternity or sorority or come from the right town at a serious, serious disadvantage.

“If … you want to pursue an internship with a for-profit employer, there aren’t going to be many circumstances where you can have an internship and not be paid and still be in compliance with the law,” the Labor Department’s Nancy J. Leppink tells the New York Times.

The Times also quotes Trudy Steinfeld, director of New York University’s Office of Career Services, regarding opportunities for unpaid internships. “A few famous banks have called and said, ‘We’d like to do this,’ said Ms. Steinfeld. “I said, ‘No way. You will not list on this campus.’” To be fair, she doesn’t want a Labor Department enforcer knocking on her door next week. But we wonder what NYU students trying to get their feet in the doors of financial firms think about Ms. Steinfeld rejecting opportunities on their behalf.

How all of this helps young people who are trying to develop marketable skills is a mystery.

Every day it becomes harder to tell if Obama is simply an overmatched imbecile or the most dangerous radical to ever occupy the White House. The results are the same: a great country's institutions and freedoms reduced to rubble. If you aren't involved, get there. If you have been involved, don't get tired--there is a long fight ahead to slow the long march.

Charles Krauthammer on Obama's "Fox Wars"

Charles Krauthammer is one of the best in the business. Few columnists have the ability to eviscerate the arrogantly powerful as well as Mr. Krauthammer, as shown in his succinct dissection of President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's jihad against the Fox News network.

Obama's Fourth Reich hoped to squelch growing criticisms of the White House by attacking a news operation and warning other networks not to pick up stories that originated on Fox. The dutiful Big Media was done the O-Train's bidding and discarded all pretense of legitimate journalism. However, even some members of the state media felt compelled to cover the ACORN scandals and Obama's communist, conspiracy nut homeboy Van Jones after those stories became huge due to Fox News, talk radio and the alternative media. When Obama tried to kick Fox out of the White House press pool, the other bureau chiefs finally said "no." That was a stinging rebuke for The One.

What is truly remarkable about the goofy Left's visceral hatred of Fox News is the fact that the network comprises a small voice in the vast media chorus (though its ratings are incredibly high--guess they aren't out of touch with Real America). Krauthammer notes:

Fox News is no monopoly. It is a singular minority in a sea of liberal media. ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC vs. Fox. The lineup is so unbalanced as to be
comical -- and that doesn't even include the other commanding heights of the culture that are firmly, flagrantly liberal: Hollywood, the foundations, the universities, the elite newspapers.

Fox and its viewers (numbering more than CNN's and MSNBC's combined) need no
defense. Defend Fox compared to whom? To CNN -- which recently unleashed its
fact-checkers on a "Saturday Night Live" skit mildly critical of President Obama, but did no checking of a grotesquely racist remark CNN falsely attributed to Rush Limbaugh?

This is a bit like the administration's claim that the free market needs competition from the government. Such logic only makes sense to an economic illiterate. Fifteen hundred health insurance companies compete for business (though their ability to compete is constrained to a large degree by, you guess it, the government), but the only REAL competition would come from a government "option." In media, one network presents all sides rather than the Statist talking points and it has undue influence on American journalism. Only in Obama World are Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman legitimate journalists and Bret Baier a Republican stooge.

Krauthammer's best zinger was aimed at Anita Dunn, White House Mistress of Disinformation. Dunn is the empty skirt who rated the 20th century's most prolific mass murderer, Mao Tse-tung, as one of her two favorite political philosophers.

Defend Fox from the likes of Anita Dunn? She's been attacked for extolling Mao's political philosophy in a speech at a high school graduation. But the critics miss the surpassing stupidity of her larger point: She was invoking Mao as support and authority for her impassioned plea for individuality and trusting one's own choices. Mao as champion of individuality? Mao, the greatest imposer of mass uniformity in modern history, creator of a slave society of a near-billion worker bees wearing Mao suits and waving the Little Red Book?

The White House communications director cannot be trusted to address high schoolers without uttering inanities. She and her cohorts are now to instruct the country on truth and objectivity?

