30 September 2009

and On the Senate Side

Boxer-Kerry Unveil Their Energy Tax Bill: Incomplete But Still Very Harmful

Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) introduced the Senate companion to the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation today and while many pieces are missing, the framework in place spells bad news for every American energy consumer, especially low income ones.

Like Waxman-Markey, the focus is a cap and trade system, but takes the House bill’s 17 percent reduction of 2005 emissions by 2020 to a more stringent 20 percent cut. Unlike the House version, which gives away emission allowances to special interests groups that lobbied hard to protect their bottom line, the Senate draft does not include how the emission allowances – hundreds of billions of dollars - will be given away.

Co-sponsor Senator Kerry tells us, “This is not a cap-and-trade bill, it’s a pollution reduction bill.” But the simple reality is it’s an energy tax bill. As OMB director Peter Orszag says, “Under a cap-and-trade program, firms would not ultimately bear most of the costs of the allowances but instead would pass them along to their customers in the form of higher prices.” And the bill’s incompleteness goes to show how impatiently Kerry and Boxer are trying to move a historic energy tax into law.

Cap and Trade-A Federal Leviathan

Not Everyone Won the Cap and Trade Lobbying Battle

The cap and trade bill introduced by Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Edward Markey (D-MA) and passed in the House is 1,427 pages and includes much more than a cap and trade system to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. We’ve been detailing these economically harmful provisions in our cap and trade calamities, but Kathleen Hartnett White at the Texas Public Policy Foundation provides a tremendous synopsis of the entire bill and asks many tough questions in her policy paper, A Federal Leviathan: The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.

One particularly revealing part of the paper is the graph on the bottom of page three. Approximately 2,340 energy lobbyists worked on the cap-and-trade bill to do what President Obama said we shouldn’t – hand out allowances costs to utilities and other industries direct revenue to them. Opposition to this huge energy tax bill wheeling, dealing and arm-twisting to eke out the narrowest of majorities. They promised generous handouts for various industries and special interests but not everyone came out winners. The blue indicates the emissions by industry and the red indicates the allowances allocated by the government.

As shown by the graph, the refining and petroleum products industry, responsible for much of the carbon emissions from energy, receive the very little allowance allocations. White writes,
“Under the aggressive carbon caps, many U.S. industries could not compete with foreign products manufactured in countries without binding carbon limits. And increased import of goods manufactured elsewhere without carbon limits would
increase global carbon emissions. To address this “carbon leakage,” the bill provides for “carbon emission allowance rebates” to industries which meet specified levels of “trade intensity” or “energy intensity.” Petroleum refining, oddly, is excluded from those eligible.”
The other loser is, of course, me and you. The disguised energy tax will cost a family of four an additional $3,000 per year. When all the tax impacts have been added up, we find that the average per-family-of-four costs rise by almost $3,000 per year. In the year 2035 alone, the tax impact is $4,600. And if you add up the costs per family for the whole energy tax aggregated from 2012 to 2035, the years in which we modeled the bill, it’s about $71,500.

Giving away allowances are not an exception to the “no free lunches” adage. Giving away allowances does not lower the costs of cap and trade; it merely shifts the costs around.
Waxman-Markey is Robin Hood in reverse: it takes a lot of money from regular Americans and funnels it to Washington bureaucrats and the corporations with the best lobbyists.

Give Them What They Need or Bring Them The Hell Home

Vets For Freedom Petition

We, the undersigned U.S. war veterans and patriotic Americans, petition you with one simple request:

Listen to the commander on the ground in Afghanistan—General Stanley A. McChrystal—and provide him with the troops he says he needs to win the war in Afghanistan.

By accepting the troop recommendations of General McChrystal—and his boss General David Petraeus—we have a chance to turn the war in Afghanistan around. This is a moment in history we must not miss.

Like General Petraeus in Iraq, General McChrystal is an outside-the-box thinker who thrives in the ambiguity of asymmetrical battlefields. Like General Petraeus in Iraq, General McChrystal has the right strategy—a comprehensive counterinsurgency plan.

In 2007, General Petraeus was given the troops he needed (the "Surge") to win, and Iraq has turned around—resulting in dramatically lower U.S. casualties, a more stable Iraq, and a drawdown of American forces.

General McChrystal—and all our brave Soldiers and Marines on the ground—deserve the same chance to win in Afghanistan. They deserve the additional troops needed to turn a winning strategy into a winning result.

We fully acknowledge that the war in Afghanistan has been tough, and is currently headed in the wrong direction. And as you have said, it has been under-resourced, under-funded, and under-manned for years. You have also said that it is a war we must win. We agree on all fronts.

Unlike Iraq, there was consensus at the beginning of the war in Afghanistan that America must be successful in toppling the Taliban and dismantling Al Qaeda, for the safety of our country. Eight years later, the consensus on the war in Afghanistan is fractured; however we believe—as do you—that the need for victory has not changed.

During this time of domestic uncertainty and global threats, winning the war will require steadfast Presidential leadership; a Commander-in-Chief who is unwilling to be swayed by lagging poll numbers or party leaders who want to block troop increases.

Now is the time for your leadership. If you listen to commanders on the ground, give them what they need, and stand behind our warriors in Afghanistan—we will stand with you. If you don't, and would rather fight the "war of necessity" with one hand tied behind our back, then we will loudly object.

Many—in fact a majority—said the war in Iraq was "unwinnable," yet our troops persevered and turned the tide. Despite the drumbeat of detractors—on both sides of the aisle—this is another war we can win. But we must act now.

We owe it to the Marines and Soldiers slogging it out with insurgents every day to get this right. If we do, they'll fight, they'll persevere, and they'll win. If we don't, we are setting them up for failure. No less than America's greatness—and the legacy of America's finest warriors—is at stake.

Clean Sweep 2010

"'Democrats lost Congress in 1994 because President Clinton failed to pass national health care.' I'm not sure if this is another example of the left's wishful-thinking method of analysis or if they're seriously trying to trick the Blue Dog Democrats into believing it. But I gather liberals consider the 1994 argument an important point because it was on the front page of The New York Times a few weeks ago in place of a story about Van Jones or ACORN.