The truth is that Anita Dunn's comments, Obama's associations, Van Jones' moonbat rantings, Rahm Emmanuel's exhortation to "not let a crisis go to waste," Michelle Obama's "first time proud comment and all of the other lunacy that has emanated from Team O is all part of a disturbing reality. That is who they are. That is who HE is. And it is that crushing realization more so than even the health care takeover or cap-and-tax scheme that has more Americans telling the Big O that he can keep his "change." Let's hope Fox News keeps reporting the truth about this gang of extremists. Who knows, maybe some of the other networks will put their profession and their country ahead of their Leftist ideology. Stranger things have happened.

Rush Says The Operative Color is Red NOT Black

Big Media still beats the drum of racism in its critiques of those who criticize President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and the Leftist Democrats. Rush Limbaugh has effectively swatted aside these desperate attacks all along, but he recently framed the argument in a succinct and powerful way. In the words of the Maha Rushi:

"It's not the color of Obama's skin that we oppose. It's the color of his policies. It's not his blackness. It's his redness."

Any questions?

Pat Buchanan is Right; We Owe Richard Nixon An Apology

Even some members of Big Media have accused President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama of using Nixonian tactics in his war against Fox News, insurance companies, investment houses, Conservatives, and generally anyone who doesn't hop aboard the O-Train without questioning the destination. Patrick J. Buchanan knows a little about the inner workings of the Nixon White House and he says the comparison with Obama is unfair. According to Buchanan, Nixon faced much tougher opposition than the thin-skinned President Obama.

Nixon took the oath as a minority president, 43 percent, in a hostile city, with both houses of Congress against him and a national press corps that had loathed him since he exposed the establishment golden boy Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy, 20 years before.

Obama took the oath with close to a filibuster-proof Senate, a near 80-seat majority in the House, the media at his feet, not his throat, and a city in adulation that had voted 93 to 7 for Barack Hussein Obama.

The hatred of Nixon was as irrational as it was deep. The hardcore Left never forgave Nixon for his exposure of traitor Alger Hiss. Despite overwhelming evidence followed by irrefutable evidence gleaned from the Venona project, some still consider Hiss some sort of political victim. He was a Communist sympathizer and one who sold out his own country. It is those who continue to support Hiss' memory who have some 'splainin' to do.

Nixon's administration ended the war in Vietnam (which had been escalated by two Democrat presidents), pushed the concept of affirmative action, created the EPA, signed the Endangered Species Act and instituted FDR-style price controls to combat inflation. Nixon's presidency may well have been one of the greatest triangulations in history. He ended the war with honor (though the Democrats in Congress will later make sure both victory and honor were sacrificed), stood up for law and order, and extolled traditional values while signing a series of "progressive" (i.e., socialist) expansions of the federal government.

Obama, on the other hand, is a hardcore Leftists with a team of Fellow Travelers in unconstitutional positions of authority and more positioned in leadership positions throughout the House and Senate. He has a Big Media establishment that consists mostly of people who dream they could be his Monica. Trust me, if Obama sends Chris Matthews a blue dress the name of the Leftist sycophant's MSNBC show "Hard Ball" will take on a whole new meaning.

Whereas Nixon's was pilloried for exposing Communists in high places, Obama's relationships with communists, socialists, and other extremists are downplayed or ignored. Nixon built his reputation uncovering the types of dangerous anti-American activity that is now a resume' enhancer in the Obama White House.

Tricky Dick came unraveled and allowed his paranoia, distrust, anger, and ego get the best of him. However, prior to Watergate, the folks who sought to bury Nixon opposed his patriotism and defense of his country. The radical Left sought to use the legitimate social upheaval of the 1960s (such as the Civil Rights movement) as a veil to mask their desire to drag the United States further into nanny-state socialism. Nixon supported civil rights, but opposed much of the Left's radicalism.

Obama believes he has a mandate to destroy the very foundations of America. Although many saw through his "hope" and "change" nonsense as the Marxist tripe that it was, Obama did his best to mask his true intentions. He lied. The Obama opposition comprises folks who want to defend the Constitution, federalism, and American values that have made this nation the envy of the world. Nixon saw himself as the protector of American greatness. Obama doesn't see America as great. Instead, he presides over a nation that believes is arrogant, greedy, and a source for more ill than good.

At first, the comparison of Obama's enemies list to Nixon's seemed appropriate. However, further analysis shows Barry Obama to be a President who is not under siege, but rather a small man who is unwilling to tolerate dissent in a democratic republic. Brother Buchanan is right. My apologies to Tricky Dick.

Another Day, Another Communist in Chairman MaObama's Inner Circle

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom is the latest member of Team Obama to be shown praising Mao Tse-tung, grand champion of 20th century mass murderers. The never-ending stream of extremists that inhabit the inner circle of Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama is almost comical. "Almost" because these people yield real power and answer to no one. There is also the problem of a large segment of the American public that either supports Marxism, blindly supports the O-Train or is so out of touch that they think Mao Tse-tung is a side dish to accompany General Tso's chicken. Roll the tape...




The "Manufacturing Czar" does not believe in the free market and quotes Chairman Mao. This is the guy who is supposed to oversee job creation in America? What's next? Wavy Gravy as the Dental Czar? Madonna as the Virginity Czar? Kanye West as the Bluegrass Czar? John Walker Lindh as the Youth Patriotism Czar?

The real question is now this: does Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama actually know anyone who loves America and the American way? You know, capitalism, free markets, individual liberty, federalism, the Constitution, baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie? Of course, according to David Ass-elrod and Rambo Emmanuel Obama's den of thieves represent "mainstream America" while Tea Party protesters are a fringe element.

Keep the Commies coming, Barry! Your vision of hope and change is clearly the same communist utopia that has left misery and destruction around the world. Americans allowed themselves to be fooled in 2008. Don't bet on Real America allowing the Demo-fascists to repeat that victory in 2010.

Obama Spokesperson Anita Dunn Quotes "Favorite Philosopher" Mao...Is America NOW Paying Attention?

We have reached the point that it is now news when one of Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's confidentes IS NOT steeped in Marxism or some other radical ideology. Obama's "friends and family" circle looks like the class picture from Lenin's School for Future Bolsheviks. The latest to be exposed is White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, sort of the Joseph Goebbels of the Obamanation. Last week, Dunn was the propagandist attacking the credibility of Fox News. Of course, that translates to "Fox refuses to simply read our press releases. Heil Obama!"

World Net Daily reports that Anita Dunn is quite proud of the way the Obama campaign contolled media content. She detailed the O-Train's tactics during a conference with the Dominican Republic's government. Of course, Dunn's recitation of Obama's media manipulation tactics was not shocking. The video shown by Glenn Beck on Thursday was even more troublesome.



Yep, that Mao. White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, the one who accused Fox News of journalistic dishonesty, has a political philosophy grounded in the ideology of murderous communist dictator Mao Tse-tung. Now, isn't that special? Of course, I'm sure President Obama is shocked, shocked I tell you.

Never has a White House been staffed by so many people who utterly reject the principles and foundations on which the United States was built. Clearly, the insiders of the Democrat party, including their highest ranking officials, media sycophants, and financial sources, inhabit the far Left of the political spectrum. Those who love this country need to spread the word far and wide. Most Americans who vote for Democrats are voting for a party that no longer exists. There are no Scoop Jacksons or Daniel Patrick Moynihans. The typical Democrat voter is not anti-American, anti-capitalism and anti-liberty. However, they are gulled into voting for individuals who are all of those things.

The stories of Obama's radical friends must be told continually. One could be an oversight, two an accident and three a coincidence. But, it seems nearly everyone who is close to this man is grounded in radicalism. That tells us a lot about the man who was elected the 44th president and what he has in store for America. Change, indeed.

Barack Hussein Obama: Nobel Peace Prize? Yeah, Makes Sense

Driving to work this morning, I heard the news of Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's Nobel Peace Prize award. And the laughter ensued. Obama-mania has truly reached the realms of absurdity.

The man had achieved nothing in life, but knew how to build a brand and deliver a speech. He parlayed those ancillary talents into becoming the 44th President of the United States. Why should it be a surprise that the same gaseous platitudes and Miss America philosophy could result in winning the Nobel Peace Prize? After all, Nobel committee members admitted that Jimmy Carter's Nobel Prize was largely awarded for his verbal tirades against President Bush and American foreign policy. Who does America bashing better than Obama? He has no peer in that field, so he was a natural winner.

The Milli Vanilli president is the emptiest suit to ever enter the political world. Becoming the biggest phony in American politics is truly an achievement. He projects American weakness. The world loves that. He rejects American exceptionalism. That is endearing to the international community. He believes America has been a force for ill around the globe. That makes him part of the in-crowd among the one-worlders.