According to a news story by Jackie Calmes: 'In 1994, Democrats' dysfunction over fulfilling a new president's campaign promise contributed to the party's loss of its 40-year dominance of Congress.' That's not the way I remember it. The way I remember it, Republicans swept Congress in 1994 not because Clinton failed to nationalize health care, but because he tried to nationalize health care.

HillaryCare failed because most Americans didn't want it. ... But just to check my recollection, I looked up the Times' own coverage of the 1994 congressional races. Republicans won a landslide election in 1994 based largely on the 'Contract With America,' which, according to the Times, promised 'tax cuts, more military spending and a balanced-budget amendment.' Far from complaining about Clinton incompetently failing to pass health care, the Times reported that Republicans were 'unabashedly claiming credit for tying Congress up in knots.' These claims were immediately followed by ... oh, what was that word again?

Now I remember ... LANDSLIDE!"

--columnist Ann Coulter

Wherever We Stand, We Stand With Israel

"Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people. The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth.

[Wednesday] the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. ... To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong. Dead wrong.

... I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come."

--Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu

28 September 2009

Hello, I'm Johnny Cash


And The Links Mysteriously Disappear From The Website

and I'm a racist right wing extremist simply for cross-posting this information.


Obama's Top Aide Gaspard Tied to ACORN
Monday, September 28, 2009 2:40 PM
By: David A. Patten

Patrick Gaspard, considered one of the most powerful figures in the Obama White House, is a "longtime ACORN operative" and former union official, according to a report posted Monday on the American Spectator's online blog.

Gaspard's name recently surfaced as the official President Obama dispatched to urge beleaguered New York Gov. David Paterson not to run for another term. Paterson insists he'll continue to run for governor even without Obama's support.

Gaspard has extensive ties to organized labor and community-organizing groups. One measure of his influence in the White House: He holds the same "political affairs director" title that belonged to Karl Rove during the Bush administration.

The Spectator's Matthew Vadum, a senior editor at the Capital Research Center think tank, reported that Gaspard was the New York political director for top ACORN official Bertha Lewis before 2003. Lewis is the CEO and "chief organizer" for ACORN, which is the subject of more than a dozen investigations for vote-registration fraud nationwide.

The House and Senate recently moved to cut off ACORN funding after a series of videos revealed the willingness of its staff to help establish a reputed child-prostitution ring based in San Salvador. Obama refused to support ending federal funding for ACORN, however, telling ABC: "It's not something I'm paying a lot of attention to."

Vadum cited the blog maintained by ACORN founder Wade Rathke, ChiefOrganizer.org, as his source for the Gaspard-ACORN link.

In May, Rathke described how officials of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) teamed up with HealthCare Reform Czar Nancy-Ann DeParle to pry big price concessions from private health firms.

Speaking of the advantage that comes from having powerful friends in high places, Rathke wrote: "Tell me that (Local) 1199’s former political director, Patrick Gaspard (who was ACORN New York’s political director before that) didn’t reach out from the White House and help make that happen, and I’ll tell you to take some remedial classes in 'politics 101.'"

The Spectator described Gaspard "ACORN's Man in the White House." It also reported that he was national field director in 2004 for American Coming Together (ACT), a get-out-the-vote organization.

The FEC hit ACT with a $775,000 fine for campaign-finance violations — one of the largest FEC fines ever — and it reportedly ceased operations in 2005.

Gaspard also worked for eight years for SEIU Local 1199, a hospital workers local, according to the Village Voice.

The Spectator report detailed what it calls the "fuzzy" line between the SEIU and ACORN.
Vadum reported that SEIU Local 880 and the SEIU Local 100 that Rathke heads are "part of the ACORN network of organizations."

He reported that the locals were listed as such on ACORN's Web site, buts the references recently were removed.

Lloyd Marcus Has An Idea

Read the whole article here:
Stop Letting the Left Set The Rules

I am so sick of the Left being allowed to make the rules. Imagine the absurdity of a competition in which one side is allowed to set the rules against their opponent. The Left tells us what is racist. The Left tells us what we can and cannot say. The Left published a cartoon depicting former black Secretary of State Condolezza Rice as an Aunt Jemima; another depicted Rice as a huge-lipped parrot for her Massa Bush. Neither were considered racist by their creators or publishers, or even widely condemned on the Left.

In opposition to black Republican Michael Steele's campaign to run for U.S. Senate, a liberal blogger published a doctored photo of Steele in black face and big red lips made to look like a minstrel. The caption read, "Simple Sambo wants to move to the big house". Not one Democrat denounced these racist portrayals of black
conservatives. And yet, a sign seen at a tea party depicting Obama as a witch doctor is considered by the Left to be beyond the pale and obviously racist. Why is the Left, given their track record of bias, granted final authority to determine the intent of the sign? Why do we conservatives so quickly and easily allow ourselves to be put on the defensive?

The rules set by the Left are extremely clear. Racist images of black conservatives and negative images of Bush are fair game. Even a play about murdering President
Bush was called "harmless art". Meanwhile, all unflattering images of Obama are racist, and constitute dangerous, potentially violent hate speech.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd called Congressman Joe Wilson a racist for saying, "You lie" to president Obama. Using her psychic powers, Dowd said Wilson was really saying in his mind, "You lie, BOY!" And yet, liberal commentator Julianne Malveaux, saying she hopes black conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife "feeds him a lot of fatty foods so he will die early from heart
disease like many black men", was not considered racist. I am a black conservative singer, songwriter, entertainer and columnist. Liberals have posted comments all over YouTube and C-SPAN freely using and calling me the "N" word.

Because they are libs and I am an uppity, off the liberal plantation, run-away black, all tactics to restore me to my owners are acceptable.

Heritage Morning Bell

The admistration needs to fish or cut bait, as my buds over at Blackfive have so eleoquently stated on numerous occasions. This half-assed approach will only get more Warriors hurt or killed.

Obama Must Lead On Afghanistan
On March 27th, President Barack Obama followed through on one of his core campaign promises and announced a New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan that included sending an additional 21,000 troops to the region. Speaking from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Obama explained:

"Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban — or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged — that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can. …But this is not simply an American problem — far from it. It is, instead, an international security challenge of the highest order. Terrorist attacks in London and Bali were tied to al Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan, as were attacks in North Africa and the Middle East, in Islamabad and in Kabul. If there is a major attack on an Asian, European, or African city, it, too, is likely to have ties to al Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan. The safety of people around the world is at stake.”