His "dedication" to peace is clear. He unilaterally nullified agreements to provide defense systems for Poland and the Czech Republic. The Poles and Czechs don't feel safer. He will not meet with the Dalai Lama during the Tibetan leader's trip to America. Obama does not want to offend Red China. He believes the world will be more peaceful if no nuclear weapons exist. Hitler did not have nukes. Mao did not have nukes. Stalin did not have nukes for most of his tenure. Tojo did not have nukes. The man has no understanding of the "peace through strength" principle. He is willing to treat Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as an equal and negotiate with the terrorist state of Iran. He calls on Israel to give up more land to the terrorists who are attacking them on a daily basis. Obama is praised by Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, Fidel Castro, and Moammar Quadaffi. Even French President Nicholas Sarkozy has commented on Obama's weakness and naivete. This is not a picture that will create and preserve greater peace.

An Update on States Rights (i.e., The United States Constitution)

Those who have not read the United States Constitution and those who pretend it doesn't exist come down with the vapors at the thought of the word "states rights." The reason, of course, is that the textbooks used in our mandatory indoctrination factories (public schools) use the term only in the context of a last-ditch effort to protect slavery and later to justify segregation. They generally fail to include The Federalist Papers, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions written by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, and the U.S. Constitution itself in explaining the concept of "states rights."

Now that creeping socialism has morphed into sprinting Marxism under President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama, Czarina Pelosi, and Court Jester Reid some states are starting to remember that they have every right to tell the Kremlin on the Potomac to pound sand. The New York Times reports on the growing 10th Amendment movement across America. It seems the trigger for many is the Democrats' desire to make it a criminal offense to not purchase health insurance. Funny, but the Constitution does not seem to provide such authority to Congress.



Congress' powers are clearly outlined in Article I of the Constitution. And what of those things not mentioned in the Constitution? See the 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Got it? Members of Congress who introduce bills or vote for bills that fall outside the parameters of the Constitution are violating their oath of office. The government does not belong to them. The Constitution is still in effect and "We The People" have every right to demand that these arrogant tyrants remain within their lawful boundaries. During the town hall meetings in August, more than one Congressperson and many Statist pundits talked about legislators living in fear. My response? Good! We are citizens not subjects. When they seek to take away individual liberty and freedom from American citizens we should be loudly engaged. If they want to "turn down the temperature" they can start by recognizing their authority is limited by the Constitution. But, as long as they desire to rule over the people they cannot expect politeness and civility from their victims.



The 10th Amendment is the ultimate trump card for the states against an abusive and invasive federal leviathan. However, that powerful statement was unnecessary in the eyes of Founding Father James Madison, who wrote in Federalist No. 45:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

No constitutional amendment has changed that principle. It has been attacked by successive waves of legislators who do not wish to abide by the constraints of limited government. But, there it remains. As long as liberty's flame flickers in the hearts of Americans, it is never too late to reclaim the birthright bequeathed to us by the Founders and protected by successive generations of brave soldiers.



Hopefully, a new awareness of the precarious state of American liberty will lead to a revitalized and committed Republican party that will wrest the federal government from the clutches of the Statists who currently hold the keys. In the meantime, it is our duty to support courageous state legislators and governors who are willing to fight for their legitimate powers. If you want to learn more about the 10th Amendment in action, check out the Tenth Amendment Center and their on-going fight for the rights of the states and of the people.

Elementary School Children Sing Praises To Obama--Frightening!

Indoctrination of the youth has always been a key tactic of statist regimes. Shaping the minds of a new generation is one of the surest ways to eliminate the thoughts and principles that previously guided a society. Now, a New Jersey elementary school brings us a teacher indoctrinating children through hymns of praise to Dear Leader, Barack Obama.




That isn't education. There is no excuse for such blatant indoctrination in a public school classroom. If this nitwit teacher wants to chant "yes we can" while she waves her "hope" and "change" signs, more power to her. However, she has absolutely no right to use the bully pulpit of the classroom to have children singing hymns to the Barack Obama.

In showing America what we were up against in World War II, Hollywood director Frank Capra produced the "Why We Fight" series. Check out the segment below for a look at schoolhouse indoctrination (the hymns for Hitler starts at about 7:40 of the video).