So according to President Obama, victory against the Taliban in Afghanistan is not only essential for the security of the United States, but for “the safety of people around the world.” We couldn’t agree more, which is why it is so alarming to learn that President Obama is considering a different strategy advocated by Vice President Joe Biden. Just as Biden opposed the successful surge in Iraq, Biden now opposes a surge in Afghanistan, instead favoring withdrawing most U.S. troops leaving only special forces and predator drones to strike al Qaeda cells. Biden was wrong about Iraq and he is wrong about Afghanistan. Heritage fellow James Phillips explains:

The war in Afghanistan cannot be effectively waged merely with air power, predator drones, and special forces. In the late 1990s, the Clinton Administration hurled cruise missiles at easily replaceable al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, but this “chuck and duck” strategy failed to blunt the al-Qaeda threat. The Bush Administration’s minimalist approach to Afghanistan in 2001 was a contributing factor that allowed Osama bin Laden to escape from his mountain redoubt at Tora Bora. Afterwards, Washington opted to focus narrowly on counterterrorism goals in Afghanistan–rather than counterinsurgency operations–in order to free up military assets for the war in Iraq. This allowed the Taliban to regroup across the border in Pakistan and make a violent resurgence. The “small footprint” strategy also failed in Iraq, before it was abandoned in favor of General Petraeus’s counterinsurgency strategy, backed by the surge of American troops, in early 2007.

Despite this record of failure, some stubbornly continue to support an “offshore” strategy for landlocked Afghanistan today. But half-measures–the hallmark of the “small footprint” strategy–will not work. Precise intelligence is needed to use smart bombs smartly. Yet few Afghans would risk their lives to provide such intelligence unless they are assured of protection against the Taliban’s ruthless retaliation.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates seconded this analysis this Sunday telling ABC News’ This Week:

I think that most people who — the people that I’ve talked to in the Pentagon who are the experts on counter-terrorism essentially say that counter-terrorism is only possible if you have the kind of intelligence that allows you to target the terrorists. And the only way you get that intelligence is by being on the ground — getting information from people like the Afghans or, in the case of Iraq, the Iraqis.
And so you can’t do this from — from a distance or remotely, in the view of virtually all of the experts that I’ve talked to.

The security of the United States and the “safety of people around the world” depend on President Obama ignoring Biden and listening to Gates on this particular point. But listening to Gates will not be enough. The American people are unsure about which strategy to pursue in Afghanistan. According to Gallup, 41% of Americans favor withdrawing troops from the country while 41% favor increasing troop levels. Gallup’s Frank Newport adds: “The data indicate that Republicans do seem willing to support Obama should he make a decision to increase U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan. On the other hand, Democrats seem willing to oppose Obama in this case.”

If anybody can convince liberals to support victory in Afghanistan it is President Obama. Health care is important. But so is national security. According to the Washington Post, Obama has scheduled at least five meetings with his national security team over the next two weeks to reexamine the strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. When this review is completed, the President should announce his decision in a nationally televised speech. He should explain to the American people what is at stake in Afghanistan, why it is necessary to make continued sacrifices to defeat distant enemies there, and why the war is not only necessary, but winnable. President Obama’s March troop surge has not even been implemented yet. The President needs to win over his own party in Washington before U.S. forces can defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Censorship by HHS

HHS muzzles private corporation

Here's the situation: Earlier this month, officials with the Louisville, Ky.-based Humana Corp. sent a one-page letter to all of its policyholders who participate in the Medicare Advantage program. The letter was entirely factual and pointed out, among other things, that because of cuts proposed under Obamacare, "millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable."

The Humana letter angered Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., who is the principal author of the Senate version of Obamacare, which indeed includes hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of "savings" that are supposed to be achieved by eliminating waste and fraud in the Medicare Advantage program. When Washington politicians talk about saving money by cutting waste and fraud, hang on to your wallets. It's their way of saying higher taxes are coming.

To make sure Americans don't see through this smoke-and-mirror act, and to stay in the good graces of Baucus, the bureaucrats at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which manages Medicare, ordered Humana and all other private companies participating in the Medicare Advantage program to "to end immediately all such mailings to beneficiaries and to remove any related materials directed to Medicare enrollees from your website."

They also added this blunt warning: "Please be advised that we take this matter very seriously and, based upon the findings of our investigation, will pursue compliance and enforcement actions.

27 September 2009

Baucus Bill - FBI/DoJ To Have Unfettered Access To Records?

Washington, DC - According to credible sources familiar with the Senate Finance Committee’s health care bill—the “Baucus Bill”—the current legislation gives the Department of Justice and the FBI unprecedented and unfettered access to the Medicare and Medicaid records of all 80 million-plus Americans enrolled in those programs.

Unfortunately, it’s Senate Finance Committee “tradition” not to release the actual legislative language for the American people to read while the Committee amends it.

FreedomWorks President and CEO Matt Kibbe commented: “Hiding the bill doesn’t fit with President Obama’s pledge to run ‘the most transparent government in history.’ This sort of secrecy and arrogance adds to the low opinion of Congress and is part of why so many came to the September 12 Taxpayer March on Washington.”

All we get to see at this point is the “Chairman’s Mark”—the general summary of what the committee intends to make law, and page 186 and 187 say:

The Chairman’s Mark would require CMS to complete development of the comprehensive “One PI [Program Integrity]” Integrated Data Repository (IDR). The “One PI” IDR would expand existing program integrity data sources and expand data sharing and data matching across Federal health care claims and payment data (including HHS, SSA, the Departments of Veterans Affairs (VA), Defense (DOD), and Justice (DOJ)). In addition to including all claims and payment data for Medicare and Medicaid, the “One PI” IDR would enable existing and new data sources to be integrated…

The “One PI” IDR would be accompanied by additional authority for HHS OIG and DOJ to use these data, including secondary data sources, to identify and investigate potential fraud and abuse.

Kibbe continued: “Persecuting waste, fraud, and abuse is very important but so are the checks and balances within the government that currently protect our privacy. These paragraphs—and particularly the line ‘additional authority…to use these data’ suggest the Baucus bill will remove these checks.