Ahmadinejad and Obama Share Similar Views of Israel

The United States joined several other countries in walking out during Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rambling diatribe in front of the United Nations of Thugs and Dictators General Assembly. That was a good move. However, the U.S. delegation should have walked out on an earlier speaker who also misrepresented the nature of the Israeli state and who seems poised to overturn his country's long history of support for the Israeli people. Everyone knows Ahmadinejad is nuttier than a squirrel turd, but this other world leader is looked to as a symbol of hope for the future. Fox News.com quotes the former community agitator:

"We continue to call on Palestinians to end incitement against Israel, and we continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements," he said.

Obama said four issues separate the two sides: security, borders, refugees and Jerusalem, but the goal is clear: a secure, Jewish state for Israel and "a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967."

The 44th President of the United States, Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama, gave one of his patented fear-mongering speeches. The U.S. has been a force for ill. The world is about to explode from the heat (despite 10 years of temperature decreases). We should get rid of all nuclear weapons. We must play footsy with dictators. This was typical Obama. Everything is a crisis and the United States is the root of all evil. However, in front of a roomful of the world's sleaziest rogues and miscreants, Obama attacked our ally, Israel. The President's use of the word "occupation" to describe Israel's possession of territory they acquired when THEY were attacked would be laughable if it did not signal such a dangerous turn in U.S. foreign policy. There is no moral equivalence between a peaceful democracy that has been forced to defend itself from brutish neighbors who seek to eliminate its existence.

But, for this President principle is never an impediment to his desire to be the most popular guy in the room. This was seen in his campaign last year. Obama will tell any room what its occupants want to hear. Bashing the United States and Israel sends one to the head of the class in the United Nations of Thugs and Dictators.

If the Arab world cared so much about the so-called Palestinians they would have provided a home for them long ago. Israel is a dot in the Middle East, but this faux ethnic group ("Palestinians") must be given a state carved out of Israeli territory. Israel has given and given in past peace talks. What have they received in return? Murder, mayhem, and now treachery from a trusted friend.

In the last week, Osama bin Laden released a statement in which he endorsed the anti-Semitic book on Arab-Israeli relations by America's worst ex-President Jimmy Carter. Leftist foreign policy hack Zbigniew Brzezinski called for the U.S. to shoot down Israeli planes if they attempt to take out Iran's nuclear capabilities. Libyan lunatic Moammar Khadaffy referred to Obama as "his son." Despite all the blustering from Ahmadinejad in Iran, Obama gave his endorsement to the crooked election results that kept the madman in power. It is clear that America's Leftwing is anti-Israel and desirous of leading the Jewish state into a suicide pact that will threaten its very existence.

The United States must not waver in supporting the one legitimate democracy in the Middle East. Our President seems willing to chuck Israel to the wolves. From his anti-Israel stance to his support of the would-be dictator in Honduras and his on-going lovefest with Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro, we have never had an American President whose fidelity to freedom and liberty is so questionable. His desire to be admired by the world's biggest cretins is much stronger than his love of his own country. It should come as no surprise that he is out to overturn institutions of long-standing in the United States as he belittles us abroad and consorts with anti-Americans and anti-capitalists. Today's speech needs to be kept on speed dial for 2012 so we can remind ourselves what this man thinks of the United States and its allies.

Cap-and-Trade To Cost Average Tax Payer Nearly $2,000

President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama has this habit of claiming that all of his magic bean projects will save humanity at no cost to the overwhelming majority of tax payers. Of course, that doesn't mean his cadre of advisers are not aware of reality. Declan McCullagh reported on the CBS blog that internal memos show that the cap-and-trade bill being debated in Congress will create a very significant tax increase on every American family.

A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year.

A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama's transition team after the
November election, says this about climate change policies: "Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP, making them equal in scale to all existing environmental regulation."

The documents (PDF) were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute and released on Tuesday.

.

So, the White House's numbers project nearly $1,800 a year in new taxes for each household. Given that government estimates are never even close to accurate, this has to scare anyone who isn't a extreme environmental wacko.

John Podesta and the Extreme Left Center for American Progress got their collective panties in a wad over the story. Declan McCullagh followed up his original story on the CBS blog.

Cap-and-Trade barely passed the House and will have big trouble getting through the Senate. Public outcry after the House vote makes it unlikely a conference bill can be successful. However, it is time to crank up the phone calls, letters, and emails once again. Cap-and-Trade is just another front of the Left's war on capitalism, prosperity and freedom.

Joe Wilson Apologizes To Barack Obama; Will Obama Apologize To Republicans?

Since the end of Dear Leader's public regurgitation earlier this evening, Big Media has been apoplectic over South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson shouting "liar" when Obama claimed illegal aliens will not be covered under his health care takeover scheme. In fact, Wilson already called the White House and apologized for his actions. Wilson's moment may have violated some form of decorum, but when the most powerful individual in America spins a series of rehashed yarns that bear little resemblance to the truth, it is easy to understand the frustration of a patriotic American.

However, Wilson's outburst and later apology brings up another question: will President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama apologize to the Republican party and Real America? On numerous occasions during the droning speech, Obama accused Republicans and Conservatives across America of lying about the health care proposals in Congress. He, in fact, misrepresented their arguments time and again in his dishonest oration.

B. Hussein Obama bleats on about wanting bipartisanship and to work together, but the community agitator could not resist delivering the most partisan address I have ever seen from an American president. It was disgraceful and beneath the dignity of the office. Obama owes Real America an apology for refusing to honestly discuss their objections to his nationalized health care scheme and accusing them of dishonesty. Joe Wilson was man enough to apologize. Do you possess the same integrity, Comrade Obama?

Flashback 1991: Democrats Investigate George H.W. Bush For School Speech

Big Media and Leftists Democrats ridiculed those who were upset with the notion of President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama giving a nationwide speech to school children. They called the concerns of Real Americans "irrational" and "ignorant." However, in today's Washington Examiner, Byron York reminds us that Democrats ordered the Government Accounting Office (GAO) to investigate George H.W. Bush's speech to America's youngsters on October 1, 1991.

Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.

With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"

Democrats did not stop with words. Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event."

Unfortunately for Ford, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly. "The speech itself and the use of the department's funds to support it, including the cost of the production contract, appear to be legal," the GAO wrote in a letter to Chairman Ford. "The speech also does not appear to have violated the restrictions on the use of appropriations for publicity and propaganda."

That didn't stop Democratic allies from taking their own shots at Bush. The National Education Association denounced the speech, saying it "cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayers' money on a staged media event at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, D.C. -- while cutting school lunch funds for our neediest youngsters."

Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush's speech itself, like Obama's today, was entirely unremarkable. "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," the president told students. "If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they're stuck in a dead end job. Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

Unlike the pro-Obama materials created by Dear Leader's administration, the Bush Department of Education did not create lesson plans asking children to write a letter about how they could help him achieve his policy goals.

Andie Brownlow Warns The Soviet Strategy For American Collapse Is Succeeding

Can the United States of America be destroyed by an enemy that ceased to exist nearly twenty years ago? Andie Brownlow's piece in The American Thinker reminds us that the strategy of Soviet-led worldwide communism was not to dismantle the United States by invasion, but by incremental doses of Marxist-influenced policy. This didn't start with Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama. It didn't start with SDS in the 1960s. This has been going on for a century. These ideas have been fostered by useful idiots in high places since the so-called Progressive Movement.

Brownlow's piece is based on information provided to the west by a former Soviet journalist.

Yuri Bezmenov, aka Tomas Schuman, was a Soviet journalist and propaganda specialist for the KGB in 1965. A few years later, disgusted with what he was being asked to do for the KGB in India, he defected to Canada. He began to publically warn about the tactics of Soviet psychological warfare. No one knows for sure what has become of Mr. Schuman; it's rumored that he is now deceased.

Mr. Schuman explained that although Hollywood glorifies Soviet espionage and James Bond-style activity, in actuality only 10 to15% of the KGB's time was devoted to covert activity. The remaining 85 to 90% was spent on a four-step process called "Ideological Subversion."

The four steps in the process are:
1. Demoralization.
2. Destabilization.
3. Crisis.
4. Normalization.

Brownlow picks up Schuman's explanation of the demoralization process.

Mr. Schuman explains Demoralization as a 10 to 30 year process:

[To] educate a generation to expose them to the ideology of the enemy: Marxism, Leninism...without being challenged by American values.

The goal is six-fold:

1) Destroy the religion of the enemy; mock and discredit it. Promote corrupt alternatives and cults.

2) Insure the disruption of education. Distract from learning constructive and pragmatic subjects and replace them with studies on frivolous topics.