Until they reveal their legislation, we are left to ask:

1. Does this mean the FBI—part of the DOJ—will have open access to all Medicare and Medicaid information?

2. Who will make sure the data will not be used for political fishing expeditions?

3. Do all who join a Medicare-like 'public option' also become part of an open-access database?

No Insurance? Go to Jail; Do Not Pass Go; Do Not Collect $200

ObamaCare: No Insurance, Go to Jail!
By Max Pappas on Sep 25, 2009

First we learned that the major health care reform bills the Democrats are pushing included an "individual mandate" that would tax you up to $1,900 (or $3,800 for a family) if you didn't buy health insurance that Congress approves of.

Now it has been revealed that if you do not pay that tax, it is a misdemeanor with up to a year in jail and $25,000 in fines!

The source? A hand written letter by the Chief of Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation written to Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), as reported in Politico.

Read it yourself here.

This is an incredible use of government power to force us to buy the product being sold by private insurance companies, and why FreedomWorks went to protest the insurance companies call for this "individual mandate", as seen in this video.

26 September 2009

Apologies For the 4th Circuit Court Decision From A Richmond Native

Westboro Ba'athist Church has not won a victory, just a temporary reprieve. Bunch of vermin. Vile, no-class, disrespectful parasites, every one of them. I can't publish what I really feel, because it would make me even uglier than these scum.

Court Says GI Funeral Protests Legal
September 25, 2009Baltimore Sun

RICHMOND, Va. -- A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that a fundamentalist Kansas church's protest outside the funeral of a Westminster Marine killed in
Iraq is protected speech and did not violate the privacy of the service member's family, reversing a lower court's $5 million award.

The ruling from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., held that the signs and writings of the Westboro Baptist Church, which included anti-gay and anti-military messages, are protected by the First Amendment. The Topeka-based congregation has protested at military funerals across the country.

"Notwithstanding the distasteful and repugnant nature of the words being challenged in these proceedings, we are constrained to conclude that the defendants' signs and [what it has on its Web sites] are constitutionally protected," Circuit Court Judge
Robert B. King wrote in the majority opinion.

Margie Jean Phelps, an attorney for Westboro and the daughter of the church's leader, said "it was an absolute shame to have a little church put on trial because of your religious beliefs."

"Everyone knows that we didn't disrupt a funeral," said Phelps, daughter of the Rev. Fred W. Phelps Sr. "Our speech, on our signs and our Web sites, is public speech. It's not on private matters. It's on public issues, so it's protected."

Sean E. Summers, an attorney for Albert Snyder, of York, Pa., the dead Marine's father, said he will appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"The most troubling fact is that it essentially leaves grieving families helpless," said Summers. "There are a lot people sending their kids over to war, and unfortunately, they're not all coming back. You would think that at least we could offer them dignity and respect."

Summers said that Albert Snyder would not comment on the decision. At trial, Snyder testified, "I had one chance to bury my son, and they took the dignity away from it."

Fred Phelps, two other adults and four children picketed the March 10, 2006, funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, holding signs that said, "Thank God for dead soldiers," and wrote on the church's Web site that Snyder's parents "taught Matthew to defy his creator."

Matthew Snyder, a 2003 graduate of Westminster High School, was 20 years old and had been in the war zone for less than a month when he was killed in a vehicle accident in Anbar province.

Westboro church members believe soldiers are being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan as punishment for what they say is the nation's tolerance of homosexuality. The church has about 75 members, most of whom are related to Phelps.

Albert Snyder sued Fred Phelps and two of his daughters, Rebecca Phelps-Davis and Shirley Phelps-Roper, for invasion of privacy and emotional distress.

In October 2007, a federal jury in Baltimore awarded the father nearly $11 million, ruling that the family's privacy had been invaded. In February 2008, a federal judge reduced the damages from $10.9 million to $5 million, citing constitutional concerns of appropriateness.

"The amount was set with a goal, and the goal was to silence us," said Margie Jean Phelps. "In this country, you don't get to claim damage over words you don't agree with. ... Because we've trained a nation of crybabies doesn't mean we change the law."

You little beeatch, you'll sue anyone who even looks at you sideways.

You notice the "church members" are all related? Think someone is practicing some anti-Biblical activity? (and don't give me the story of Lot. His daughters thought they were the last living beings on Earth.)

Some background:

Federal legislation:
Congress has entered the fray over funeral protests. In March 2006, Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., introduced the Dignity for Military Funerals Act of 2006, which would bar picketing within 300 feet of a military funeral for a period of one hour before to one hour after the ceremony. The measure was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Several months later, Congress passed the more narrowly confined Respect for America’s Fallen Heroes Act and President George W. Bush signed it into law on May 29, 2006. The law broadly prohibits any type of demonstration “under the control of the National Cemetery Administration or on the property of Arlington National Cemetery unless the demonstration has been approved by the cemetery superintendent or the director of the property on which the cemetery is located.” It imposes both time (one hour before and after) and distance requirements (150 feet from road and 300 feet from the cemetery).

The last section of the federal law explains why so many states have rushed to enact and pass similar legislation: “It is the sense of Congress that each State should enact legislation to restrict demonstrations near any military funeral.”

They showed up at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in March of 2006. They showed up Memorial Weekend 2006 at Arlington National Cemetary. They have showed up at every Freedom Walk in DC. Words fail me, because my redneck nature wants to choke the living crap out of every one of these vermin.

Southern Poverty Law Center ID's Potential Terrorists

Relevant article here:
Cops, deputies warned again about right-wing 'terrorists'SPLC alarm: 'Militiamen, white supremacists, anti-Semites, nativists, tax protesters coalescing'
Posted: September 25, 200910:10 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A private activist organization apparently is picking up where the federal government left off when the Department of Homeland Security issued its "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" warning that returning veterans and people in a long list of other categories were potential terrorists.

Only the new warning, delivered recently to police officers, sheriffs and other law
enforcement personnel across the country, is lumping those dedicated to the constitutional principles on which the nation was founded together with crazed killers.

The fall 2009 "Intelligence Report" was issued recently by the Southern Poverty Law Center, where officials confirmed to WND it was published specifically for and delivered to law enforcement personnel across the nation.

The SPLC did not respond to a WND request for other comment.