3) Destroy social ties and impede bargaining and conflict resolution. Bring in bureaucracy and dependence on authority.

4) Institute power structuring around unelected bureaucrats and the media.

5) Destroy labor relations by mediating employee /employer interaction. Create friction and oppositional relationships.

6) Warp law, order and morality. Demonize the police and those upholding the law. Make the bad guy look like a victim of society; justify his actions.

Are you getting the picture? Do these goals for demoralizing a stable republic sound like anything you have witnessed in recent decades? It might be time for the Nostradamus detectives to look at something more recent and more dangerous in terms of breaking down America. The social, educational, economic and moral changes of the previous decades have not been accidental. It is no accident that the radical Left is always to connected to these movements.

Even something as legitimate as the civil rights movement was fouled by Marxist influences who were more interested in adding Blacks to their anti-American coalition than in improving the lives and opportunities of Black Americans. The current political scene demonstrates how this works. Just listen to Al Sharpton, Je$$e Jackson and other influential Black leaders compare bans on same-sex marriage to the days of Jim Crow or even to slavery. This attitude is not consistent with most Blacks. Look at Black so-called "leaders" when it comes to school policy. No matter how poorly urban schools perform they support the education bureaucracy, dumbed-down curriculum, fluff courses, and accuse any demand for rigor as being based in "racism." I can't speak for Black Americans, but I would guess if you asked Black parents they would want their child to learn to read, learn to write competently, learn to use numbers effectively, and be given the skills for adult success.

Be sure to read the rest of Andie Brownlow's piece, "From Russia With No Love." Much of the Leftist plan for America has come to pass. We have to understand, and make our friends and neighbors understand, that politics are no longer a series of parlor games between rival fraternities. The thirst for government power we are now witnessing is a fight for America's soul. We have a choice. We either return to being the land of liberty, the world's last best hope, or we become just another footnote in history, a great power that gave in to the failed ideologies of mass dependence and worship of the state.

NOTE: For more details and background to support Andie Brownlow's "From Russia With No Love," check out Brownlow's website for more documentation.

Cruel and Unusual "Health Care": Today England; Tomorrow America

The British health service bureaucracy is doing its part to manage health care costs in the United Kingdom. If they are likely going to die, don't waste care on them. The Daily Telegraph details the widespread dissatisfaction with the cruel program.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.

Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.

As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.

“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.

“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."

The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.

The rest of the article can be read here. Just a little advance preview of the health care plan President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and his fellow travelers have in store for America. Sounds great, doesn't it?

Washington Post Tries To Save Creigh Deeds

Does The Washington Post (Compost?) plan to duplicate its 2006 feat when it took one word uttered by Virginia Senator George Allen and ran story after story until he lost to pathetic Democrat candidate Jim Webb? SWAC Girl has put together an excellent post which shows how Democrats are trying to use an old college paper to smear Republican Bob McDonnell. Big Media realizes the only hope for hapless Democrat candidate Creigh Deeds is to damage McDonnell with personal attacks. This, of course, is the Left's strength, so it bears monitoring.

It is interesting that McDonnell's blunt language in a pro-family position paper is so offensive to the Big Media when we just elected a President who:

• Spent 20 years in the church of a racist, anti-semite pastor who the President called his spiritual mentor.
• Told multiple, contradictory versions of his relationship with the minister before finally rejecting him after Hillary Clinton gained on him in the primaries.
• Had a close working relationship and friendship with Weather Underground domestic terroristic Bill Ayers.
• Told multiple, contradictory versions of his relationship with the unrepentent terrorist before finally claiming he was just a guy he happened to serve with on a board.
• Had a long connection to far left socialist and communist friends and colleagues.
• Wrote a racially charged biography before writing a tamer biography shortly before running for President.
• Made his most passionate speech as a state legislator against a law that protected the lives of babies who survived attempted abortions.

Interestingly, we were instructed to disregard everything we knew about Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama during Campaign 2008. If we allowed his questionable past to impact our evaluation of him, then we were racist neanderthals. Aren't you glad Big Media is objective?

Why is Chris Dodd Hiding The Senate Health Bill?