Gee I wonder why SPLC didn't want to talk to a news outlet. Does anyone but me remember Morris Dees from the 90's? That piece of scum worked for SPLC.

As you read this list, see if any of the criteria listed applies to anyone you know. If it does, immediately report them to the SPLC. The future of your freedom depends upon it.

SPLC warned of potential terrorism threats from those who:
Oppose abortion
Are returning veterans
Oppose same-sex marriage
Oppose restrictions on firearms
Oppose lax immigration laws
Oppose the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
Oppose continuation of free trade agreements
Are suspect of foreign regimes
Fear Communist regimes
Oppose a "one world" government
Bemoan the decline of U.S. stature in the world
Are upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India, and more.

Oh wait, they all apply to me. I guess I need to turn myself in now.

This Why We Don't Need No Steeenkin' Czars

Yeah, its those evil white guys who control the media who are definitely the problem. We should go drag them from their mansions and make them broadcast all Zero all the time.

From the Washington Times, reported by the extremely talented Amanda Carpenter.

President Obama's diversity czar at the Federal Communications Commission has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to "step down" in favor of minorities, prescribed policies to make liberal talk radio more successful, and
described Hugo Chavez's rise to power in Venezuela "an incredible revolution."
Mark Lloyd's provocative comments - most made during a tenure at the liberal Center for American Progress think tank - are giving fodder to critics who say Mr. Obama has appointed too many "czars" to government positions that don't require congressional approval. They are also worrying to some conservatives who fear the FCC might use its powers to remove their competitive advantage on talk radio and television.

Many of the remarks have been unearthed by conservative-leaning writers and bloggers and discussed on cable television amid a broader critique of Mr. Obama's penchant for czars that exploded with the ouster this month of "green jobs czar" Van Jones.

In one of his more eye-opening comments, Mr. Lloyd praised Mr. Chavez during a June 2008 conference on media reform, saying the authoritarian Venezuelan president had led "really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution."
In a video clip of the conference that has been aired by Fox News personality Glenn Beck and others, Mr. Lloyd seems be siding with the anti-American leader against independent media outlets in his own country, some of which supported a short-lived coup against Mr. Chavez in 2002.

"The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him," Mr. Lloyd said. "But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country."

Mr. Chavez in fact forced the nation's oldest television network, RCTV, off the air in 2007 by refusing to renew its license, replacing it with a state-run station that showed cartoons and old movies while protesters marched in the streets against the shutdown. His government has also threatened to shut down Globovision, one of two TV channels that continue to criticize Mr. Chavez.

Those pesky property owners are always causing problems.

25 September 2009

Warrior Legacy Foundation Committed To Veterans

Secretary Shinseki Orders Emergency Checks to Students Awaiting Education Benefits
Thousands of Checks to Alleviate Student Financial Burden

WASHINGTON – Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki announced the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has authorized checks for up to $3,000 to be given to students who have applied for educational benefits and who have not yet received their government payment. The checks will be distributed to eligible students at VA regional benefits offices across the country starting Oct. 2, 2009.

“Students should be focusing on their studies, not worrying about financial difficulties,” Secretary Shinseki said. “Education creates life-expanding opportunities for our Veterans.”

Starting Friday, Oct. 2, 2009, students can go to one of VA’s 57 regional benefit offices with a photo ID and a course schedule to request advance payment of their education benefits. Because not all these offices are located near students, VA expects to send representatives to schools with large Veteran-student bodies and work with Veteran Service Organizations to help students with transportation needs.

A list of those VA regional offices is available at www.vba.va.gov/VBA/benefits/offices.asp.

“I’m asking our people to get out their road maps and determine how we can reach the largest number of college students who can’t reach us,” VA’s Under Secretary for Benefits Patrick Dunne said. “Not everyone has a car. Not everyone can walk to a VA benefits office.”

Although VA does not know how many students will request emergency funds, it has approximately 25,000 claims pending that may result in payments to students. The funds VA will give to students now are advance payments of the earned benefits for education benefits.
This money will be deducted from future education payments.

VA officials said students should know that after this special payment, they can expect to receive education payments on the normal schedule -- the beginning of the month following the period for which they are reimbursed.

“This is an extraordinary action we’re taking,” said Shinseki. “But it’s necessary because we recognize the hardships some of our Veterans face.”

More than 27,500 students have already received benefits for housing or books under the new Post-9/11 GI Bill, or their schools received their tuition payments.

Washington DC
24 September 2009

WLF partners with White House and VA to get GI Bill payments expedited

The Warrior Legacy Foundation (WLF) is working with the White House and the VA to assist veterans who have been experiencing delays in GI Bill payments. Recently a number of veterans have not received payment for college expenses they are due in a timely fashion. This has caused financial hardship in an already difficult economy.

This is unacceptable and WLF is committed to helping fix the problem.

Our leaders have been in contact with veterans officials at both the White House and VA and they agree this is a priority that must be addressed. They have dedicated resources and we will be working with them to expedite these payments and to ensure that systemic problems are addressed. We will provide assistance to veterans affected by this and connect them with the proper authorities to get them the benefits they earned. We appreciate the attention and help from both the White House and VA in rectifying this.

Veterans who have not received payment can contact us at info@warriorlegacyfoundation.org with GI Bill in the subject line.

Stop The Czars

Czars??? We don't need no steeenkin' czars!!!

The problem is not the position, its the people who fill those positions.
Most of them couldn't obtain a security clearance to work in the places I work. No vetting, no background checks. working at the highest levels of government with access to above Top Secret intelligence? We already know the philosophy of the people Zero associates with. SDS, Weather Underground, New Black Panther Party. Individuals with admitted ties to Marxist organizations and goals which are 180 degrees opposite of the Founding Principles.

I can tell you what the Founding Fathers would do.

Politics : Foxx cosponsors legislation to rein in unelected “czars”WASHINGTON, D.C.—

U.S. Representative Virginia Foxx (NC-05) today announced that she is cosponsoring legislation (H.R. 3226) to re-establish Congress’s constitutional role in the presidential appointment of government ‘czars’. Since taking office, President Obama has appointed dozens of powerful administration officials, popularly known as ‘czars’, outside the Senate confirmation process established by the Constitution.

“In the past eight months the Obama administration has appointed more than 30 czars with power over every conceivable area of government and very few have gone through the constitutionally mandated Senate confirmation process,” Foxx said. “Congress must reclaim its oversight role in the confirmation process of high-ranking administration officials.”

“As the recent dust-up over President Obama’s green jobs czar shows, transparency and accountability matter,” Foxx said. “I believe that every President should be
advised by the best and brightest our country has to offer. But I am concerned that the proliferation of unaccountable czars threatens to undermine our system of checks and balances.”H.R. 3226, the Czar Accountability and Reform Act cuts off funding for czar positions which have not been subject to Senate confirmation. To date the Obama administration has appointed ‘czars’ with authority in areas from bank and auto bailouts to technology and energy policy.

Running With the Big Dogs

I'm back from celebrating Arthur Guiness's 200th birthday with several very shady individuals. The guest list read like a who's who of right wing extremists and potential terrorists:
Matty O'Blackfive
Jimbo O'Hanson
Jonn O'Lilyea
Toby O'Nunn
Mary K O'Ham
Concrete O'Bob
Army O'Girl
and a really suspicious (but smokin' hot) Lady with suspected ties to a secret security force down in NC.

Its a wonder we weren't all renditioned just for being in the same county together.
Fortunately, the satellite look down malfunctioned and we disabled our GPS phones.

Buy American

H/T to one of my engineers

Subject: stimulus check

This is the best plan I’ve seen yet. I’m very excited now.
Sometime this year, we taxpayers will receive another Economic Stimulus payment.

Best explained by using the Q & A format..

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers..

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Just a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:
• If you spend the stimulus money at Wal-Mart, the money will go to China ..
• If you spend it on gasoline, your money will go to the Arabs.
• If you purchase a computer, it will go to India .
• If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala ..
• If you buy a car, it will go to Japan or Korea .
• If you purchase useless stuff, it will go to Taiwan ..
• If you pay your credit cards off, or buy stock, it will go to management bonuses and they will just hide it offshore.

Instead, keep the money in America by:

1 spending it at garage sales, or
2 going to ball games, or
3 spending it on prostitutes, or
4 beer or
5 tattoos.

(These are the only American businesses still operating in the US )


BUY AMERICAN ... Go to a ball game with a tattooed hooker that you met at a garage sale and drink beer all day.

21 September 2009

Two Views on Zero; Woodward Is Still Connected

Washington Post -- McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure'
The first big leak from the military during the Obama era went public hours after the president accused his commanders of putting the “resource question ahead of the strategy question.”

Someone in the chain of command slipped Bob Woodward the 66-page assessment of the situation in Afghanistan by commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal that suggests without a substantial increase in U.S. forces, the war against Taliban insurgents will be irrevocably lost. The report has been on President Obama’s desk for two weeks, but the White House has been sitting on the bombshell as Democrats have complained more bitterly about the president’s escalation of the war.

McChrystal’s message to Obama seems to be that if the president wants a new strategy of nation building in Afghanistan he has to be willing to deliver the resources necessary.

“The assessment offers an unsparing critique of the failings of the Afghan government, contending that official corruption is as much of a threat as the insurgency to the mission of the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF, as the U.S.-led NATO coalition is widely known.

‘The weakness of state institutions, malign actions of power-brokers, widespread corruption and abuse of power by various officials, and ISAF's own errors, have given Afghans little reason to support their government,’ McChrystal says.”

Wall Street Journal -- Obama Questions Plan to Add Forces in Afghanistan

The Obama team is smarting from the poor reception of their Sunday stunt of having the president appear on five talk shows and still must tape the entire hour with former funnyman David Letterman in New York today.

While Obama said nothing new about health care in his round robin of Sunday chat shows, he did make news about ACORN, racial attitudes, and most of all, Afghanistan. As Examiner colleague Susan Ferrechio points out, five interviews means five headlines. The president, who will need forbearance from liberal members of his party in order to be able to declare symbolic victories on health and global warming, was looking to placate the anti-war base that made him the Democratic nominee.

But by pooh-poohing the rather desperate-sounding request for more troops that he had received from the man he put in charge in Afghanistan, Obama instead opened himself to criticism from the Left (unsatisfied with the status quo) and the Right (anxious that Obama will wimp out).

Just five months after announcing a bold and more ambitious approach to Afghanistan with a lamentation of his predecessor’s inattention to the Hindu Kush, the president seems to be having second thoughts.

‘I don't want to put the resource question before the strategy question,’ Mr. Obama told CNN's ‘State of the Union.’ ‘There is a natural inclination to say, 'If I get more, then I can do more.' But right now, the question is—the first question is—are we doing the right thing? Are we pursuing the right strategy?’

Mr. Obama's comments suggested that the White House could be reassessing its strategy in Afghanistan, ahead of an expected request for more troops from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. and NATO commander there. Mr. Obama, who has approved more troops for Afghanistan while ordering a drawdown in Iraq, has already agreed to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, bringing the total number of U.S. forces there to 68,000 by year's end.”

Daily Mail Article on 9/12 March

In all fairness to the Daily Mail, the Park Service has released its final tally of the attendance in DC on 9/12/09.
2.1 million
Some of the comments posted are priceless, and some are just plain ugly.

A million march to US Capitol to protest against 'Obama the socialist'
By David Gardner
Last updated at 6:59 AM on 14th September 2009
Comments (279)

As many as one million people flooded into for a massive rally organised by conservatives claiming that President Obama is driving towards socialism.

The size of the crowd - by far the biggest protest since the president took office in January - shocked the .

Demonstrators massed outside Capitol Hill after marching down Pennsylvania Avenue waving placards and chanting 'Enough, enough'.

The focus of much of the anger was the president's so-called 'Obamacare' plan to overhaul the U.S. health system.

Demonstrators waved U.S. flags and held signs reading 'Go Green Recycle Congress' and 'I'm Not Your ATM'. 'The protest on Saturday came as Mr Obama took his campaign for health reforms on the road, making his argument to a rally of 15,000 supporters in Minneapolis.