Statist Democrats including President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama keep whining about Real Americans "lying" about what is in the nationalized health care proposals currently floating around both Houses of Congress. Of course, they can't point to any actual lies. Most of what the Leftists are calling "scare tactics" fall into one of two categories:

1. Placing "legal-ese" double-talk into plain language. No, words like "death panel" and "rationing" do not appear, but the provisions of the bill will clearly create such problems.
2. The House bill creates over 50 new bureaucracies that will have the power to make their own rules. So, Statist Democrats are not technically lying when say this provision or that provision is not in the bill. However, the words and ideas that guide President Obama and his health care advisiors present a Draconian vision of America's health care future. Congress may not include these measures in a bill, but unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats will.

The Senate bill is even more of a mystery. The Wall Street Journal reports that Senator Christopher Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, is refusing to release the details of approximately 200 amendments that were added to the 790-page Senate version that is available. Reports have surfaced about a number of Republican amendments to clarify some of the vauge, but startling, elements of the bill were rejected. So, what is in the hidden 200? Why is Dodd, the man who helped craft policies directly responsible for the banking crisis, keeping these additions under wraps?

Even one of the most partisan Leftists in the Senate spoke out about the Keystone Kops process in the chamber:

The whole process was so haphazard that at one point during the committee mark-up Barbara Mikulski, the Democrat from Maryland, declared: "Giving me language on little pieces of paper on which I'm going to commit the sacred fortunes and honor of the United States for decades, this is not the way to go. We can't do this on the backs of envelopes."

Democrats want to ram a massive government takeover of the American health care industry down the throats of the citizens. Our job was to sit down, shut up, and take it. They reject every proposal that would encourage competition and lower costs without the federal government increasing its power. Their intentions are clear. Tea Partiers and other Real Americans need to keep pouring on the pressure.

Obama's Health Care Special Interests Outspending Free Market Supporters

Among the many myths (lies?) being perpetrated by Statist Democrats in regard to the debate over nationalized health care is the canard that the opposition is being propped up by a vast rightwing conspiracy of special interests. However, even that noted "conservative" newspaper The New York Times reported that the supporters of ObamaCare or some other big government reform have outspent free marketeers by a five-to-one margin. According to the Old Gray Lady, pro-government reform forces have spent $47 million on advertising to the $9 million paid for by the defenders of the free market. That doesn't even count the in-kind contributions of Big Media's slobbering, unprofessional shill work for their party.

President Obama To Fund Offshore Drilling--For Brazil!

While President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama waits for the fall to try to push his cap-and-tax energy bill through the Senate, the United States is set to lend $2 billion (as a start with more to come) to Brazil for off-shore oil exploration. That's right, the same administration that wants us to ride to work in cars that run on cotton candy and happy thoughts is willing to send billions to South America for oil discovery while he tells the American people to pound sand.

The Drill Brazil deal demonstrates the phony nature of the "global warming/global climate change" nonsense. First, if the Democrats are so concerned about the "menace" of "global climate change" then why are they sending billions to South America to discover and produce even more evil of the fossil fuels that are destroying Mother Earth? On the other hand, if Brazil drilling for oil will not cause the planet to explode why not allow private American companies develop the rich resources below the ocean's floor off the American coastline? Is there something about American-produced oil that is inherently more evil than oil pumped by Brazilians?

When the cap-and-tax debate re-ignites this fall, remember President Obama is paying for foreigners to develop their natural resources while he wants you using the bike path.

Beware The Trojan Horse of "Compromise" Health Care Cooperatives

Recent talk that President Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and Senate Democrats are willing to forego the socialist "public option" for health care cooperatives is nothing more than a political shell game. They want you to think this idea is similar to your local hippie food co-op. However, there is a big problem. The co-ops most folks envision are totally private and voluntary entities. The government "co-op" would be managed by the government, with insurers approved by the government, paid for by the government (i.e., tax payers), and operate under rules set by the federal government. Yeah, there's your private sector solution.

The idea of health care cooperatives has potential if done correctly. Correctly, of course, meaning individuals and businesses acting in a free and open market without government mandates. Earlier in the summer, the Heritage Foundation wrote about the co-op concept as a way to reform elements of the health care industry without a government takeover.

Reform ideas that increase consumer choice and that facilitate competition have been defeated by Leftist Democrats for years. They do not want genuine reform. The only firm goal of Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Socialist-Democrats is power. They want the government to control your life from womb to tomb and any reform that does not provide that authority will not be sufficient. Beware of the "co-op compromise"; its a socialist wolf in a free-market sheep's clothing.