Saying he was determined to push through a bill making health insurance more affordable, Mr Obama said: 'I intend to be president for a while and once this bill passes, I own it.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html?ITO%1490#ixzz0RiLBaILs

20 September 2009

GoE Laptops for Wounded

Check out the article from Canada Free Press

If They Keep Screwing With Israel, They Get What They Deserve

Obama Foreign Policy Advisor Calls For US to Shoot Down Israeli Jets


Last year Zbigniew Brzezinski, adviser to former US president Jimmy Carter, described the Bush administration's policy of maintaining the option of military action against Iran as "counterproductive."

Now Brzezinski, who advises Obama on foreign policy, is calling for the US to shoot down Israeli jets.

Brzezinski is known to be anti-Israel.

The Weekly Standard Blog reported:

In a little noticed interview with the Daily Beast (presumably little noticed because
serious people don't read the Daily Beast), Zbigniew Brzezinski suggests that Barack Obama do more than just refuse to support an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear sites -- the American president must give the order to shoot down Israeli aircraft as they cross Iraqi airspace:
DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse.

I Wonder Which American Way They Represent

From NewsMax:

I guess "People for the American Way" aren't really all that gung-ho on grassroots activism.

A liberal advocacy group founded by TV producer Norman Lear has launched an attack on conservative talker Glenn Beck, saying his influence on the GOP is "shameful."

In an e-mail sent to supporters, People for the American Way's President Michael B. Keegan referred to last weekend's protests in Washington against President Barack Obama and the Democrats and rebutted the claim that as many as 2 million people took part.

"Officials estimated the crowd to be about 60,000," Keating wrote. "Significant, yes, but not indicative that these people are anything more than a vocal minority
representing the views of only a small portion of Americans.

"A PFAW staffer who showed up to check out the scene talked to many participants, and when she asked why they showed up, an overwhelming number gave the same answer: 'Glenn Beck sent me.'"

Keating continued: "It is shameful that the GOP would give someone like Glenn Beck that sort of power. The Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of the world have been pulling the strings of the Republican Party for too long."

Oh bullshit!!!
Rush and Glenn speak for the grassroots conservative movement, NOT the Republican Party.

Kucinich Is a Nut

Accuses the FBI of politically motivated arrests to insure re-authorization of the Patriot Act.
Refused to answer a direct question about the safety of America and the Patriot Act.

19 September 2009

Walter Reed Army Medical Center 9/11/09

No matter how they arrive at Walter Reed, by ambulance or helo from Andrews, the young men and women who fight every day recieve a hero's Welcome Home every Friday night. They are not, nor will they ever be, taken for granted, or forgotten.

ACORN and Housing: Alinsky Style

Patriot Post
Friday Digest

From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File
"The truth remains that thousands of New Yorkers who are facing foreclosure depend on charitable organizations like Acorn for assistance." --Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)

But as Investor's Business Daily argues,
"The fact is that this 'charitable organization' helped precipitate the mortgage meltdown that shattered the economy. It was Acorn, under the cover of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), that intimidated banks through mob action into making risky loans in the name of 'fairness' to people who could not afford them. The tactics, taken straight from the pages of Saul Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals,' were used by Acorn as early as 1991, when it took over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA."

Blackfive for President?!?

Well, maybe we should start slow and work our way up.
So, here is the link to a good man's website.
Matt Burden

Go donate.

"Tightly Scripted Events"??

Health reformers targeting 'enemies'
September 19, 2009 4:45 AM EDT
(page 1 of 6) View Entire Story
The plan for a series of grass-roots demonstrations Tuesday to promote President Obama's health care agenda calls for tightly scripted events and an "escalation" of efforts against "enemies" of reform.
Organizers insist there is no comparison to rowdy summer town hall meetings and recent "tea party" protests that have challenged White House policies.
But Health Care for America Now (HCAN), which is backed by a coalition of labor unions and liberal groups including ACORN and MoveOn.org, organized the protests to target insurance companies and drafted the plan, which describes the demonstrations as part of its "insurance enemies project."
The document, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times, details specific talking points, tactics, props and strategies to stage the protests. It lists goals that include action that "mobilizes our base by animating existing anger about private insurers."

18 September 2009

10th Amendment Musings

By a young Turk from Virginia who will be a force.

The 10th Amendment Center

Freedom Plaza 9/12 March

Thats me on the right.

Surprises on the Votes To De-fund ACORN

The R's voted yes across the board.

Kudos to Democrats Boucher, Nye, and Perriello for doing the right thing.

Shame on Connolly for not voting. Typical dhimmicrat. Time for him to go.

The two NO votes came from Virginia's very own expert on domestic violence, Jim Moron, and Bobby Scott from the 3rd District. Our rural constituents have been badly served by Scott, and his days are now numbered.

Anyone who can face the public they serve after voting to continue funding for an organization that should be prosecuted under the RICO statutes, needs a dose of reality.

We will do that at the ballot box in 2010.

17 September 2009

Meet A Hero: SFC Jared Monti

My newest best bud, Susan Katz-Keating, has a video.

We Own the Movement; We Select the Leaders

Today Is Constitution Day

"I call not upon a few, but upon all: not on this state or that state, but on every state; up and help us; lay your shoulders to the wheel; better to have too much force than too little, when so great an object is at stake."—Thomas Paine, 1776

Federal law mandates that all high schools, colleges and universities across the country that receive federal funds host educational events about the Constitution on Constitution Day, September 17. Yet as John W. Whitehead points out in his latest commentary, the best way to celebrate the Constitution is by knowing and exercising your rights.

Formally adopted on September 17, 1787, the Constitution has long served as the bulwark of American freedom and as an example for struggling nations worldwide. Unfortunately, the rights enshrined in this vitally important document are under constant attack. And this month's Faith and Freedom newsletter shines a spotlight on three vitally important religious freedom cases being litigated by The Rutherford Institute before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Busch v. Marple Newtown School District, Institute attorneys are fighting for Donna Busch's right to read a few verses from Psalms as part of an "All About Me" kindergarten classroom program intended to spotlight her son Wesley and his favorite book, the Bible. School officials actually told Mrs. Busch that the Bible is illegal in public schools. Incredibly enough, school officials then suggested that a book on Halloween might be an appropriate substitute!

In McComb v. Crehan, Institute attorneys are fighting for high school valedictorian Brittany McComb's right to give God credit in her graduation speech as the reason for her success in school. School officials actually unplugged Brittany's microphone just as began speaking about her Christian faith.

And in Nurre v. Whitehead, Institute attorneys are fighting for Kathryn Nurre's right, as part of a school woodwind ensemble, to be able to perform an instrumental arrangement of Franz Biebl's "Ave Maria" at graduation. Mind you, no words were to be sung—just an instrumental piece was to be played! School officials actually defended the ban as necessary in order to avoid offending someone in the audience.

We hope you'll take a moment to read about these and other critical cases and issues affecting your rights. Thank you, and God bless you, for continuing to stand with The Rutherford Institute as we strive for liberty and justice for all.

16 September 2009

I Know How To Fix It

1. Allow all medical expenses to be deducted from your income on Schedule A. Eliminate the 7.2% rule. Full deduction.
2. De-regulate the health insurance industry; allow insurance companies to operate wherever they choose; let the free market and capitalism direct the course of commerce.
3. A tax-credit for employers who provide full coverage for employees.
4. Put the Social Security Trust Fund back where it belongs and get it out of the General Fund.
5. Allow employees to opt-out of the SS system with the corresponding employer match eliminated as well.
6. Institute a fair tax or flat tax.
7. Tort reform. Set limits on pay-outs.

14 September 2009

A New Blog


A Message From Dick Armey

Dear Friend,

The 9-12 March on Washington has concluded and by any measure it was nothing short of an historic success for the limited government movement.

The debate over how many people were actually there is now raging from one extreme to another. Some media reports have gone as high as 2 million, while liberal pundits like David Schuster have thrown out insulting low estimates under 50,000. I believe the truth is that our crowd actually approached 1 million, but you can judge for yourself as coverage of the March will air on CSPAN again tonight at 8 pm EST. No matter the actual number, the 9-12 March on Washington was far and away the largest gathering of limited government conservative activists in history and I want to thank you for helping to make it so.

Whether you were there or not, your support was key – your contribution, attendance at a local taxpayer protest in your own community, or your presence in DC is being felt today by the politicians here in the Nation’s Capital. Some may not admit it publicly, but I promise you that even the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barrack Obama himself now know the power that our side represents.

We are all exhausted, but it’s imperative that we keep telling the stories, and sharing the images, and connecting the people from all 50 states who spoke with one voice to petition their government. After all, we all worked so hard to send the message to our elected officials: “Silent No More.” To help document this monumental event, over the next few weeks, FreedomWorks will be putting together an online archive of the 9/12 March on Washington. However, if this project is going to be successful, we need your help!Here is how you can help:

Tell us your story. If you were at the March, watched it from home, or participated in one of the hundreds of other local taxpayer rallies that took place all over the country, we want to hear from you! Simply email your story to 912dc.org@gmail.com, and don’t forget to include your name (we’ll only publish your first name), age, and location! We will also be sure to get a hard copy hand-delivered to your Senators and Congressman.

Send us your pictures and video. Did you take photos or video at the DC March or your local event? If so, we’d like to post them on our archive. To do this, all you need to do is upload your photos to Flickr.com, and videos to YouTube.com, then include the tag “912dc” before saving them. If you have too many photos, or your video is too large, you can mail a CD or DVD to: FreedomWorks, 601 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, North Building, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004.

We need your help to get ready for the coming battles. The health care debate continues to rage and we expect the Left to continue their push for cap and trade and other items on the big government wish-list through the end of this year. We are working to build an infrastructure capable of conducting targeted research and issuing rapid-response calls to action that will make the difference in these fights.

In addition, our political battle plan for 2010 is already starting to come together. To give you a sneak preview, this includes another major event in Washington, D.C. and playing in the most high-profile Congressional mid-term races. All of this of course will take significant resources, but that’s what it is going to take to give limited government activists like you the necessary tools to affect change. Click here to support FreedomWorks with your generous contribution.

I think back to 1994. Then, true limited government conservatives saw the dawn of a new era where fiscal conservatives rose to power on the shoulders of the Contract with America and “threw the bums out.” While conservatives in Congress ultimately lost their way and thus the support of the voters, I believe that thanks to the grassroots uprising we are seeing now that lawmakers are getting the message and that 2010 could look a lot like 1994, if we keep it up.

So while I again congratulate you on the success of 9-12, I remind you that the battle goes on. We can take our government back, but as abolitionist Wendell Phillips famously said, “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”


Dick Armey

"Look At All These People!!!"

Washington Examiner Political Digest
Byron York - Inside the 9/12 protest

Hours before Saturday's protest began, it was clear that the crowd of people opposing Obama's big-government policies would be larger than many anticipated. There are no official estimates of how many attended, but there's no doubt that the turnout, from the crush on Pennsylvania Avenue to the crowd at the West Front of the Capitol, was big -- perhaps in the 100,000 range.

No one was more surprised at the show of force than some of the marchers themselves. "We did it!" cried one elated woman as she approached Pennsylvania Avenue. "Look at all these people!"

You certainly did.

12 September 2009

A More Realistic Estimate

We all know the VLWM is suffering from a serious numerical dyslexic-disorder. They just can't seem to get their numbers straight, for some reason.

Lets get this out of the way now.

Most media outlets are using the term "10's of thousands" to describe the 9/12 March attendance in Washington DC.

I was there from 0700 until 1500 and I can assure you, (and I have Park Police estimates to back it up), there were 1.3 million Americans at the 9/12 March in Washington DC.

ONE POINT THREE MILLION voting Americans who quite possibly represent another 100 voting Americans who could not attend.

Are you listening now?

Can you hear THEM NOW?!?!


InstaPundit has a photo taken by MKH, (what a class act and a smokin' hot baby-doll) who actually paid $18 to access the vantage point from the top of the Newseum. This is the end of Pennsylvania Ave from about 3rd Street to the West Lawn. The Newseum is at 555 Pennsylvania Ave, between 5th and 6th. The March extends west to 14th Street. Do the math. It took 3.5 hours to move the crowd from 14th to 3rd Streets, and the marchers filled Pennsylvania Ave from curb to curb for almost 3 hours.

Tankerbabe and I met up with Uncle Jimbo and Lilyea.
Uncle Jimbo was speechless; a condition he rarely, if ever, suffers from, although I did hear several "WOW!!!'s" and at least three "I can't effing believe this!!'s"

He did manage to recover sufficiently to film some folks.